Scottish Premier League Reconstruction - 14 Team SPL?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibbyradge

All options have been considered, from a top flight of ten, all the way through to a league of 24.

Lists of pros and cons have been collated next to each option and, after consideration, a 14-team league is regarded as the favoured option.

.
.
The plan is for each team to play each other once home and away (26 fixtures) before splitting into two sections, either six/eight or eight/six.
Teams would then play other teams in their section once more home and away.
It means those in the post-split section of six would play 36 matches and those in the group of eight would play 40 games..
.
.

The SPL see the main benefit of this format as the balancing up the games after the split, since there has been controversy in recent seasons surrounding the disparity of teams facing more away games than others.

I think it sounds pretty good.

Getting into the top 6 would be more important than it is now. That's good for the league.

The top 6 would be better, with home and away games against all 5 teams, and the bottom half would have an extra edge if 2 teams could be relegated.

A 16 team league is a non-starter. 32 games isn't enough to keep the bank managers happy.

An 18 team league would be an utter snore fest, with low attendance records being broken regularly.

14 seems to be worth a try.

---

Why would 18 team league be any more of a snorefest than it is now? When Hibs were in first division and winning games against'lesser' opposition games were good, Hibs played well and got good crowds.

Sure Ross County V QOS might get a low crowd but it still does in First Division anyway:confused: This might be compensated by a ICT v Ross County game though.

14 teams is ridiculous. Just miss out on top six after 26 games and then rest of season really will be a snorefest.

These smaller clubs do my nut in, I know they rely on the large unwashed hoards descending on them like the plague to boost their coffers.
But do they not realise that it would be better to get more of your own supporters bums on seats, by playing against more evenly matched opposition your giving yourself a chance of collecting more points thus possibly earning more money by finishing higher up the table!
Plus the more of your own supporters you encourage to come back, the more dosh you stand to make selling club merchandise as well!

When will these clubs realise that the OF are killing the game up here, rather than helping it. The SPL need to do this reconstruction right, as has been mentioned a 16 team league is the way to go for me, with 1 automatic relegation spot and 1 automatic promotion from the first and then having a 2nd,3rd bottom and 2nd,3rd top from the first playing off for survival and promotion!

If the SPL and SFL have the balls to do this properly it gives them the opportunity to possibly barter a better TV deal, with the added play-offs and the league becoming more competitive they should generate a more interested and wider audience!
Then the next move would be for them to say to the uglys that the TV money is to be evenly split, as people no longer just want to watch you, they want to watch football that is genuinely competitive and far more entertaining because of this!

Is it just me or would more people want to watch Scottish football if, it wasn't about watching the uglys pump everbody most of the time? It's been made all to easy for them to become the financial heavy weights for way to long now and the time for change is needed to save the Scottish game from fading into obscurity.:pray:

Maybe I'm just making it all sound way to easy, maybe it is to much of a financial gamble for the smaller clubs.:dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith

Why do they consistently choose the most ridiculous option every time. Teams in the top half after the split play 36 matches while teams in the bottom play 40 games. You couldn't make this **** up.

Just have 16 teams with everyone playing each other twice. Simple!!

---

This is the key word that should be used by the SPL/SFL when deciding on the new structure.

If I ever talk to someone who doesn't follow Scottish football they find the whole split business funny but confusing as you said 16 teams play each other twice once home once away no problem no confusion , no embarrassment.

How many people would still buy a season ticket knowing they could be done out of 2 home games should their team finish in the wrong half before the split?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Why would 18 team league be any more of a snorefest than it is now? When Hibs were in first division and winning games against'lesser' opposition games were good, Hibs played well and got good crowds.

---

You should look up the stats for that season. You'd be surprised how low the crowds were, even though we had something to play for, and were playing well and winning.

I'll be pleased if we move from 12 to 14.

Gotta be 16 for me:-

* One home and one away match against each team = 30 matches
* Four groups of four play home and away, two top go through to QF's = 6 games guaranteed (do a seeding system based on previous seasons league positions)
* One down one up
* 2nd bottom plays 3rd top of 1st, 3rd bottom plays 2nd in 1st

SHIMPLES

Am I right in saying that if you're in the lower half of the table after 26 games you can't make a challenge for a European spot?

If so, that's got to be wrong.

Surely a team in 7th place could have a really good chance of catching the club in fourth if there's still 2/3 months of the season left?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ballengeich

So why did we give this up nearly 40 years ago?

---

That was when it was 2 points for a win, so there were loads of meaningless games the last 2+ months of the season.

