League reconstruction: Let's hear your view

[HTG]

Again, the LL covers almost three times as many clubs as the HFL, that does not reflect population demographics nor the club spread in Scotland. Even if you consider Tayside Junior clubs to be North, its still heavily weighted too far one way.

If we want more strong clubs challenging for promotion, we need three avenues for that, two of which are south of the Tay, the three Region split with the best of the West, East and North providing the challenge.

36/38 National (16-16, of maybe even 16-18 or 12-12-12 or whatever combination you like)

16 HFL 16 LL West 16 LL East

16 North Superleague (HFL remnants/Juniors), 16 West Superleague (SoS/Juniors), 16 East Superleague (EoS/Juniors) and so on and so forth.......

End of season 4 team group playing home and away over 3 weeks, winner secures a league place for the following season, could be;

Montrose

Brora Rangers

Auchinleck Talbot

Linlithgow Rose

In time, this expands to automatic relegation for the SPFL club, with a three way play-off to decide promotion.

I like this. You won't get a reduction in the overall size of the SPFL but that's ok. Three leagues of 14 would work for them. That could allow automatic relegation for the team finishing 14th (to avoid rewarding complete failure) and then a 4 way play off between the 3 league winners and team 13 from SPFL. I don't think one down and a play off from a league of 14 would be dramatically unfair. Or keep the top twelve as they are and stick two leagues of 16 under them with 30 games and then an 8:8 split making up the last 7 games of the season. That could all happen from the first season after a regional structure is in place which allocates the 2 additional spaces via play offs and nobody is relegated.

[Wilky1878]

I like this. You won't get a reduction in the overall size of the SPFL but that's ok. Three leagues of 14 would work for them. That could allow automatic relegation for the team finishing 14th (to avoid rewarding complete failure) and then a 4 way play off between the 3 league winners and team 13 from SPFL. I don't think one down and a play off from a league of 14 would be dramatically unfair. Or keep the top twelve as they are and stick two leagues of 16 under them with 30 games and then an 8:8 split making up the last 7 games of the season. That could all happen from the first season after a regional structure is in place which allocates the 2 additional spaces via play offs and nobody is relegated.

If bottom goes down I assume you would have top 2 come up in your group?

[HTG]

Yes. 2 from the 4 which is comprised of team 13 and each of the 3 regional leagues. I'm not sure if there is another part of any pyramid anywhere where a team which has performed sufficiently poorly as to finish bottom of its league gets another chance in the way Montrose did last season. I could imagine the furore this season if Rangers won the championship but still ended up where they were because Dundee Utd finished bottom of the Premier but were then given (and took advantage of) a playoff.

Edited January 5, 2016 by HTG

[SpoonTon]

Again, the LL covers almost three times as many clubs as the HFL, that does not reflect population demographics nor the club spread in Scotland. Even if you consider Tayside Junior clubs to be North, its still heavily weighted too far one way.

If we want more strong clubs challenging for promotion, we need three avenues for that, two of which are south of the Tay, the three Region split with the best of the West, East and North providing the challenge.

36/38 National (16-16, of maybe even 16-18 or 12-12-12 or whatever combination you like)

16 HFL 16 LL West 16 LL East

16 North Superleague (HFL remnants/Juniors), 16 West Superleague (SoS/Juniors), 16 East Superleague (EoS/Juniors) and so on and so forth.......

End of season 4 team group playing home and away over 3 weeks, winner secures a league place for the following season, could be;

Montrose

Brora Rangers

Auchinleck Talbot

Linlithgow Rose

In time, this expands to automatic relegation for the SPFL club, with a three way play-off to decide promotion.

If you're removing up to 10 SPFL teams from the national leagues then why be so tentative with promotion (while also removing much of the competition from the lower end if the national league)? You could essentially be giving a terrible deal for up to 20 current SPFL teams i.e. those who would be relegated with very little chance of promotion, and those who would struggle to fight for promotion to the top flight with only one potential relegation spot to avoid.

No thanks.

[HTG]

If you're removing up to 10 SPFL teams from the national leagues then why be so tentative with promotion (while also removing much of the competition from the lower end if the national league)? You could essentially be giving a terrible deal for up to 20 current SPFL teams i.e. those who would be relegated with very little chance of promotion, and those who would struggle to fight for promotion to the top flight with only one potential relegation spot to avoid.

No thanks.

