How did we get here?

[Kyle Reese]

14 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Given the very real financial meltdown spreading from the Baltic Hearts board presumably had more pressing concerns than a hypothetical vote on league reform

I'm quite sure they would have. I was surprised but quite impressed that Southern took the time to reply in all honesty.

[SuperSaints1877]

1 hour ago, Lex said:

 

We had a chance to fix the voting structure when Rangers died. The other clubs could have then outvoted the old firm on any proposal and something like that could have been introduced.
Aberdeen and Stewart Milne decided against it however, so we are stuck with 11-1. c***s.

 

Complete self interest on behalf of Aberdeen. Despicable club. 

[gannonball]

21 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

After removing the 50/50 gate receipts rule they also tried to get a 5% cut of gate receipts from every away game because they provided so many fans to the Diddy clubs. 

That was a joke, I can remember then the clubs just selling directly to away fans and Celtic realised they couldn’t control it to satisfy investors looking to snake tickets for whatever they wanted so took distribution of them back for free again.

1 hour ago, Luddite said:

I don’t know enough about this. What was the Aberdeen logic here?

I kind of thought they thought they could be the next big fish (and redistributing money would mean they would miss out if they keep coming second) with the Edinburgh teams doing so shite but Milne forgot he is also pretty terrible at running a football club. I couldn’t believe the cheek of him when he left Aberdeen and having a dig at the old firm* when ultimately it was him that fucked it for real change in Scottish football at the top level.

Edited February 3, 2022 by gannonball

[SuperSaints1877]

1 hour ago, Luddite said:

If teams like Hearts, Aberdeen, Hibs, Dun Utd only had to go to Ibrox and Parkhead once a season, would that reduce the number of “guaranteed 3 pts” for the OF against teams with the best chance of forming a challenge to them?

It still kinda needs a 3rd team to separate  themselves from the rest though, like a few teams have had good performances and results against OF this season, then followed it up with a loss to teams below then in the league.

Great thread @Luddite

I totally agree with the idea of a larger league playing each other home and away only. Problem is the TV companies and sponsors demand 4 OF league games. 

It requires our football authorities and our clubs to agree to a larger top division similar to other major footballing countries. Due to the voting rights and the self interest of clubs in the top league, this won’t happen. Outside the OF the clubs look forward to multiple visits by OF. Personally I don’t. 

The only way I can see change happening is that the fans unite as one and threaten to withhold season ticket money to force change. 

Problem is that the fans of the two largest clubs probably see 4 OF league games as a bonus rather than a visit to Dunfermline/Thistle/Kilmarnock or dare I say it Morton.

Our league format is boring. Our gate prices are becoming prohibitive for many fans. 

We need change but I firmly believe the only way we make change is through the fans demanding change.

[GNU_Linux]

Even if we ignore the OF et al not wanting a reduction in OF games any SPFL wide restructure proposals will go nowhere as colts will be bolted onto it as has happened previously.

[ahemps]

2 hours ago, SuperSaints1877 said:

Great thread @Luddite

I totally agree with the idea of a larger league playing each other home and away only. Problem is the TV companies and sponsors demand 4 OF league games. 

This is a huge sticking point? I know a few OF fans that would like a bigger league and they realise that would mean losing OF fixtures but they are happy with it. We are appeasing the TV fan here rather than the matchday fan. Almost every survey that I have seen shows that most fans want a bigger league. Would their really be a big loss of TV money? I think it would be minimal if at all.

2 hours ago, SuperSaints1877 said:

It requires our football authorities and our clubs to agree to a larger top division similar to other major footballing countries. Due to the voting rights and the self interest of clubs in the top league, this won’t happen. Outside the OF the clubs look forward to multiple visits by OF. Personally I don’t. 

Not sure if this is true but I think I heard last year on a podcast that Killie and Aberdeen have a lower home attendance when the OF come to town, obviously the overall is higher because of the away crowd but the OF fans can be a turn off and especially to family's. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the same with other teams.

[kennie makevin]

2 hours ago, SuperSaints1877 said:

Great thread @Luddite

I totally agree with the idea of a larger league playing each other home and away only. Problem is the TV companies and sponsors demand 4 OF league games. 

It requires our football authorities and our clubs to agree to a larger top division similar to other major footballing countries. Due to the voting rights and the self interest of clubs in the top league, this won’t happen. Outside the OF the clubs look forward to multiple visits by OF. Personally I don’t. 

The only way I can see change happening is that the fans unite as one and threaten to withhold season ticket money to force change. 

Problem is that the fans of the two largest clubs probably see 4 OF league games as a bonus rather than a visit to Dunfermline/Thistle/Kilmarnock or dare I say it Morton.

Our league format is boring. Our gate prices are becoming prohibitive for many fans. 

We need change but I firmly believe the only way we make change is through the fans demanding change.

Why is broadcasters & sponsors wanting 4 old firm games a problem. Either tell them sorry, no (as telt in those countries who would demand 4 Barca v Real or 4 Bayern v Dortmund or 4 Liverpool v Man Utd) or make sure the Old Bigots are paired together first opportunity in League & Scottish Cup......thus avoiding the societal mayhem that is a Celtic v Rangers cup final & giving 4 old firm games...win win all round.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TheScarf]

Even if the 11-1 changed to 8-4 or something, league reconstruction would never happen as the top flight clubs budget on at least 3 visits of the old firm every season.  4 if they finish in the top 6 frequently (Aberdeen/Hearts/Hibs).

Having a 18 or 20 team top flight would be brilliant, lots of intriguing games, but it would never happen because clubs would lose half the gate money the old firm bring, and this fucking weird obsession of having no dead rubbers, something that is unavoidable in a league format of any amount of teams.

