League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[Stag Nation]

1 hour ago, SecretCEO said:

For me, it would be a mandatory quota of two or three Scots teens in first teams. Maybe supported by a seniors v youths pathway, as described above, which doesn't compromise the integrity of the pyramid.

I believe that would be illegal racial discrimination, under the Equality Act. "Race" is defined as including "nationality" and "ethnic or national origins".

[DiegoDiego]

I believe that would be illegal racial discrimination, under the Equality Act. "Race" is defined as including "nationality" and "ethnic or national origins".

You could classify it as three Scottish trained players. They would need to have been registered at Scottish clubs for a certain amount of years before a certain age. It wouldn't matter what their nationality was but you'd find the vast majority would be eligible to play for Scotland anyway. That's how hockey got away with it.

[realmadrid]

20 hours ago, Stag Nation said:

What is the logic behind a 10 club second tier? Why not 16 like all the other divisions?

Also, can we drop this "premier",  "championship" nonsense and go back to 1, 2, 3 etc?

With any larger top league you need to keep a small second tier , it would be disastrous financially for any team to go from a fully professional full time set up to a league where half the teams are part time and play to under 1000 fans with relegation.

[Donathan]

8 minutes ago, realmadrid said:

With any larger top league you need to keep a small second tier , it would be disastrous financially for any team to go from a fully professional full time set up to a league where half the teams are part time and play to under 1000 fans with relegation.

Am I right in saying there are roughly 22 full time clubs in Scotland? I know Falkirk and Partick are full time outwith the top two leagues, and Alloa and Arbroath are part time clubs within the top two leagues?

 

I've always felt the following two things are true:

- There should be no such thing as a national league that is entirely or almost entirely part time

- However, we should have a few part time teams in the lowest national league to give the larger part time clubs something to aspire towards.

 

It points to 24/28/30 clubs playing in national leagues and then regionalise below that. The biggest issue is the TV deals relying on old firm money thus meaning a quadruple round robin or split is necessary.

 

16 game top league with a 4-8-4 split isn't a bad option. Could have 30 games then split into 4 groups. 1-2-3-4, 5-8-9-12, 6-7-10-11 and 13-14-15-16. The bottom two from the top group and the two group winners from the middle groups entering Europa league playoffs.

[realmadrid]

On 08/03/2021 at 18:21, Thistle Scotland Europe said:

Here are my ideas in full.

1. My League re-organisation Plan.

16 Team Premier.

10 Team Championship.

16 Team Scottish League One North,

16 Team Scottish League One South.,  

I think we should have a 16 teams Scottish Premier and cut the number of games down to 30 games a season in the league. That way more Scottish sides would be in the Premier. The first 10 seasons of the Scottish League were played under a system that involved less than 30 games in a league season, for each team.

You are asking teams to drop 4 home games and second visits from at least one of the Old firm ® for a visit from Raith Rovers , Dundee or Morton , financially its not going to happen

2. Cross border cups, such as an Atlantic League Cup.

Our own league cup has history , having just won it id not want to see it lost

3. B teams or colt teams in the lower divisions.

The purpose of sticking the big side’s colt teams in the lower divisions, is simply to ensure that the big sides develop. I would love all Scottish Premier sides or the big 7 sides Celtic, Rangers, Hibernian, Hearts, Aberdeen, Dundee United and Motherwell to play colt sides in the lower divisions.

It may have skipped many people but the Saints side that just won the league cup just featured a whole team and sub who were all born in Scotland. For some reason our players dont get called up and thus Ali McCann chose the country of his fathers birth and is already playing for Northern Ireland.

Of the cup final team Clark, Kerr, May, Kane, McCann all came through the Saints youth set up, Liam Gordon and David Wotherspoon while both from Perth ended up in other teams academy before returning so where do we fit in with this big 7.

No need for Colts, just use the loan system and develop and play your own players

 

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by realmadrid

[Oldster]

4 hours ago, SecretCEO said:

What about if our bottom senior national division had sixteen teams, playing every opponent twice.

And if we had a non-pyramid top development league of eight teams, playing every opponent twice.

Then we asked those seniors to play each youth team once as part of their points-earning regular season. These could be eight midweek games across their season, giving the seniors a 38 game season each.

