How do you solve a problem like the Scottish Premiership?

[Bad Wolf]

1 hour ago, TheScarf said:

It's a fucking stupid shout from Old Firm fans and pundits.  Only 10 of those 26 benefit from the 'Blue and Green Pound' each season anyway. The Championship clubs and Falkirk never see a penny from their glory hunting fans.

Tbf to the thick, bigoted, flag-shagging c*nts, just this once, we wouldn't expect anything else. It's consistent if nothing else.

[Red Kite]

Domestically, the average fan has very little sway with what a big club will do. Down here, I don't remember anyone being asked if we wanted to bin off the old First Division.  The Super League can GTF.  I think it will come, though.

The more I started getting into Scottish Football, the more I found myself getting annoyed about the OF signing up all the best players.  I have been talking to my mate about Scottish football for about 25 years and (embarrassingly) it had not really registered.  I think that's what the EPL does to you; you just get used to financial disparity.  Don't worry, there is a parachute payment so you can take that and wreck the EFL.

I don't know what can be done.  The main upside is that you can actually get into most Scottish top flight grounds, most of the time.  You can still actively support your club and not just be a follower. 

 

.

 

 

Edited February 8 by Red Kite

[Otis Blue]

On 22/01/2024 at 13:11, TheScarf said:

...  Only 10 of those 26 benefit from the 'Blue and Green Pound' each season anyway...

^^^ Exactly ... the majority of the SPFL see no significant benefit from the OF, bar an occasional cup encounter once a decade or so.  Anyhow, I see the possible solutions as:

1 - The OF join the English leagues - not a cats chance in hell, the clubs down there don't want them and the English police certainly don't want them.

2 - The OF agree to disperse a significant % of their profits downwards across the SPFL clubs to attempt some kind of levelling up - aye, good luck with that one, hell will freeze over first.

3 - 40 of the 42 SPFL clubs decide to breakaway from the SPFL and form their own league leaving the OF behind to play themselves 38 times a season.  Aye, I know its a stupid thought - sadly in part because the Boards of many of our clubs are populated with directors with OF leanings one way or the other.

4 - For me, the only realistic hope - the European Super Leagues happen soon and the OF feck off to join Tier 3 or whatever and leave the rest of us behind.  The ESL will happen, simply because the major clubs (across Europe) are financial businesses first and sporting institutions second and they are primarily driven by greed and don't give a toss about the national game/culture.  Given the right financial incentives the OF won't give the rest of the SPFL a single backward glance on their way to the promised land.  I actually see this happening, but sadly now, it's unlikely to be within my own lifetime.  Bring it on.

[ahemps]

16 hours ago, Otis Blue said:

4 - For me, the only realistic hope - the European Super Leagues happen soon and the OF feck off to join Tier 3 or whatever and leave the rest of us behind.  The ESL will happen, simply because the major clubs (across Europe) are financial businesses first and sporting institutions second and they are primarily driven by greed and don't give a toss about the national game/culture.  Given the right financial incentives the OF won't give the rest of the SPFL a single backward glance on their way to the promised land.  I actually see this happening, but sadly now, it's unlikely to be within my own lifetime.  Bring it on.

I agree with this and the frustrating thing is it is happening anyway but at a snails pace. The gradual changing of money distribution has only ever been in one direction of travel and that is more money to fewer select clubs. Th next few changes within the Champions league will see these same clubs being guaranteed CL football regardless of final league position domestically and essentially a league on its own anyway. There will be a push to move  the CL to weekends within 10yrs and then it becomes the absolute priority.

I am actually not opposed to a ESL. I think what we have now is way worse. A ESL that removes the top 2-3 teams that may allow the leagues left behind to have a reset and put in place conditions that do not allow clubs to become so dominant in future.

What most fans want from sport is to watch something that is competitive, has jeopardy, is unknown and over a period of time to see the highs and lows that come with it. The money earned and the actual standard of the sport is irrelevant to most fans. Remove the OF and it would be hard to predict who would win the league most seasons and that is way more important than aiming for 3rd and getting the crumbs off their table that they think we should be grateful for.

[buchan30]

Me and my mate have had this discussion a few times and i think it depends on a lot of factors. In an ideal world, those who leave places where there is already a team, Aberdeen, Fife, Edinburgh for example. Would ditch the old firm (if they are having to travel much further afield in England or Europe to watch them) and start going to their local teams, there would be the positive upturn that way. More money for clubs, better wages, better players, better product on the park. 

It then depends on how much a lure and how financially viable it is for them to continue supporting them in these places. Some people may be well off enough to do that. 
 

The first few seasons would probably see different winners of the league, but I wonder if once the champions league money started rolling in for a team winning it say 3 times out of 6, then they would possibly start to pull away? 

I agree that we need to increase the league size, playing the same team 4 times a season is maybe what some fans don’t like. Between that and the cup, we will play Dunfermline 6 times this season (if they make the playoffs, it could possibly be 8?) 

