HTG Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Those leagues utterly farcical. Shows how ridiculous splitting beneath championship is What's utterly farcical about them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Have you looked at who is put together? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Have you looked at who is put together? Mostly just a bunch of part time clubs. To be fair, I wouldn't be quite so drastic. I reckon the top half of League 1 is still a decent level and it would be unfair not to have them national. Two leagues of 14 with the balance tipped out. But I believe in being realistic. The SPFL construct simply isn't going to change. There needs to be greater consequences for finishing at or close to the bottom of League 2 though. At the very least, team 12 should be relegated and team 11 should play off against the Regional League play off runners up with the winner of that tie going straight up. The Juniors need to be incorporated. Someone has to make it sufficiently attractive to the more ambitious teams. I think a number of them don't rate the LL for the same reasons you would - albeit your reasons are magnified. Joining the LL would cost us £thousands in lost revenue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 What's utterly farcical about them? Forfar are in with Wick in one set up, and Gretna in the other. We'll start with that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Second Andy Goram Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Anyone else here the guy on Clyde 1 saying teams should earn extra points for having higher average attendances... Will turn this into a laughing stock with stupid rules like the old NASL was. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) Mostly just a bunch of part time clubs. To be fair, I wouldn't be quite so drastic. I reckon the top half of League 1 is still a decent level and it would be unfair not to have them national. Two leagues of 14 with the balance tipped out. But I believe in being realistic. The SPFL construct simply isn't going to change. There needs to be greater consequences for finishing at or close to the bottom of League 2 though. At the very least, team 12 should be relegated and team 11 should play off against the Regional League play off runners up with the winner of that tie going straight up. The Juniors need to be incorporated. Someone has to make it sufficiently attractive to the more ambitious teams. I think a number of them don't rate the LL for the same reasons you would - albeit your reasons are magnified. Joining the LL would cost us £thousands in lost revenue. It's pretty obvious different part-time teams have different ability's tho, and whilst some will write it off as arrogant it just doesn't make sense to have teams in the same leagues as ones that are more on par with their u20s than first team. I agree fully that more promotion opertunity is needed, indeed i would go further, I believe that fundamentally winning a league should come with an automatic promotion slot. The final point has been gone over 1000 times, junior involvement is needed, but with them being on the outside its hard to see a satisfactory way for this to occur, ultimately the LL isn't going away, and direct junior access to the spfl is madness. We probably are too far along the road and need a significant change in the current circumstance for talks of mass junior entry to the pyramid. My suggestion would be for entry licence to become a requirement at super league level, this should be temporarily be viewed as a commitment to the pyramid from the sjfa thus meeting that requirement (allowing Scottish cup entry) , after say 2 seasons of that in place talks could (re)begin on junior involvement, possibly in a 3 region solution. Edited January 15, 2016 by parsforlife 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Mostly just a bunch of part time clubs. To be fair, I wouldn't be quite so drastic. I reckon the top half of League 1 is still a decent level and it would be unfair not to have them national. Two leagues of 14 with the balance tipped out. But I believe in being realistic. The SPFL construct simply isn't going to change. There needs to be greater consequences for finishing at or close to the bottom of League 2 though. At the very least, team 12 should be relegated and team 11 should play off against the Regional League play off runners up with the winner of that tie going straight up. The Juniors need to be incorporated. Someone has to make it sufficiently attractive to the more ambitious teams. I think a number of them don't rate the LL for the same reasons you would - albeit your reasons are magnified. Joining the LL would cost us £thousands in lost revenue. Considering there are only 10 teams in league two finishing 11th or 12th is criminal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Forfar are in with Wick in one set up, and Gretna in the other. We'll start with that. And? Lochee Utd would be in the same boat but with far less infrastructure to cope even though the powers that be are content to push non league teams down this track. In every regional set up there are teams at the extremes of the region. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Considering there are only 10 teams in league two finishing 11th or 12th is criminal. Well quite lol. The point stands even if the arithmetic is pish. