I've read and heard a lot of people calling for a 16 team league. The arguments are that it would reduce the boredom caused by playing teams 4 times a season and it might give teams a better chance of competing for the title.
Those are desirable benefits, for sure.
However, a 16 team league would only provide 15 home games instead of the current 19, a statistical drop of over 21% in income. However, there would also only be one game against Celtc and TV money would also reduce so the actual loss in income would be closer to 25%. Hibs and Hearts would be even harder hit as we'd also lose out on a home derby.
How could clubs adapt to that?
An increase in ticket prices? Pay lower wages?
Home and away games against the likes of Arbroath, Berwick and Queen's Park in a revamped league cup? (I thought we were trying to reduce the boredom).
I don't think it's at all feasible, but I'd be interested in the views of those who advocate it.
Results 1 to 30 of 34
Thread: Is a 16 team league possible?
-
11-08-2015 11:37 PM #1
Is a 16 team league possible?
Last edited by Hibbyradge; 11-08-2015 at 11:39 PM.
-
12-08-2015 02:20 AM #2This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
United we stand here....
-
12-08-2015 07:15 AM #3This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Also playing teams only twice a season will see a closer league. This again should help attendances.
The League Cup may be something they need to look at but playing this early in the season when kids are still on holiday will keep crowds low.
My worry though is the rumours of Sky etc only offering decent poppy for a 4 times a year OF bun fight. This could be catered for with a regional LC format.
A bigger league will hopefully help young talent come through. Less pressurised games but this relies on managers having the guts to do this.
I'm really not sure of the correct number but we need to try something.
-
12-08-2015 07:52 AM #4
I don't think a 16 team league is possible without some kind of split after 30 games. restructuring the league cup is fine in its own merits but it doesn't make up for a loss of league games IMO.
-
12-08-2015 08:10 AM #5This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 08:27 AM #6
There would be disadvantages to a 16 team league, but I don't think they would be as bad as those with either the 10 or 12 team leagues we've had for the last 40 years. Whether a 16 team league is the answer (or 18 or 20) the one thing I'm certain of is that 10 and 12 team leagues are boring and predictable and the mid-season split is nothing more than a farce. Change in league size has to happen, the only question is what option should be tried next.
#PERSEVERED
-
12-08-2015 08:42 AM #7
How about the away team gets a share of the home gate, that would even things up a bit.
-
12-08-2015 08:52 AM #8This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 09:02 AM #9
I am all for a 16 team league. The current 12 plus ourselves, Rangers, St mirren and Falkirk would be a good competitive league IMO.
A lot of spl teams fans seem to have the impression that there is a massive gap between the 2 leagues, especially since Motherwell pumped Rangers. I think there wouldn't be a massive gap between ourselves, Rangers, St mitten, qos and Falkirk and the bottom 6 teams in the splLast edited by Unseen work; 12-08-2015 at 09:04 AM.
-
12-08-2015 09:07 AM #10This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
It would, IMHO, encourage fans to support their team home and away.There is no such thing as too much yarn, just not enough time.
-
12-08-2015 09:45 AM #11
18 team league: 17 home and 17 away games.
No split.
No extra League Cup games.
Replace Doncaster & Co with people that can talk up and actively sell our game, instead of doing the reverse. Preferably somebody that can do a better deal with the TV companies, so we can at least compete money wise with the lower leagues in England.
-
12-08-2015 09:50 AM #12This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 09:52 AM #13
I'm with The OP on this. A 16 team league gives too few games.
There is no way clubs and broadcasters would want to give up 4 derbies a season compared to 2.
Maybe two leagues of 10 again with 2 up 2 down, more equal spread of the sponsorship money with regional leagues below would be better."Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.' - Paulo Freire
-
12-08-2015 09:59 AM #14This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 10:15 AM #15This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteEvery gimmick hungry yob,
Digging gold from rock and roll
Grabs the mic to tell us,
He'll die before he's sold.
-
12-08-2015 10:21 AM #16This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Obviously keeping the play offs for relegation/promotion.
-
12-08-2015 10:34 AM #17
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Location
- Edinburgh
- Age
- 42
- Posts
- 3,338
16 team league is a good idea because....
- Teams only play each other twice which increases interest..
- Play New Year round of fixtures then have a shut down until February as over-priced tickets are financially crippling in January..
- Re-start the season after the break with the Scottish Cup..
- Less games will help players playing for the national team..
-
12-08-2015 10:40 AM #18This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
As it's 18 teams, could still have 2 automatically relegated and a a third club in the Play-Offs.
-
12-08-2015 10:47 AM #19
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- East Kilbride
- Age
- 40
- Posts
- 772
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 12:04 PM #20
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Posts
- 1,288
People who want a 16 team league don't need to remodel the league cup to make up games lost. All that is required is have a range of splits at the end of the 30 games. We could follow the Belgian Pro league model which has s top 6 playing each other home and away again with 2 sections for 7th -14th who again play home and away and the winners play each other the winner then plays against the top 6s 5th place team for the final European place. The bottom 2 play each other to death over up to 5 games to see who is relegated. Of course we could choose our own splits that suit us but the beauty of this is that it adds exciting additional games, makes it likely there are 4 old firm games at least 2 edinburgh , Dundee, highland and sometimes Fife , Lanarkshire and Renfrewshire derbies. What's stopping us ?