Maybe we need to think about bonus points as Jack Ross mentioned in his blog here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/jackross/..._easy_foo.html

We've changed things before, when goal average was used to deicde league placings if the points were the same. Nice to think back to the title deciding match in 1964/65, when Killie needed to beat Hearts by 2-0 to pip the Yams on goal average. Killie won 2-0 :greengrin

nice to see scottish football is going down the ****ter :rolleyes:

I presume the blazers are concerned with the number of financially viable clubs which is why they are considering 14 as opposed to a greater number?

They can't have another Gretna or Dundee scenario but at the same time if you just have the same whipping boys going up and down all the time it makes it a farce.

My personal preference is 18 teams but again not sure if leaves enough depth in a 1st division to have a meaningful promotion process.

I personally would prefer less league games, it might encourage more people to actually come along and if its income that is then the issue then amend the cup competitions.

I would like to have seen how thorough this report has genuinely been to have come up with the current recommendation.

It's a total joke. They're pissing around trying to keep the OF happy. Nobody gets capacity crowds at home to the OF as they are always on tv and they have increased costs for police and stewards. The only number of teams that makes less sense than 14 is 13 and I'm surprised they haven't suggested that. Ditch the split and get back to a league of 18.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibbyradge

All options have been considered, from a top flight of ten, all the way through to a league of 24.

Lists of pros and cons have been collated next to each option and, after consideration, a 14-team league is regarded as the favoured option.

.
.
The plan is for each team to play each other once home and away (26 fixtures) before splitting into two sections, either six/eight or eight/six.
Teams would then play other teams in their section once more home and away.
It means those in the post-split section of six would play 36 matches and those in the group of eight would play 40 games..
.
.

The SPL see the main benefit of this format as the balancing up the games after the split, since there has been controversy in recent seasons surrounding the disparity of teams facing more away games than others.

I think it sounds pretty good.

Getting into the top 6 would be more important than it is now. That's good for the league.

The top 6 would be better, with home and away games against all 5 teams, and the bottom half would have an extra edge if 2 teams could be relegated.

A 16 team league is a non-starter. 32 games isn't enough to keep the bank managers happy.

An 18 team league would be an utter snore fest, with low attendance records being broken regularly.

14 seems to be worth a try.

---

Aye better than what we have particularly the 2 up 2 down part as we will see a few new faces.

SPL - 20 teams - Play each team home and away - 38 games each
SL1 - 10 teams - Play each team 4 times - 36 games each
SL2 - 10 teams - Play each team 4 times - 36 games each

Next season no relegation from the SPL, top 8 promoted from the 1st division, 8 promoted from the 2nd to the 1st and 8 promoted from the 3rd to the 2nd. The remaining 2 teams in division 3 will be relegated to their regional leagues (East of Scotland or Highland league, not sure what is set up for West of Scotland teams?)

From 2012 onwards, 2 up 2 down in the SPL and 2 up 2 down in SL1. 2 teams will be relegated from SL2 into their regional leagues and the winners of these league will be promoted into SL2.

Benefits

SPL - Gap between Old Firm and the rest of the league could be closer due to the fact you only play them twice a season.

SL1 - Competition would be increased knowing that top 2 can get promoted into the SPL, and the bottom 2 getting relegated therefore only 6 teams will remain in the division.

SF2 - Same as the SL1 but the importance of remaining in the league (relegation to regional leagues) would be a huge factor, especially financially.

Promotion from regional leagues would give smaller teams like Spartans a goal to aim for rather than just winning the league year in year out with no promotion. Same for the highland league teams.

Stadium requirements for newly promoted teams to be reviewed, with at least 2 years timescale for effected teams to comply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keekaboo

Am I right in saying that if you're in the lower half of the table after 26 games you can't make a challenge for a European spot?

If so, that's got to be wrong.

Surely a team in 7th place could have a really good chance of catching the club in fourth if there's still 2/3 months of the season left?

---

Spot on.

16 team League for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken

SPL - 20 teams - Play each team home and away - 38 games each
SL1 - 10 teams - Play each team 4 times - 36 games each
SL2 - 10 teams - Play each team 4 times - 36 games each

Next season no relegation from the SPL, top 8 promoted from the 1st division, 8 promoted from the 2nd to the 1st and 8 promoted from the 3rd to the 2nd. The remaining 2 teams in division 3 will be relegated to their regional leagues (East of Scotland or Highland league, not sure what is set up for West of Scotland teams?)

