Old Firm Colts in L2

[Tulloch Gorum]

If all of this is supposed to be an amazing boon to the lower league teams, with shiny benefits by the score, you kind of wonder why none of the L1 or L2 teams were calling for this sort of set-up themselves.  The initiative for a change didn't come from the smaller teams, and that should tell you something.

Note also, as has been pointed out, the lack of OF fans on this thread engaging with the idea.  They don't care, and why would they?  They don't watch their youth teams as it is.

[Cowden Cowboy]

Hello

 

I am writing to you on the recently mooted idea to include SPFL Colt teams in the SPFL League Two as of next season.

 

Whilst I would hope our campaign concludes successfully in promotion this season, I am writing to express my strongest possible opposition to this plan.

 

You may have seen that Elgin City FC have released the consultation document on the proposal, on their website, so I write having read the proposal carefully.

 

The proposal offers absolutely nothing other than wishful thinking and what would be called, in any other line of business, a bribe, in order to encourage acceptance. The idea that Rangers and Celtic colts (both sides nowhere near the top of their development league) would offer anything to our level of football surely does not hold water.

 

Still less credible is the notion that this plan would have anything whatever to do with grounding future internationals at our level of football. The solution to the long term development of the national team lies not at this level of football, but at elite level, and to the successful re-establishment of reserve leagues. Given the underhand way in which this has been introduced, little faith can be placed in the blandishment that this Colt team proposal is a "pilot", either. Once these teams are introduced there will be no going back.

 

The "piloting" of Colt teams in the challenge cup can hardly be described as a success either in terms of crowds, or in terms of the results for those teams themselves. A recent extensive survey of supporters associations saw opposition to these proposals run 3 : 1 against the introduction of colt teams to the league set-up. Nor does the contention that because the likes of Germany, Portugal and Spain have "B" teams in their league set-up, so should Scotland. Those countries have very different football cultures to ours; moreover, disparities in levels of performance are much more to do with the education of coaches and a functioning training infrastructure. The mere existence of "Colt teams in a league system does not guarantee success.

 

More than any, clubs like ours know that our level of football run on the loyalty of a core supporter base and the goodwill and unrelenting hard work of club boards and administrators. This disastrous plan, poorly thought out and advocated with minimal evidence, threatens to wreck the integrity of league competition at our level. If it is enacted, I know that many fans across the lower leagues- the kind who travel to Annan or Berwick in midweek- will not be back.

 

I hope that, when the question is asked by the SPFL formally, the board of Montrose FC will vote for league integrity and against this proposal, and to be part of a much broader debate which attempts seriously to tackle the deep seated problems with our national side. "Being seen to do something", even if that proposal has absolutely no chance of addressing those problems, is the worst possible thing that could happen both for the club and the semi-professional game at this time.

 

Ivo den Bieman

 

 

You are though suggesting that the solution to the long term development lies not at this level of football but at the elite level, and to the successful re-establishment of reserve leagues.

That is a huge assumption that reserve leagues will be the solution for long term development - no more evidence for that than for the colts! It's just an alternative which may or may not work better

[HibeeJibee]

14 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

But the net will almost certainly not be £15k. In fact it's debatable if there even will be a profit. Even if there was any profit, it will only be for 2 years. What then? The damage has been done, and revenue will most likely have fallen and there won't be any cheap bribe to offset that fall in revenue

... currently we get 18 games v proper clubs

... under the proposal we get 13 games v proper clubs
This takes no account of possible reduction in crowds through disillusionment, nor lower Season Ticket sales (given 6 of 19 home games are v 'B' teams)

... cheque in lieu of away tickets

... our remaining 6 games are against 'B' teams. Away fans have already got their tickets. Lets say the home support is down
Evidence from the Challenge Cup suggests home crowds may actually fall considerably more than 2/5.

This takes no account of reduced sales of car parking, 50/50 draw tickets, programmes, food and drink at lower-attended games.


There is a small bus saving from 3 fewer away games.

As soon as the cheque is withdrawn it becomes a definite loss.

Obviously the principle of the idea is the primary objection... but even if not, the practicality in supposed financial benefits seems unrealistic.

Edited January 24, 2018 by HibeeJibee

[Ivo den Bieman]

6 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

You are though suggesting that the solution to the long term development lies not at this level of football but at the elite level, and to the successful re-establishment of reserve leagues.

That is a huge assumption that reserve leagues will be the solution for long term development - no more evidence for that than for the colts! It's just an alternative which may or may not work better

 

well, many ex-pros calling for the re-establishment of reserve leagues will do for me for now. plenty on Sportsound on the last year- ex-pros now broadcasting, stating that they learned a massive amount from the old set-up.

the difference is that if a reserve league doesn't have the required impact, an entire grade of football won't have been ruined as a result, nor generations of committed fans alienated. How the SPFL 2 has a role to play in making elite football is a question no one can realistically answer.

