Spfl reconstruction

[Wellbankhibby]

Was thinking about reconstruction of leagues. I personally would prefer a 16 team league but thats highly unlikely due to Financial reasons. With the Play offs in place why dont they consider 2 automatic promotions and 2 automatic relegation places, then have the play offs third team plays fourth and vice versa in other league this would still bring in revenue. With this season ending as it stands that lot were promoted we would have been automatically promoted and Sevco and QOS fighting it out against 3rd bottom of SPL for third place in Premier League. Surely worth thinking about. Wondered what thoughts/ comments. :flag:

[Eyrie]

It would have to be an 18 team league for financial reasons as clubs need the home games.

Oher than that, I'd rather see third bottom play fifth and third play fourth, with the winners meeting in a one-off game for the last spot in the top flight.

[whiskyhibby]

It would have to be an 18 team league for financial reasons as clubs need the home games.

Oher than that, I'd rather see third bottom play fifth and third play fourth, with the winners meeting in a one-off game for the last spot in the top flight.

I think 18 is about the right figure

[Keith_M]

I think 18 is about the right figure


Wasn't that the number in the top league until the mid-70s?

[whiskyhibby]

Yeah I think it was

[HoboHarry]

Was thinking about reconstruction of leagues. I personally would prefer a 16 team league but thats highly unlikely due to Financial reasons. With the Play offs in place why dont they consider 2 automatic promotions and 2 automatic relegation places, then have the play offs third team plays fourth and vice versa in other league this would still bring in revenue. With this season ending as it stands that lot were promoted we would have been automatically promoted and Sevco and QOS fighting it out against 3rd bottom of SPL for third place in Premier League. Surely worth thinking about. Wondered what thoughts/ comments. :flag:
I've been saying for a while that if Rangers get beaten tomorrow we are all going up. I imagine that Ladbrokes have insisted on it even though Rangers are going to be cannon fodder next year....

[JJP]

Surely it's too late to bring that in next season with St Mirren already confirmed as being relegated. I have to say I would be for it. An 18 team league would be better for allowing other teams to compete with Celtic and clubs would be more inclined to give more young Scottish players a chance.

[offshorehibby]

I've been saying for a while that if Rangers get beaten tomorrow we are all going up. I imagine that Ladbrokes have insisted on it even though Rangers are going to be cannon fodder next year....

I think the 18 team league would be better allowing a decent number of home games but if the huns do get humped the SPFL will come up with the brain wave of 16 and some ridiculous scheme to get more home games.

[IanM]

I've been saying for a while that if Rangers get beaten tomorrow we are all going up. I imagine that Ladbrokes have insisted on it even though Rangers are going to be cannon fodder next year....

I'm sure it was on here but someone posted the SPFL rules not long ago and the earliest the league can look at reconstruction is the 2017 season

[HoboHarry]

I'm sure it was on here but someone posted the SPFL rules not long ago and the earliest the league can look at reconstruction is the 2017 season
OK fair enough if that is true, but I would be surprised if there were no loopholes written in there to allow it in "emergency circumstances". That's what the legal eagles do......

[Pete]

I've been saying for a while that if Rangers get beaten tomorrow we are all going up. I imagine that Ladbrokes have insisted on it even though Rangers are going to be cannon fodder next year....

That would be absolutely mental but things like that have happened before. I think it was in Argentina where a big team finished bottom of the league so they decided to immediately scrap relegation.

[Roxyhibee]

A 16 team league would be a significant backward step for Scottish football as it currently stands in terms of potential interest to fans and other stakeholders such as sponsors and media.

An 18 team league would just be a disaster. The last third of the season would be a mass of meaningless fixtures for 9 or 10 of those clubs not involved in Europe or relegation - as a supporter in the late 60's and 70's I can tell you that those games attracted terrible crowds, but the handful of fixtures against the bigger clubs had much bigger crowds than today.

Up until the last games of these past few seasons, almost every team in
the top 2 divisions have had something to play for - which is good for Scottish football. As much as I am desperate to get out of this Championship as the next Hibby, I don't want a huge league full of boring unattractive games.

It's up to the bigger clubs like us, Yams and Sevco to get themselves sorted and not get relegated, so there are far more exciting games in a smaller top league.

[greenpaper55]

A 16 team league would be a significant backward step for Scottish football as it currently stands in terms of potential interest to fans and other stakeholders such as sponsors and media.

An 18 team league would just be a disaster. The last third of the season would be a mass of meaningless fixtures for 9 or 10 of those clubs not involved in Europe or relegation - as a supporter in the late 60's and 70's I can tell you that those games attracted terrible crowds, but the handful of fixtures against the bigger clubs had much bigger crowds than today.

Up until the last games of these past few seasons, almost every team in
the top 2 divisions have had something to play for - which is good for Scottish football. As much as I am desperate to get out of this Championship as the next Hibby, I don't want a huge league full of boring unattractive games.

It's up to the bigger clubs like us, Yams and Sevco to get themselves sorted and not get relegated, so there are far more exciting games in a smaller top league.

I think you will find that Hamilton v St Mirren etc has less fans attending than in the "bad old days " with the meaningless games, we need a bigger league as it's so boring at the moment with teams playing each other upwards of four games a season, ignore your customers at your peril !.

[Roxyhibee]

I think you will find that Hamilton v St Mirren etc has less fans attending than in the "bad old days " with the meaningless games, we need a bigger league as it's so boring at the moment with teams playing each other upwards of four games a season, ignore your customers at your peril !.

No. I don't think so. Terrible crowds in those days for those games and there were a lot of those games - in a time when people were more likely to attend football. Think about it.

Whether we like it or not, the tight leagues and play offs make the whole season at the very least interesting and for most, quite exciting.

[hibees 7062]

If it's gonna go ahead a decision should be made now rather than waiting to see if that lot get promoted

[Lucius Apuleius]

How do all the other leagues in the world with 16 and 18 teams, our even more, mange to have non meaningless games towards the end of the season?

[superfurryhibby]

No. I don't think so. Terrible crowds in those days for those games and there were a lot of those games - in a time when people were more likely to attend football. Think about it.

Whether we like it or not, the tight leagues and play offs make the whole season at the very least interesting and for most, quite exciting.

