The Grand Design - SPL Restructuring

[I Love Lamp]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/8653062.stm

They did it.

They found a way to make it look even more ridiculous than it already does.

[Sir David Gray]

I didn't think it was possible to create a more farcical set-up than what we have just now.

Clearly I was wrong. :bitchy:

[Bristolhibby]

For the love of Christ. 18 teams, play each other twice. Scottish football - done.

This is the idea of a load of self serving lunatics!

J

[Sir David Gray]

Could someone please try to explain to me what is difficult about arranging an 18 team SPL with each team playing each other twice - once at home and once away.

That would make it a 34 game season.

Is that really such a far fetched idea? :confused:

[ChooseLife]

That is unbelievable...

I'd rather keep it the way it is thanks.:bitchy:

[dawn]

"Another SPL chairman admitted that, while he favoured an even bigger top league, a 14-club set-up was more likely to find favour with clubs because of financial considerations, with fewer clubs sharing SPL income."

Sums it up!

"the love of money is the root to all evil":grr:

[I Love Lamp]

I can understand the financial arguments to an extent but the problem is that the momentum is all downward just now. The pot of money is shrinking. Perhaps the new setup could result in a collapse in the quality of the 'product' (scarcely imaginable I know) for a couple of years due to the need to share out the money among a greater number of clubs which could affect future TV deals etc. However, that is not necessarily so since the TV deal at the moment is just to cover the OF, the Edinburgh derbies and a couple of extras. The Dundee and Highland derbies would be added to this. It is difficult to see that the deal would go down in these circumstances since the customer base would remain similar and it could even go up. The hope is crowds might get a boost to, thereby making up a bit of the shortfall.

Even if it did collapse, though, the point is that the direction just now is one of decline and sometimes you have to do something big to give a jolt to the system. I remember that Levein at Dundee United used to bring on another centre-half and then shove Lee Wilkie upfront (did it once at McDiarmid when I was there) to keep teams guessing. Changing the league to an 18 team league could well be that change.

And if all that wasn't good enough, the fans have said they want an end to the split. Every business should listen to its customer base. Adapt or die.

[Brando7]

After the split, clubs in the top six and the bottom eight would then play each other twice.

This would mean 36 matches for the clubs in the top six, with 40 games being played by those finishing in the bottom eight.

WTF :confused:

[jakedance]

The problem is the tv companies will always want four old firm derbies a season and the clubs want the current number of old firm visits a season. They won't vote for anything that reduces income. An 18 team league may be better for Scottish fitba long term but most clubs live hand to mouth and can't take the hit.

Bit of a catch 22.

[the_ginger_hibee]

I've checked the date 3 times now and it quite clearly doesn't say April 1 2010.

Please, for the love of football and scottish 'fitba, tell me the article has been dragged up from the 1st. There is no way this can be the actual way we are going to go.

Also didn't think there was a way to make the current split seem reasonable, but alas, add in an 'uneven' split with some mental way of playing each other and bam - our current set-up seems not so bad after all!


Top six and the bottom eight.

36 matches for the clubs in the top six, with 40 games being played by those finishing in the bottom eight

:faf: Who comes up with this *****? Honestly. What a mess.

[Ryan91]

This is a farce, total farce. This guarantees 4 Old Firm games a season, they never learn do they, screw what the fans want, let's do it our way. They do love the idea of a 'split' - top 6 bottom 8 playing each other twice, why not make it even and have a top 7 bottom 7, 6 more games post split and each team playing 3 times at home and 3 away after the split. Also forget the idea that the 7th placed club can stay 7th with less points than the club in 8th after the split, 32 games played, 2 teams relegated one automatically, 11th through 13th play in a round-robbin mini league format with team with fewest points going down along with 14th. But really a 16 team league format would work best, 18 teams would be too many unless we had a full pyramid system with Junior Clubs able to gain promotion to higher leagues.

GGTTH

[hibbytam]

After the split, clubs in the top six and the bottom eight would then play each other twice.

This would mean 36 matches for the clubs in the top six, with 40 games being played by those finishing in the bottom eight.

WTF :confused:

It is actually impressive the level of complication they have managed to put into something that should be so simple.
It's a pity that the money speaks higher than what the fans want, and the game needs.

[EuanH78]

This is a farce, total farce. This guarantees 4 Old Firm games a season, they never learn do they, screw what the fans want, let's do it our way. They do love the idea of a 'split' - top 6 bottom 8 playing each other twice, why not make it even and have a top 7 bottom 7, 6 more games post split and each team playing 3 times at home and 3 away after the split. Also forget the idea that the 7th placed club can stay 7th with less points than the club in 8th after the split, 32 games played, 2 teams relegated one automatically, 11th through 13th play in a round-robbin mini league format with team with fewest points going down along with 14th. But really a 16 team league format would work best, 18 teams would be too many unless we had a full pyramid system with Junior Clubs able to gain promotion to higher leagues.

GGTTH

I like the cut of your jib young man :thumbsup:

[MountcastleHibs]

They're off their heids!

18 teams, play each other twice a season - home and away, 34 game season... Sorted :thumbsup:

It's just ridiculous having a 14 team league, splitting into a top 6, and bottom 8... Totally and utterly ridiculous :bitchy:

[ScottB]

Jesus Christ!

So they plan to replace a stupid, uncompetitive, overcomplicated league set up with one that's even worse?

Splitting the league at the half way stage is a disastrous idea! At the moment your dooming the teams at the top half of the bottom section to a few pointless games, now they will face half a seasons worth! Worse still they could easily face players wanting to leave in the January window because of it etc. How many times have we seen teams make late season charges (or drops) that will also be eliminated. How much in ticket income would Hibs lose if we were doomed to half a season in the bottom half?

If this is about smaller clubs lust for Old Firm cash, why on earth would they agree to accepting only 2 games against them a season guaranteed? The St Mirrens, Falkirks and St Johnstones have the most to lose from this, why not just go for the 18 team league? Same number of matches against the big clubs, but more small teams as an insulation against relegation?


