Kneetrembler Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 5 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Love threads like these, its always the Celtic fans who seem to assume they have some "magical formula" that'll revolutionise Scottish football. Such brilliant ideas like "getting more fans" and "merging with other clubs to create a SUPER CLUB" never fail to grasp my attention and wonder why we've never done such simple things that would guarantee us success. We're looking at hooking ourselves on to Islam up in Aberdeen to generate a bit of international media interest and chase the hate pound. How about you Fermer's take the Shiites and we go with the Sunnis? We'll be stabbing each other in no time and filling out the grounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 21 minutes ago, Tartantony said: While I don't dispute anything you have said, I still don't see what relevance it has in this thread. The whole point of the thread is to discuss whether investment in the other clubs could lead them to challenge for the title. I made a point that there is an easier way to have another club winning the league without major investment in adopting an MLS style playoff system which would give other teams a better chance of winning the league and offered my opinion that some clubs merging might be advantageous in creating more competition. My point regarding moving on from the past is in relation to small clubs fans not wanting mergers because they love their clubs history and in turn refuse to look to the future. So can we move on from the Celtic and Rangers bigotry nonsense that has no relevance please? Why would not wanting a merger be refusing to look to the future as if its the only way, who are you talking about here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Nobodies suggesting these options would guarantee success, they are viable options that would give a club a better chance of success though. My suggestion of mergers is also in relation to the new set up I suggested. I don't necessarily think mergers is a good thing in the current system. Scottish football fans like to complain that they can't compete with the OFs resources but instead of looking for a way to compete they would rather just sit and moan about it. Sitting silent is better than slavering shite, m8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I see Davie and tony haven't been getting enough attention away from the internet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 4 minutes ago, Tartantony said: Nobodies suggesting these options would guarantee success, they are viable options that would give a club a better chance of success though. My suggestion of mergers is also in relation to the new set up I suggested. I don't necessarily think mergers is a good thing in the current system. Scottish football fans like to complain that they can't compete with the OFs resources but instead of looking for a way to compete they would rather just sit and moan about it. I think most of time you are thinking the fans of other clubs are in your view complaining about not being able to compete with Celtic or Rangers(old) for various reasons is that they are trying to get through the thick skulls of those Celtic and Rangers fans explaining why their club cannot compete on that level. This here thread is a good example of how out of touch with reality certain Celtic fans are. I have yet to see anyone of a smaller club having a moan about it and certain Celtic fans like to change the context, portraying something that's not there. I have no problem with where my club is compared to Celtic, but it seems ridiculous why I have to keep explaining why my team cannot challenge for the title or explain why Aberdeen or anyone else can't, should be pretty obvious to someone who knows anything about Scottish football. The difference in money and resources are a perfectly good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I see Davie and tony haven't been getting enough attention away from the internet again. I suggested that a new league set up would give teams a better chance of winning the league. Not my fault people want to talk about Celtic and Rangers rather than the point of the thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I think most of time you are thinking the fans of other clubs are in your view complaining about not being able to compete with Celtic or Rangers(old) for various reasons is that they are trying to get through the thick skulls of those Celtic and Rangers fans explaining why their club cannot compete on that level. This here thread is a good example of how out of touch with reality certain Celtic fans are. I have yet to see anyone of a smaller club having a moan about it and certain Celtic fans like to change the context, portraying something that's not there. I have no problem with where my club is compared to Celtic, but it seems ridiculous why I have to keep explaining why my team cannot challenge for the title or explain why Aberdeen or anyone else can't, should be pretty obvious to someone who knows anything about Scottish football. The difference in money and resources are a perfectly good reason. See all I read there was "no ambition"!Perhaps this is the problem, we believe that other teams can win the league but in order to win the league you need to make changes to grow and more importantly you need to believe you can win the league. Resources didn't stop Leicester from winning the league or Porto from winning the Champions League or two tiny clubs from Inverness merging and eventually winning the Scottish Cup and becoming one of the best clubs in Scotland in the space of 20 years. You believe in "I'll believe it when I see it". I believe in "I'll see it when I believe it" So back to the topic, do you think that another team will ever win the league again? What do you think it would take to win the league? Do you agree that a MLS style setup would provide a better chance to the other teams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 6 minutes ago, Tartantony said: I suggested that a new league set up would give teams a better chance of winning the league. Not my fault people want to talk about Celtic and Rangers rather than the point of the thread You both could just f**k off? Sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 17 minutes ago, Tartantony said: I suggested that a new league set up would give teams a better chance of winning the league. Not my fault people want to talk about Celtic and Rangers rather than the point of the thread Any example of how your new league set up would look? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lubo_blaha Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 See all I read there was "no ambition"!Perhaps this is the problem, we believe that other teams can win the league but in order to win the league you need to make changes to grow and more importantly you need to believe you can win the league.Resources didn't stop Leicester from winning the league or Porto from winning the Champions League or two tiny clubs from Inverness merging and eventually winning the Scottish Cup and becoming one of the best clubs in Scotland in the space of 20 years. You believe in "I'll believe it when I see it". I believe in "I'll see it when I believe it" So back to the topic, do you think that another team will ever win the league again? What do you think it would take to win the league? Do you agree that a MLS style setup would provide a better chance to the other teams? Leicester: once in a lifetime story where a perfect storm of factors came together and they won the league.Porto: the José Mourinho effect and a number of big clubs failing allowed for this.Inverness: a unique example where an area with a large population didn't have a league club. They also benefited from clubs with bigger budgets failing to some extent.These examples are exceptions to the rule, that's why they're significant and you're able to readily list them. There is an incredibly strong correlation in any football league in the world between who finishes highest in league and who pays the highest wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kneetrembler Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 22 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said: You both could just f**k off? Sorted. Ensh'Allah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Skidmarks Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Porto are a much bigger club than Tony thinks they are, they were on a roll from beating some pishy club in the UEFA cup final they year before and had a lot of Champions League/European Cup pedigree winning it in 87, getting to the semis in 94. If he's using that as an example of the underdogs winning then he's more deluded than I thought he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 1 minute ago, Tartantony said: See all I read there was "no ambition"! Perhaps this is the problem, we believe that other teams can win the league but in order to win the league you need to make changes to grow and more importantly you need to believe you can win the league. Resources didn't stop Leicester from winning the league or Porto from winning the Champions League or two tiny clubs from Inverness merging and eventually winning the Scottish Cup and becoming one of the best clubs in Scotland in the space of 20 years. You believe in "I'll believe it when I see it". I believe in "I'll see it when I believe it" So back to the topic, do you think that another team will ever win the league again? What do you think it would take to win the league? Do you agree that a MLS style setup would provide a better chance to the other teams? I would say you are out of touch and unrealistic. We learned some hard lessons on the way to where we are now, not two months after knocking Celtic out of the Scottish Cup in 2000 we nearly went out of business and the club only just survived having been in the 1st Division a season and already we were living beyond our means. Finishing third in the league and winning the Scottish Cup is not lacking in ambition, we could with the right team achieve this again, but winning the league....like Leicester City it would need a perfect storm like then where the big 4 had a 'mare of a season and like Leicester City a bit more money behind us that what we have been used to. Are Leicester City up there at the to this season sustaining their form of last season? See I would look for my club to continue to grow and become bigger. ICT are still growing and improving each season. I would think about the club's long term future as most important which is sustainability at this level. This is not lack of ambition this is common sense. If any other club and that includes Rangers wins the title it would require as last seasons EPL a perfect storm, a nightmare season for Celtic for this to happen. there are maybe two or three clubs other than Celtic that could be perfectly placed to pick up if Celtic have a worst season ever. They would have to be as a team that good, I think the last real challengers to Celtic or Rangers was that George Burley managed Hearts team, imagine what might have happened if Romanov's ego hadn't interfered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Any example of how your new league set up would look? Off the top of my head, a 16 team division with 4 regionalised groups of 4.Each team plays each of their group opponents 4 times = 12 games (derbys) and play the other 3 groups twice = 24. Total of 36 matches in the regular season and we don't lose the 4 OF games that the TV companies love so much.The top team in each group goes into a 2 legged semi final with the winners playing a one off final at Hampden.Or two groups of 6 with 4 times against your group and twice against the other group to give 32 regular season games. The top team in each group gaurenteed the playoffs