From 2012 onwards, 2 up 2 down in the SPL and 2 up 2 down in SL1. 2 teams will be relegated from SL2 into their regional leagues and the winners of these league will be promoted into SL2.

Benefits

SPL - Gap between Old Firm and the rest of the league could be closer due to the fact you only play them twice a season.

SL1 - Competition would be increased knowing that top 2 can get promoted into the SPL, and the bottom 2 getting relegated therefore only 6 teams will remain in the division.

SF2 - Same as the SL1 but the importance of remaining in the league (relegation to regional leagues) would be a huge factor, especially financially.

Promotion from regional leagues would give smaller teams like Spartans a goal to aim for rather than just winning the league year in year out with no promotion. Same for the highland league teams.

Stadium requirements for newly promoted teams to be reviewed, with at least 2 years timescale for effected teams to comply.

---

Whilst I agree with an increase in numbers of the top league am not sure if we have enough 'quality' teams to justify the top 8 being promoted to the Premier league. Would teams like Cowdenbeath or Stirling Albion ever be in a position to be promoted to the SPL normally, probably not so they then become yo-yo teams or worse try to break the bank in order to stay up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SidBurns

Gotta be 16 for me:-

* One home and one away match against each team = 30 matches
* Four groups of four play home and away, two top go through to QF's = 6 games guaranteed (do a seeding system based on previous seasons league positions)
* One down one up
* 2nd bottom plays 3rd top of 1st, 3rd bottom plays 2nd in 1st

SHIMPLES

---

Eh?

Four groups of 4?

Why 1 up and 1 down...1 down in a 16 team league but with play offs. Naa I think there has to be at least 2 certain relegation places.

If this goes ahead, will it be implemented immediately for season 2011-12? :confused:

:grr::grr::grr::grr::grr: seriously what is with this freakin split, it is shocking and only bearable and just (by the skin of its teeth and cos we have no other option but to accept it) acceptable now cos 95% of the time get 2 home and away games with each team but come on a 16 team league and a split to make 37 games.
I am seriously considering pounding my head of my desk a dozen times or so at the thought.
Who else does this split (i tried googling for it and only found "SPL split" and "hajduk split") it is just my opinion but i think it is the one of the worst things in our game, teams finishing in 7th with more points than 6th and now i see an idea to have a 14 team league with a 8 & 6 split so we wont even have a league where we all play the same games.
Seriously glad i am now in China, no OF bias SPL drivel, at least 3 live EPL and 3 La Liga games every week, Uefa cup, Champions league, internationals (inc Scotland Spain live) and best of all not a scottish (or english) commentator in site, give me a chinese commentator talking god knows what over that any day!!
God its been a long day - perfect thread for me to vent my anger, cheers http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/thumbs%20up.gif
ps 16 or 18 teams suit me even throw in a winter break if you want, just scrap the split i dont care if there is a 4 or 24 team league just no split!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YehButNo But

It looks like we are heading for a 14 team SPL, according to this article on the BBC website. Will this be any better?

If the majority get their way, the new-look SPL will welcome two new teams and become a division of 14.
The favoured new set-up will also include relegation play-offs with a two-up, two-down system.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...em/9108392.stm

---

We have got to try something differant as the league is not very entertaining at the moment i think keeping the split makes the end of the season more interesting and the play off was good the last time we had it so bring it on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenPJ

Whilst I agree with an increase in numbers of the top league am not sure if we have enough 'quality' teams to justify the top 8 being promoted to the Premier league. Would teams like Cowdenbeath or Stirling Albion ever be in a position to be promoted to the SPL normally, probably not so they then become yo-yo teams or worse try to break the bank in order to stay up.

---

I don't think there is much difference between more than half of the First Division teams and the bottom few SPL teams. Falkirk are the perfect example.

Since when have the chairmen of ANY club given a ***** about the supporters? If they did there would be 16-18 teams in 2 leagues with 2 up and 2 down AND SATURDAY football at 3pm only.
Do these money men not realise that it is the pandering to TV that has pi$$ed off the supporters as no one can plan in advance now what games they can go to and what ones they cannot due to some games being to early on a Saturday on playing Sundays.
If there was no LIVE football and only the highlights plus reduce the high prices I reckon the crowds would come back.
But then again I am only a supporter so my thoughts count for FA. :grr:

Surely these clubs that need the 2 home games a year against each of the Old Firm are those clubs that are likely to end up in the bottom half anyway!

