Top 12 leagues In Europe

[decullio]

the top 12 leagues In Europe all have 16 teams or more .time to change for the good of Scottish football fxxk the old firm

[Tenor]

[Malcolm Tucker]

 

 

The OP's got a point.

[decullio]

What's so difficult to understand ?

[Ray Gin]

 

What was confusing about the OP?

[Cow]

Agree , it's so feckin obvious.

[alanjambo]

I agree. 16 or 18 team league will be better. I know we changed to a ten team league because a change was needed but now a change is needed back.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Reckon it would help likes... I think by far the biggest problem however is that too many people only support those same two teams. Kinda obvious but. hell... It is by far the biggest problem with football in this country in my opinion.

[Dr. Sheldon Cooper]

Get where the OP is coming from but the point has been made on here recently that having the likes of Partick, Raith Rovers etc in the league and then playing them instead of St Mirren or St Johnstone again isn't really all that appealing tbh. It won't make a difference to the attendance levels or any TV deals. 30 games in a season isn't enough either, we'd need to restructure the League Cup and play it at weekends to balance it out.

[Tenor]

So we change the league to a 16-team league are we magically going to become one of the top leagues in Europe?

[decullio]

So we change the league to a 16-team league are we magically going to become one of the top leagues in Europe?

I'm not saying it will change over night but the smaller clubs will get stronger through time and make the league better In my opinion.

[Cow]

So we change the league to a 16-team league are we magically going to become one of the top leagues in Europe?

Time of the month hen?

[JamboX2]

Get where the OP is coming from but the point has been made on here recently that having the likes of Partick, Raith Rovers etc in the league and then playing them instead of St Mirren or St Johnstone again isn't really all that appealing tbh. It won't make a difference to the attendance levels or any TV deals. 30 games in a season isn't enough either, we'd need to restructure the League Cup and play it at weekends to balance it out.

 

 

It would be better though. When was the last time Hearts played Raith? It's variety. If not expanding the league add another relegation spot. It's awful that only 1 goes down. The SFL 1 is just a non-league, you could loose it by 1pt and not even get a playoff. Its ridiculous. A bigger league would be better, other teams out with the OF could build up runs, longer runs, you'd get the OF less too. Playing the Old Firm isn't a 'big' thing anymore. It's as boring as playing St.Mirren.

[Sydney]

the top 12 leagues In Europe all have 16 teams or more .time to change for the good of Scottish football fxxk the old firm

9 out of the 11 leagues ranked below Scotland have 16 teams.

 

The number of teams in the SPL doesnt matter a jot.

 

The quality of team between 6-16 in Scotland is much of a muchness. So, I dont think it will make the league worse - but it will not make the league better.

 

We wont get as many visits from Hibs, Rangers and Celtic to Tynie, but at least we'll be able to see Partick Thistle, Livingston and Hamilton more regularly.

[Sydney]

30 games in a season isn't enough either, we'd need to restructure the League Cup and play it at weekends to balance it out.

 

The league cup has never attracted people though. I remember about 3,500 at a league cup tie in 85-86 against Cowdenbeath, and then the following season we had our first home game after Dens and we only got about 7000 at home in the league cup.

 

Weekends or not, it is just not a cup that enough people care about.

[decullio]

9 out of the 11 leagues ranked below Scotland have 16 teams.

 

The number of teams in the SPL doesnt matter a jot.

 

The quality of team between 6-16 in Scotland is much of a muchness. So, I dont think it will make the league worse - but it will not make the league better.

 

We wont get as many visits from Hibs, Rangers and Celtic to Tynie, but at least we'll be able to see Partick Thistle, Livingston and Hamilton more regularly.

I can remember a packed tynecastle I'n 86 against Clydebank and it was live on tv.if your team is winning it doesn't matter who you play the fans will turn up

[Jambo, Goodbye]

16 team league could have 37 games, ditch the mickey mouse cup and Scottish cup replays, have games at Ibrox and parkhead shown on tv only and all tv money split at end of season.

 

Imo of course

[southside1874]

We just need a league that is not dominated by the needs of the weegies. ou can't get sport while the weegies have the control. Sport goes out the window. We can change the size of the league and we can change the goalposts. Lennon went off his head last year because he knew there was a balance that didn't suit. He pumped Dallas. He sees what goes on in Scottish Football. The guy is happy now because he is on a level playing field. Weegie anger runs football in this country.

[CavySlaveJambo]

Does anyone know the make up of european leagues and the number of clubs each league has. More so for countries the same or of similar size as Scotland.

[No longer active]

If and when the club formally known as Rangers gets booted out and rejoins in the 3rd division, it would take them at least 3 years to (probably more) to advance back up the league system, unless of course we had leagues of 16, only 2 seasons to progress back to the Premier league.

[IMA MAROON]

I agree. 16 or 18 team league will be better. I know we changed to a ten team league because a change was needed but now a change is needed back.

 

We change back and crowds will drop. Season ticket sales will drop. Only one game against the Old Firm and only one game against hibs.

 

Not many fans desperate to see Hearts v diddy team fc.

[kingantti1874]

We change back and crowds will drop. Season ticket sales will drop. Only one game against the Old Firm and only one game against hibs.

 

Not many fans desperate to see Hearts v diddy team fc.

 

 

It'll make the league tighter and more competitive.. Therefore better.. Tight competitionanf success will leads to bigger crowds... Hence why the hobos average went up in the 1st division..