It also makes the football dull, defensive and risk averse.

I don't think we have eighteen teams worthy of a top league place. I too remember the auld 1st Division, with teams like Arbroath and Dumbarton in it etc. 16 would be enough.

The TV money etc, sponsorship and revenue are the obstacles to change. The irony is that the desire to compete and attract funds from other, ahem, stakeholders has changed the game and is now starting to slowly strangle the life out of it.

[Hamish]

If it's gonna go ahead a decision should be made now rather than waiting to see if that lot get promoted


I am a cynical old b*****d and reckon if Queens get through then reconstruction will be back on the agenda backed by our excellent media.

[brog]

I think we could justify an 18 team league quite easily. This season's top tier plus the top 6 in the 2nd tier are all teams who've been in the top division before & there's other teams like Dunfermline, Ayr & Morton with the potential to attract decent crowds if successful. I don't think 16 will fly, that's a minimum loss of 3 home games. Personally I like a 14 team league with a split after each team has been played twice. After the split you have another 6 games home & away giving 38 games in total. Only problem with that scenario is every team has a blank week after the split, but I don't see that as an insurmountable problem.

[Kaff]

As Wellbank says its making promotion and relegation more open that keeps leagues alive. Up till recently getting relegated from the SPL was potentially a sentence for a long stretch in the 1st division and if a team ran away with that league then there was a long season of 'so what' quite often. As has been shown with these playoffs the reach down to 5th in the table has kept it interesting right to the end even though there is a 20 point gap at the top, opening up the bottom of the SPL to three places would keep a large part of that league fully involved and yet getting relegated wouldnt be so disastrous since promotion would be far more open to a well run club.
In a 12 team league with overall 3 up 3 down (including play off) you would be either be pushing for league winner/europe or relegation no dead games i would think

[stoneyburn hibs]

I've been saying for a while that if Rangers get beaten tomorrow we are all going up. I imagine that Ladbrokes have insisted on it even though Rangers are going to be cannon fodder next year....

:agree:, The Huns will be in the premier next season no matter what.

[Eyrie]

If you want a season of meaningful fixtures then you should have supported the 12-12 splitting into 8-8-8 proposal that was rejected last year.

I was in favour of that model for years but accept that it isn't going to be considered again for a generation.

[greenlex]

No. I don't think so. Terrible crowds in those days for those games and there were a lot of those games - in a time when people were more likely to attend football. Think about it.

Whether we like it or not, the tight leagues and play offs make the whole season at the very least interesting and for most, quite exciting.
These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.

[hibees 7062]

I am a cynical old b*****d and reckon if Queens get through then reconstruction will be back on the agenda backed by our excellent media.

Monday morning Hamish :agree:

[greenlex]

It also makes the football dull, defensive and risk averse.

I don't think we have eighteen teams worthy of a top league place. I too remember the auld 1st Division, with teams like Arbroath and Dumbarton in it etc. 16 would be enough.

The TV money etc, sponsorship and revenue are the obstacles to change. The irony is that the desire to compete and attract funds from other, ahem, stakeholders has changed the game and is now starting to slowly strangle the life out of it.
Are you saying the current top 12 with Hubs Hearts Rangers and either QoS or Falkirk wouldn't be a good league. Take Dt Mirren out and add Raith. Enough decent clubs and teams for a top league of 18 no problem.

[stoneyburn hibs]

Are you saying the current top 12 with Hubs Hearts Rangers and either QoS or Falkirk wouldn't be a good league. Take Dt Mirren out and add Raith. Enough decent clubs and teams for a top league of 18 no problem.

:agree: A top league of 16 or 18 teams would invigorate Scottish fitba, bottom three go down and 4th 5th bottom go into a play off in some form with the division one teams.
Definitely beats the hum drum of playing each other 4 times a season. It's a very long shot but maybe someone at the top could make this happen, and even have the foresight to distribute the money evenly, so that Scottish football could go from strength to strength.

[Andy74]

These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.

Yep good post.

[IberianHibernian]

Whatever happens I hope we`re not promoted by reconstruction . I`m old enough to remember enjoying 18 - club league after League Cup section matches but it`s got to be remembered that we did well in LC in late 60s / early 70s ( and year we won in 1972 was fortunately first / maybe only year that 2nd in group qualified for QFs ) and that LC wasn`t considered inferior to SC till this century ( ? ) . When we won LC in 1972 there was no feeling of having won the " wee cup " and it was the same at other clubs with possible exception of Hearts who went about 50 years without reaching LC semi ( maybe a couple of semis ? ) let alone win it . Mention LC cause clubs , fans and TV cos have got used to long seasons ( 10 months ) with a lot of matches ( 38 league matches plus possible playoffs and cup matches ) so any reconstruction will have to match that ( personally would like to see a shorter season with fewer matches but won`t happen ) which means extended LC if 16 or 18 in top division and long post - split if 14 ( or maybe extended LC and / or long post - split in all cases ) . Also how do you keep interest in a league that`s growing from 12 to 14 / 16 / 18 ? No relegation from Premiership wouldn`t make for much interest and having 2 , 4 or even 6 from 10 promoted would mean a lot of unimportant matches ( didn`t say " meaningless " since all matches mean something to fans at least ) . What about starting season on first Saturday of August and having a split including relegation / promotion after 2 rounds of fixtures then continuing with league after short break ? Would have to allow for postponed matches from Aug to December and use midweeks ( no LC and SC from January for big clubs as before ) to finish league asap .

[superfurryhibby]

Are you saying the current top 12 with Hubs Hearts Rangers and either QoS or Falkirk wouldn't be a good league. Take Dt Mirren out and add Raith. Enough decent clubs and teams for a top league of 18 no problem.

Aye, I'm saying that I remember the old 18 team league and there was too much dross. 16 is enough. Creativity required to extend fixture numbers.

The current top 12, with 4 teams is 16?

[Hibeesmad]

Aberdeen
Celtic
Dundee
Dundee United
Falkirk
Hamilton
Hearts
Hibernian
Inverness
Kilmarnock
Motherwell
Partick
Queen of the South
Rangers
Raith
Ross County
St Johnstone
St Mirren

18 team league playing each team only twice.

17th and 18th automatically relegated.
1st and 2nd championship promoted.