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Why not have a spectacular rebrand into 3 leagues of which the HL & LL filter in below the third tier. So all 42 league sides meet once over a season, 21 H / 21 A. Final position decides where you start off in the new structure. No league/challenge cup or something that season to make up for extra games. Bound to be some compelling stuff going on that year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effeffsee_the2nd Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) i like how he has groundsharing east stirlinghsire and stenhousemuir in different regions, also 1 auto relegation, but no auto promotion, that division will have no one left in it soon enough anyway, we can go on about this all day, there is no such thing as a perfect fit for scotland, having regional below the championship means that either you have a bottle neck with little to no movement ( the 4 way play offs) or too much relegation making it hard for promoted teams to survive, we've discused a 2 way split below the championship but nobody wants that, whatever you do theres going to be at least one b*****d level to this pyramid. maybe think about having a 3rd level of national, also 16 teams. it still allows movement up and down the levels, the long away trips are only twice a season, it isnt such a huge jump as going from N/E/W to playing full time teams, crowds will probably remain at spfl 2 levels but theres nothing you can do about that, its a better one to have a 3 way split below, like is said, theres always going to be an undesirable division Edited January 16, 2016 by effeffsee_the2nd 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 There seems to be an opinion from some on here that clubs should give up their national league place for a system which offers little hope of return. And that somehow not offering their club as a sacrifice is some sort of horrible self interest getting in the way of progress. What they need is the opportunity to prove they're worth their place, not simply thrown out. Which either means a regional system with plenty opportunities for promotion, or retaining their national league status with greater opportunities for relegation. Either way a three way split as described above isn't going to be helpful. If the juniors are getting involved then you either retain the number of teams in the national leagues (and split them into three divisions) with 4 regions below, or you reduce the number of national teams and retain the highland/lowland with greater opportunities for promotion from the lowland league. I think the former should be the aim . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) ^ Can't see the problem with a three-way split myself... Premiership Celtic CL Aberdeen EL Hearts EL St.Johnstone EL Ross Co. Inverness Dundee Motherwell Partick Killie Hamliton Dundee Utd Rangers Hibs PO Falkirk RL Raith Rvs RL (16) Championship Morton PR QoS PR St.Mirren PO Dumbarton PO Livingston PO Alloa Dunfermline Ayr Utd Peterhead Albion Rvs Stenny Airdrie Stranraer Cowdenbeath Forfar PO Brechin RL (16) West One North One East One Annan PO&LC Elgin PO&LC East Fife PO&LC Clyde LC Brora LC Arbroath LC Q.Park LC Cove LC Montrose LC Stirling LC Formartine LC Edin. City LC E.Stirling. Turriff Spartans Stirling Uni. Nairn Whitehill E.Kilbride Wick Selkirk Cumbernauld Forres Preston BSC Glasgow Fraserburgh Gala FD Dalbeattie Clachnacuddin Edin. Uni. Gretna '08 Inverurie Vale of Leithen Threave Keith Burntisland Glasgow Uni. Buckie Civil Service Wigtown & B Huntly Coldstream (14) Lossiemouth Hawick RA Deveronvale Berwick (er ?!) (16) (16) Newton Stew.* Strathspey Th. Linlithgow Rose St.Cuthbert W.* Fort William Girvan* Rothes Golspie Banks o' Dee (+3) (+5) (+1) Plenty of depth in each region, no real issues with travel, and all licenced except those marked (*) who are current SFA member clubs that are due to be licenced by the start of next season (so I've read elsewhere on P&B). The difficulty might be more about what comes below this? Edited January 18, 2016 by RabidAl 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
effeffsee_the2nd Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Can't see the problem with a three-way split myself... Premiership Celtic CL Aberdeen EL Hearts EL St.Johnstone EL Ross Co. Inverness Dundee Motherwell Partick Killie Hamliton Dundee Utd Rangers Hibs PO Falkirk RL Raith Rvs RL (16) Championship Morton PR QoS PR St.Mirren PO Dumbarton PO Livingston PO Alloa Dunfermline Ayr Utd Peterhead Albion Rvs Stenny Airdrie Stranraer Cowdenbeath Forfar PO Brechin RL (16) West One North One East One Annan PO&LC Elgin PO&LC East Fife PO&LC Clyde LC Brora LC Arbroath LC Q.Park LC Cove LC Montrose LC Stirling LC Formartine LC Edin. City LC E.Stirling. Turriff Spartans Stirling Uni. Nairn Whitehill E.Kilbride Wick Selkirk Cumbernauld Forres Preston BSC Glasgow Fraserburgh Gala FD Dalbeattie Clachnacuddin Edin. Uni. Gretna '08 Inverurie Vale of Leithen Threave Keith Burntisland Glasgow Uni. Buckie Civil Service Wigtown & B Huntly Coldstream (14) Lossiemouth Hawick RA Deveronvale (15) (16) Newton Stew.* Strathspey Th. Linlithgow Rose St.Cuthbert W.* Fort William Rothes Golspie Banks o' Dee (+2) (+5) (+1) Plenty of depth in each region, no real issues with travel, and all licenced except those marked (*) who are due to be licenced by the start of next season. The difficulty might be more about what comes below this? youv got 3 league winners plus forfar in the play offs, and brechin automaticly relegated, but no automatic promotion , how does that work? who automaticly replaces brechin? do both the play of finalist go into the championship? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) The winners of the 3 regions and second bottom of the Championship are drawn into two play-off matches - two 'finals' if you like. The two winners of these play-off matches take the two available places in the Championship for the following season. 