Our Competitive League

[VincentGuerin]

13 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Now I don’t know exactly how much revenue comes through Scottish football but let’s for talking sake says it’s around 500 million which is a significant over-estimation

That makes turnover split equally to around 11-12 million each so effectively you bankrupt Celtic and Rangers, Hearts and Aberdeen lose a little and everyone else benefits for a couple of seasons

In a season or 2 you lose 150 million from the pot due to you killing your 2 biggest clubs and then that snowballs killing off other clubs season after season as revenue dwindles.

You didn’t think that one through  

You've not understood my post, have you.

[Dons_1988]

45 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

I wondered about this at the time. it had potential to be very good.

I think there'd probably be a second-level version of this, linked officially or not. The likes of the OF, Anderlecht, Benfica etc would want a piece of that action and would be telling the smaller clubs in their countries to get to f**k. Where that ultimately leads is hard to say, but I wouldn't be against the seismic shock leading to an opportunity. What we have now is fucking pish anyway, nothing to lose.

I think our seismic event was in 2012 and those in charge let us down there. 

What was funny during the super league thing was the Helen lovejoy reaction from certain people about the concept of a competition being manufactured to maximise money for a small number of clubs who see themselves as better than the others. 

[Monkey Tennis]

39 minutes ago, AJF said:

I think we are at a stage where Celtic and Rangers will always be bigger, more successful clubs no matter what we do. But I think there are some suggestions that could go towards making things more competitive, in all competitions, and reduce the gap somewhat. This could include wage caps, Play-off style leagues to determine the champion, a more strict requirement to have x amount of homegrown players in your match day squad, some form of prize/sponsorship sharing, remove the league format of the league cup and have no seeding in place to determine which round clubs enter (can also be used for the Scottish cup).

Most of those suggestions would require a change to the voting structure or one of Celtic or Rangers to move away from their historic “big two” stance and vote with the other clubs. Rangers being the most likely I’d imagine given Celtic’s relative dominance.

As I said, I don’t think we will ever get to a level playing field, but I believe some of those things would result in there being more occasions of teams being able to challenge.

Ok then.

My idea, as I said, was for action to be taken by clubs to demand some such changes.  However, you seemed under the weird impression that I was proposing an end game.  

Do you also think that nurses are going on strike in order to close hospitals and never treat patients again?

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I think our seismic event was in 2012 and those in charge let us down there. 

What was funny during the super league thing was the Helen lovejoy reaction from certain people about the concept of a competition being manufactured to maximise money for a small number of clubs who see themselves as better than the others. 

I live in England and obviously know a lot of English fitba fans.

It was really funny being involved in conversations with Liverpool or Man City fans etc about how terrible the whole thing was. When it was pointed out to them that their club competes in the Champions League, a tournament that is already designed to make it as easy as possible for them to qualify (at the expense of others) then to do well, earn money, gain prestige etc to the detriment of clubs from the rest of the continent, they just couldn't see it.

I love English lower league and non-league fitba. But the gap to the attitudes of the Big Club fans is huge. They think they're the good guys.

There's this idea that the current set-up in fitba is natural and just. That the big clubs should just get to keep all the money. This complete refusal to consider what a sport is. And our Old Firm pals are just the same.

[Monkey Tennis]

2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I think our seismic event was in 2012 and those in charge let us down there. 

What was funny during the super league thing was the Helen lovejoy reaction from certain people about the concept of a competition being manufactured to maximise money for a small number of clubs who see themselves as better than the others. 

Precisely this.  The sight of protesting Chelsea fans was especially ridiculous.

Like you though, I welcomed it as a logical extension of what's been happening in football for decades.  I liked the idea of it eating itself and maybe provoking a reset.

Something similar probably remains our best bet of ever seeing positive change.

[VincentGuerin]

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Precisely this.  The sight of protesting Chelsea fans was especially ridiculous.

 

This was fucking hilarious. I mean, where do you begin?

[Jinky67]

9 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

You've not understood my post, have you.