16th premiership v winner of 3rd/4th championship

Winners from that game gain premiership status

[Nando™]

Whatever happens I hope we`re not promoted by reconstruction

So you'd rather we stay in Championship if we don't get through the playoffs.

Why?

[offshorehibby]

Aberdeen
Celtic
Dundee
Dundee United
Falkirk
Hamilton
Hearts
Hibernian
Inverness
Kilmarnock
Motherwell
Partick
Queen of the South
Rangers
Raith
Ross County
St Johnstone
St Mirren

18 team league playing each team only twice.

17th and 18th automatically relegated.
1st and 2nd championship promoted.

16th premiership v winner of 3rd/4th championship

Winners from that game gain premiership status

The teams in this list would definitely be competitive, my worry and no disrespect to smaller clubs but if three smaller clubs were to come up, i fear they would be cannon fodder and most likely be back down.

I would have it 18th automatically relegated with 16th & 17th maybe playing of with 2nd and 3rd.

[JimBHibees]

These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.

Agree with every word. 18 also should allow more teams to blood younger players and sometimes take a slightly longer term view. Leagues of 10 and 12 just mean teams are petrified of the drop and play risk averse football IMO. In saying that no chance of happening due to self interest of clubs and TV.

[IanM]

The teams in this list would definitely be competitive, my worry and no disrespect to smaller clubs but if three smaller clubs were to come up, i fear they would be cannon fodder and most likely be back down.

I would have it 18th automatically relegated with 16th & 17th maybe playing of with 2nd and 3rd.

That happens in the EPL most seasons, up then right back down but you'll never have a league where it's competitive top to bottom. Apart from this seasons Algeria league where there was 12 points separating top to bottom with only a few games left!

[PPZPOL]

Aberdeen
Celtic
Dundee
Dundee United
Falkirk
Hamilton
Hearts
Hibernian
Inverness
Kilmarnock
Motherwell
Partick
Queen of the South
Rangers
Raith
Ross County
St Johnstone
St Mirren

18 team league playing each team only twice.

17th and 18th automatically relegated.
1st and 2nd championship promoted.

16th premiership v winner of 3rd/4th championship

Winners from that game gain premiership status

That's actually a decent competitive league IMO and also correct promotion and relegation scenario. The current set up doesn't work and needs freshened up, it's a nonsense to play teams 4 times a season. And don't get me started on that top split with uneven home/away games, laughing stock!

[JimBHibees]

That's actually a decent competitive league IMO and also correct promotion and relegation scenario. The current set up doesn't work and needs freshened up, it's a nonsense to play teams 4 times a season. And don't get me started on that top split with uneven home/away games, laughing stock!

Agree about the split Jeff on soccer Saturday was laughing at Hamilton in 7th on 50 points being behind Dundee on 45 in 6th. :greengrin

[s.a.m]

These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.

:agree: Agree with that. I'd like (almost) any structure that did away with playing each other 4 times. And I might be alone here, but I don't need every game to be 'meaningful'. At the extreme end of meaningfulness, when we had a 10 team league for a few years, the main result for most teams was fear. Managers claimed they weren't able to bring young players through or experiment because of the reduced margins for error. In a larger league, fans of teams which are not at either of the business ends of the league would (hopefully) be more likely to see emerging talent, as well as better performances from more relaxed players. So meaningfulness replaced with a bit of morale-boosting and hope for the coming season? :dunno: I'd take that.

[JimBHibees]

:agree: Agree with that. I'd like (almost) any structure that did away with playing each other 4 times. And I might be alone here, but I don't need every game to be 'meaningful'. At the extreme end of meaningfulness, when we had a 10 team league for a few years, the main result for most teams was fear. Managers claimed they weren't able to bring young players through or experiment because of the reduced margins for error. In a larger league, fans of teams which are not at either of the business ends of the league would (hopefully) be more likely to see emerging talent, as well as better performances from more relaxed players. So meaningfulness replaced with a bit of morale-boosting and hope for the coming season? :dunno: I'd take that.

Agree entirely.

[bigwheel]

These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.

Whilst there is a romance in some of these points, the main reason there was competition in those days was that finances were far more equal. Pre bosman clubs could keep players....the fact is , an 18 team league,would be boring for about a third of the games....nice thought but it's a no from me....

[superfurryhibby]

Whilst there is a romance in some of these points, the main reason there was competition in those days was that finances were far more equal. Pre bosman clubs could keep players....the fact is , an 18 team league,would be boring for about a third of the games....nice thought but it's a no from me....

Your first point about competition us spot on.

The boring one, nah. The SPL is monotony on a pitch. It cannot be out-bored by any alternative format. The football is so defensive and risk averse, it is utter tedium. A bigger league might promote a more open game, allow clubs to introduce more young talent etc.

The wider point is still the question of revenue loss and the implication for finances. It's clear the current model doesn't work. So many clubs have been in or close to administration. The cycle of unsustainable wages etc, it needs to end. So does our kow-towing to TV companies.

So, we will be unable to pay wages? All it means is that our team can no longer compete financially with teams from an even lower level of English football than the current low level they compete with now. Will standards drop that much? In the long term does that actually matter?

Our game is at a crossroads. It's clear the current model has failed. Time to find a plan B.

[bingo70]

Agree about the split Jeff on soccer Saturday was laughing at Hamilton in 7th on 50 points being behind Dundee on 45 in 6th. :greengrin

I still don't understand why people don't get that or think it's funny, it's essentially a different league after the split, Hamilton had a different set of fixtures that were considerably easier than what Dundee had. I'd expect the situation you've described to happen every season.

(That's not a dig at you btw, more at Jeff)

He was also laughing at Scottish football yesterday when all games were at nil nil after about half an hour until someone pointed out it was the same in the English premiership, Funnily enough there was no patronising s******ing at English football after that.

Should point out I actually like Jeff, he's class, was a duck yesterday though.

[Kojock]

If the split is such a great idea why dont all the top leagues do it?

[bingo70]

If the split is such a great idea why dont all the top leagues do it?

They don't have the same problem with two teams winning it all the time and a need to create interest throughout the season for the other teams.

I could be wrong but I think there are other examples of countries using it, possibly in Scandinavia?