B teams in Holland have been a bt of a disaster, really, since thier introduction a couple of years ago. In seeing that, I am happy to go with my own assumptions rather than this back of a fag packet stuff being touted by the Old Firm.

The deeper causes of the national team's failure- coaching training and infrastructure and the falure to bring through the required number of qualified coaches- is something for the national association and the elite game to address.

bringing through two poor quality kids teams into SPFL 2 will have precisely f**k all impact on the national team, and there is no convincing argument to the contrary.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Ivo den Bieman

[Cowden Cowboy]

 
well, many ex-pros calling for the re-establishment of reserve leagues will do for me for now. plenty on Sportsound on the last year- ex-pros now broadcasting, stating that they learned a massive amount from the old set-up.
the difference is that if a reserve league doesn't have the required impact, an entire grade of football won't have been ruined as a result, nor generations of committed fans alienated. How the SPFL 2 has a role to play in making elite football is a question no one can realistically answer.
B teams in Holland have been a bt of a disaster, really, since thier introduction a couple of years ago. In seeing that, I am happy to go with my own assumptions rather than this back of a fag packet stuff being touted by the Old Firm.
The deeper causes of the national team's failure- coaching training and infrastructure and the falure to bring through the required number of qualified coaches- is something for the national association and the elite game to address.
bringing through two poor quality kids teams into SPFL 2 will have precisely f**k all impact on the national team, and there is no convincing argument to the contrary.

Many ex-pros call for all sorts of things indeed some will think this colts proposal is a great idea - I am not sure being guided by their views is a panacea.

Your further comments aren't relevant to the point I made - you have decided that reserve leagues are fundamental to the improvement of the Scottish game based on no more evidence than says the colts idea would meet that need. It seems all you need is a couple of ex-pros filling airtime and that is the solution for our game.

Me I am a believer that after under 18 we should just have reserves but I don't claim to know that will make all the difference

[edinabear]

As a Rangers fan with a keen interest in lower league football this has all been done really poorly. There is no way the Colts should start in League 2. I also don't buy ' for the good of Scottish football' tag line. This will solely benefit the Old Firm.

In my mind the only way this will be even remotely considered is if the colt experiment is not exclusively for the old firm and any teams are put at the very bottom of the Pyramid eg

Rangers & Celtic in a new 'West of Scotland League'

Hearts & Hibs in the new East of Scotland 2

Aberdeen in Highland League 1/2.

I genuinely see a lot of the colt sides struggling to even reach League 2, assuming that should be the highest they are allowed to reach.

 

 

 

[Ivo den Bieman]

4 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Many ex-pros call for all sorts of things indeed some will think this colts proposal is a great idea - I am not sure being guided by their views is a panacea.

Your further comments aren't relevant to the point I made - you have decided that reserve leagues are fundamental to the improvement of the Scottish game based on no more evidence than says the colts idea would meet that need. It seems all you need is a couple of ex-pros filling airtime and that is the solution for our game.

Me I am a believer that after under 18 we should just have reserves but I don't claim to know that will make all the difference

do you have a point or just looking to fill your lunch hour with a semantic argument?

what a bizarre post.

[tamthebam]

18 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

This.

Here's my analysis of it from Berwick's perspective:


... working on their £10 per ticket average, and our Board's 50% comment, our matchday ticket income is about £5,000.

... currently we get 18 games v proper clubs = £90,000.


... under the proposal we get 13 games v proper clubs = £65,000.
This takes no account of possible reduction in crowds through disillusionment, nor lower Season Ticket sales (given 6 of 19 home games are v 'B' teams)

... cheque in lieu of away tickets = £15,000.

... our remaining 6 games are against 'B' teams. Away fans have already got their tickets. Lets say the home support (450) is down by 2/5 (270) = £16,000.
Evidence from the Challenge Cup suggests home crowds may actually fall considerably more than 2/5.

... final total = £96,000.
This takes no account of reduced sales of car parking, 50/50 draw tickets, programmes, food and drink at lower-attended games.




So what we're actually looking at is just £6,000 and then only if none of the bold happen. If it does - it's break-even or more likely a loss. (There is a small bus saving from 3 fewer away games).

As soon as the cheque is withdrawn it becomes a definite loss - considerable if the bold happen.

Obviously the principle of the idea is the primary objection... but even if not, the practicality in supposed financial benefits seems like total fantasy anyway.

you could also factor in cost of extra stewarding just  in case a drunk load of fans of the gruesome twosome turn up on a train vs. hardly any fans of the gruesome twosome bothering to turn up.

[Ross.]

2 hours ago, Sonsteam of 08 said:

we win 3-1 to win the title by finishing fourth (behind Hearts, Hibs, Rangers and Celtic B).

You're doing well to finish 4th behind 4 other teams. That must count as something?...

[Cowden Cowboy]

This.

 

Here's my analysis of it from Berwick's perspective:

 

 

... working on their £10 per ticket average, and our Board's 50% comment, our matchday ticket income is about £5,000.