You said in your post to pool all revenue and cut it 42 ways across all SPFL clubs. That’s pretty to easy to understand

I also don’t need to be Archimedes to work out that would be a disaster 

 

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

You said in your post to pool all revenue and cut it 42 ways across all SPFL clubs. That’s pretty to easy to understand

I also don’t need to be Archimedes to work out that would be a disaster 

 

Confirmed you didn't understand the post.

Cheers for that.

[AJF]

5 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Ok then.

My idea, as I said, was for action to be taken by clubs to demand some such changes.  However, you seemed under the weird impression that I was proposing an end game.  

Do you also think that nurses are going on strike in order to close hospitals and never treat patients again?

I wasn’t under any weird impression. I used the exact same terminology that you did and explained why I didn’t think that many teams would vote for such a radical proposal (deliberately throwing matches to create an unofficial league winner that would bring no practical benefit to the unofficial champions).

Don’t take it as a personal attack. I just disagreed with it.

[Nowhereman]

20 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

 

Scottish football never had a maximum wage in peacetime.

Och you and your facts

[Monkey Tennis]

5 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

 

There's this idea that the current set-up in fitba is natural and just. That the big clubs should just get to keep all the money. This complete refusal to consider what a sport is. And our Old Firm pals are just the same.

Correct, and the reality is that it is utterly contrived and unnatural, and ludicrously unjust.

I find it entertaining when people whose own political beliefs are left leaning and redistributive, somehow see this most livid form of capitalism as right and proper.

[Monkey Tennis]

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

I wasn’t under any weird impression. I used the exact same terminology that you did and explained why I didn’t think that many teams would vote for such a radical proposal (deliberately throwing matches to create an unofficial league winner that would bring no practical benefit to the unofficial champions).

Don’t take it as a personal attack. I just disagreed with it.

You failed to see it as a threat, a bargaining chip, a form of action.

I know nothing like it is happening, but that's what the idea represents; not an end in itself.

[AJF]

Just now, Monkey Tennis said:

You failed to see it as a threat, a bargaining chip, a form of action.

I know nothing like it is happening, but that's what the idea represents; not an end in itself.

Aye, that’s fair enough. I can see why it would be used as such, I’m just not sure that particular idea would garner much support, even if the sole purpose is to strengthen the hand of those involved, such as strike action.

[The Saintee]

It's worth it because when one of the OF have a rare trophyless season the meltdown is glorious.

[VincentGuerin]

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

Aye, that’s fair enough. I can see why it would be used as such, I’m just not sure that particular idea would garner much support, even if the sole purpose is to strengthen the hand of those involved, such as strike action.

The whole point is that nothing that will make any difference will get enough support.

Edited December 24, 2022 by VincentGuerin

[Jinky67]

14 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Shocked at this intervention from you. 

You can phase these things - for example you say we’re pooling all revenue in 5 years, giving clubs a transitional period to budget and cut their cloth accordingly. 

No one is under any illusion these things will happen but if there was enough will for it then they would. 

Do you honestly envisage a situation where clubs like Celtic, Rangers and to a much lesser extent Aberdeen and Hearts are going to buy into a proposition that says in 5 years your revenue will be slashed to around a tenth of what it was? What CEO on earth is selling a proposition to their board that cuts their revenue streams by 90% and make themselves financially vulnerable so they can fund a more competitive league for 40 other clubs. 

Ultimately that sort of plan feels more like a plan to kill off the big 2 firstly or force their hand to leave more than it’s a plan to rebalance.

There are more practical steps if you look back to when the league was more competitive 

Our TV deal is a joke compared to countries of a similar size where if our game was sold better we could easily split that equally.

We could reimpose salary caps as a % of revenue earned. We could limit the number of foreign players in our starting 11’s. We then can look at infrastructure around ticket prices to try get every stadium full. 

You seem to think I’m against the idea of making the league more competitive, I’m not but what I am against is a proposition that takes my club back to 1994.

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Do you honestly envisage a situation where clubs like Celtic, Rangers and to a much lesser extent Aberdeen and Hearts are going to buy into a proposition that says in 5 years your revenue will be slashed to around a tenth of what it was? What CEO on earth is selling a proposition to their board that cuts their revenue streams by 90% and make themselves financially vulnerable so they can fund a more competitive league for 40 other clubs. 