[superfurryhibby]

If the split is such a great idea why dont all the top leagues do it?

Our top league is not a top league though. Results achieved in Europe tell us where we stand and it's far from the summit. More reasonable to compare our leagues to those of a similar standard and stature.

[Mr White]

They don't have the same problem with two teams winning it all the time and a need to create interest throughout the season for the other teams.

I could be wrong but I think there are other examples of countries using it, possibly in Scandinavia?
Northern ireland use pretty much an identical system to us. Not that that gives it any more credibility of course.

[Geo_1875]

They don't have the same problem with two teams winning it all the time and a need to create interest throughout the season for the other teams.

I could be wrong but I think there are other examples of countries using it, possibly in Scandinavia?

Yet the EPL teams aren't clamouring for a split to make West Ham v Everton battling for a top 10 place more exciting. Clubs are only looking to get more money out of fans who won't turn up when their team is safe. They can't see that it is their own mismanagement of the game that is killing it. No split, no play-offs and play each other twice in a 16 or 18 team league ( at 3pm on a Saturday). It might work again.

[Keith_M]

I'd like to propose a merger of the four divisions into a 42 team league.

Every team plays the others once at home and once away, giving 82 games in total, and the season lasts two years.

By the time it's finished, most people will have completely lost interest and forgot who was actually at the top, so anybody that wants to can claim to be champions and sell all the souvenir strips, mugs, etc that goes with it and make a fortune.

Everybody makes money and everybody's happy.


:greengrin

[Just Alf]

I think a league of 16-18 would be a good thing allied to some form of play offs as already mentioned, to be sustainable though I think they TV revenue etc distribution needs to be revisited,
the % difference between first and last needs to be reduced, that would help spread more of the money further down the leagues..... Hopefully allowing some of the "smaller" teams to compete (to some extent) financially.

[GreenCastle]

100 % Easter Road would sell out more often if we only played certain teams only once a season.

Only playing each other twice (especially the old firm) would see the gap at the top closed.

The stumbling block here is the TV deal and idiots running our game.

[Just Alf]

I'd like to propose a merger of the four divisions into a 42 team league.

Every team plays the others once at home and once away, giving 82 games in total, and the season lasts two years.

By the time it's finished, most people will have completely lost interest and forgot who was actually at the top, so anybody that wants to can claim to be champions and sell all the souvenir strips, mugs, etc that goes with it and make a fortune.

Everybody makes money and everybody's happy.


:greengrin

:agree: ..... The winners could even put a random number of stars on their badges as well!

[Keith_M]

:agree: ..... The winners could even put a random number of stars on their badges as well!


Yep, and think of the increase in Season Ticket Sales when the supporters find out their Club has 'won' the league

[bigwheel]

Your first point about competition us spot on.

The boring one, nah. The SPL is monotony on a pitch. It cannot be out-bored by any alternative format. The football is so defensive and risk averse, it is utter tedium. A bigger league might promote a more open game, allow clubs to introduce more young talent etc.

The wider point is still the question of revenue loss and the implication for finances. It's clear the current model doesn't work. So many clubs have been in or close to administration. The cycle of unsustainable wages etc, it needs to end. So does our kow-towing to TV companies.

So, we will be unable to pay wages? All it means is that our team can no longer compete financially with teams from an even lower level of English football than the current low level they compete with now. Will standards drop that much? In the long term does that actually matter?

Our game is at a crossroads. It's clear the current model has failed. Time to find a plan B.

The one thing about the current set up is that every game is competitive in our top division....and because of the split and play offs there are very few meaningless games...I'd love a plan B, just never heard a better solution yet....

[lord bunberry]

The one thing about the current set up is that every game is competitive in our top division....and because of the split and play offs there are very few meaningless games...I'd love a plan B, just never heard a better solution yet....
Dundee v Aberdeen was. Meaningless yesterday.

[Roxyhibee]

These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.

You don't like dealing with facts do you..? Since the SPL was shortened from the old 18, the league has been won four times outwith the old firm. And every one of those times was with only 10 (TEN) teams in the league. And had Sir Albert not divinely intervened in 86 - it would have been 5 league non old firm titles with just ten teams competing.

The supporting demograph is completely different now from the 50's 60's and 70's in Scotland - much more difficult to attract fans along, but at least with the current set up most teams are playing for something all the way to May. You're going to have to trust me that in the 60's and 70's, huge crowds of sometimes 35 to 40,000 would attend Easter Road for old firm games but a game against Dumbarton, Clydebank, etc for the last 3 or 4 months of the season could be 6 or 7,000. And the reasons we don't compete in Europe have absolutely nothing to do with a smaller league. - I'd love to hear why you think a large league with a significant portion of meaningless games with smaller attendances would benefit our teams performances on the European stage. Jeez.?!

And comparing the SPL with the EPL .? just don't..

[Keith_M]

When I was a kid (early Primary School age), teams played each other twice a season in league games and the Edinburgh Derby was regularly attended by 30k+ Fans. When the league switched to ten teams, playing each other 4 times, the Derby Attendance dropped to about 16-18,000.

I suspect there are additional reasons why that happened but it seemed to suggest that the game was no longer as special as it had been when only played twice a season.

[bigwheel]

Dundee v Aberdeen was. Meaningless yesterday.

I did say very few , not none...in a bigger league , and without a split, there will be many more meaningless games

[lord bunberry]

I did say very few , not none...in a bigger league , and without a split, there will be many more meaningless games
You did:greengrin other leagues seem to manage with bigger numbers than us. A large % of our home attendance is made up from season ticket holders, so I don't get the argument that crowds will drop significantly.

[whiskyhibby]

The one thing about the current set up is that every game is competitive in our top division....and because of the split and play offs there are very few meaningless games...I'd love a plan B, just never heard a better solution yet....

Competitive in what way................a Euro spot, or relegation, that's about it......

To get crowds back and TV income we need a top league where 4 or 5 teams have a chance of winning it

[Keith_M]

I've never understood the 'meaningless games' tag. OK, I get that sometimes Clubs are playing for nothing but pride but surely that isn't meaningless?


As a Hibs Fan of (too) many decades experience, I've followed my team to lots of games where there was no Relegation or European Place at stake but it didn't matter, as it was still Hibs and I wanted them to win every game. A victory was still a victory to me and I always hoped that the Players felt the same.