I would keep the playoffs, but maybe change it so that they are like the playoffs further down the leagues (9thv4th & 2ndv3rd)

 

[Otis Blue]

36 minutes ago, buchan30 said:

... I agree that we need to increase the league size, playing the same team 4 times a season is maybe what some fans don’t like. Between that and the cup, we will play Dunfermline 6 times this season (if they make the playoffs, it could possibly be 8?)  ...

I think Queens played Dundee something like 7 times one season, I'm sure both clubs/players/fans were sick of the sight of each other.  Wee 10 team leagues with teams playing each other 4 times a season need binned.  There's no novelty factor for the fans.

[LIVIFOREVER]

50 minutes ago, buchan30 said:

Me and my mate have had this discussion a few times and i think it depends on a lot of factors. In an ideal world, those who leave places where there is already a team, Aberdeen, Fife, Edinburgh for example. Would ditch the old firm (if they are having to travel much further afield in England or Europe to watch them) and start going to their local teams, there would be the positive upturn that way. More money for clubs, better wages, better players, better product on the park. 

It then depends on how much a lure and how financially viable it is for them to continue supporting them in these places. Some people may be well off enough to do that. 
 

The first few seasons would probably see different winners of the league, but I wonder if once the champions league money started rolling in for a team winning it say 3 times out of 6, then they would possibly start to pull away? 

I agree that we need to increase the league size, playing the same team 4 times a season is maybe what some fans don’t like. Between that and the cup, we will play Dunfermline 6 times this season (if they make the playoffs, it could possibly be 8?) 

I would keep the playoffs, but maybe change it so that they are like the playoffs further down the leagues (9thv4th & 2ndv3rd)

 

Short term i don't think there would be enough to make a difference, they'd just watch them on the telly for away game and go to the home games. A lot of them are armchair fans anyway, and don't go to local games every week . Long term though, once the lure of watching a team that's always one of the top 2 in the Country is taken away, you will get kids going to other teams in Scotland. There will also be a lot of erse cheek glory hunters dropping off when their team isn't winning most of the time, and lifting league trophies.

[TheScarf]

2 hours ago, Otis Blue said:

I think Queens played Dundee something like 7 times one season, I'm sure both clubs/players/fans were sick of the sight of each other.  Wee 10 team leagues with teams playing each other 4 times a season need binned.  There's no novelty factor for the fans.

The Caley played Alloa 7 times in one season a few years back.  Horrendous.

And i agree the 10 team leagues need chucked.  That's far too small for a domestic competition.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, LIVIFOREVER said:

Short term i don't think there would be enough to make a difference, they'd just watch them on the telly for away game and go to the home games. A lot of them are armchair fans anyway, and don't go to local games every week . Long term though, once the lure of watching a team that's always one of the top 2 in the Country is taken away, you will get kids going to other teams in Scotland. There will also be a lot of erse cheek glory hunters dropping off when their team isn't winning most of the time, and lifting league trophies.

No they won't, kids will watch games on the telly and be Liverpool/Man City supporters. People who did watch either regularly won't go anywhere if they don't attend at Rangers or Celtic.

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

2 hours ago, buchan30 said:

Me and my mate have had this discussion a few times and i think it depends on a lot of factors. In an ideal world, those who leave places where there is already a team, Aberdeen, Fife, Edinburgh for example. Would ditch the old firm (if they are having to travel much further afield in England or Europe to watch them) and start going to their local teams, there would be the positive upturn that way. More money for clubs, better wages, better players, better product on the park. 

It then depends on how much a lure and how financially viable it is for them to continue supporting them in these places. Some people may be well off enough to do that. 
 

The first few seasons would probably see different winners of the league, but I wonder if once the champions league money started rolling in for a team winning it say 3 times out of 6, then they would possibly start to pull away? 

I agree that we need to increase the league size, playing the same team 4 times a season is maybe what some fans don’t like. Between that and the cup, we will play Dunfermline 6 times this season (if they make the playoffs, it could possibly be 8?) 

I would keep the playoffs, but maybe change it so that they are like the playoffs further down the leagues (9thv4th & 2ndv3rd)

 

Agree with your post except the bit in bold.

I don't think there would be any Champions League money rolling in. Scotland probably wouldn't have any automatic places and I doubt our teams would be good enough to get through the qualifying rounds, much like many other similar sized countries to ours. Maybe now an then, but it certainly wouldn't be a regular occurrence. 

[Urban Spaceman]

9 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

No they won't, kids will watch games on the telly and be Liverpool/Man City supporters. People who did watch either regularly won't go anywhere if they don't attend at Rangers or Celtic.

Exactly there is a proportion of season ticket holders at both the Glasgow Clubs (just as there is with Man U or Liverpool etc.) that would not be going to football or put any money in if they clubs stopped existing. They would just stop.