1st-4th in each region and any relegated teams qualify for the following season's league cup (under the new format). So that would be 12 teams from the regions, plus 16 from the Championship, plus 12 from the Premiership to give 40 for the summer group stage; the top 4 Premiership teams would come in after the groups as normal (depending upon Scottish Cup winners, etc). Edited January 16, 2016 by RabidAl 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 If you're splitting the Highland League from the rest in terms of physical geography it has to be 2 regions. If you're splitting it in terms of population then it has to be at least 4 regions (something like: Highland/Aberdeen - Dundee, Fife, Angus, Stirling, Falkirk - West Central - East South). Those regions should also keep travel down to under 100 miles outside of the Highland region. But if we're splitting into 4 regions like that then there should be a national conference league at the 3rd tier. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 (edited) The borders could just as easily be drawn at, say, Kincardine (east/west) and Angus/Aberdeenshire (north/east) to give a reasonable three-way split. I suppose grazza's conferences idea could be adapted to give West, North and East regional-national conferences of 8 teams each below the two national tiers of 16. So a 24-team tier 3 would be 3 parallel leagues of 8 teams, where they'd play teams within their own regional league twice each season, once at home and once away (for 14 games), and teams within the other two conferences once each season, just once at home or away (for a further 16 games), to give 30 games in total - the same number as with the top two tiers of 16. The benefits could be: - quality is maintained within each region by keeping the strongest clubs together, acting as a safe landing zone for relegated clubs and an attractive target for the best non-league clubs to aspire to; - having a good number of national fixtures to keep higher standards overall, yet only having 4 aways to each other region; - as with 16-16- it would bring more clubs to a higher level (24 at tier 3) whilst maintaining competitiveness and giving more competition than an equivalent national league of 24 teams; - good variety in fixtures with 23 opponents per season and no more than 2 league games versus any other team. E.g.: Conference West Conference North Conference East Queen's Park Elgin East Fife Annan Ath. Brora Arbroath Clyde Cove Montrose Stirling Formartine Berwick East Stirling. Turriff Edin. City Stirling Uni. Nairn Spartans Cumbernauld Inverurie LW Edin. Uni. East Kilbride Fraserburgh Whitehill W. {In terms of arranging the fixtures, I suppose you'd be looking at alternating between national and regional games ('matchdays') each weekend, with the regionals just being following a straight-forward fixtures list for 8 teams. The matchdays for fixtures on a national basis would possibly have to be arranged on the basis of each division being divided into two groups, with teams within each group then playing each team in an opposing group once, before the groups themselves would swap after the 4 matches, to then play each of the other groups in turn, except the group containing teams within their own region who they will play on the regional fixtures list as normal.} E.g: West North East 1 A 1 C 1 E 2 A 2 C 2 E 3 A 3 C 3 E 4 A 4 C 4 E 5 B 5 D 5 E 6 B 6 D 6 E 7 B 7 D 7 E 8 B 8 D 8 E So, in national matchdays 1-4, for group A (Conf. West, 1-4) and group C (Conf. North 1-4): A v C A v C A v C A v C 1) 1 v 1 2) 1 v 2 3) 1 v 3 4) 1 v 4 2 v 2 2 v 3 2 v 4 2 v 1 3 v 3 3 v 4 3 v 1 3 v 2 4 v 4 4 v 1 4 v 2 4 v 3 (h) v (a) (a) v (h) (h) v (a) (a) v (h).....and so on for the other groups. The national (N) matchdays could have the fixtures for the groups of teams scheduled as: N 1-4: group A vs group C, B v E, D v F. N 5-8: A v E, B v D, CvF. N 9-12: A v F, B v C, D v E. N 13-16: A v D, B v F, C v E. The regional (R ) matchdays could be interspersed with the national (N ) matchdays: N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-R-N-N <-----teams play regionally or nationally on consecutive weeks. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10... ....30. <------fixture number. It might be the case that that there'd be a bit of flexibility within the system anyway, so clubs on the boundaries when promoted/relegated to the conferences, could apply and be accepted to West rather than East (Alloa, say) or North rather than East (Montrose) with the consent of participating clubs. If we want a pyramid, it seems boundary issues are in the nature of the beast. Edited January 19, 2016 by RabidAl 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 What is the purpose of a 3 way split? Why would this be a better option than a 2 or 4 way split? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 Has anyone ever considered having an odd number of teams? One team a week would sit out which could give players the chance to rest and pitches the chance to not be damaged further. Teams could of course do their own thing in their weekend off if they wanted (e.g. arrange a friendly). It might also give teams an opportunity to help get a fixture out of the way (say for example they have a free weekend and a team they need to play in a rearranged game is out of the cup or vice versa). Depending on the size of the league each team would only sit out a round of fixtures two or three times. If this was built in then it could negate the need for a break. Just a thought. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 (edited) What is the purpose of a 3 way split? Why would this be a better option than a 2 or 4 way split? The part-time and non-league clubs divide more proportionately into north, east and west regions than they do into just highland and lowland, for example; it keeps (admittedly, slightly arbitrary) boundaries to a minimum within a sub-national system that, by its nature, must have them - whereas a four-way split adds complexity; and there's good precedent for a three-way split with the juniors, which could also be useful if you want to try to convince them to sign up to the 'senior' pyramid. Edited January 18, 2016 by RabidAl 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.