[bingo70]

Competitive in what way................a Euro spot, or relegation, that's about it......

To get crowds back and TV income we need a top league where 4 or 5 teams have a chance of winning it

Only way that'll happen is if we get rid of the old firm.

You've certainly won me round.

[whiskyhibby]

Only way that'll happen is if we get rid of the old firm.

You've certainly won me round.

Absolutely, they could leave for England or Ireland tomorrow as far as I am concerned and take their bigoted bile with them.....

[Keith_M]

Absolutely, they could leave for England or Ireland tomorrow as far as I am concerned and take their bigoted bile with them.....


Surely they'd be best suited to playing their games in Belfast.

[Geo_1875]

Surely they'd be best suited to playing their games in Belfast.

Belfast one week, Dublin the next.

[blackpoolhibs]

These were the very days where our teams actually competed better in Europe. Derbies happened twice s year. Teams actually ran the old firm close and in some cases actually won the league. You can beat the old firm often enough once but twice or even three times a season it won't happen. Win once and get beat once and it's down to how you do against the rest. A far more competitive league will interest fans of all the competing clubs in all the games. Sponsorship would follow. 4 times a season plus cup ties is killing interest. (How any times did Celtic play Dundee Utd in a row) 18 team leaguewould flourish. All other imitations since have slowly been strangling our game. Scrap the split. Keep the play offs in maybe even an extended form. It's crap and it needs changed.
Could you imagine the EPL shortened to 10-12 teams with them playing 4 times? It would bore the tits of folks in no time and the top couple of teams would be miles ahead. Nothing to do with Hibs or Rangers being in the second teir and everything to do with developing the game and youngsters in Scotland.


:agree: The old 18 team league could work with a little tinkering, 2 relegated each season maybe even 3. And 4th bottom play against 4th top of the championship in a one off game for another place.

You'd have the fight for the championship, a fight for Europe and a fight at the bottom. Most teams would have something to play for.

There were some meaningless games yesterday in the SPL.

[bingo70]

:agree: The old 18 team league could work with a little tinkering, 2 relegated each season maybe even 3. And 4th bottom play against 4th top of the championship in a one off game for another place.

You'd have the fight for the championship, a fight for Europe and a fight at the bottom. Most teams would have something to play for.

There were some meaningless games yesterday in the SPL.

Regardless of the set up there's going to be meaningless games when there's only a week or two left. Its ensuring all teams have still got something to play for at Christmas is the challenge.

[greenpaper55]

I see that it was mentioned that back in the days of an 18 team league that there was a load of dross games and i think that is fair comment but nowadays small teams are much more difficult to beat as managers are much more tactically aware than back then. Also i think it is more difficult for the OF to win a bigger league and i'm sure someone out there can explain the coefficient of how that works -playing each other just twice is a good way to freshen up the league.

[J-C]

Back in the day when the league was indeed bigger, the OF where regularly split and teams like Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen etc came 2nd

[3pm]

It's not just reconstruction. It's the whole product that needs freshened up.

[bigwheel]

Back in the day when the league was indeed bigger, the OF where regularly split and teams like Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen etc came 2nd

They are split now ...by about 14 teams ! ;-).

Again though , it was not the size of the league that caused that in those days - it was the more equal suing field in terms of finance etc

I don't see the appeal of 18 league top tier - we are too small a country to justify it . For most teams relegation wouldn't even be a threat ...even we would have survived that !

[J-C]

They are split now ...by about 14 teams ! ;-).

Again though , it was not the size of the league that caused that in those days - it was the more equal suing field in terms of finance etc

I don't see the appeal of 18 league top tier - we are too small a country to justify it . For most teams relegation wouldn't even be a threat ...even we would have survived that !


I don't think we had as many glory hunter supporters back in the day, people tended to support their local club, I remember the larger crowds at ER not so much against teams like Clyde etc but 20K+ against the OF and Hearts regularly.

[Eyrie]

Maybe we should take a look at rugby, and have an eighteen team league but with playoffs to decide the title.

First at home to fourth, and second at home to third, with the highest seeded winner hosting the final to decide the title. That wouldn't stop Septic and Sevco Huns dominating, but it would give other teams a better chance.

[Carheenlea]

First at home to fourth, and second at home to third, with the highest seeded winner hosting the final to decide the title. That wouldn't stop Septic and Sevco Huns dominating, but it would give other teams a better chance.

I don't really get this. I didn't think it was possible, but any league that the team who finishes top at the end of a season and not actually win it would be an even more Mickey Mouse set up than the one that has a team in 7th place ending up with more points than the team in 6th.
Not a set up that would appeal to me anyway.

[Nando™]

I don't really get this. I didn't think it was possible, but any league that the team who finishes top at the end of a season and not actually win it would be an even more Mickey Mouse set up than the one that has a team in 7th place ending up with more points than the team in 6th.
Not a set up that would appeal to me anyway.

:agree: Completely undermines the achievement of finishing first.

[Sunny1875]

Our top league is not a top league though. Results achieved in Europe tell us where we stand and it's far from the summit. More reasonable to compare our leagues to those of a similar standard and stature.


Sunday Leagues anywhere in Europe don't have a split either

[Nutmegged]

An 18 team League would be great in an ideal World but its simply not viable, clubs would lose money on gates, maybe not a club who might be challenging for the Title but the majority most seasons would lose fans - then there is the second tier, in order to have a thriving top Division your second Division has to be strong, the Top League has to be seen to be an achievement to get into and stay in, with an 18 team top League with 2 or 3 promotion places my fear would be the same 4-6 clubs yoyo-ing most years between the Divisions

I remember someone on Twitter said a few years ago about a 16 team top league and how it could be achievable, It caught my eye because it actually sounded viable

16 team league wihich splits into 4 groups of 4 in decending order after 30 games - (1st-4th - 5th-8th - 9th-12th - 13th-16th) everyone will then play each member of their group Home & Away giving a grand total of 36 League games

The Top group would obviously finalise the League winner, runner up and Europa League place - the second group would see the team finishing 5th enter an end of Season Europa League Play-Off with the team that finished 4th (or 3rd depending on EL spots)

the third group would see the team finishing 12th enter a Relegation Play-Off with the club finishing 14th (3rd bottom overall) the bottom group would see team 15 and 16 relegated for finishing bottom two and the team that fonished 13th would escape relegation due to finishing top of the last group

same again in the second tier, 16 teams, splits into 4 groups of four? Top two promoted then Play-Offs where 3rd plays 6th and 4th plays 5th then a Final - the bottom of the table would look equally similar with regards to relegation

third tier would be 10 teams - top two promoted and 3rd vs 4th would Play-Off for the 3rd spot

[NAE NOOKIE]

Germany has a population of around 80 million people and a top league of 18 teams. If they cant find room for 20 teams it would suggest 18 is a stretch for us these days.