I've come to the conclusion the family behind me don't actually like football or watch any games, just come for the Celtic more than a club craic and to be associated with a winning team.

[stressball]

21 hours ago, Otis Blue said:

^^^ Exactly ... the majority of the SPFL see no significant benefit from the OF, bar an occasional cup encounter once a decade or so.  Anyhow, I see the possible solutions as:

1 - The OF join the English leagues - not a cats chance in hell, the clubs down there don't want them and the English police certainly don't want them.

2 - The OF agree to disperse a significant % of their profits downwards across the SPFL clubs to attempt some kind of levelling up - aye, good luck with that one, hell will freeze over first.

3 - 40 of the 42 SPFL clubs decide to breakaway from the SPFL and form their own league leaving the OF behind to play themselves 38 times a season.  Aye, I know its a stupid thought - sadly in part because the Boards of many of our clubs are populated with directors with OF leanings one way or the other.

4 - For me, the only realistic hope - the European Super Leagues happen soon and the OF feck off to join Tier 3 or whatever and leave the rest of us behind.  The ESL will happen, simply because the major clubs (across Europe) are financial businesses first and sporting institutions second and they are primarily driven by greed and don't give a toss about the national game/culture.  Given the right financial incentives the OF won't give the rest of the SPFL a single backward glance on their way to the promised land.  I actually see this happening, but sadly now, it's unlikely to be within my own lifetime.  Bring it on.

Given Rangers don’t make profits #2 definitely won’t happen  

[LIVIFOREVER]

24 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

No they won't, kids will watch games on the telly and be Liverpool/Man City supporters. People who did watch either regularly won't go anywhere if they don't attend at Rangers or Celtic.

Yeah you have to get them hooked by getting them to games, but if clubs did free tickets for school kids now and again it might be enough to do that. Or if their pals support a local team and they tag along.

The other way is when parents take them, which would fall into what you're saying, the ones going to erse cheek games might just stop going to games. Might get some just going to the odd local game though and taking their kids with them.

Not having the erse cheeks gives us all a better chance of getting more local supporters anyway.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, LIVIFOREVER said:

Yeah you have to get them hooked by getting them to games, but if clubs did free tickets for school kids now and again it might be enough to do that. Or if their pals support a local team and they tag along.

The other way is when parents take them, which would fall into what you're saying, the ones going to erse cheek games might just stop going to games. Might get some just going to the odd local game though and taking their kids with them.

Not having the erse cheeks gives us all a better chance of getting more local supporters anyway.

I know it's very pessimistic but Rangers and Celtic will still exist and keep all their fairweather and armchair supporters.

The few teams who do well will see an increase, but at the other end and lower divisions will stay much the same.

Free tickets has been done to death and never seems to work.

[DiegoDiego]

Not basing this on anything other than a hunch, but I'd imagine the number of fans lost to repetitive fixtures would be similar to the number lost due to increasing numbers of matches being irrelevant as the season wears on.

The final day of the championship last season was magic, people want to see games that matter.

Leagues of twenty or whatever would inevitably doom some poor club to be in the same division as Stenny for a generation. I don't mind playing Dundee United five times this season as I know we might not meet them again for a decade.

[HibeeJibee]

4 hours ago, TheScarf said:

And i agree the 10 team leagues need chucked.  That's far too small for a domestic competition.

More than half the top divisions in Europe contain 8, 10 or 12 teams.

[TheScarf]

Just now, HibeeJibee said:

More than half the top divisions in Europe contain 8, 10 or 12 teams.

Do they also have 3 cup competitions where you could meet the same team? 

[HibeeJibee]

10 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Do they also have 3 cup competitions where you could meet the same team? 

I'm not well enough up on "the Challenge Cups of Continental Europe" to say comprehensively, with respect to lower divisions... but plenty countries have League Cups and/or 2 legs in FA cups and/or Supercups and/or playoff systems and/or lower division cups. My point is small divisions playing each other more than twice is far from being some aberration - it is infact very common, indeed increasing.

EDIT: only 1/3 of the top divisions in Europe only play each other twice.

Edited February 9 by HibeeJibee

[RandomGuy.]

Id worry bigger divisions would go stale really quickly.

A 14 team second tier would likely have about 18 teams just constantly recycling through it with ~9/10 being virtual mainstays who never go up or down, dependent on the size of the top flight which might make it even more stale. 

You'd play team less a season but youd be playing the same teams literally every season.

[Dons_1988]

As @Sergeant Wilson alludes to, you can’t actually defeat the fact that there’s a huge market of people who ‘quite like’ football but don’t love it and therefore want more out of it than just a competitive game of football. 

These people want some or all of winning games, winning trophies, big stadiums, big crowds, celebrity players, off-field drama, big transfer fees, big technology and anything else you can shoe horn into make a game of football into some sort mass appeal event. 

A larger league structure and free tickets can’t beat that unfortunately. Our clubs average attendances are unlikely to materially increase based on incremental changes to format or pricing.