Does any other league in the world use the stupid split idea anyway??

[s.a.m]

I've had an idea!:idea:


A league of 20, based on the previous years placings. The top two take part in a seperate 'mini-league' (provisional title 'Scottish Collective of Uber Menschen - S.C.U.M.), who play each other 16 times home and away then, following a split, play each other another 4 times home and away. The bottom 18 play each other twice (home and away), with each club agreeing to ensure that points accrued do not land any team other than the aforementioned S.C.U.M. in the top two at the end of the season.

Telly happy, Old Firm happy, non-Old Firm fans happy. I think I have a solution, ladies and gentlemen.

[Frogga]

What I don't understand is if they insist on this split then why don't they have 16 teams and then you could have a top 8 and bottom 8.

A top 8 would mean 4 more games for the big teams resulting in more money and would avoid the league becoming lopsided.

16 teams would keep the fans happy too.

The proposal they have just now seems to be a very poor attempt to act like change is taking place.

And why do we need an 11-1 favour to bring in a new rule?? I thought all this was abolished for a 8-4 ruling to avoid the OF v the rest philosophy from holding back good ideas (not that this the 14 team league is a good idea...).

[Dashing Bob S]

This is one of the reasons I despair of the cretins who run Scottish football. Why they just come out and say, "the game needs change but we can't do anything because the TV companies want 4 OF games per season, and 14 clubs is about the maximum we can divi up the (declining) SPL loot between."

Instead they not only shuffle deck chairs on the titanic, but throw the life rafts over the side without getting anyone into them. Look how moribund our season is already, and that's with teams still fighting for Europe, and the relegation slot.

If it was, say on the basis of the current table, a double-header clash between, say, A'deen and and St Johnstone, would anybody actually bother to attend those games? What would be the point?

And what is the point of this exercise, and of the timid, complacent, steady-as-she-sinks bowling club officials who run the senior game in this country?

[GreenCastle]

FARCE!

How to kill Scottish football even more :grr:

Do they ever listen to any fans ? :bye:

[H18sry]

FARCE!

How to kill Scottish football even more :grr:

Do they ever listen to any fans ? :bye:

no

[ANDY McGEECHAN]

This is one of the reasons I despair of the cretins who run Scottish football. Why they just come out and say, "the game needs change but we can't do anything because the TV companies want 4 OF games per season, and 14 clubs is about the maximum we can divi up the (declining) SPL loot between."

Instead they not only shuffle deck chairs on the titanic, but throw the life rafts over the side without getting anyone into them. Look how moribund our season is already, and that's with teams still fighting for Europe, and the relegation slot.

If it was, say on the basis of the current table, a double-header clash between, say, A'deen and and St Johnstone, would anybody actually bother to attend those games? What would be the point?

And what is the point of this exercise, and of the timid, complacent, steady-as-she-sinks bowling club officials who run the senior game in this country?

Probably Dalkeith Bowling Club

[Barney McGrew]

"the game needs change but we can't do anything because the TV companies want 4 OF games per season"

And that in a nutshell is why we'll never get a sensible league set up in this country

[Steve20]

Don't get me wrong, this new idea is rubbish. However, it's better than what we have just now. At least you won't have to play someone three times away or have teams with more games away than at home.

Still don't know why we can't have an 18 team league.

[PeeKay]

Don't get me wrong, this new idea is rubbish. However, it's better than what we have just now. At least you won't have to play someone three times away or have teams with more games away than at home.

Still don't know why we can't have an 18 team league.

It looks like what they have done is come up with a system that addresses this problem alone - no doubt in response to Martin Bain's comments on "lack of sporting integrity" - but ignores all the other well-documented problems with the current set-up.
One of the fundamental problems is that there are too many clubs chasing a diminishing fan base, but when the Huns and Yams finally go into financial melt-down that will be that solved :greengrin

[HFC07]

For the love of Christ. 18 teams, play each other twice. Scottish football - done.

Exactly it couldn't be more simpler than that, why confuse things FFS its not rocket science all teams are sick of seeing the seam teams over and over. Is it not enough that at the moment you play a team at a minimum of 3 times a season. 4 times if you are in the split and 5 times if you are drawn in the cup with them and dare i say it 6 times if in the unlikely event you get them twice in both cups.

It is simple, have an 18 team league to play each other twice a season and possibly more due to meetings in the cup, but you can't control that.

SFA get it sorted and stop the wine drinking while trying to arrange the league; its not a good set up and makes us look even more amateurish than we already are.

[bighairyfaeleith]

This is absolute ****. Honestly it has to be a joke. Just create a 16 or 18 team league with two relegation spots and everyone plays each other twice. You can make the promotion more interesting by doing playoffs like in england. That way we only have to put up with vermin like the huns and yams at our shiny new stadium once a year!!

A split of 6 and 8, I mean what the ****?????????????

Surely there has to be a way to let them know this is a stupid ****ing idea??

If we tell hibs will they pass the message on?????

[K.Marx]

Was April 1st not a few weeks back!? :rolleyes:

You just couldn't make this up, 8 teams playing 40 games and 6 playing 36!? WTF? :bitchy:

[.Sean.]

I should really be shocked at this awful proposition, but this is the SPL and I don't think those who run it have an ounce of football knowledge between them. Farcical setup, and that's being kind.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The problem is the tv companies will always want four old firm derbies a season and the clubs want the current number of old firm visits a season. They won't vote for anything that reduces income. An 18 team league may be better for Scottish fitba long term but most clubs live hand to mouth and can't take the hit.

Bit of a catch 22.

It always amazes me that when a company or organisation finds itself in trouble, the people given the task of fixing it are the same people who created the mess in the first place.

There's times I despair about Scotland. I like to think we are a creative, imaginative, fair country. Every now and then I am taken back down to earth by petty, small minded, small time people like the SPL.

We have to vote with our feet on this one. It's a total joke. The worst thing about our league, for me, is the need to play the same teams four times a year. It is so boring.