Ultimately that sort of plan feels more like a plan to kill off the big 2 firstly or force their hand to leave more than it’s a plan to rebalance.

There are more practical steps if you look back to when the league was more competitive 

Our TV deal is a joke compared to countries of a similar size where if our game was sold better we could easily split that equally.

We could reimpose salary caps as a % of revenue earned. We could limit the number of foreign players in our starting 11’s. We then can look at infrastructure around ticket prices to try get every stadium full. 

You seem to think I’m against the idea of making the league more competitive, I’m not but what I am against is a proposition that takes my club back to 1994.

Fucking hell.

This is hard to watch. You're just not getting this at all, are you?

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Do you honestly envisage a situation where clubs like Celtic, Rangers and to a much lesser extent Aberdeen and Hearts are going to buy into a proposition that says in 5 years your revenue will be slashed to around a tenth of what it was? What CEO on earth is selling a proposition to their board that cuts their revenue streams by 90% and make themselves financially vulnerable so they can fund a more competitive league for 40 other clubs. 

Ultimately that sort of plan feels more like a plan to kill off the big 2 firstly or force their hand to leave more than it’s a plan to rebalance.

There are more practical steps if you look back to when the league was more competitive 

Our TV deal is a joke compared to countries of a similar size where if our game was sold better we could easily split that equally.

We could reimpose salary caps as a % of revenue earned. We could limit the number of foreign players in our starting 11’s. We then can look at infrastructure around ticket prices to try get every stadium full. 

You seem to think I’m against the idea of making the league more competitive, I’m not but what I am against is a proposition that takes my club back to 1994.

I’m not doing this again with you. 

It’s literally been said multiple times that no one expects the clubs to buy into this. 

And yes, I’m fully aware that you’re in favour of a competitive league up to the point Celtic are impacted. 

[VincentGuerin]

4 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

We could reimpose salary caps as a % of revenue earned. We could limit the number of foreign players in our starting 11’s. We then can look at infrastructure around ticket prices to try get every stadium full. 

 

None of these things would give us a competitive league.

This is the whole point, the one you are totally missing.

All the things deemed 'sensible' - or that the OF (and on occasion Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen) would agree to - are window dressing. They'd have no actual real impact on the league.

Wage cap as a % of revenue - The OF still stroll it.

Limit on foreign players - The value of Scottish players goes up, making the best ones too pricey for Hearts etc. The OF hoard Scottish players and continue to stroll it.

Ticket prices filling stadium - No impact on who can challenge for the title.

These are non-suggestions.

[pozbaird]

As others have said, been multiple threads about this, and nothing is ever going to change. The root issue is that in a very small country, we have two disproportionally large clubs. In every major football league you care to mention, they too naturally have their big clubs, middling clubs, wee clubs, and yo-yo clubs. That’s pretty much a given. However, in most other decent standard leagues, unlike us, there are more than two clubs who could win the league, or at least be genuinely sniffing it…. Barcelona & Real Madrid at least have Atletico to think about. Italy has multiple big, well matched clubs. England has at least a big four, if not more when Newcastle truly unlock the baw-bees hidden down the back of their Saudi sofa. Netherlands has Ajax, PSV Eindhoven, Feyenoord. Portugal has Benfica, Sporting Lisbon, Porto. I’m not saying all other leagues see different winners each year, or the title is shared every five years, whatever, but at least there are more than two big clubs who garner support, and media attention, and money. The dynamic changes when two becomes at least three.

Germany and France are weird ones these days. No matter, even with their weirdness, someone list me another ‘major’ or well regarded European league where no-one, outwith the same two clubs, has won their top flight in what is approaching 30 years. Show me another European league where two clubs have supporters buses actively running to their middens from every, and I mean every, corner of the country in multiple towns that have their own professional clubs.

I could also ask to be shown a European league where two clubs have a rivalry based on religion, and an unhealthy dose of bigotry, with a media who have their noses so far up their arses that even Noel Fitzpatrick the Super Vet couldn’t operate on them.

There is no solution. Other than them fcuking off to some sort of European Super League Division 2. Not holding my breath.

Edited December 24, 2022 by pozbaird