You won't get rid of SPFL teams. It's a view held by Burnie but I think he's wise enough to know it won't happen. I also disagree with him on this but I know where he is coming from. But there is no reason why we should be going above and beyond to protect the worst of them from what happens everywhere else and at the same time stifling those who may be capable of offering more to the game.

[itzdrk]

The fact these clubs (EK, BSC, Colts, Uni sides) have jumped straight into the 5th tier ahead of established football clubs with a fan base highlights whats wrong with how the "pyramid" was introduced and set-up. Only EK have shown that they can develop a fan base.

In any normal pyramid, EK, Colts and BSC start at the very bottom. In Scotland, they bypass 160+ clubs. Not their fault, they're just taking advantage of a flawed system.

They have started at the very bottom.

The juniors are below the bottom because of their terrified of change attitude

[HTG]

They have started at the very bottom.

The juniors are below the bottom because of their terrified of change attitude

Lol. We're trying to keep this one reasonable old bean. I think the widespread fear of change in Scottish football is pretty evident from everything that has happened over a number of years. #armageddon

[SpoonTon]

You won't get rid of SPFL teams. It's a view held by Burnie but I think he's wise enough to know it won't happen. I also disagree with him on this but I know where he is coming from. But there is no reason why we should be going above and beyond to protect the worst of them from what happens everywhere else and at the same time stifling those who may be capable of offering more to the game.

I agree with that. I actually think that in principle 32 teams is about right for the national set-up. The deal has to be right (as far as that can be pushed) for everyone though. I suspect this will mean accepting the HL/LL split at the top level of the regional leagues. In essence it's like having to split a national conference because of physical geographical issues. And you'd be giving the smaller area with the larger population more promotion places to compensate.

A compromise like that might need to be accepted.

[Burnie_man]

If you're removing up to 10 SPFL teams from the national leagues then why be so tentative with promotion (while also removing much of the competition from the lower end if the national league)? You could essentially be giving a terrible deal for up to 20 current SPFL teams i.e. those who would be relegated with very little chance of promotion, and those who would struggle to fight for promotion to the top flight with only one potential relegation spot to avoid.

No thanks.

Well given the SPFL clubs only agreed to a play-off as it currently stands and not straight relegation, maybe they would only agree to a play-off initially? As I said, this is just for starters, once the system is bedded in we can move onto automatic relegation for the bottom club plus a play-off as HTG outlines. Yes, that would be preferable right from the off but I doubt you’ll sell that to the SPFL clubs who are already sceptical about the idea of a Pyramid as it stands already.

A terrible deal for SPFL clubs is already in place, with clubs bumping around the bottom two divisions for the last umpteen decades safe in the knowledge that they will always be SPFL members and sooking up the league sponsorship payments but heading nowhere, until last season of course but even then, only a play-off which an awful Montrose team negotiated against a reluctant Brora.

Anyway, all pie in the sky as I have already said unless there is a major change of attitudes in Scottish football with self-interest set aside. If the SFA aren’t interested (which they aren’t), and the SPFL, HFL and LL all happy with the situation then we’ll carry on as we are. There is absolutely no incentive for the LL to encourage Junior participation, and there is absolutely no incentive for the HFL to seek a link with the North Juniors to allow promotion/relegation, and there is no incentive for the SJFA to encourage involvement in a set-up which does not appeal to the vast majority of its members. Nobody is interested.

I also doubt very much that the SFA want a huge influx of Junior clubs into its membership, hence the late inclusion of the “committed to Pyramid” clause that HTG mentions a few posts ago.

[SpoonTon]

Well given the SPFL clubs only agreed to a play-off as it currently stands and not straight relegation, maybe they would only agree to a play-off initially? As I said, this is just for starters, once the system is bedded in we can move onto automatic relegation for the bottom club plus a play-off as HTG outlines. Yes, that would be preferable right from the off but I doubt you’ll sell that to the SPFL clubs who are already sceptical about the idea of a Pyramid as it stands already.

A terrible deal for SPFL clubs is already in place, with clubs bumping around the bottom two divisions for the last umpteen decades safe in the knowledge that they will always be SPFL members and sooking up the league sponsorship payments but heading nowhere, until last season of course but even then, only a play-off which an awful Montrose team negotiated against a reluctant Brora.