The other thing is, now we are in the third tier of European football, should we not just face facts and adopt summer football? It would at least give us a chance of progress in the Euro competitions, and get us back up the ladder.

Those idiots in the West, really have to drop this misplaced grandiosity they have about the importance of the OF in world football, and get back to basics.

[Beefster]

As had been said, there are numerous options that would make the SPL better, remove the split and re-engage the fans yet the SPL are suggesting an option that would do none of these things and would make the set-up even more bizarre.

You could not make it up.

If Hibs vote for this, I'll seriously consider giving up my ST.

[Saorsa]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/8653062.stm

They did it.

They found a way to make it look even more ridiculous than it already does.oh dear :bitchy: what a load of pish, the people running fitba in this country are beyond belief :grr:

[Iain G]

Yet its still not as complicated as the Aussie A League finals series!! :greengrin

Right, its simple:
- 18 team SPL playing each other twice, 2 up 2 down.
- 12 to 16 team 1st Division
- Regional Leagues with the winners of each league getting promotion to the 1st Division (or a playoff series with the winners of each leagues perhaps?).

Scottish Cup stays the same
League cup goes back into a number of mini leagues to add some interest and revitalise the competition, perhaps regionalised, then QF/SF/Finals.

[Leith Green]

Was April 1st not a few weeks back!? :rolleyes:

You just couldn't make this up, 8 teams playing 40 games and 6 playing 36!? WTF? :bitchy:



Crazy eh..

How the **** can clubs price season tickets etc when they dont know wether they will play 18 or 20 home matches in a season and wether clubs (take Hibs for instance) will play 3 extra home cat A matches or not, complete bull**** for me, and reeks of them trying to make themselves look like making radical changes to suit all when in fact they are just giving a balls up of a set-up a make over and trying to make it look fresh..

If this goes ahead then I'm not putting another penny into scottish football as it has already reached farcical lows,and the powers that be arent prepared to do whats required to fix it.anyone with any idea whatsoever can tell you the league needs 18 teams playing each other twice, forget about having to split money amongst more teams because the game is dying on its erse and there will soon be no money to split amongst any teams the way we are heading..

If the league doesnt re-construct into 16 or 18 teams playing twice then we are goosed, and could end up with a farcical league like wales or Ireland with predominently part time teams in the top flight...

Makes you wonder wether the Huns an Celtic know this and wether it would suit their agenda of playing in England??

[Leith Green]

Also, if they were thinking of doing a 14 team league spliting after 26 games then wouldnt it be common sense to split into a top 7 and bottom 7 playing an extra 12 games each?? That would ensure every team plays 38 games a season.. rather than this bull****

[dangermouse]

A 16 or 18 team league makes sense in many ways. No skewed home and away fixtures, no split, full fixture list known at the start of the season, if a non OF team hit a purple patch they have a better chance of winning the league or splitting the OF, likelihood of most fixtures being at 3PM on a Saturday.

I also like the idea of the OF still leaving and joining the Atlantic League with one caveat, the games actually get played in the Atlantic.

[Hainan Hibs]

Whoever thought up that idea should be taken outside with a double barrell shoutgun and taken care of.

Why the **** no one at that *****y organisation, who are probably raking in the cash for doing **** all, can't get it into their heads that what the majority of fans want is an 18 team league with two rounds of fixtures and no split is beyond me.

Who in their right minds thinks of a 14 team league, with a spilt, but split it 6 and 8, not the logical 7 and 7, and then have the bottom 8 teams play 4 more games:confused:

It comes down to the Old Firm games. They want as many Old Firm games a season they can get and won't agree to a 16 or 18 team league because of that. The SFA serve the Old Firm and because 11 clubs need to agree on something for it to pass the Old Firm will never be defeated.

The people who run Scottish Football are the biggest shower of ***** I've ever seen.

[blackpoolhibs]

While the game in Scotland is being run by the tv company's, we wont get what the fans want. They demand 4 old firm games, and that cant happen with an 18 or 16 team league.

[TheUsualSuspect]

I agree that it should be 18 or 20 teams in the league playing each other twice.

but there are a few things that would have to be considered. firstly the entry rules for the SPL. like an all seater stadium, not sure if all the stadiums would comply. and don't all teams have be full time rather than part-time, i'm sure some of the lower first division teams are part time.

Then you come on to another problem is if one of the current division 3 teams get promoted. the facilities would be completely inadequate and then you could and up teams getting pumped 7-0 or more on a weekly basis which in tun could make Scottish football look like even more of a joke.

as i said i want a bigger league and more competition but i can see why they said 14 teams, don't like it though.

If the feeling is so strong among other supporters clubs like the DU, Aberdeen and them etc would it not be worth getting all supporters trusts on board and making it a stringer agruement out of it

anyway just a thought

[HibbyRod]

What I don't understand is if they insist on this split then why don't they have 16 teams and then you could have a top 8 and bottom 8.

A top 8 would mean 4 more games for the big teams resulting in more money and would avoid the league becoming lopsided.

16 teams would keep the fans happy too.

The proposal they have just now seems to be a very poor attempt to act like change is taking place.

And why do we need an 11-1 favour to bring in a new rule?? I thought all this was abolished for a 8-4 ruling to avoid the OF v the rest philosophy from holding back good ideas (not that this the 14 team league is a good idea...).

I was confused by this too F_F_HFC?

We were certainly led to believe that this 8-4 ruling was arranged during the "revolt" against the OF a number of years ago.

Given that some of the club chairmen subsequently backed down, did that leave the 11-1 ruling in place after all? :confused:

Bloody hope not! :bitchy:

[blackpoolhibs]

I agree that it should be 18 or 20 teams in the league playing each other twice.

but there are a few things that would have to be considered. firstly the entry rules for the SPL. like an all seater stadium, not sure if all the stadiums would comply. and don't all teams have be full time rather than part-time, i'm sure some of the lower first division teams are part time.

