Glenconner Posted April 9, 2017 Share Posted April 9, 2017 East Kilbride could always team up with Clyde. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leb8t Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 On 08/04/2017 at 10:04, The Mantis said: You're right. Progress in the game has to be on playing standards, not size of support or whatever. If clubs are unsustainable then they go bust, simple as that. True but I would question whether they made all that much. Whitehill played Celtic at Easter Road 20 years ago and the secretary told me that Hibs made more from it than WW did. Playing standard only? A hypothetical situation, League two relegation; Team A - Do not own ground, £500,000 debt, average age of squad 30, no youth development, finish on level points with Team B but better goal difference. Team B - Own their ground, no debt, average age of squad 23, youth development set up, finish on level points with Team A but poorer goal difference. Do team B deserve to be the club in the relegation play off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Playing standard only? A hypothetical situation, League two relegation; Team A - Do not own ground, £500,000 debt, average age of squad 30, no youth development, finish on level points with Team B but better goal difference. Team B - Own their ground, no debt, average age of squad 23, youth development set up, finish on level points with Team A but poorer goal difference. Do team B deserve to be the club in the relegation play off? Of course they do!!! [emoji23] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DutchBorderer Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 59 minutes ago, leb8t said: Do team B deserve to be the club in the relegation play off? That'd be a whole-hearted yes from me, because they finish below team A in the standings based on the rules of the competition. A case can be made for well-run clubs having a better impact on a country's league system in the long run, but on pitch performance is ultimately what matters (and a truly well-led club will not end up in team A's predicament in the first place by translating off field work into matchday results). Ranking and promoting/relegating clubs based on boardroom performance simply isn't feasible outside of coming down hard on cheaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Playing standard only? A hypothetical situation, League two relegation; Team A - Do not own ground, £500,000 debt, average age of squad 30, no youth development, finish on level points with Team B but better goal difference. Team B - Own their ground, no debt, average age of squad 23, youth development set up, finish on level points with Team A but poorer goal difference. Do team B deserve to be the club in the relegation play off? Yes. You set up off-feild requirements at the start of the season. Presuming team a have met whatever those requirements are then they stay up. Average squad age is clearly and rightly never going to be a requirement, Owning your own ground is a strange obsession of some, many many clubs don't own their own grounds but have perfectly good arrangements in place, alternatively we have clubs owning grounds in disrepair, with less security, their is no perfect arrangement. Youth development may well be a requirement, but if it's not in place to start with its irrelevant. Level of debt is interesting and really depends for each situation whether it's 'acceptable debt' or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB_Bino Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Owning your own ground is a strange obsession of some, many many clubs don't own their own grounds but have perfectly good arrangements in place, alternatively we have clubs owning grounds in disrepair, with less security, their is no perfect arrangement. Never really got the obsession for this. I remember reading a stat in FourFourTwo a few years ago that WBA are 1 of only 4 teams to own their stadium in England. I would imagine we are no different up here. Off the top of my head, Stirling, Falkirk, Clyde, Dunfermline, Airdrie, Edinburgh City, Cowdenbeath and Rangers don't own the stadium. If you really were in the know, I bet there is a lot more. By and large it means absolutely nothing if, as has been stated, good arrangements have been put in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Playing standard only? A hypothetical situation, League two relegation; Team A - Do not own ground, £500,000 debt, average age of squad 30, no youth development, finish on level points with Team B but better goal difference. Team B - Own their ground, no debt, average age of squad 23, youth development set up, finish on level points with Team A but poorer goal difference. Do team B deserve to be the club in the relegation play off? Not sure if this is a joke or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonD Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 On 11/04/2017 at 21:50, leb8t said: Playing standard only? A hypothetical situation, League two relegation; Team A - Do not own ground, £500,000 debt, average age of squad 30, no youth development, finish on level points with Team B but better goal difference. Team B - Own their ground, no debt, average age of squad 23, youth development set up, finish on level points with Team A but poorer goal difference. Do team B deserve to be the club in the relegation play off? Actually this is a fair point. Let's take it to the logical conclusion and do away with the actual football. Simply list the teams in order of bank balance then award additional points for ownership of ground and deduct them in line with average age of squad to determine the final placings. The entire season lasts half an hour while the sums are done, then promotion and relegation are announced and we can all do something more constructive on Saturday afternoons until the same time next year when we go through it all again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Never really got the obsession for this. I remember reading a stat in FourFourTwo a few years ago that WBA are 1 of only 4 teams to own their stadium in England. I would imagine we are no different up here.Off the top of my head, Stirling, Falkirk, Clyde, Dunfermline, Airdrie, Edinburgh City and Rangers don't own the stadium. If you really were in the know, I bet there is a lot more.By and large it means absolutely nothing if, as has been stated, good arrangements have been put in place. Definitely more clubs than that that don't. Berwick, Livingston, Inverness I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leb8t Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 On 11/04/2017 at 23:13, parsforlife said: Yes. You set up off-feild requirements at the start of the season. Presuming team a have met whatever those requirements are then they stay up. Average squad age is clearly and rightly never going to be a requirement, Owning your own ground is a strange obsession of some, many many clubs don't own their own grounds but have perfectly good arrangements in place, alternatively we have clubs owning grounds in disrepair, with less security, their is no perfect arrangement. Youth development may well be a requirement, but if it's not in place to start with its irrelevant. Level of debt is interesting and really depends for each situation whether it's 'acceptable debt' or not. I agree with most of what you say, Of course, the bottom line is points gained. I was thinking more of what the criteria for SFA club licencing and how rigorously they enforce them. In my experience not very, as long as the boxes are all ticked, actual practice is not really audited. The pyramid will work most effectively if it is monitored effectively. I was also trying to make the point that fans should have realistic expectations, most seem to want world class youth development while sitting top of the league on a minimal budget. Bearing in mind this was a question for League two do you want your club to develop their own and accept that this could mean disappointing seasons and perhaps relegation? Or would you rather your club risks debts spiralling out of control by signing experienced players who have played at a higher level and are now past their best years? Of course it does not need to be one extreme or the other. Do fans ever wonder or reason why their club is there? It is interesting that so many focussed on owning their ground. Maybe there is a few raw nerves. I think that there are many effective models groundshare, lease, own, council owned etc. and as you say as long as good arrangements are in place e.g. length of lease etc. It may even lead to some mergers! I feel that through the club licencing clubs should not be forced have a youth development if it is not benefitting the club. Level of debt, I fear that one or two clubs in league two may stifle some clubs being promoted by running up unacceptable debt e.g. not paying ground rent, signing players and again I have no faith in the SFA applying financial fair play rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamthebam Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 I believe our green neighbours don't own their stadium, Sir Tom does. Although he's unlikely to evict them at any point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.