Anyway, all pie in the sky as I have already said unless there is a major change of attitudes in Scottish football with self-interest set aside. If the SFA aren’t interested (which they aren’t), and the SPFL, HFL and LL all happy with the situation then we’ll carry on as we are. There is absolutely no incentive for the LL to encourage Junior participation, and there is absolutely no incentive for the HFL to seek a link with the North Juniors to allow promotion/relegation, and there is no incentive for the SJFA to encourage involvement in a set-up which does not appeal to the vast majority of its members. Nobody is interested.

I also doubt very much that the SFA want a huge influx of Junior clubs into its membership, hence the late inclusion of the “committed to Pyramid” clause that HTG mentions a few posts ago.

I was meaning if the number of teams was reduced, e.g. if it was 16/16 then regional.

What I'm saying is that you could have a national conference split into a north and south region, with the south region getting most of the promotion places. You could have a Lowland league that looked something like this (in no particular order):

Queen’s Park

Clyde

------------------

Berwick

East Fife

East Stirling

Annan

------------------

Stirling Albion

Edinburgh City

Spartans

East Kilbride

Auchinleck Talbot

Kirkintilloch Rob Roy F.C.

Pollok

-------------------

Bonnyrigg Rose

Boness United

Linlithgow Rose

The play-off winners would face a play-off final against the HL winners. I think that would be a really workable way of starting the pyramid. Whether anyone would agree to that, I have no idea.

Another issue is that Premiership clubs might push for B teams at that level of the set-up (and below). I'm not a fan of the idea of B teams, but it's another factor to consider if a new system was being constructed for the benefit of everyone.

[Wilky1878]

Yes. 2 from the 4 which is comprised of team 13 and each of the 3 regional leagues. I'm not sure if there is another part of any pyramid anywhere where a team which has performed sufficiently poorly as to finish bottom of its league gets another chance in the way Montrose did last season. I could imagine the furore this season if Rangers won the championship but still ended up where they were because Dundee Utd finished bottom of the Premier but were then given (and took advantage of) a playoff.

I agree with this, always said bottom of league two should be automatically relegated.

[Edgar81]

Have you ever looked at other European countries with population around 5 million?

Scotland

Population density map (Wikipedia)

Population: 5,295,000
Area: 78,782 km2
Density: 67.2/km2

First, the only one with no actual pyramid:

Republic of Ireland

Population: 4,635,400
Area: 70,273 km2
Density: 65.3/km2

Level 1: 12 teams
Level 2: 8 teams

Now the others:

Croatia

Population: 4,284,889
Area: 56,594 km2
Density: 75.8/km2

Level 1: 10 teams
Level 2: 12 teams
Level 3: 3 groups: West (16) / East (16) / South (18)
Level 4: County leagues (one for each of the 21 counties)

Norway

Population density map (Wikipedia)

Population: 5,165,802
Area: 385,178 km2
Density: 15.5/km2

League system (Wikipedia)

Level 1: 16
Level 2: 16
Level 3: 4 groups of 14 teams each
Level 4: 12 groups of 12-14 teams each
Level 5 and below: Regional football unions

Slovakia

Population: 5,415,949
Area: 49,035 km2
Density: 111/km2

Level 1: 12
Level 2: 2 groups: 12 / 12
Level 3: 4 groups: 16 / 16 / 16/ 18
Level 4: 8 groups

Finland

Population density map (Wikipedia).

Population: 5,489,097
Area: 338,424 km2
Density: 18/km2

League system (Wikipedia)

Level 1: 12
Level 2: 10
Level 3: 4 divisions of 10 teams each
Level 4: 9 divisions of 10 to 12 teams each
Level 5: 14 divisions of 9 to 12 teams each
Level 6: 22 divisions of 7 to 19 teams each
Level 7: 27 divisions of 5 to 16 teams each

Denmark

Population: 5,699,220
Area: 42,915.7 km2
Density: 132.8/km2

League system (Wikipedia)

Level 1: 12
Level 2: 12
Level 3: 2 divisions: 16 / 16
Level 4: 3 divisions: 14 / 14 / 14
Level 5: 5 regional divisions - these can be even 7 levels deep

In all these countries, there's a split after the second level. In Slovakia the split occurs after the first level.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Edgar81

[LongTimeLurker]

If SPL2 had happened and the rump of the SFL had lost most of its subsidy, something similar to the above might have happened. As things stand there is almost no chance of a continental style pyramid emerging any time soon, because the lower division SPFL, HL and LL clubs are not going to want to lose status and subsidy on the one hand, and junior clubs are happy in a three-way regional format on the other.