Then you come on to another problem is if one of the current division 3 teams get promoted. the facilities would be completely inadequate and then you could and up teams getting pumped 7-0 or more on a weekly basis which in tun could make Scottish football look like even more of a joke.

as i said i want a bigger league and more competition but i can see why they said 14 teams, don't like it though.

If the feeling is so strong among other supporters clubs like the DU, Aberdeen and them etc would it not be worth getting all supporters trusts on board and making it a stringer agruement out of it

anyway just a thought

Until such times as the all the non old firm teams grow a set of balls, and they ALL resign from the league, and set their own league up, with a fairer set of rules. Nothing will change, and they will all be complaining in 20 years time about the same things, by which time i think grounds will be emptier than they are now, and non old firm fans, will nearly ALL have an english club they support, with the scottish clubs being their 2nd side.:boo hoo:

[Gatecrasher]

While the game in Scotland is being run by the tv company's, we wont get what the fans want. They demand 4 old firm games, and that cant happen with an 18 or 16 team league.


why dont we have 2 leagues, the OF can just play each other every week then everyone else can have a normal league without all this pish :rolleyes:

[Westie1875]

After the split, clubs in the top six and the bottom eight would then play each other twice.

This would mean 36 matches for the clubs in the top six, with 40 games being played by those finishing in the bottom eight.

WTF :confused:

Ludicrous, if they want to go down that road and keep the split then make the league 16 teams and split it into a top and bottom 8. It would be ridiculous to have teams in one half of the league playing more games that those in the other half.

I don't want the split kept anyway.

[Antifa Hibs]

That is one of the funniest things I have read on the internet in years.

Could you imagine the premier league getting split into a top 8 then a top 12, with the bottom teams playing an extra game each.

:faf:

SPL/SFA GTF!

An 18 team league = 34 games. Lower the seat criteria to 4000/5000. *** simple.

[GreenPJ]

Until such times as the all the non old firm teams grow a set of balls, and they ALL resign from the league, and set their own league up, with a fairer set of rules. Nothing will change, and they will all be complaining in 20 years time about the same things, by which time i think grounds will be emptier than they are now, and non old firm fans, will nearly ALL have an english club they support, with the scottish clubs being their 2nd side.:boo hoo:

Whilst that would be a lovely thought as you pointed out earlier the Scottish league (as are most in the world) are currently goverened by TV. Like it or not football needs TV revenue and we would get none if there was a league set-up without the OF (unless they had moved south).

The only hope I can see is that TV revenue in the future comes from the likes of the BBC and they need to be happy to cover games fairly and equally and therefore there is not as much need to bow down to the OF in terms of demanding 4 derbies a season.

[Hainan Hibs]

That is one of the funniest things I have read on the internet in years.

Could you imagine the premier league getting split into a top 8 then a top 12, with the bottom teams playing an extra game each.

:faf:

SPL/SFA GTF!

An 18 team league = 34 games. Lower the seat criteria to 4000/5000. *** simple.

If the people who run football in Scotland keep up with one idiotic decision after another the criteria could be set at "allow room for one man and his dog".

Scottish football is on it's arse but there is so much room for potential.

I wish the 10 teams outside the Old Firm would grow a set and tell them to play by a fair set of rules.

[RIP]

I can understand the financial arguments to an extent but the problem is that the momentum is all downward just now. The pot of money is shrinking. Perhaps the new setup could result in a collapse in the quality of the 'product' (scarcely imaginable I know) for a couple of years due to the need to share out the money among a greater number of clubs which could affect future TV deals etc. However, that is not necessarily so since the TV deal at the moment is just to cover the OF, the Edinburgh derbies and a couple of extras. The Dundee and Highland derbies would be added to this. It is difficult to see that the deal would go down in these circumstances since the customer base would remain similar and it could even go up. The hope is crowds might get a boost to, thereby making up a bit of the shortfall.

Even if it did collapse, though, the point is that the direction just now is one of decline and sometimes you have to do something big to give a jolt to the system. I remember that Levein at Dundee United used to bring on another centre-half and then shove Lee Wilkie upfront (did it once at McDiarmid when I was there) to keep teams guessing. Changing the league to an 18 team league could well be that change.

And if all that wasn't good enough, the fans have said they want an end to the split. Every business should listen to its customer base. Adapt or die.

The trouble is JT that the clubs have to vote for change. Change is a journey, not a destination.

The needs of the clubs are not always the needs of the fans. We need to examine, in financial terms what this new set up means.

For the top six there could be

More TV income
More ticket sakes (unless the fans dont buy in to more big games)
Slightly bettter distinction for being top six i.e. Better 6th out of 14 than 12.
Fairness i.e. same no of games home and away to main rivals


The bix six are not going to shoot themselves in the foot by voting for an 18 club league. Then they would face more expensive and financially unrewarding matches against e.g. Queen of the South or Ross County instead of more big matches

It's a win win for the big six - no? Better than the status quo and avoiding the spectre of an 18 club top flight

[Beefster]

Also, if they were thinking of doing a 14 team league spliting after 26 games then wouldnt it be common sense to split into a top 7 and bottom 7 playing an extra 12 games each?? That would ensure every team plays 38 games a season.. rather than this bull****

You'd have two teams not playing every weekend after the split.

[yekimevol]

great less money for what postion u finsh cause theres more teams in the league.

[Woody1985]

I've not read all the posts on here so it may have been said already but this set up would mean that Rantic still get to play each othe 4 times a season.

It also means that they get to play any potential challengers for the league 4 times a season, meaning that any challenger would still need to play the OF for 24 points a season.

With the financial gap between the clubs no one will be able to bridge that 24 points.

That's why this set up is more likely and geared towards the OF yet again.

We'd be better saving all ourselves that hassle and just let them flip a coin each year and decide who gets the title. Nothing's going to change.


Any change to the current league set-up would, however, require an 11-1 vote in favour from the existing 12 clubs under the SPL constitution.

As for the above, I thought it was changed to 8-4 a few years back or was that only for TV deals?