Having said that ... We need a 16 team league sooner rather than later, even if we do it now it will be 3 seasons too late IMO. With a decent play off structure we can keep things interesting till the end of the season, while still giving clubs room to blood new home grown players.

But its not just about league reconstruction .. we need to make the whole experience of going to football fun again, every club should have a standing area for its home supporters and the fans in those parts of the ground should be actively encouraged to bring flags, drums, rattles etc etc.

We also need to have some sort of a fund to help clubs like ICT, Partick, Falkirk etc to complete their stadiums .... these 3 sided grounds scream small time and do our leagues image no favours whatsoever ..... I'm only talking about providing the likes of ICT and Falkirk with 2,000 capacity stands on their open sides.

We need to advertise the league on TV during prime time programmes.

I'm sure there are a number of objections to some of these suggestions:

Hibs spent a fortune developing ER without any help, why should other clubs get outside help?
League reconstruction now will only be to help The Rangers or Hibs back into the Premiership.
Football has a number of dedicated TV and Radio slots, why pay to advertise?

Well as far as I'm concerned its time to set aside petty differences on these matters and an understandable, though IMO misguided, view that to reconstruct now will be against sporting integrity .... being against what a majority of us have been calling for for a few years now just because a club we all hate might benefit is counter productive IMO.

As for advertising, if its good enough for a brand that everybody in the universe knows about and where to buy it IE Coca Cola, then its good enough for us.

[Nutmegged]

You cant have automatic reconstruction this Summer, absolutely no chance you can do that, you can't have Play-Off's then at the end just say "right everyones up"

Reconstruction has to be planned a season in advance so everyone knows what they're playing for at the start of the Season

[Thecat23]

You cant have automatic reconstruction this Summer, absolutely no chance you can do that, you can't have Play-Off's then at the end just say "right everyones up"

Reconstruction has to be planned a season in advance so everyone knows what they're playing for at the start of the Season

Spot on.

[Geo_1875]

An 18 team League would be great in an ideal World but its simply not viable, clubs would lose money on gates, maybe not a club who might be challenging for the Title but the majority most seasons would lose fans - then there is the second tier, in order to have a thriving top Division your second Division has to be strong, the Top League has to be seen to be an achievement to get into and stay in, with an 18 team top League with 2 or 3 promotion places my fear would be the same 4-6 clubs yoyo-ing most years between the Divisions

I remember someone on Twitter said a few years ago about a 16 team top league and how it could be achievable, It caught my eye because it actually sounded viable

16 team league wihich splits into 4 groups of 4 in decending order after 30 games - (1st-4th - 5th-8th - 9th-12th - 13th-16th) everyone will then play each member of their group Home & Away giving a grand total of 36 League games

The Top group would obviously finalise the League winner, runner up and Europa League place - the second group would see the team finishing 5th enter an end of Season Europa League Play-Off with the team that finished 4th (or 3rd depending on EL spots)

the third group would see the team finishing 12th enter a Relegation Play-Off with the club finishing 14th (3rd bottom overall) the bottom group would see team 15 and 16 relegated for finishing bottom two and the team that fonished 13th would escape relegation due to finishing top of the last group

same again in the second tier, 16 teams, splits into 4 groups of four? Top two promoted then Play-Offs where 3rd plays 6th and 4th plays 5th then a Final - the bottom of the table would look equally similar with regards to relegation

third tier would be 10 teams - top two promoted and 3rd vs 4th would Play-Off for the 3rd spot

I agree with you that 16 team league is the answer but why bother with play-offs. West Ham and Everton were never going to challenge for the title and were safe from relegation at Christmas yet they had a sell-out crowd on Saturday. Who said there are meaningless games? I've never been to a Hibs game that was meaningless and that includes friendlies.

[Nutmegged]

I agree with you that 16 team league is the answer but why bother with play-offs. West Ham and Everton were never going to challenge for the title and were safe from relegation at Christmas yet they had a sell-out crowd on Saturday. Who said there are meaningless games? I've never been to a Hibs game that was meaningless and that includes friendlies.

I appreciate a lot of fans feel that way about their team about no meaningless games, must say you're a better fan than me if you think there is no meaningless Hibs games but thats by the by, why bither with Play-Offs? Because in my opinion Play-Offs give fans hope and give fans an achievable goal, in the structure I mentioned too it also gives every group of games a consequence which is the essence of sport.

take a look at Montrose on Saturday for further proof, their average attendance is 400 odd but on Saturday for their Play-Off with Brora Rangers they had in excess of 2,000 fans at their game, that proves what kind of interest and energy Play-Offs bring, look at Ibrox yesterday, Rangers have averaged about 30k all season, pretty good compared to most teams but yeaterday they got 48k...

Just for the record though, not once did I mention "meaningless games"

[GreenPJ]

You cant have automatic reconstruction this Summer, absolutely no chance you can do that, you can't have Play-Off's then at the end just say "right everyones up"

Reconstruction has to be planned a season in advance so everyone knows what they're playing for at the start of the Season

Why?

[pontius pilate]

I would prefer a 16 team league
At each team home and away
15 x 2 = 30
Then break into two groups with a fresh slate teams 1-8 play each other once to settle the championship title.
The bottom 8 teams do the same to decide relegation. Teams finishing bottom two automatic relegation teams from the championship 1 auto promotion then play offs to decide the other newly promoted club. So to summarise
15 x 2 = 30regular season games
7 X 1 = 7 play off games given a 37 season game 1 game less than we currently play in a regular season but with every club having something to play for at seasons end could that generate interest

[Nutmegged]

Why?