[RedLichtie86]

If SPL2 had happened and the rump of the SFL had lost most of its subsidy, something similar to the above might have happened. As things stand there is almost no chance of a continental style pyramid emerging any time soon, because the lower division SPFL, HL and LL clubs are not going to want to lose status and subsidy on the one hand, and junior clubs are happy in a three-way regional format on the other.

If SPFL 2 had happened then we would have seen 24 teams play a 22 game league season over 2 leagues.

Followed by a 24 teams play a 14 game season over 3 leagues.

And fans buying season tickets not knowing who their teams will be playing in the second half of the season.

Was a failed system in Austria and Switzerland. Thank feck it wasnt implemented here.

Edited January 8, 2016 by RedLichtie86

[BFTD]

Bit off topic, so apologies, but this is probably the best thread to include it in as posters are most likely to be interested.

There's a copy of The Scottish Football League: The First 100 Years by Bob Crampsey in the British Heart Foundation shop in Alloa. Anyone interested can drop by and buy it for £3.35 (ask at the counter if it isn't out on the shelves), or send me a PM and I'll be happy to put it aside for you. More than happy to post it to you if you like; I think the shipping's likely to be about £3.20. You can make a payment direct on the BHF's website, which I can help you with.

Picture below of the same edition, and in similar-looking condition:

What a depressing title, by the way

[Edgar81]

Implementing a 3-region (North-East-West) split below the Championship, based on standings at the end of last season. I merged League One, League Two, Highland League, Lowland League, East of Scotland League and South of Scotland League into two levels.

The last team in the Championship would be relegated to L3, while the 3 L3 winners + the second last team in the Championship would be drawn in to 2 ties, with the aggregate winners going to the Championship.

1. Level 3 10/10/10 + Level 4 16/18/18

2. Level 3 12/12/12 + Level 4 12/18/16

[SpoonTon]

Implementing a 3-region (North-East-West) split below the Championship, based on standings at the end of last season. I merged League One, League Two, Highland League, Lowland League, East of Scotland League and South of Scotland League into two levels.

The last team in the Championship would be relegated to L3, while the 3 L3 winners + the second last team in the Championship would be drawn in to 2 ties, with the aggregate winners going to the Championship.

1. Level 3 10/10/10 + Level 4 16/18/18

split1.png

2. Level 3 12/12/12 + Level 4 12/18/16

split2.png

Those region splits highlight some of the real problems with splitting the Scottish leagues into regions. Forfar is closer to Greenock than it is to Inverness (and closer to Stranraer than Wick). The central belt isn't too far from Fife, Fife isn't too far from Angus, Angus isn't too far from Aberdeen, and so on.

If at the top level we're talking about expanding to play a greater variety of teams, then why restrict lower teams from traveling in one direction but not another? That's why I think the top level of the regional leagues should only be used to separate the Highland League from the rest. And after that point I think it's a case of finding an agreement of merging with the Juniors.

[parsforlife]

Those leagues utterly farcical. Shows how ridiculous splitting beneath championship is

[RedLichtie86]

Wait, what? Potentialy only 2 teams going up.

You may as well make the prem and championship a closed shop.

Bottom 3 of championship relegated. 3 league winners up.

4th bottom, and 2nd place teams play offs.

But you need bigger leagues to have that. Its going to be the 12 12 idea soon enough.

[HTG]

Those region splits highlight some of the real problems with splitting the Scottish leagues into regions. Forfar is closer to Greenock than it is to Inverness (and closer to Stranraer than Wick). The central belt isn't too far from Fife, Fife isn't too far from Angus, Angus isn't too far from Aberdeen, and so on.

If at the top level we're talking about expanding to play a greater variety of teams, then why restrict lower teams from traveling in one direction but not another? That's why I think the top level of the regional leagues should only be used to separate the Highland League from the rest. And after that point I think it's a case of finding an agreement of merging with the Juniors.

There are not enough teams in the Highlands to merit a genuine 2 way split.

And the issue of splitting is always a headache. Tayside is the definition of the split at the moment but absolutely nobody from non league Dundee would want to be in a league with Brora and Wick. In fact Wick is just not worth identifying as a reason not to do something. They are miles from everywhere and an exception that just needs to be managed.