[holyrood hibbie]

To freshing up the SPL they need 18 teams. 17 home and 17 away, it aint that hard. To freshing up Scottish football they would have to make a minimum of two lower leagues that have either 18 or 20 teams. In these leagues they need teams from the Highands, such as Forres Mechanics, teams from the west, such as Irvine Meadow, teams from the east, such as Bonyrigg and teams from the southm such as Gretna 2008.

Theres how to save Scottish football. Get it sorted SFA :grr:

[Prawn Sandwich]

The good fleet SFA, SPL, SFL.................rearranging the deck chairs and all that! :yawn:

Wake up and smell the napalm!

[Leith Green]

You'd have two teams not playing every weekend after the split.


Hardly that big a deal is it? The way the pitches here are, it probably wouldnt even happen like that..

[dangermouse]

The trouble is JT that the clubs have to vote for change. Change is a journey, not a destination.

The needs of the clubs are not always the needs of the fans. We need to examine, in financial terms what this new set up means.

For the top six there could be

More TV income
More ticket sakes (unless the fans dont buy in to more big games)
Slightly bettter distinction for being top six i.e. Better 6th out of 14 than 12.
Fairness i.e. same no of games home and away to main rivals


The bix six are not going to shoot themselves in the foot by voting for an 18 club league. Then they would face more expensive and financially unrewarding matches against e.g. Queen of the South or Ross County instead of more big matches

It's a win win for the big six - no? Better than the status quo and avoiding the spectre of an 18 club top flight

Who are the big six? I'm assuming Aberdeen are in that list? I'm sure they'd be delighted playing an extra 4 games a season against the likes of Dundee, Raith Rovers, Ross County or the likes if they don't improve. The only thing that is likely to happen here is that the OF, Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen and Dundee United will perpetually be the top 6 and get richer than the bottom 8 causing an even greater chasm in the SPL.

THIS CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN but how do we stop it?

[Phil D. Rolls]

53 posts in, and not one in favour of the change. You would hope that someone, somewhere, would get the picture.

[RoslinInstHibby]

lot of nonsense!

they might as well just say an 18 team league, we all play each other once at home and once away, then the top 2 in the league go into a best of 3 playoff to decide the championship, everyone is happy!

[Dan Sarf]

I've had a long think about this (about three minutes, probably two minutes more than the SFA etc) and have come up with an plan that, I think, will satisfy everyone who matters. In a heart-stopping double header, the season gets underway when the top two from the previous year (Rangers and Celtic) play each other home and away. TV companies: tick. Then they play each other again (home and away). TV companies: tick. There then follows a mid-season break for the cup final played between last year's finalists (or Rangers and Celtic if either of them failed to get to the final). Now the pressure is really on as the league splits into two with the top team in each section (Rangers and Celtic) facing each other in not one but two more thrilling double headers. TV companies: tick. And finally, the teams coming first and second (Rangers and Celtic) play an all-or-nothing double-header decider for treble points. TV companies: tick. And that's it. Job done. Oh and all other teams in the present, hopeless set-up will, of course, be told to xxxxxx off. Thoughts? :greengrin

[dangermouse]

I've had a long think about this (about three minutes, probably two minutes more than the SFA etc) and have come up with an plan that, I think, will satisfy everyone who matters. In a heart-stopping double header, the season gets underway when the top two from the previous year (Rangers and Celtic) play each other home and away. TV companies: tick. Then they play each other again (home and away). TV companies: tick. There then follows a mid-season break for the cup final played between last year's finalists (or Rangers and Celtic if either of them failed to get to the final). Now the pressure is really on as the league splits into two with the top team in each section (Rangers and Celtic) facing each other in not one but two more thrilling double headers. TV companies: tick. And finally, the teams coming first and second (Rangers and Celtic) play an all-or-nothing double-header decider for treble points. TV companies: tick. And that's it. Job done. Oh and all other teams in the present, hopeless set-up will, of course, be told to xxxxxx off. Thoughts? :greengrin

I think you should delete this post ASAP before someone from the SPL reads it.

[Hibs On Tour]

Yet its still not as complicated as the Aussie A League finals series!! :greengrin

Right, its simple:
- 18 team SPL playing each other twice, 2 up 2 down.
- 12 to 16 team 1st Division
- Regional Leagues with the winners of each league getting promotion to the 1st Division (or a playoff series with the winners of each leagues perhaps?).

Scottish Cup stays the same
League cup goes back into a number of mini leagues to add some interest and revitalise the competition, perhaps regionalised, then QF/SF/Finals.

We have a winner! Agree 100% with all of that.

[Iain G]

I've had a long think about this (about three minutes, probably two minutes more than the SFA etc) and have come up with an plan that, I think, will satisfy everyone who matters. In a heart-stopping double header, the season gets underway when the top two from the previous year (Rangers and Celtic) play each other home and away. TV companies: tick. Then they play each other again (home and away). TV companies: tick. There then follows a mid-season break for the cup final played between last year's finalists (or Rangers and Celtic if either of them failed to get to the final). Now the pressure is really on as the league splits into two with the top team in each section (Rangers and Celtic) facing each other in not one but two more thrilling double headers. TV companies: tick. And finally, the teams coming first and second (Rangers and Celtic) play an all-or-nothing double-header decider for treble points. TV companies: tick. And that's it. Job done. Oh and all other teams in the present, hopeless set-up will, of course, be told to xxxxxx off. Thoughts? :greengrin

Way too complicated, think I can do easier.

18 team SPL.

The split happens BEFORE the season starts, its a 2/16 split, where Rangers and Celtic are the two and play each other home and away every weekend, while everyone else gets on with it and plays each other twice (once home and once away) to decide who gets the Europa Cup spot at the end of the season...

Kinda like what we have just now, only more formal :agree:

Benefits: Scottish media gets to wet itself talking about an old firm game every week, none of the rest of us have to put up with their biggoted rubbish, which can only be a good thing...