Isn't it obvious? Football Clubs, fans and everything else that goes with it has to know what they're competing for before a ball is kicked, what the hell would be the point in these Play-Off's if all we are going to do at the end is say "right, everybody up" ...its beyond common sense, beyond sporting integrity and beyond fairness in competiton

Fans involved in the Play-Off's would be expected to pay for games outwith the regular Season and then be told at the end it was irrelevant as the games would essentially not count for a single thing, its fundamentally illogical to think this kind of thing would be OK

[Nutmegged]

I would prefer a 16 team league
At each team home and away
15 x 2 = 30
Then break into two groups with a fresh slate teams 1-8 play each other once to settle the championship title.
The bottom 8 teams do the same to decide relegation. Teams finishing bottom two automatic relegation teams from the championship 1 auto promotion then play offs to decide the other newly promoted club. So to summarise
15 x 2 = 30regular season games
7 X 1 = 7 play off games given a 37 season game 1 game less than we currently play in a regular season but with every club having something to play for at seasons end could that generate interest

Dont like the sound of that at all to be honest, after a gruelling 30 games it wouldn't matter if you finished anywhere between 1st and 8th as you'd all start again on an even keel, that for me generates far more meaningless games from the 15th game onwards, about 5 or 6 teams would be more or less guaranteed a top 8 finish by November then they're basically left to tread water for about 4 months until the real competition starts up again.

the aim should never be to allow a crap team fluke the league Title, it should encourage teams to rise to the level of the better teams in the Division.

[Pete]

If Motherwell or ourselves put rangers out then I've no doubt that Mr. Ladbrokes will be phoning Mr. Doncaster to discuss the fine details regarding the sponsorship.

It would be crazy but I wouldn't give a stuff. Scrub that it would be bloody hilarious.

As long as we're not one of the four teams who will be relegated the season after following more reconstruction.

[Nutmegged]

No chance Peter, I think your paranoia has took over here, there is no-way the SPFL or Ladbrokes would make a big song and dance about Sponsoring our Leagues if the money on offer depended on Deidco going up - I've no doubt it would be a perfect storm for Ladbrokes if they could get their name plastered all over four Old Firm games next Season but they are a huge company and wouldn't need the bad publicity such a backtracking would bring, same with the SPFL, they know the last thing they need is more unnecessary bad publicity and thats exactly what this would be.

[greenginger]

It does seem strange they would tie down a deal for next season before they know what the fixtures will be.


Another couple of weeks and they would know if the 4 greatest football matches on the planet ( Old Firm derbies according to the Daily Rectum ) will be on show next season.


There again, it may make no difference to the value of the League sponsorship if the vermin play each other , or not.

[Nando™]

No chance Peter, I think your paranoia has took over here, there is no-way the SPFL or Ladbrokes would make a big song and dance about Sponsoring our Leagues if the money on offer depended on Deidco going up - I've no doubt it would be a perfect storm for Ladbrokes if they could get their name plastered all over four Old Firm games next Season but they are a huge company and wouldn't need the bad publicity such a backtracking would bring, same with the SPFL, they know the last thing they need is more unnecessary bad publicity and thats exactly what this would be.

This wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. After all, this is Neil Doncaster we're talking about.

[HH81]

I don't really get this. I didn't think it was possible, but any league that the team who finishes top at the end of a season and not actually win it would be an even more Mickey Mouse set up than the one that has a team in 7th place ending up with more points than the team in 6th.
Not a set up that would appeal to me anyway.

It works so well in rugby league. The higher you finish the better the route to the final.

The final is attended by 70,000+ each year when a log of the clubs average less than Hibs.

It's about time something different was tried.

[Dr What If?]

Reconstruction has to be the most depressing subject in Scottish football, not because of the fans that bring it up but because despite the weight of feeling the authorities just keep ignoring it. Just about every suggestion on this thread is better than what we have but who cares? Keep hearing the problem is money, if the guys running the SPFL had any foresight they would see this would get the fans back longterm and if they had any business sense they would make it work.
Honestly, if I had my hands on the marketing budget of a big company I wouldn't waste it by associating my brand with one that shows continual contempt for its customer base.

[pennyhibee]

Agree entirely.

I go for that too with all games Saturday 3.00pm kick off and the Pink on the way home

[Nutmegged]

This wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. After all, this is Neil Doncaster we're talking about.

Doncaster is just the scapegoat, the SPFL board like the SPL before it make every decision, Doncaster just the very annoying mouthpiece

[MyJo]

You cant have automatic reconstruction this Summer, absolutely no chance you can do that, you can't have Play-Off's then at the end just say "right everyones up"

Reconstruction has to be planned a season in advance so everyone knows what they're playing for at the start of the Season

Not really as if league reconstruction was announced before the season started then clubs in the Premiership know they wont be relegated so it would have an affect on performances and probably attendances and clubs in the championship would know that finishing in the top 4 would be good enough to go up and there wouldnt be any relegation there either so it wouldnt be nearly as interesting and renders the play-offs themselves useless when these are money spinning games for both the clubs and SPFL as well with TV coverage etc.

It would make more sense to allow the season to progress as normal and as soon as the final whistle goes on the play-off final then announce that the leagues are being changed for the following season with a set of plans already in place for the new set-up.

I fully expect that this will be the case if Sevco fail to get promoted, they will announce league reconstruction and claim that it was all planned for ages they just didnt want to compromise the value of the league competition by annoucing it

[Nando™]

Doncaster is just the scapegoat, the SPFL board like the SPL before it make every decision, Doncaster just the very annoying mouthpiece

Do they negotiate the sponsorship of Scottish football?

[Wellbankhibby]

Not really as if league reconstruction was announced before the season started then clubs in the Premiership know they wont be relegated so it would have an affect on performances and probably attendances and clubs in the championship would know that finishing in the top 4 would be good enough to go up and there wouldnt be any relegation there either so it wouldnt be nearly as interesting and renders the play-offs themselves useless when these are money spinning games for both the clubs and SPFL as well with TV coverage etc.

It would make more sense to allow the season to progress as normal and as soon as the final whistle goes on the play-off final then announce that the leagues are being changed for the following season with a set of plans already in place for the new set-up.

