Agree with everything you say but if Celtic and Rangers don't want it to change it wont.
Printable View
Stuck between a rock and a hard place. No one wants Celtic to win 10 in a row yet the only team who can realistically stop them is rangers who I dread of winning the league due to the fact their fans are **** and would rattle on about "55" forever and ever. Both set of fans are unbearable and both outcomes are unbearable.
I said on another post recently.
All clubs should break away and start own league.
Old Firm would be screwed - no where to play.
If they wanted to play in Scotland they need to share TV revenue and agree to new conduct about sectarian singing for starters. Also only play each other twice a season. Not 4 due to TV deal.
The old firm need us more than they realise as England won’t take or need them.
Is it just the TV companies though?
Celtic/rangers won't want to reduce their derbies. Hibs and hearts also.
The rest of the teams would be swapping the money from their second visits (as well as Hibs and hearts) for minimal number of fans/money they'll get if there's 6 more teams bringing 100/200 fans.
Nope, I was being 100% serious.
Each season Celtic have won those 8 league titles pretty comfortably. It’s not like the title race has gone right down to the wire (like this season in the EPL) and someone other than Celtic could win it. They are the heavy favourites at the start of each season to win it and their resources & finances are far superior to anyone in Scotland to even compete with them over a course of a season.
That’s why someone stoping them winning 10 in a row would be a bigger achievement than them winning 10 titles in a row when it practically has their name on the trophy before a ball is even kicked.
I don't think the TV companies would consider Hibs vs Partick a suitable replacement for two Edinburgh derbies, and they'd be even less happy at the viewing figures for Celtc vs Ayr or Sevco vs Morton compared to two Ugly Sisters games.
An 18 team league would see a massive drop in TV money, with what little was paid spread even more thinly because there are more teams. And with less money we'd end up competing for players with non-league teams in England.
I'd say probably yes when you look at it...
No team other than Celtic or Rangers have won the league since the 80's, so its the norm. They share 104 titles out of about what? 140ish?
Leicester winning one PL is a bigger achievement than Man City winning 2 on the bounce.
Yes it would.
When you consider how strong Celtic are over everyone else in the league both on and off the pitch, it would be a big achievement if a team stopped them winning 10 in a row. As I said, when was the last time Celtic looked like they weren’t going to win the league? Probably Rangers pre-liquidation. Then again, those two had dominated the league since the end of the 80’s.
maybe eventually.
until that point how much money would be lost? it would take years if not decades to shift attitudes about our league being crap or a pub league.
in addition why would teams other than Celtic start winning the title?
I'm for it mainly because we have to try something. I'm just not sold it'll be as much of a utopia as every one makes out.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Maybe some one with bit more time on their hands can do a premier league table, removin results against the old firm.. we can crown the top of the 10 unofficial champions...