The top development teams would therefore have sixteen games each per season against senior pros, and a thirty game season each in total.

There could be a second level of development teams who would aim for promotion to that elite level. Unless perhaps the Lowland League would want to participate in something similar.

That's a bit sketchy, so maybe fits with all the changes to the league's attempts at player development and the changing faces at our national association's equivalent.

It always seemed like there were good intentions, yet I could never see the final step in their development programmes.

For me, it would be a mandatory quota of two or three Scots teens in first teams. Maybe supported by a seniors v youths pathway, as described above, which doesn't compromise the integrity of the pyramid.

8 midweek games per club, yep, but 16 midweek matchdays to get through it all since the 8 development teams can only take on one opponent at a time.

Or instead just add a Development League as the third side of the pyramid in parallel with the HL and LL. With pyramid play off semi finalists being the bottom SPFL team, HL winners, LL winners, and Development League winners.

37 minutes ago, Donathan said:

Am I right in saying there are roughly 22 full time clubs in Scotland? I know Falkirk and Partick are full time outwith the top two leagues, and Alloa and Arbroath are part time clubs within the top two leagues?

 

I've always felt the following two things are true:

- There should be no such thing as a national league that is entirely or almost entirely part time

- However, we should have a few part time teams in the lowest national league to give the larger part time clubs something to aspire towards.

 

It points to 24/28/30 clubs playing in national leagues and then regionalise below that. The biggest issue is the TV deals relying on old firm money thus meaning a quadruple round robin or split is necessary.

 

16 game top league with a 4-8-4 split isn't a bad option. Could have 30 games then split into 4 groups. 1-2-3-4, 5-8-9-12, 6-7-10-11 and 13-14-15-16. The bottom two from the top group and the two group winners from the middle groups entering Europa league playoffs.

Queen's Park and Airdrie may also be full time.

[realmadrid]

13 minutes ago, Donathan said:

Am I right in saying there are roughly 22 full time clubs in Scotland? I know Falkirk and Partick are full time outwith the top two leagues, and Alloa and Arbroath are part time clubs within the top two leagues?

 

I've always felt the following two things are true:

- There should be no such thing as a national league that is entirely or almost entirely part time

- However, we should have a few part time teams in the lowest national league to give the larger part time clubs something to aspire towards.

 

It points to 24/28/30 clubs playing in national leagues and then regionalise below that. The biggest issue is the TV deals relying on old firm money thus meaning a quadruple round robin or split is necessary.

 

16 game top league with a 4-8-4 split isn't a bad option. Could have 30 games then split into 4 groups. 1-2-3-4, 5-8-9-12, 6-7-10-11 and 13-14-15-16. The bottom two from the top group and the two group winners from the middle groups entering Europa league playoffs.

Having brought everyone back under one banner of the SPFL within the last 10 years the only way you could cut the national league numbers is to have another break away and I do not see that as in any way desirable . No club at the lower end of the 42 is going to vote to reduce the league .

Having spent time in the company of Kevin Rutkiewicz at Hamilton last week and heard him on the Dogger Saints podcast . He talked about how the aim was not only to eventually get Stirling Albion into league 1, but then consolidate with the aim of making the Championship in time. Possibly after he has moved on but as you say every team needs a goal

Most of the teams in the Premiership could at some point drop to the championship if they have a bad season and most championship teams could easily play in the Premiership.  Its only when teams are badly managed such as Falkirk and Partick Thistle that a full time team drops down a league.  For the part time teams the Championship is a realistic goal.

[SecretCEO]

2 hours ago, Oldster said:

8 midweek games per club, yep, but 16 midweek matchdays to get through it all since the 8 development teams can only take on one opponent at a time.

Or instead just add a Development League as the third side of the pyramid in parallel with the HL and LL. With pyramid play off semi finalists being the bottom SPFL team, HL winners, LL winners, and Development League winners.

Queen's Park and Airdrie may also be full time.

Thanks - sixteen midweek fixture dates seems to make sense. It should keep the within-league games that supporters are more interested in scheduled on weekends.

A Development League as a third side to the pyramid is interesting. I would worry about a youth team actually being promoted to the SPFL, although perhaps it isn't likely because the pyramid play offs would be of a high enough standard to prevent it.