I fully expect that this will be the case if Sevco fail to get promoted, they will announce league reconstruction and claim that it was all planned for ages they just didnt want to compromise the value of the league competition by annoucing it

I personally would prefer an 18 team Premier League playing each other home and away 34 league games. First division 2 promoted 2 relegated from Premier. you also have your cup ties. Only have one Transfer window at end of season through to start of new season. No transfers between then and Bring back the reserve leagues. Finally get some additional money into schools football to allow school coaches to bring youngsters on.

[Nutmegged]

Not really as if league reconstruction was announced before the season started then clubs in the Premiership know they wont be relegated so it would have an affect on performances and probably attendances and clubs in the championship would know that finishing in the top 4 would be good enough to go up and there wouldnt be any relegation there either so it wouldnt be nearly as interesting and renders the play-offs themselves useless when these are money spinning games for both the clubs and SPFL as well with TV coverage etc.

It would make more sense to allow the season to progress as normal and as soon as the final whistle goes on the play-off final then announce that the leagues are being changed for the following season with a set of plans already in place for the new set-up.

I fully expect that this will be the case if Sevco fail to get promoted, they will announce league reconstruction and claim that it was all planned for ages they just didnt want to compromise the value of the league competition by annoucing it

It wouldn't make more sense at all, that scenario is utterly illogocal, you can't have Play-Offs to determine a winner then at the end say "right everybody wins" thats just plain daft and defeats the purpose of Sporting Merit


League Reconstruction may very well happen but absolutely no chance of it happening in time for next Season regardless of whether deidco get up or not - its such a ridiculously paranoid notion

[Nutmegged]

Do they negotiate the sponsorship of Scottish football?

The SPFL board do Yes

[jacomo]

It wouldn't make more sense at all, that scenario is utterly illogocal, you can't have Play-Offs to determine a winner then at the end say "right everybody wins" thats just plain daft and defeats the purpose of Sporting Merit


League Reconstruction may very well happen but absolutely no chance of it happening in time for next Season regardless of whether deidco get up or not - its such a ridiculously paranoid notion

League Reconstruction for next season won't happen. Dodgy penalty in favour of the Orcs in our forthcoming play off tie likely, though!

[Dr What If?]

Rangers asides, what are the cons that are stopping reconstruction, i.e. why it is a bad idea?
Money seems to be the only real issue, the drop in revenue from loosing eight league games (assuming a 16 team division) is too great a hole to fill and looking at it in cold economic terms the SPFL might be right - say you are one of the smaller teams, ave. 3,500 at home at roughly £20 a ticket, based on 4 home games that is just shy of quarter of a million pounds.
The fact that the argument stops there shows a remarkable lack of ideas and invention from the SPFL, it also a worrying indicator of where its priorities lie. All private businesses will openly admit to profit being the main motivator, however the quality of product or service is generally not to far behind. Football is an entertainment, a 16 team team league with 30 games would make the title winners more unpredictable and most likely allow someone other than Celtic the chance of winning the title, even if it was just once every ten years. In essence, more excitement, hope for the other clubs and a better product.
There are other ways of filling the financial hole rather than just getting the same teams to play each other umpteen times a season, take the league cup for example. Currently only the final gets any real interest from fans, change it! I'm a fan of some form of Celtic Cup with Welsh and Irish Premier teams involved, you could start with a round robin of 5 teams a group - that is your hole already filled. Scottish teams that qualify go into a knock out stage and those who don't go into a standard all Scottish league cup with the non top league sides.
We also don't need three lower divisions, one will do and that can be as big as you like...20, 22, 24 teams etc. The variety would make that a bit more interesting for sponsors and fans.
While we are at it lets have a bit of fun with the play-offs. I'm not quite sure why the current arrangement was agreed, I can only guess it is the best way of stopping premier sides being relegated. I would have an end of season competition - 5 sides fighting for one place, four group games with the top two playing in a final, what's more I would pick a single neutral venue for all the games - just for the sheer novelty.
A lot of words I know and not something everyone will think is a good idea, it does point out however that other alternatives exist and the the SPFL must either be bloody stupid or just incredibly OF biased not to see them.

[Wellbankhibby]

Rangers asides, what are the cons that are stopping reconstruction, i.e. why it is a bad idea?
Money seems to be the only real issue, the drop in revenue from loosing eight league games (assuming a 16 team division) is too great a hole to fill and looking at it in cold economic terms the SPFL might be right - say you are one of the smaller teams, ave. 3,500 at home at roughly £20 a ticket, based on 4 home games that is just shy of quarter of a million pounds.
The fact that the argument stops there shows a remarkable lack of ideas and invention from the SPFL, it also a worrying indicator of where its priorities lie. All private businesses will openly admit to profit being the main motivator, however the quality of product or service is generally not to far behind. Football is an entertainment, a 16 team team league with 30 games would make the title winners more unpredictable and most likely allow someone other than Celtic the chance of winning the title, even if it was just once every ten years. In essence, more excitement, hope for the other clubs and a better product.
There are other ways of filling the financial hole rather than just getting the same teams to play each other umpteen times a season, take the league cup for example. Currently only the final gets any real interest from fans, change it! I'm a fan of some form of Celtic Cup with Welsh and Irish Premier teams involved, you could start with a round robin of 5 teams a group - that is your hole already filled. Scottish teams that qualify go into a knock out stage and those who don't go into a standard all Scottish league cup with the non top league sides.
We also don't need three lower divisions, one will do and that can be as big as you like...20, 22, 24 teams etc. The variety would make that a bit more interesting for sponsors and fans.
While we are at it lets have a bit of fun with the play-offs. I'm not quite sure why the current arrangement was agreed, I can only guess it is the best way of stopping premier sides being relegated. I would have an end of season competition - 5 sides fighting for one place, four group games with the top two playing in a final, what's more I would pick a single neutral venue for all the games - just for the sheer novelty.
A lot of words I know and not something everyone will think is a good idea, it does point out however that other alternatives exist and the the SPFL must either be bloody stupid or just incredibly OF biased not to see them.

Any Type of reconstruction is Better than playing the same team a minimum of 4 times include cup ties and its worse Look at Dundee Utd v Celtic what a shambles.