Old Firm Colts in L2

[Jacksgranda]

14 hours ago, haufdaft said:

Why would the footballing authorities need to increase the money pot? Surely the 1000's of additional old firm supporters through the turnstiles will increase revenues. That's before the huge sponsorship and TV deals

Take your tongue out of your cheek, man, you'll end up looking like a hamster.

[Poet of the Macabre]

9 hours ago, King Dom's Moustache said:

Add me to the 'if this goes through I'm done' list.

Absolute shambles it's even been thought of let alone discussed.

This is the worst thing. Even if/when it gets voted down, it won't be long before the next terrible idea comes around.

You also know that if it gets rejected, it will be clubs like Clyde and Arbroath who are blamed for "holding back" Scottish football.

[haufdaft]

This is the worst thing. Even if/when it gets voted down, it won't be long before the next terrible idea comes around.
You also know that if it gets rejected, it will be clubs like Clyde and Arbroath who are blamed for "holding back" Scottish football.

To be honest, Arbroath do hold us back a bit [emoji1]

[Blue Brazil Forever]

24 minutes ago, BinoBalls said:

The collective seethe of P&B to this shambolic idea is like a warm blanket on a cold winter's day. Page after page of fans from all walks of life coming together to tell the Old Firm / SFA / media / armchair fans to get tae fùck.

The Old Firm wouldn't piss on your mouth if your teeth were on fire yet we're supposed to be their sparring partners when it suits? Their Colt teams would attract East Stirlingshire level supports, and where is the evidence this would help the national team?

I'm sure nigh on everyone on this thread wants our national team to improve. So it speaks volumes that everyone still thinks it's a bad idea, except of course that Cowdenbeath zoomer with his voodoo accountancy.

I wish Regan and Mackay would read threads like this. Danger is they only speak to each other and other OF boaby sookers in the media, and are genuinely oblivious to how insulted the rest of us are about this idea. 

If we want to improve football then how about playing in the summer when the grass grows, how about forcing players to complete a proficiency course where they need to be able to bend the ball accurately with both feet on demand 80% of the time, how about investing in one of those incredible footbotonaut (look it up on YouTube) machines that Borussia Dortmund have and making them available for youth footballers.

Na, much better letting Rangers youth play Berwick and Annan instead. That'll sort everything out. 

CC is very far from being a zoomer but he is absolutely correct in putting forward counter arguements as all clubs will need to give earnest consideration to any proposal. All Directors have a legal duty to do what is best for the Club and the shareholders and cannot just take a stance based on emotion alone. A similar proposal was turned down comprehensively in the past. However Clubs did agree that  Colts teams be allowed to play in the challenge cup this season - the thin end of a very large wedge??

For this proposal to succeed now, some substantial inducement will be needed whether from the betting industry, the SFA, the Old Firm or other sponsors. I would hope that my Club will continue to turn this idea down but I am aware that quite a number of clubs were in the past not willing to see Sevco demoted to the lowest league ( Cowden and their Chairman  were firm supporters  of the new Rangers starting off from scratch).

A further thought: as you know Malky Mackay was appointed in controversial circumstances. The last thing he needs right now is another major row right at the start of his tenure. I wonder which opponents of his appointment fed him this particular turkey.

 

[ICTChris]

Our under 20s team finished one point behind Rangers last season, can we get into League two?

 

[HibeeJibee]

Formally-speaking clubs didn't agree to 'B' teams in the Challenge Cup: it's an SPFL Board decision, whereas this would require a club vote... Evidently there was consultation, but there were competing claims on here over 'how many clubs actually wanted it' and 'whether they had to take it or leave it as part of the wider package' etc. etc.

Edited December 19, 2016 by HibeeJibee

[RedLichtie86]

I hate the idea of Colt teams in the SPFL, but there could be a financial advantage if the lower SPFL teams play hard ball with Regan, Cockwomble, Celtic and Sevco.

If they want Colt in the league, well then they have to earn their place like every other team. Thats by starting in the lowest possible league in the pyramid. And they must also pay an entry fee each season for admittance to the league setup.

Lets say the 2 COLT teams payed £100,000 each to play in the Lowland League, that £200,000 can be shared out with all teams at Tier 5 level. Be about £6000 each. Colt teams pay £130,000 to play in League 2 (£14500 - £32000 for each non Colt team), £160,000 to play in League 1 (£17500 - £40000 for each non Colt team). And they are barred from going into the Championship.

But at the same time the whole league setup needs to be looked at to safegaurd smaller clubs from being pushed out completely by any influx of Colt teams, such as having bigger leagues and more promotio/relegation places between HL/LL and SPFL2. maybe merge SPFL1 and 2 to make a 20 team setup but limit the numbers of Colt teams allowed at this level to 4 teams.