It would be good, in that context, to give the best youth teams something real to aim towards and that motivation could spur their development.

Perhaps a Development League could encompass the youth, or combined academy, teams down through to the Lowland League and beyond, linking up the divisions initially and then leaving it to run. It would be good to give sixteen to nineteen year olds who aren't quite developed enough for first team football genuinely competitive divisions to play in, with promotion and relegation issues to drive their engagement.

 

[Salvo Montalbano]

Surely the lower league sides wouldn't be playing their full strength sides against these development sides? Why would they risk injury or burn out if there were no points up for grabs? You'd essentially have these development squads playing de facto reserve and/or youth teams which arguably is worse than what already have!

[DiegoDiego]

Regionalising below the Championship is a terrible idea.

1. There are far more clubs with the capability to play at a national level than there currently are.

2. Because Scotland's clubs are predominantly in the central belt, regionalisation wouldn't make much difference, in fact, for some clubs it would slightly increase their traveling.

3. An even north-south split would remove some derbies, like Stenny - Falkirk among teams on the cusp. Increased pairings, such as Peterhead vs Elgin or Annan vs Stranraer aren't derbies anyway.

4. The teams who would benefit the most from decreased travel are ones who actually lobbied to join a national league.

5. Increased derbies would get stale if more often then not there were 24 Angus derbies a season.

6. Exposure, prize money and sponsorship would drop, making clubs worse off.

7. Nobody wants this. Just Ann Budge and others with no skin in the game.

[BFTD]

The regionalisation thing is even more mystifying than the youth teams scam. It's invariably punted by fans of full-time sides, and the reasoning usually amounts to, "because I think it should, alright?"

DiegoDiego went over most of the reasons why it's an irrational idea, the most important being that the clubs say it won't help with their finances (when asked), and fans of part-time SPFL clubs are generally not in favour of constant local derbies against teams that they regularly play anyway.

The impression I come away with is that some folk have an underlying sense of resentment that part-time clubs have the same status as their bottom-end full-time club, as it does tend to be popular with fans of clubs like Falkirk, Morton, or whoever else has recently visited the seaside leagues. Nobody else seems to give a shit, other than fuds like Ann Budge who'd just like for us all to fold and watch Hearts instead.

[SecretCEO]

9 hours ago, SecretCEO said:

What about if our bottom senior national division had sixteen teams, playing every opponent twice.

And if we had a non-pyramid top development league of eight teams, playing every opponent twice.

Then we asked those seniors to play each youth team once as part of their points-earning regular season. These could be eight midweek games across their season, giving the seniors a 38 game season each.

The top development teams would therefore have sixteen games each per season against senior pros, and a thirty game season each in total.

There could be a second level of development teams who would aim for promotion to that elite level. Unless perhaps the Lowland League would want to participate in something similar.

That's a bit sketchy, so maybe fits with all the changes to the league's attempts at player development and the changing faces at our national association's equivalent.

It always seemed like there were good intentions, yet I could never see the final step in their development programmes.

For me, it would be a mandatory quota of two or three Scots teens in first teams. Maybe supported by a seniors v youths pathway, as described above, which doesn't compromise the integrity of the pyramid.

 

1 hour ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

Surely the lower league sides wouldn't be playing their full strength sides against these development sides? Why would they risk injury or burn out if there were no points up for grabs? You'd essentially have these development squads playing de facto reserve and/or youth teams which arguably is worse than what already have!

They would earn points for the games against development sides 

Edited March 10, 2021 by SecretCEO

[Oldster]

^ Oops! Mask slipped there Mr Maxcaster!

I think his idea was for senior teams to earn points towards their own league (League 2, or whatever we're calling it) tally if they won or drew any games against any of the youth teams, and the youths would do likewise earning points towards their Development League tally if they had a result against the seniors. But I may be wrong.

2 hours ago, SecretCEO said:

Thanks - sixteen midweek fixture dates seems to make sense. It should keep the within-league games that supporters are more interested in scheduled on weekends.

I like your idea as a way not to upset folk with no c***s involved in the pyramid...

