Scottish Premier League Reconstruction - 14 Team SPL?

[YehButNoBut]

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

[Steve-O]

And the split would remain

[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!!

[Lucius Apuleius]

Would rather 16

[Godsahibby]

Many fans favour a larger division still, but several chairmen are fearful of losing the financial benefits of playing the Old Firm clubs twice at home

This is the problem we are always going to have, its the money men deciding whats best for them rather than the football men deciding whats best for Scottish football.

[YehButNoBut]

It seems riduculous that some teams would play 36 games and the rest 40 games.

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.

[H18sry]

18 teams 2 up 2 down and restructure the league cup into regional groups of 4 playing home and away then a knockout, each team is then guaranteed 20 home games a season.

[alfie]

BBC Sport:
Many fans favour a larger division still, but several chairmen are fearful of losing the financial benefits of playing the Old Firm clubs twice at home.

That says it all!

It needs to be 16 teams or more to make the SPL more interesting. Playing teams more than twice in a season (home and away) is getting boring. Add in possible cup ties and at the moment you could play the OF 8 times (I'm guessing) in a season FFS!

Is it any wonder that SPL crowds having been dropping?

[Sandy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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!!

Not ****in rocket science is it ?

[Steve-O]

Teams rarely even fill the ground for OF visits these days anyway...it's a load of pish!

Haven't they thought that they might be more likely to have fans turn up if they were challenging near the top of the league?

This 14 team idea is guff and will just create more post-split pish, especially if there are 8 teams in the bottom section! They'd be as well having teams 7-10 just give up at the split and have the bottom 4 fight it out for relegation!

[Hibbyradge]

I like it. Better than what we've got.

And the top 6 split doesn't bother me.

[Spike Mandela]

As a fan it's 18 for me. Home and away 34 games a season. No split.

[ballengeich]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

18 teams 2 up 2 down and restructure the league cup into regional groups of 4 playing home and away then a knockout, each team is then guaranteed 20 home games a season.

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

[Westie1875]

Has to be at least 16, the 14 team idea is worse than what we have now.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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 utter stupidity - the 14 teams idea that is, not your post. You would be better off in the finishing 8th than 7th so you have the revenue from the extra home games. Can't believe a body who is paid to organiuse football leagues could come up with this.

Also agree re the 16/18 teams and less games. With less fixtures our national team would benefit, teams would maybe take the league cup more seriously and we could have a winter break.

[lyonhibs]

"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"


This is a sherry fuelled joke from the blazers, right???

[Posh Swanny]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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

Agreed.

One of the great things about football down south is the psychological effect of only playing each other twice, as you get just the one chance for revenge each season. There is definitely something added to an away game at Hartlepool in April if you battered them 6-0 at home in October.

Would the hype surrounding Chelsea vs Man Utd at Stamford Bridge be quite as high had they played each other twice already and there was at least one more to come?

The fact is that EVERY game in England is a one-off spectacle each season. Up here you get frequent repeats throughout the year and then an Omnibus at the end.

[hibs0666]

As usual, these guys are considering lots of solutions before they fully understand the problem(s) that a league reconstruction is meant to fix.

There was a golden opportunity to make radical, innovative, change but it is going to be an opportunity missed.

[Steve20]

18 team league, with either 2 or 3 teams getting relegated.

[Stevie Reid]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I like it. Better than what we've got.

And the top 6 split doesn't bother me.

Whilst the 14 teams still doesn't sound ideal, it would still be a refreshing change from what we have.

[SlickShoes]

18 team league or leave it the way it is.

We have to be the only league in europe coming up with these stupid structures and splits.

Like others have said as long as money dictates everything Scottish Football is doomed, there is no point even worrying about it.

[H18sry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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

To re-brand Scottish football, which worked back then but has fallen flat on its face in recent years.

We have seen in recent years that there are 1st division team who can hold there own against SPL teams in cup tie's, so why can't they hold there own in a league system, in which they will have a bigger more realistic playing budget.

[MrSmith]

Things just couldn't get any worse eh?? Then up pops the all knowing chairmen oracles of the SPL to create another farce set-up!

How much lower can Scottish football get with these clowns at the helm??

We need; One Association, 16-18 team league playing each other once home and away; and; drop the points system back to two points for a win and one for a draw.

The final knife in the back....Goodbye Scottish Football...

[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.

[David@EasterRoad]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Things just couldn't get any worse eh?? Then up pops the all knowing chairmen oracles of the SPL to create another farce set-up!

How much lower can Scottish football get with these clowns at the helm??

We need; One Association, 16-18 team league playing each other once home and away; and; drop the points system back to two points for a win and one for a draw.

The final knife in the back....Goodbye Scottish Football...

The only teams that want to play each other 4 times a season are the Old firm.

[Steve-O]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

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.

Oh well that's it settled then.

I wonder if the not playing the OF twice at home 'negative' was given more weight than other 'cons' in those lists...

edit - you cheated my adding more to your post afterwards! :

[Spike Mandela]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That says it all!

It needs to be 16 teams or more to make the SPL more interesting. Playing teams more than twice in a season (home and away) is getting boring. Add in possible cup ties and at the moment you could play the OF 8 times (I'm guessing) in a season FFS!

Is it any wonder that SPL crowds having been dropping?

That's only 30 games though, 15 home games. 8 weeks less of football than we have now. Might be good for footballers but rubbish for the fan IMO.

Edit: Sorry quoted wrong post it should have been one saying 16. Simples.

For me has to be 18 or 20 if only playing each other twice.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh well that's it settled then.

I wonder if the not playing the OF twice at home 'negative' was given more weight than other 'cons' in those lists...

Maybe you should email them and ask.

I'm merely quoting the article.

I have, however, added to that post and concluded that 14 seems to be worth a try.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

edit - you cheated my adding more to your post afterwards! :

I like to employ a piecemeal approach.

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The only teams that want to play each other 4 times a season are the Old firm.

Every team will want four games against the OF, including Hibs and Hearts. There's a big difference in revenue between having 18/19k for a further two OF games to having 10k for games against Raith Rovers and Dunfermline.

I like the two up / two down idea.