 

But then again maybe we should all just resign and let Celtic and Sevco set up a league where all they do is play each other and their Colts. they could develop 50 Messi's in not time at all. After all, they are the saviours of the national team.

[Harry Haddock]

This nonsense must be stopped before it gathers anymore momentum.Only a few weeks ago we had failed Clyde manager Alex Smith putting forward the idea that Celtic should take over Clyde in order to develop their younger players without a thought for those fans who follow a team with a 133 years tradition behind them.Time I think for those in charge of Scottish football to realise that people follow teams like Clyde because we cannot stand what the Old Firm stand for.All of a sudden my passion for Clyde is reignited.

[Bazil85]

20 hours ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Here's a tricky scenario - clubs in SPFL 2 or Lowland League get offered a payment of say £25k/£30k from some Central pot to allow these 2 sides in. If SPFL 2 sides turn it down then Lowland League clubs have bonus funding giving them all an improved chance of relegating and replacing an existing SPFL 2 side.

That's called a bribe and illegal

[Cowden Cowboy]

That's called a bribe and illegal

It won't be done in an illegal manner - you really think this could go through without a financial incentive

[Bazil85]

16 hours ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

You genuinely don't seem to have any savvy or insight at all - better stay out of the debate

Why would the bigger clubs vote for this then? If they take away £200/£300k from them for lower clubs.  Where's the benefit for them in letting Old firm colts in?

[Bazil85]

20 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

It won't be done in an illegal manner - you really think this could go through without a financial incentive

Probably same point in regards to my last quote.  Financially incentive's the smaller clubs means taking money from somewhere.  Why would bigger clubs in top flight/ Championship vote this through if they're getting less money, potentially losing good young players to the colts and whatever teams form part of the elite youth division of 8? 

[GordonD]

When I started reading this topic it seemed as if it was just a crazy idea that somebody had come up with when they were pissed. Now it's looking as if it's almost a done deal. How exactly was this pitched? "Let's put a couple of Colts teams in League 2. Say, just of the top of my head, Celtic and Rangers." Why are those two getting this benefit? No, forget it, stupid question. I should be asking, "How can the SPFL justify picking those two without admitting they don't give a toss about anybody else?"

[Bazil85]

4 minutes ago, GordonD said:

When I started reading this topic it seemed as if it was just a crazy idea that somebody had come up with when they were pissed. Now it's looking as if it's almost a done deal. How exactly was this pitched? "Let's put a couple of Colts teams in League 2. Say, just of the top of my head, Celtic and Rangers." Why are those two getting this benefit? No, forget it, stupid question. I should be asking, "How can the SPFL justify picking those two without admitting they don't give a toss about anybody else?"

I don't think it's a done deal by any stretch.  Would require an 11-1 vote in SPFL, pretty sure they won't get that.  If Hearts and Motherwell fans feel same way as other fans on here they'll knock it back when they vote on the subject.  (assuming they will as fan owned) 

[1320Lichtie]

I don't think it's a done deal by any stretch.  Would require an 11-1 vote in SPFL, pretty sure they won't get that.  If Hearts and Motherwell fans feel same way as other fans on here they'll knock it back when they vote on the subject.  (assuming they will as fan owned) 

Sure there are 8 member clubs that vote on these things.

Rangers and Celtic are 2.

[Bazil85]

3 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Sure there are 8 member clubs that vote on these things.

Rangers and Celtic are 2.

 

Pretty sure that's only first stage to take it to the table but any league reconstruction at all which this would be would require 11-1 vote.  

[JakeSAFC]

Sure there are 8 member clubs that vote on these things.

Rangers and Celtic are 2.

Love that, this clearly effects our clubs but our clubs dont get a vote?

What a laughing stock the SFA & SPFL are.

[1320Lichtie]

So surely won't even get past the 8 clubs then? Pundits on sportsound were saying they should do what the English FA have done and write to Westminster to take this away so the SFA can just decide things themselves to enforce change as nothing was getting through....!!!

No thanks!!

[HibeeJibee]

It may have to go through SFA and/or SPFL boards (perhaps where this 8 originates?) but it would then have to face SPFL club votes: that's an 11-1 vote of Premiership then 75% of Premiership-&-Championship then 75% of all 42 clubs, IIRC.

[CowdenConvert]

8 minutes ago, JakeSAFC said:

 

Love that, this clearly effects our clubs but our clubs dont get a vote?

What a laughing stock the SFA & SPFL are.

 

All clubs get a vote and there's 3 gates it has to pass.  11-1 in the prem is one of the gates.  I can't remember the details of the other two gates and can't be arsed to look it up but it's something like 75% of all clubs and I think the other is a certain number of prem and championship clubs.