Quote

A Development League as a third side to the pyramid is interesting. I would worry about a youth team actually being promoted to the SPFL, although perhaps it isn't likely because the pyramid play offs would be of a high enough standard to prevent it.

It would be good, in that context, to give the best youth teams something real to aim towards and that motivation could spur their development.

Perhaps a Development League could encompass the youth, or combined academy, teams down through to the Lowland League and beyond, linking up the divisions initially and then leaving it to run. It would be good to give sixteen to nineteen year olds who aren't quite developed enough for first team football genuinely competitive divisions to play in, with promotion and relegation issues to drive their engagement.

 

...I prefer my idea because it delivers on the Competition Working Group's approved proposal of a couple of years ago of c***s being entered at tier 5, which seems also to be their approximate level if the Challenge Cup is anything to go by.

I also think my idea would hush the Old Farm as they would have their way, but with the indemnity of the pyramid playoffs to prevent their actual progression into the SPFL.

***colts

 

Edit - I like your suggestions regarding expanding the pyramid's third side, down the development divisions.

(And just teasing about your identity!)

Edited March 10, 2021 by Oldster

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Regionalising below the Championship is a terrible idea

After the 2 pro teams and 6 semipro sides Scottish Rugby has 46 teams in the national set up before you get to regional level. Berwick and Caithness are in the same division. Orkney were there until recently

If Scotland’s biggest sport could only do 22 would be an embarrassment

[St-ow!]

@SecretCEO

Your proposal - colts teams, not part of the pyramid, but playing some games against SPFL lower league opponents, each earning points towards their respective leagues:

22 hours ago, SecretCEO said:

What about if our bottom senior national division had sixteen teams, playing every opponent twice.

And if we had a non-pyramid top development league of eight teams, playing every opponent twice.

Then we asked those seniors to play each youth team once as part of their points-earning regular season. These could be eight midweek games across their season, giving the seniors a 38 game season each.

The top development teams would therefore have sixteen games each per season against senior pros, and a thirty game season each in total.

There could be a second level of development teams who would aim for promotion to that elite level. Unless perhaps the Lowland League would want to participate in something similar.

That's a bit sketchy, so maybe fits with all the changes to the league's attempts at player development and the changing faces at our national association's equivalent.

It always seemed like there were good intentions, yet I could never see the final step in their development programmes.

For me, it would be a mandatory quota of two or three Scots teens in first teams. Maybe supported by a seniors v youths pathway, as described above, which doesn't compromise the integrity of the pyramid.

 

19 hours ago, DiegoDiego said:

20 hours ago, Stag Nation said:

I believe that would be illegal racial discrimination, under the Equality Act. "Race" is defined as including "nationality" and "ethnic or national origins".

You could classify it as three Scottish trained players. They would need to have been registered at Scottish clubs for a certain amount of years before a certain age. It wouldn't matter what their nationality was but you'd find the vast majority would be eligible to play for Scotland anyway. That's how hockey got away with it.

17 hours ago, Oldster said:

8 midweek games per club, yep, but 16 midweek matchdays to get through it all since the 8 development teams can only take on one opponent at a time.

 

14 hours ago, SecretCEO said:

Thanks - sixteen midweek fixture dates seems to make sense. It should keep the within-league games that supporters are more interested in scheduled on weekends.

 

14 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

Surely the lower league sides wouldn't be playing their full strength sides against these development sides? Why would they risk injury or burn out if there were no points up for grabs? You'd essentially have these development squads playing de facto reserve and/or youth teams which arguably is worse than what already have!

 

12 hours ago, Oldster said:

^

I think his idea was for senior teams to earn points towards their own league (League 2, or whatever we're calling it) tally if they won or drew any games against any of the youth teams, and the youths would do likewise earning points towards their Development League tally if they had a result against the seniors.

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by St-ow!

[St-ow!]

@Oldster

Your proposal - colts at tier 5 of the pyramid, but within their own division, in parallel with the Lowland and Highland leagues:

17 hours ago, Oldster said:

Or instead just add a Development League as the third side of the pyramid in parallel with the HL and LL. With pyramid play off semi finalists being the bottom SPFL team, HL winners, LL winners, and Development League winners.