[Kyle Reese]

30 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Even if the 11-1 changed to 8-4 or something, league reconstruction would never happen as the top flight clubs budget on at least 3 visits of the old firm every season.  4 if they finish in the top 6 frequently (Aberdeen/Hearts/Hibs).

Having a 18 or 20 team top flight would be brilliant, lots of intriguing games, but it would never happen because clubs would lose half the gate money the old firm bring, and this fucking weird obsession of having no dead rubbers, something that is unavoidable in a league format of any amount of teams.

HMFC cut their support. Maybe others will follow suit? Relying on the supporters of rival clubs to inflate club budgets isn’t healthy to the overall good of the league. As you said though, many would never vote for it, because obviously it helps them compete with the other non-OF clubs. Can’t honestly blame them, but it’s where we are.

[HibeeJibee]

Across all Europe only leagues with 18/20 clubs playing 34/38 games are England, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Turkey i.e. almost exclusive to big nations.

[Henrik's tongue]

The thread title keeps making me hum Once In A Lifetime by Talking Heads.

[Kyle Reese]

16 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Across all Europe only leagues with 18/20 clubs playing 34/38 games are England, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Turkey i.e. almost exclusive to big nations.

I don't really see how that is a reason why it wouldn't work here. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

 

23 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Across all Europe only leagues with 18/20 clubs playing 34/38 games are England, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Turkey i.e. almost exclusive to big nations.

And it hasn't stopped the Netherlands, Portugal, Italy and Turkey each being dominated by a trio of big clubs for decades. The Bundesliga isn't a great advert for 18 team leagues promoting open competition either.

 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

20 minutes ago, Kyle Reese said:

I don't really see how that is a reason why it wouldn't work here. 

Rather depends what you mean by "work"
 

[Game of throw-ins]

Regarding Aberdeen voting against changing the 11-1, as a long time Aberdeen season ticket holder I have never met a single Aberdeen fan who didn't think that was a shameful decision.  It reflected the values of Stewart Mine, not the values of Aberdeen fans.

 

Edited February 3, 2022 by Game of throw-ins

[Jacksgranda]

2 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

 

And it hasn't stopped the Netherlands, Portugal, Italy and Turkey each being dominated by a trio of big clubs for decades. The Bundesliga isn't a great advert for 18 team leagues promoting open competition either.

 

When we had 18/20 team divisions, the only time it wasn't dominated by (the same) two teams was 1948 - 1965 when it was two different teams. (Rangers, Hibs, Hearts and Kilmarnock. East Fife, Aberdeen, Dundee and Clyde won more than 1 trophy. Motherwell, Falkirk, St Mirren and Dunfermline all won trophies, too.)

Edited February 3, 2022 by Jacksgranda

[TheScarf]

1 hour ago, Henrik's tongue said:

The thread title keeps making me hum Once In A Lifetime by Talking Heads.

The answer is always the same as it ever was.

[Kyle Reese]

1 hour ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Rather depends what you mean by "work"
 

“Work”, I would define as: narrowing the gap between second and third. As in: what we currently have, is broken.

[PauloPerth]

A top league in of 18 clubs in Scotland would be horrendous. 2 teams battling it out for promotion, a handful for Europe, and a few battling to avoid relegation.

For a lot of the bigger non-OF clubs they would just indefinitely exist between 4th and 13th with little excitement in a season.

In the past 10-15 seasons we've had Dundee United, Dundee, Hearts, Hibs, St Mirren, Kilmarnock, Falkirk, Dunfermline, Partick Thistle, Inverness, Ross County and various others all relegated from the top league.

Our league set up is far from perfect, but it's about as good as we can get with the number of clubs and the dominance of the OF, which is not going to change regardless of the number of clubs, no matter how much we try to kid ourselves. Clubs in every division have something to play for and a bit of interest in their seasons. Which, ultimately, is the point of professional sport; to provide entertainment to the spectators. (Ignoring the obvious 'to make rich people richer' answer). There is definitely an argument that the play-off should be fairer in that the team 11th in the Premiership enters at the semi-final stage, and that might provide more variety in the teams playing in the league. Or even straight 2 up 2 down.

As shite as many of the changes have been, Scottish football in the 1970's and 80's (and English) had loads of issues. Many grounds had hardly been touched in half a century and wouldn't still be open today if it wasn't for upgrading, crowds were down and falling I believe, though happy to be corrected on that, and hooliganism was rife.

I started going to the football in the mid 1980's and loved it, really happy memories, but the money that came into the sport would still be the same regardless of our league size, as soon as subscription tv and live matches became the norm, and the big two would still be dominating if we had a league of 18.

The only solution is for the rest of the league to get together and tell The OF to f**k off somewhere else. No Colts or any leftovers, just pack your bags and find somewhere else to play.

Our football would be brilliant, could be a different title winner every season.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

16 minutes ago, Kyle Reese said:

“Work”, I would define as: narrowing the gap between second and third. As in: what we currently have, is broken.

In which case no it wouldn't

Basically the whole fallacy started surfacing 1997/98 the season where Hearts got 1 point out or 12 against Rangers and two against Celtic but that was the exception rather than the rule.

Generally if you're good enough to get title contender results against everybody else then you're probably good enough to get decent results against the other contender(s).

When Hearts took the title to the last day in '86 they did it having beaten Celtic once and drawing the other 3. Dundee United won the title by a point over Celtic after beating them once and losing once When Rangers denied Aberdeen the title on the final day in 1991 they were squaring the series at one win each and two draws. Ferguson's Aberdeen managed to win the league while coming out behind against Celtic and Celtic managed to win the league while coming out behind Aberdeen. The 1994 season when Aberdeen and Motherwell finished relatively close saw them both break even against Rangers.  The 2006 Hearts side pipped Rangers to 2nd before we went to Ibrox because we'd already beat them and drawn twice