Utter madness and they've actually managed to come up with a system even more ridiculous than the one we already have. That alone simply boggles the mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YehButNo But

It looks like we are heading for a 14 team SPL, according to this article on the BBC website. Will this be any better?

If the majority get their way, the new-look SPL will welcome two new teams and become a division of 14.
The favoured new set-up will also include relegation play-offs with a two-up, two-down system.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...em/9108392.stm

---

NO! It's complete and utter bollocks :bitchy: :grr:

16-18 (I'd prefer 18) teams, 2 up, 2 down,

nae f'n split :grr:

i like 16 or 18 with bottom team relegated and league winner up and the next 2 bottom and next 2 top having a play off ..in a league especially of 16 that gives teams a lot to play for in both divisions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottB

Surely these clubs that need the 2 home games a year against each of the Old Firm are those clubs that are likely to end up in the bottom half anyway!

Utter madness and they've actually managed to come up with a system even more ridiculous than the one we already have. That alone simply boggles the mind.

---

and only end up with 1 home game rather than 2 :top marks

I know the smaller clubs will prefer 2 homes games against the uglies than 1, but these games are not selling out now. If we went back to 1 home and 1 away game, i'm pretty sure they would. I am fed up playing the same teams so many times, they are not special anymore. If the football is to get better, and more competitive, 16-18 teams, back to 2 points and no split.

Yes its back to what we had years ago, but what we have now is worse.

I agree with the comments endorsing change - we MUST try someting new! Hope its Pars and Dees or Raith up :agree:

Had an idea and posted it in a rush on the thread with the poll on this subject. Having thought it through more and more here goes...

I've taken my inspiration from over the pond and the NFL to be precise. What if we adopted the conference system?
So we have lets say 20 sides and instead of one big league lets have four mini leagues of 5 sides.

They might be grouped like this for example but the composition doesn't really matter:

Group A: Hibs Motherwell Inverness Morton QOS
Group B: Hearts Dundee Utd Kilmarnock Ross County Partick Thistle
Group C: Celtic Hamilton St Johnstone Raith
Group D Rangers Kilmarnock Aberdeen Dunfermline Falkirk

Ok now we have the groups, this is how it works. All 20 teams play each other home and away once, so that's 19 home and 19 away but every side is just competing in their own wee groups.

At the end of the 38 rounds of fixtures we then go to a post season where the top 2 sides in each group then go into a simple knock out, last eight tournament.
This would be seeded with the group winners playing one of the other runner ups.
You would then ultimately be left with a grand final or 'Super Bowl' type situatuion!

The beauty of this set up is that we all get to play everyone just the onec at home and once away but the season should remain very competitive for most of the sides if not all right up until the end.

Scotland can't support any more than 20 professional sides (probably not even that many) So the remaining SFL sides would then drop into new regionalised leagues with the top junior, highland league sides ect. This would be part-time semi pro so no change there then. It could be structured in a pyrimid type way with maybe one super league.

What about relegation I hear you ask?
Well the side with the worst record out of the 20 group sides, i.e. the side that would've finished bottom had it been just the one big league would then either be relegated to the super regional pyrimid set up with the champs comming up (and turning pro) or you could have a play off or whatever.

The Scottish cup would continue with all sides in the pyrimid set up having the chance to compeate and maybe drawing the Gers or Celts at home if they get far enough.
As for the league cup, that might have to go, after all most European federations only have the one cup tourney anyway.

I know it sounds totally mental and it would never happen but if I was starting from scratch tomorrow then the American conference system is one that certainly works and I think it would raise standards and excitment all over the country!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Why would 18 team league be any more of a snorefest than it is now? When Hibs were in first division and winning games against'lesser' opposition games were good, Hibs played well and got good crowds.

Sure Ross County V QOS might get a low crowd but it still does in First Division anyway:confused: This might be compensated by a ICT v Ross County game though.

14 teams is ridiculous. Just miss out on top six after 26 games and then rest of season really will be a snorefest.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keekaboo

Am I right in saying that if you're in the lower half of the table after 26 games you can't make a challenge for a European spot?

If so, that's got to be wrong.

Surely a team in 7th place could have a really good chance of catching the club in fourth if there's still 2/3 months of the season left?

---

Exactly why this is a non-starter for me.

We do need change - its called get rid of the split.

How the hell would season tickets work in this system anyway!?

Would you have to pay extra if you end up in the bottom half? Or pay full price and get a refund if you end up in the top 6? Or end up paying for a season ticket for the first stage of the season then another for the post split?

Utter insanity likes.