 

14 hours ago, SecretCEO said:

A Development League as a third side to the pyramid is interesting. I would worry about a youth team actually being promoted to the SPFL, although perhaps it isn't likely because the pyramid play offs would be of a high enough standard to prevent it.

It would be good, in that context, to give the best youth teams something real to aim towards and that motivation could spur their development.

Perhaps a Development League could encompass the youth, or combined academy, teams down through to the Lowland League and beyond, linking up the divisions initially and then leaving it to run. It would be good to give sixteen to nineteen year olds who aren't quite developed enough for first team football genuinely competitive divisions to play in, with promotion and relegation issues to drive their engagement.

 

12 hours ago, Oldster said:

I prefer my idea because it delivers on the Competition Working Group's approved proposal of a couple of years ago of colts being entered at tier 5, which seems also to be their approximate level if the Challenge Cup is anything to go by.

I also think my idea would hush the Old Farm as they would have their way, but with the indemnity of the pyramid playoffs to prevent their actual progression into the SPFL.

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by St-ow!

[Marten]

Scotland's geography is too big an issue to regionalise directly below full-time leagues. Say, there are 24 teams in the 2 top leagues like suggested above, the current 22 + Falkirk & Cove (purely based on the current table). And then say 2 regional divisions of 12 below that. If you do it without a fixed boundary, you can just add the top 3 of both the HL & LL, split that and get something like this:

North: Brora Rangers, Elgin City, Fraserburgh, Peterhead, Rothes, Montrose, Brechin City, Forfar Athletic, East Fife, Stirling Albion, Kelty Hearts, Cowdenbeath
South: Stenhousemuir, Edinburgh City, Dumbarton, Clyde, Airdrie, Albion Rovers, Partick Thistle, Queens Park, BSC Glasgow, Bonnyrigg Rose, Annan Athletic, Stranraer

That would put pretty southern teams like Cowdenbeath, Kelty, Stirling & East Fife in the north division. For those teams, regionalisation would massively increase travel. Also, southern teams like Stenhousemuir & Edinburgh City would lose some pretty close games, that's just not a good idea. Alternatively, you can work with fixed boundaries like the current HL/LL dividing line, that would give leagues like this:

North: Brora Rangers, Elgin City, Fraserburgh, Peterhead, Rothes, Montrose, Brechin City, Forfar Athletic, Buckie Thistle, Inverurie Loco Works, Formartine United, Nairn County
South: East Fife, Stirling Albion, Cowdenbeath, Stenhousemuir, Edinburgh City, Dumbarton, Clyde, Airdrie, Partick Thistle, Queens Park, Annan Athletic, Stranraer

That makes the south division much stronger than the north division. I even had to remove one SPFL team (Albion Rovers) from the south, while the north only has 5 current SPFL teams and 7 current HL teams. Neither option really works, regionalisation makes sense from tier 5 but not higher.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Marten

[SecretCEO]

4 hours ago, St-ow! said:

@SecretCEO

Your proposal - colts teams, not part of the pyramid, but playing some games against SPFL lower league opponents, each earning points towards their respective leagues:

That's right, mate. Sorry for the confusion.

[St-ow!]

On 10/09/2020 at 16:37, anonanist said:

Comparing the travel distances for East Fife for the two scenarios mentioned (League One this coming season vs the proposed North Conference), I found the approximate one-way milages to be:

 

North Conference

Brora 193, Elgin 164, Brechin 57, Kelty 18, Cowdenbeath 15.

Total 447.

 

League One

Dumbarton 74, Partick 61, Airdrie 52, Clyde 46, Falkirk 36.

Total 272.

 

I didn't add the milages for the away trips that both leagues would have in common - to Forfar, Montrose, Cove, and Peterhead.

This clinched it for me. Shame, as I was very keen on parallel conferences at the third tier.

[Gordon EF]

On 26/02/2021 at 13:30, St-ow! said:

Something more radical to propose?

It's not the radicalness or otherwise I have any issue with. It's the goal of reconstruction. It shouldn't be about trying to maintain as many full time teams as possible or ridiculous notions about tweaks to the leagues determining what quality of international player Scotland produces. It should be about setting up a structure that's entertaining and competitive for supporters and fair and competitive for clubs.