[Groathillgrump]

What is this crazy obsession with having a split? Just give us an expanded league with a simple play each other home and away set up so we know exactly where we are! :grr:

[SlickShoes]

The thing that most baffling is keeping this split.

Moving to a 14 team league is a step in the right direction but having a split still is sheer stupidity! Is there any other league that is as laughably bad as the SPL? (this is a serious question btw)

[Craig_in_Prague]

What is this crazy obsession with having a split? Just give us an expanded league with a simple play each other home and away set up so we know exactly where we are! :grr:

:top marks

in a nutshell.

How much are these idiots also earning whilst fking up our game :grr:

[Vini1875]

Does anyone know how the voting works? I am sure I read that it was not simply one club one vote and of course the OF have a veto as well I'm sure.

The OF are not going to vote for any set up which a. creates more of a challenge to them and b. means losing any OF games. They want 4 SPL games and two finals, the rest can go and take a f*** to themselves.

So given that 4 OF games is a must, with possibly another two in cup games, how is it possible to restructure the league. Also I think the SPL is trying to look after fans, but it is the fans who watch TV not the ones who go to the games. Possibly the ones who watch TV are actually a bigger audience.

[JimBHibees]

How about a 16 or 14 team league with a nominated champion after the 30 or 26 games. The top 6 or so have a play off type tournament which consists of playing each other twice, the top 2 in the mini league then play in a final for the play off competition trophy. European places are decided at the end of the league tournament i.e the initial stage.

No idea about the bottom 8 or 10:greengrin

[Diclonius]

Way too complicated, think I can do easier.

18 team SPL.

The split happens BEFORE the season starts, its a 2/16 split, where Rangers and Celtic are the two and play each other home and away every weekend, while everyone else gets on with it and plays each other twice (once home and once away) to decide who gets the Europa Cup spot at the end of the season...

Kinda like what we have just now, only more formal :agree:

Benefits: Scottish media gets to wet itself talking about an old firm game every week, none of the rest of us have to put up with their biggoted rubbish, which can only be a good thing...

You, sir, are a genius. :agree:

[Franck is God]

I think that the league should be structured as below.

OFGTF League

Rangers
Celtic

Scottish Divisions 1-4

The rest....


They can play each other every week as many times as they want in Glasgow, Dublin, Belfast, Boston or wherever the ***** they want and leave us alone.



Sorry Ian G, didn;'t read your post before I did mine.

[Gerrintaethem]

2 leagues.

SPL and division one teams go into the SPL 1

Div 2 and 3 teams go into the SPL 2

2 up 2 down every year, no play offs or pish like that.

simple stuff :grr:

[Arch Stanton]

An 18 club league wouldn't just reduce the number of OF games would also reduce the number of Cat A games at ER - reduced income for Hibs and hence a smaller player budget - is that what people want?

Personally it wouldn't bother me as I am in favour of using our up-and-coming players more and have less drafting in of proven and experienced players. However, I suspect many would expect to have it both ways and for the player budget to remain the same.

[basehibby]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/8653062.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/8653062.stm)

They did it.

They found a way to make it look even more ridiculous than it already does.

On the up side it DOES look better than the current set up - no more farces such as Hibs going to Motherwell three times in a season while Motherwell still have to play more games away than at home.

I'd also favour an 18 team set up in principal, but can also see one particular problem going down that route - if you took the top six teams out of Div 1 you'd then be left with precious few clubs with the facilities and stature to challenge for promotion - potentially creating a bit of a closed shop at the top level (what's new I hear you ask).

In an ideal world though, an 18 team set up is what I'd like to see - 14 teams is at least a step in the right direction.

[IWasThere2016]

I think the SPL want Dundee up - but fear for Killie (in particular) that relegation will cause their demise.

If Killie are propping up the SPL on May 8 - I wouldnt bet against this being accelerated for 2010/11

Otherwise, I think they will make this change for 2011/12

[Long suffering]

a top six and bottom 8 :rolleyes:

[down-the-slope]

The problem is the tv companies will always want four old firm derbies a season and the clubs want the current number of old firm visits a season. They won't vote for anything that reduces income. An 18 team league may be better for Scottish fitba long term but most clubs live hand to mouth and can't take the hit.

Bit of a catch 22.


:agree:..saved me posting...sums up reasons perfectly..Turkeys will never vote for Christmas :wink:

[patlowe]

Let's be frank about this, the problem is the people who run SPL clubs, afraid to risk revenue made from the OF smellies 4 times a season. This mentality has to stop. **** their money. I'd much rather see a NORMAL LEAGUE. Even if the money teams make from the OF drops (which I'm not convinced about btw, given recent crowds against them), maybe that's not such a bad thing.

It's time we started living in the real world and accept our place right now in European football. Given that a 16 or 18 team league would undoubtedly increase the level of competition at both ends of the table, I'm convinced that interest would return to Scottish football and subsequently have a positive effect on revenue. Can you imagine the hype around a derby if it was the only one we'd see at Easter Road that season? Our newly-increased capacity stadium would be packed to the rafters.

I'm sick of this set-up, I'm sick of seeing the OF four times a season and I'm sick of the SPL. If they don't sort it soon, far more revenue will be lost through apathy than through the loss of a few thousand weegies.

RANT OVER.

[PatHead]

While the game in Scotland is being run by the tv company's, we wont get what the fans want. They demand 4 old firm games, and that cant happen with an 18 or 16 team league.

Make it an 18 team league with a play off (home and away) for the title. More than likely it will be Rangers?Celtic anyway. They get their 4 games a season for Sky. We get 2 games against each other home and away.

With any luck all the supporters will murder each other during the league play off and we are rid of them for good.

[marleyhib]

Interesting graphic showing crowds for 2008/09.

http://billsportsmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/scotland_2008-09attendances_z2.gif

Kinda shows all teams are much of a muchness after the top 6. I think an 18 team league is the answer. Bigger crowds in more parts of the country, better for the Scottish game as a whole, bored of watching the same teams over and over.