 

... currently we get 18 games v proper clubs = £90,000.

 

 

... under the proposal we get 13 games v proper clubs = £65,000.

This takes no account of possible reduction in crowds through disillusionment, nor lower Season Ticket sales (given 6 of 19 home games are v 'B' teams)

 

... cheque in lieu of away tickets = £15,000.

 

... our remaining 6 games are against 'B' teams. Away fans have already got their tickets. Lets say the home support (450) is down by 2/5 (270) = £16,000.

Evidence from the Challenge Cup suggests home crowds may actually fall considerably more than 2/5.

 

... final total = £96,000.

This takes no account of reduced sales of car parking, 50/50 draw tickets, programmes, food and drink at lower-attended games.

 

 

 

 

So what we're actually looking at is just £6,000 and then only if none of the bold happen. If it does - it's break-even or more likely a loss. (There is a small bus saving from 3 fewer away games).

 

As soon as the cheque is withdrawn it becomes a definite loss - considerable if the bold happen.

 

Obviously the principle of the idea is the primary objection... but even if not, the practicality in supposed financial benefits seems like total fantasy anyway.

I don't get your maths - aren't Berwick saying that the £15k is a bit more than 50% of current budgeted gate admissions figure so currently gate admissions are expected to be around £30k not £90k? How are the 6 games v old firm producing reduced 'other matchday sales' due to reduced crowds when your model suggests these games will produce higher crowds than average - 520 v 500?

[Ter]

I would like to see B-Teams included in the pyramid but they are going about it the wrong way trying to squeeze them in to the existing structure. Teams shouldn't be playing each other in the league 4 times a season and there is a badly needed restructure to sort this out. They should also have their own identity rather than be called B, Colts, Reserves or whatever.

Stranraer, Annan and Stirling Uni already have reserve sides competing at level 6 so not an entirely new concept. Just a shame Hibs scrapped their reserve team when they got relegated or the question of B-Teams in level 4 and above would probably have been answered by now.

[Cowden Cowboy]

do you have a point or just looking to fill your lunch hour with a semantic argument?
what a bizarre post.

Yes your logic is badly flawed and partial

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Rangers Bvs Dumbarton - 389 their second lowest crowd of the season, Dumbarton Vs Connahs quay nomads- 491
There we have it a part time team from wales who brought no travelling fans was a bigger draw to Dumbarton’s gate than an Old Firm B team. Also can we please fucking stop calling them ‘colt’ teams it makes me shudder its cringey AF.

[Ivo den Bieman]

5 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Yes your logic is badly flawed and partial

I dont see how you can make that claim, but I'm not going to spend the rest of the day debating it with you.

[Cowden Cowboy]

I dont see how you can make that claim, but I'm not going to spend the rest of the day debating it with you.

Difficult to see when blinkered - but have a nice day

[Ivo den Bieman]

1 minute ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Difficult to see when blinkered - but have a nice day

quite

[DA Baracus]

1 hour ago, parsforlife said:

Response from our SLO isn't comprehensive as our board haven't discussed the revised proposals yet.  However he is anticipating our answer will be the same as in June. (which was to get it in the fucking sea)

 

I too emailed the SLO about this and (obviously) got the same answer. As far as I know the board will have the same view, as nothing in the proposal would sway them in favour of it (indeed it would probably strengthen their opposition to it all).

[She who dares gins]

I don't think ever I've ever read such a united thread on here - bar one or two who are in favour (fair play, but absolutely disagree).

I'm pretty sure a 16-year-old sports science student could have written a better proposal paper than the one I've read, which so many have excellently taken apart. 

The idea of  having Old Firm funded golden carrots dangled in from of L2 chairman to tempt them to go against the potential wishes of their fans has me f******g raging and quite frankly is one example of why I don't want them anywhere near our leagues. 

[Jan Vojáček]

20 minutes ago, Ross. said:

You're doing well to finish 4th behind 4 other teams. That must count as something?...

 I'm such a diddy

13 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Rangers Bvs Dumbarton - 389 their second lowest crowd of the season, Dumbarton Vs Connahs quay nomads- 491
There we have it a part time team from wales who brought no travelling fans was a bigger draw to Dumbarton’s gate than an Old Firm B team. Also can we please fucking stop calling them ‘colt’ teams it makes me shudder its cringey AF.

To be fair, Connah's Quay did officially bring three fans.

They should be referred to as Youth teams - just in case anyone thinks that it's acceptable to turn them into Reserves.

[Poet of the Macabre]

If I was involved with Celtic or Rangers I would just pay a friendly businessman to buy a Lowland League or Highland League side and loan them a whole load of youngsters and run it as an unofficial B team.

Not sure I agree about the re-introduction of reserve leagues. Not totally against it but also unsure it would be any better than current set-up.

Comments on that Berwick FB page were depressing "what do we have to lose?" "that's a lot of money"