and the other 2 based on league position in the overall 12 similar to NHL rules. There are lots of ways of doing it and I'm certain some better than what I've just suggested but ultimately it gives a cup final to one of the other clubs to have a chance to win the league! I am pretty confident in saying that we would see a lot more teams winning the league than we do now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Skidmarks Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 What a mentalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I would say you are out of touch and unrealistic. We learned some hard lessons on the way to where we are now, not two months after knocking Celtic out of the Scottish Cup in 2000 we nearly went out of business and the club only just survived having been in the 1st Division a season and already we were living beyond our means. Finishing third in the league and winning the Scottish Cup is not lacking in ambition, we could with the right team achieve this again, but winning the league....like Leicester City it would need a perfect storm like then where the big 4 had a 'mare of a season and like Leicester City a bit more money behind us that what we have been used to. Are Leicester City up there at the to this season sustaining their form of last season? See I would look for my club to continue to grow and become bigger. ICT are still growing and improving each season. I would think about the club's long term future as most important which is sustainability at this level. This is not lack of ambition this is common sense. If any other club and that includes Rangers wins the title it would require as last seasons EPL a perfect storm, a nightmare season for Celtic for this to happen. there are maybe two or three clubs other than Celtic that could be perfectly placed to pick up if Celtic have a worst season ever. They would have to be as a team that good, I think the last real challengers to Celtic or Rangers was that George Burley managed Hearts team, imagine what might have happened if Romanov's ego hadn't interfered. The closest any team have been in my time was 1998 when Hearts shat the bed in the last few weeks of the season. That was the most exciting season I've experienced as a Celtic fan. The first few months of the Burley season were great as well. Inverness may well have had some hard times but they have still got to where they are now due to two smaller clubs merging and showing a bit of ambition and belief to be one of the best teams in Scotland. I'll accept that the Porto and Leicester examples are extreme one offs but the only reason the Inverness one is a one off is because no other clubs have attempted it. Dundee is an example of a city that doesn't need two clubs and imo would achieve far more as one club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 What a mentalist. What's mental about it? It guarantees another team the chance to win the league without the investors/ tv companies going mental about not having 4 OF games. The fact you find it mental that your team would have a one off game to win the league is exactly what I'm talking about when I say people are stuck in the past.Why is it such a mental idea in your opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 12 minutes ago, Tartantony said: Off the top of my head, a 16 team division with 4 regionalised groups of 4. Each team plays each of their group opponents 4 times = 12 games (derbys) and play the other 3 groups twice = 24. Total of 36 matches in the regular season and we don't lose the 4 OF games that the TV companies love so much. The top team in each group goes into a 2 legged semi final with the winners playing a one off final at Hampden. Or two groups of 6 with 4 times against your group and twice against the other group to give 32 regular season games. The top team in each group gaurenteed the playoffs and the other 2 based on league position in the overall 12 similar to NHL rules. There are lots of ways of doing it and I'm certain some better than what I've just suggested but ultimately it gives a cup final to one of the other clubs to have a chance to win the league! I am pretty confident in saying that we would see a lot more teams winning the league than we do now Hows the prize money spread out? Who qualifies for Europe? Is there relegation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kneetrembler Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 5 minutes ago, Tartantony said: The closest any team have been in my time was 1998 when Hearts shat the bed in the last few weeks of the season. That was the most exciting season I've experienced as a Celtic fan. The first few months of the Burley season were great as well. Inverness may well have had some hard times but they have still got to where they are now due to two smaller clubs merging and showing a bit of ambition and belief to be one of the best teams in Scotland. I'll accept that the Porto and Leicester examples are extreme one offs but the only reason the Inverness one is a one off is because no other clubs have attempted it. Dundee is an example of a city that doesn't need two clubs and imo would achieve far more as one club. Explain to me why Dundee doesn't need two clubs. My favourite game of last season was the awesome Doon Derby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 4 minutes ago, Tartantony said: What's mental about it? It guarantees another team the chance to win the league without the investors/ tv companies going mental about not having 4 OF games. The fact you find it mental that your team would have a one off game to win the league is exactly what I'm talking about when I say people are stuck in the past. Why is it such a mental idea in your opinion? Who's in the group with your mobs and how do you sort European places? Perhaps if I may, here';s a rough sketch of how a more sensible system might work? Spoiler Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.