We might win more games too :)

[MyJo]

that is quite honestly the stupidest thing i have ever heard in my entire life. If scottish football wasn't enough of a laughing stock as it is this idea is putting the red nose and oversized boots on just to confirm how ******ing useless the SFA/SPl are.

If they are so bloody determined to have 4 old firm games a season why not have a 16 team league with each team playing each other twice (30 games) then have the league split into 4 mini leagues.

Top 4 compete for the title and european places, bottom 4 for relegation. other two leagues for pride and placings in the league.

[jacomo]

Also, isn't the 2nd part of Henry McLeish's report going to be about the structure of the professional game?

OK, it may or may not come up with any good proposals, but why not wait and see, rather than jump the gun with this half-baked fudge?

[francobaresi]

I can't understand why we don't just have 3 leagues! Premier with 20 teams like Engerlund & 2 of 10 with play offs etc. As has been muted previously, this is not rocket science & it spreads the wealth around the smaller clubs. Or is it really the greed wanting a couple of extra pieces of silver when the OF visit. :confused:

Scottish football died a long time ago, we need a drastic overhaul before we become a bigger laughing stock...:grr:

GGTTH

[Atalanta]

Nice as it sounds playing in an 18 team league and having a wider variety of opponents, money will always be the driving force. The only time the away end is anywhere near full is for the visits of the OF and Hearts. If you consider that most of the current bottom six sides bring along crowds that are so small you can probably count all the individual people in the away section, it is a no brainer commercially.

I guess that having the two home games against each of the top teams compared with once against everyone in an 18 team league is probably worth over £0.5m in ticket sales alone. When you then add on individual match TV fees, hospitality etc as well as the split of SPL sponsorship monies there is absolutely no chance of the idea of an 18 team league every happening, unless there is a massive change in the game's overall economics in the future.

[Keith_M]

Could someone please try to explain to me what is difficult about arranging an 18 team SPL with each team playing each other twice - once at home and once away.




Yes, that's easy enough to explain (and why it's unlikely we'll ever see it).

Your option: Two Old Firm derby's per season,
All the half arsed options mooted: Four OF derbys per season.

Simples.

:wink:

[libernian]

I LIKE THIS IDEA!

14 teams means we can get some decent bigger teams like dundee or dunfermline. and derbies like dundee v dundee united which is good for the league.

the split means we all have something to play for and not have a boring season if were midtable at christmas. you cant beat the numerous six pointers we get - makes it much more exciting i think.

18 teams would mean we would have more pointless teams like hamilton accies who bring nothing to league and have no fans so thats a non-starter imo.

hope they bring in the 14 teams league with a split. :agree:

edit: and another relegation spot also makes it more interesting down the bottom!

[cwilliamson85]

Rangers
Celtic
Dundee Utd
Motherwell
Hibernian
Hearts
St Johnstone
Hamilton
Aberdeen
St Mirren
Kilmarnock
Falkirk
Inverness CT
Dundee
Queen of Sth
Ross County
Dunfermline
Partick Thistle


18 teams play each other 1 home and 1 away. Why over complicate things with a split. Also add play offs for relegation to mix things up.

[libernian]

Rangers
Celtic
Dundee Utd
Motherwell
Hibernian
Hearts
St Johnstone
Hamilton NO FANS
Aberdeen
St Mirren
Kilmarnock
Falkirk
Inverness CT NO FANS
Dundee
Queen of Sth NO FANS
Ross County NO FANS
Dunfermline
Partick Thistle

18 teams play each other 1 home and 1 away. Why over complicate things with a split. Also add play offs for relegation to mix things up.

what do those teams add to the league though? i wouldnt go to easter road to watch those games.. lets keep what little wealth is in this league in it i say

[cwilliamson85]

what do those teams add to the league though? i wouldnt go to easter road to watch those games.. lets keep what little wealth is in this league in it i say

These are the best 18 teams in the country (going by league tables).

Obviously these clubs you highlighted do not have the fan base of other teams in the top 18 but you can say that about the English and Spanish leagues.

You will never get a 14 league team with sell out crowds.

[Arch Stanton]

These are the best 18 teams in the country (going by league tables).

Obviously these clubs you highlighted do not have the fan base of other teams in the top 18 but you can say that about the English and Spanish leagues.

You will never get a 14 league team with sell out crowds.

And if two get relegated who would your other two be?

[libernian]

These are the best 18 teams in the country (going by league tables).

Obviously these clubs you highlighted do not have the fan base of other teams in the top 18 but you can say that about the English and Spanish leagues.

You will never get a 14 league team with sell out crowds.

yeah i suppose, but theres not as many people in scotland. at least theres some fans at these other teams. i mean how much have hibs made from hamilton being in the league? say 100 away fans * £20 * 3 games = £6000 in two years and the football they play is embarrasing as is their empty stadium. same can be said for st johnstone btw - why they never put fans behind the goals baffles me.. at least make it look likes there some people at the game

also i think it would become more uncompetitive, the old firm would make mince meat of those teams if they played em on a regular basis too (sc semi final was a one off imo) and i think we would just beat them.

things are gonna turn round in scotland i feel pretty soon as old firm get worse n other teams get better. i just kinda wish our coefficient would get a bit worse so rangers didnt get that champions league money.

[libernian]

And if two get relegated who would your other two be?

we could have cowdenbeath in the spl or alloa... lol. suppose it would be good for novelty factor though, like burnley in the premiership (kind of).

[mim]

I LIKE THIS IDEA!

14 teams means we can get some decent bigger teams like dundee or dunfermline. and derbies like dundee v dundee united which is good for the league.

the split means we all have something to play for and not have a boring season if were midtable at christmas. you cant beat the numerous six pointers we get - makes it much more exciting i think.

18 teams would mean we would have more pointless teams like hamilton accies who bring nothing to league and have no fans so thats a non-starter imo.

hope they bring in the 14 teams league with a split. :agree:

edit: and another relegation spot also makes it more interesting down the bottom!