-
12-08-2015 12:19 PM #21This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
The travelling in the 2nd division kills teams already and we've already had Brora citing their reluctance to come up should they have beaten Montrose.
Would you go 14 under the premier and then regionalise the 3rd league adding more teams in who want to progress?Someone once told me that hard work wouldn't kill me.
I thought: "Hell, why take the chance"!
-
12-08-2015 12:25 PM #22This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThis quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThis quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThis quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThis quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show QuoteThere is no such thing as too much yarn, just not enough time.
-
12-08-2015 12:31 PM #23
Bad idea number 1 .............. An 18 team league .... No matter what folk say it will have too many meaningless games and the teams left in the 2nd division will just about all be part time with very little prospect of them ever bringing through a club which would enhance the top league after promotion, even a 16 team league pushes that to the limit. Bad idea number 2 ......... a 10 team league .......... too little variety and far too much chance of being relegated, it would also sideline the play offs, which are a great idea. Its got to be 14 .. and with a split. As I said on another thread, the only thing wrong with the current set up is the imbalance of games before the split, with for example Aberdeen playing Celtic away twice and at home once before the top 6 is decided. ....................................... 26 games home and away followed by an 8 / 6 split, that gives the bottom 8 teams 40 games and the top 6 teams 36 games. The bottom two get relegated automatically and the 11th and 12th teams play each other home and away to decide who plays the winner of the play off between 3rd and 4th in the 2nd division in a winner takes all one off game at a suitable neutral venue.
-
12-08-2015 12:58 PM #24This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Meaningless Games:
I've never understood that as a concept. No game is meaningless to the fans that attend as, even if the only thing at stake is pride, that's enough reason to still want to win. The other side of the coin is the complaint that every game is such high pressure that teams are reluctant to introduce young players. However, having games where you knew your league place was not at stake would allow clubs to do that.
The Bundesliga currently has 18 clubs, with relegation and playoffs as proposed, but nobody ever complains of 'meaningless games'. Every game is still taken seriously. Most clubs know that they have little to no chance of winning the league but that's irrelevant, as winning is stil important.
The Split:
I absolutely hate this whole concept. It's interesting that other leagues have tried this and dumped it ASAP, e.g. Switzerland. For one thing, clubs can finish in the top or bottom six and have absolutely nothing to play for in the last five matches, therefore negating the 'meaningless games' argument.
For another, a club on the slide can just squeeze into the top six at the last minute and avoid a playoff or relegation spot that they might have deserved if there was no split. Teams finishing in the bottom half of the league automatically lose the right to challenge for a Euro spot they might otherwise still have had a chance of gaining.
There is often an imbalance of home and away games under the split, with some clubs playing others 3 times at home and once away, and vice versa. That's hardly fair.
Number of viable clubs:
This is actually a very good point, as to whether we have enough clubs to make an 18 team league viable. The issue is not having 18 large enough clubs, but also having others that can take their place. However, who would have ever predicted that ICT or Ross County would become mainstays of our top league? It can happen.
-
12-08-2015 01:14 PM #25This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 01:21 PM #26This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
That's just my take on things, NN, I'm not claiming it's the only fair view.
I'm willing to listen to your viewpoint...no matter how wrong it is
-
12-08-2015 01:41 PM #27
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Edinburgh
- Posts
- 3,002
I think league re construction isnt just to make this instantly better. If teams only played each other twice and things became more exciting as a spectacle then more interest would be shown in the scottish game. Yes, if we went to an 18 team top tier the league below would be made up of a lot part time clubs, however, if we can draw more interest, better sponsorship etc then more money would be available for the scottish game.
Personally I hate the split. If I knew that I would only see Hibs vs Hearts once a season I would be up for the game so much more. Playing that much different opposition could mean a lot more different types of players, different tactics etc so games could become a bit more challenging and entertaining.
16 team IMO is still too small. 18 would be the way forward, yes there would be a lot of issues for smaller clubs in lower divisions but its hardly a picnic for the just now. If it was 18 with 2 automatic relegation spots and another for play off it would give these smaller clubs a better chance of making it to the top league and playing the bigger clubs and getting better gate receipts etc.
If we went to 18 teams as well, there would be the chance for young scottish players from the smaller clubs out of that 18 to play against big clubs in big stadiums possibly on the television. IMO it would become a lot more attractive to players to come to this league and play for one of the smaller clubs that would normally not have much chance of reaching the top flight.
-
12-08-2015 01:44 PM #28This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
-
12-08-2015 01:46 PM #29
16 team league giving 15 home and away games. League them splits into top 8 and bottom 8 therefore giving each team another 3 or 4 games.
No difference to what happens now i.e. 18 or 19 home league games.
No matter what people think the split is here to stay regardless of size of league.
-
12-08-2015 02:09 PM #30
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Erm...........................
- Age
- 56
- Posts
- 12,941
The obsession with money is what's killing the game.
The English prem despite its faults gives the broadcasters a product they like which let's them create massive advertising revenues.
Unfortunately there's only 2 teams they're interested in up here and that's what drives every decision that gets made up here.
Personally a regionalised cup is a better idea than this stupid stupid split imo.Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, vodka in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming, "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Log in to remove the advert |
Bookmarks