Glad someone likes it, because I do too.
Mind you, I have to say that, because I suggested similar a few weeks ago.
This is an improvement on the current farce (and any improvement should be supported).

I, like most others, would like to see an 18 team league, but finances dictate that THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN, so what is the best alternative?

I don't favour the 6/8 split. Granted, a 7/7 split would mean one team in each half idle in each round of post split fixtures, but I don't see that as a big deal.

It may not be perfect, but it's better than what we have now.

38 games as now, but with 19 at home and 19 away and no team playing on their opponents ground 3 times is definitely an improvement.

Whether it's fair to consign teams to the bottom league after 26 games, rather than 33 games, is a moot point. I don't think that it is so unfair as to invalidate the advantages.

Please, let's not poo-poo any suggestion that actually makes things less ridiculous than they are now.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Would love an 18 team league, but its never going to happen for the reasons given by other posters on here.

I dont actually think the OF away support is as vital as it used to be for most clubs. It used to be 10,000 at ER, now its less than 4,000 also look how many the OF take to Killie for instance.

16 teams with a split to 8 each after the first round of matches.

2 down automatically and 13th & 14th in a play off to see who plays against 3rd or 4th in a 16 team 1st division after they have had a play off.

Still not ideal, but at least its balanced.

[mim]

Would love an 18 team league, but its never going to happen for the reasons given by other posters on here.

I dont actually think the OF away support is as vital as it used to be for most clubs. It used to be 10,000 at ER, now its less than 4,000 also look how many the OF take to Killie for instance.

16 teams with a split to 8 each after the first round of matches.

2 down automatically and 13th & 14th in a play off to see who plays against 3rd or 4th in a 16 team 1st division after they have had a play off.

Still not ideal, but at least its balanced.

I've also thought along these lines, but that would give 30 games before the split and then 7 (or 14) after the split. 44 is too many and 37 doesn't give you an even home and away split, or stop the nonsense of playing a team more often away than at home.

[Brando7]

Would love an 18 team league, but its never going to happen for the reasons given by other posters on here.

I dont actually think the OF away support is as vital as it used to be for most clubs. It used to be 10,000 at ER, now its less than 4,000 also look how many the OF take to Killie for instance.

16 teams with a split to 8 each after the first round of matches.

2 down automatically and 13th & 14th in a play off to see who plays against 3rd or 4th in a 16 team 1st division after they have had a play off.

Still not ideal, but at least its balanced.

I'm sure i read somewhere it was some kind of protest as the amount they charge the OF when they go 2 rugby park compared to other SPL clubs...might be wrong tho :greengrin

[ekhibee]

Posted by cwilliamson85 http://www.hibs.net/message/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.hibs.net/message/showthread.php?p=2445068#post2445068)
Rangers THE BIGOT KINGS
Celtic THE BIGOT BHOYS
Dundee Utd POOR SUPPORT CONSIDERING THEIR SUCCESS
Motherwell VIRTUALLY NO FANS
Hibernian GREAT SUPPORT CONSIDERING LIMITED SUCCESS
Hearts VERY SMELLY INDEED
St Johnstone A £5 FOR PARKING
Hamilton NO FANS
Aberdeen SMELLY AND WOOLLY
St Mirren POOR SUPPORT AN AW
Kilmarnock GOOD PIES
Falkirk
Inverness CT NO FANS
Dundee
Queen of Sth NO FANS
Ross County NO FANS
Dunfermline
Partick Thistle

:wink:

[poolman]

I've tracked down the guy who thought this up


http://blog.jimmyngu.com/wp-content/empty-head.gif

[Brando7]

Posted by cwilliamson85 http://www.hibs.net/message/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.hibs.net/message/showthread.php?p=2445068#post2445068)
Rangers THE BIGOT KINGS
Celtic THE BIGOT BHOYS
Dundee Utd POOR SUPPORT CONSIDERING THEIR SUCCESS
Motherwell VIRTUALLY NO FANS
Hibernian GREAT SUPPORT CONSIDERING LIMITED SUCCESS
Hearts VERY SMELLY INDEED
St Johnstone A £5 FOR PARKING
Hamilton NO FANS
Aberdeen SMELLY AND WOOLLY
St Mirren POOR SUPPORT AN AW
Kilmarnock GOOD PIES
Falkirk
Inverness CT NO FANS
Dundee
Queen of Sth NO FANS
Ross County NO FANS
Dunfermline (Great Bridies)
Partick Thistle

:wink:

:greengrin

[DH1875]

And if two get relegated who would your other two be?


How about Morton, Airdrie, Raith Rovers, Clyde, Stirling, Livingston and Queens park to name a few. Throw in Ayr if they can get their stadium sorted as well.

[GreenCastle]

Let's be frank about this, the problem is the people who run SPL clubs, afraid to risk revenue made from the OF smellies 4 times a season. This mentality has to stop. **** their money. I'd much rather see a NORMAL LEAGUE. Even if the money teams make from the OF drops (which I'm not convinced about btw, given recent crowds against them), maybe that's not such a bad thing.

It's time we started living in the real world and accept our place right now in European football. Given that a 16 or 18 team league would undoubtedly increase the level of competition at both ends of the table, I'm convinced that interest would return to Scottish football and subsequently have a positive effect on revenue. Can you imagine the hype around a derby if it was the only one we'd see at Easter Road that season? Our newly-increased capacity stadium would be packed to the rafters.

I'm sick of this set-up, I'm sick of seeing the OF four times a season and I'm sick of the SPL. If they don't sort it soon, far more revenue will be lost through apathy than through the loss of a few thousand weegies.

RANT OVER.

Some good points and I agree there would be more buzz for the bigger games and seeing teams only once at home a season. Teams would then surely bring bigger travelling away supports ?

I think we have to step back and look bigger picture again - the German league is the best in Europe right now for attendances. Ticket prices are reasonable for the quality on show.

They also have a competitive league - several different winners over the years.

Read this -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/apr/11/bundesliga-premier-league

We need to break the trend of Old Firm domination - the question is how ?!