[IMA MAROON]

It'll make the league tighter and more competitive.. Therefore better.. Tight competitionanf success will leads to bigger crowds... Hence why the hobos average went up in the 1st division..

 

That is just wishful thinking. The Old Firm will continue to dominate. They have the fanbase and therefore the money. We can't even speculate to accumulate anymore because of the new Financial Fair Play rules.

 

Fans like the big games and the big game atmosphere. Hearts v no marks with no fans just does not do it. That is the way it was before we cut the league from 18 to 10 and it is the way it will go if we change back.

[Statto]

From next season, Croatia are reducing their top flight from 16 to 12 teams which will then be reduced further to 10 teams by 2013/14.

The reason for this change in Croatia is to increase the level of competition in the league as the Croatian Football Federation Executive committee believes; "that the current format with sixteen teams does not contribute to development of football in Croatia and the standard of its domestic competitions".

 

 

Portugal on the other hand is expanding their league from 16 to 18 teams. Interestingly, around half of the comments at the bottom of >this< article are in favour of reducing the number of teams, in their opinion "Adding two more will do nothing to improve the league. Attendance is abysmal as it is, so how exactly is the league/teams going to profit. You say TV, I say the revenue won't increase that much and teams will get a smaller cut".

Although one comment gave an interesting suggestion to make the whole league more exciting; "If they do increase the size of the liga, I would like to see them increase the number of relegation/promotion spots to 3 or 4. That would make the bottom half of the table more exciting and worth following for fans. The liga should be focused more on how to increase fan attendance".

 

 

It would be interesting to follow the competition levels of clubs from both countries and also, the difference in attendances between the clubs when there was more teams in the league and less.

 

 

It is something to add to the debate of expanding/reducing the size of the SPL. There is no getting away from the fact that Celtic and Rangers fans contribute more money to the Scottish game than any other team in Scotland so for most teams, expanding the league and therefore reducing the number of games against the Old Firm will have a huge negative affect in the short term for many clubs.

However, by increasing the number of teams, the quality is lower meaning about 6 or 7 teams could potentially put a challenge in for the league title which may increase the attendances of these 6 or 7 clubs, obviously meaning in the long term, more teams' fans would be contributing more money into the game which means it could gradually become more competitive.

[kingantti1874]

That is just wishful thinking. The Old Firm will continue to dominate. They have the fanbase and therefore the money. We can't even speculate to accumulate anymore because of the new Financial Fair Play rules.

 

Fans like the big games and the big game atmosphere. Hearts v no marks with no fans just does not do it. That is the way it was before we cut the league from 18 to 10 and it is the way it will go if we change back.

 

In 1998 we'd have won the title without the old firm...a 26 team league would enhance the possibility of such seasons .. I honestly never give a monkeys who we are playing, sone of my best memories at football are rolling over weaker teams... Hearts sold out week in week out in 05:06 because we believed we could win.. 12 teams is horrendous, 10 would be catastrophically bad

[2NaFish]

But why stop there, Comrades?

 

Most of the top leagues are also based on continental Europe! Therefore i propose, using a series of controlled explosions, we literally separate from the rest of Great Britain and float down the Atlantic and nestle in sweetly in the Bay of Biscay, also known as 'The Nape of Europe'. We shall then, unfortunately, turn that glorious nape in to something akin to a humpback; we may leave continental Europe hideously disfigured, like some ******* child of the elephant man, however it will do our coefficient no end of good.

[Stanley_]

Does anyone know the make up of european leagues and the number of clubs each league has. More so for countries the same or of similar size as Scotland.

 

I did a quick check on Wikipedia so some of the figures may have changed recently. These are the European countries with a population or around 3m to 9m (Scotland has about 5m) with the most populated countries listed first:

 

Sweden-16

Azerbaijan-12

Austria-10

Switzerland-10

Bulgaria-16

Denmark-12

Slovakia-12

Finland-14

Scotland-12

Norway-16

Ireland-10

Bosnia and Herzegovina-16

Georgia-12

Croatia-16

Moldova-12

Lithuania-12

Wales-12

Albania-14

Armenia-8

[Hagar the Horrible]

But why stop there, Comrades?

 

Most of the top leagues are also based on continental Europe! Therefore i propose, using a series of controlled explosions, we literally separate from the rest of Great Britain and float down the Atlantic and nestle in sweetly in the Bay of Biscay, also known as 'The Nape of Europe'. We shall then, unfortunately, turn that glorious nape in to something akin to a humpback; we may leave continental Europe hideously disfigured, like some ******* child of the elephant man, however it will do our coefficient no end of good.

 

 

My master plan was always for the entire male population to marry brazillian women, and as such create a superhuman footballer, you get the balance and ball control of the Brazillians and the heart, strength, passion and fight of the Scots. however if the reverse is true we could be worse than Ulbonia.

 

Scottish women have let the nation down, time for a change.

[cosanostra]

Increasing the no. of middle of the table, meaningless games and reducing the no. of games that make us money and bring us excitement is not going to help anyone i'm afraid.

[Sydney]

I can remember a packed tynecastle I'n 86 against Clydebank and it was live on tv.if your team is winning it doesn't matter who you play the fans will turn up

 

Your memory is good - but not quite spot on.

 

21,000 at home to Clydebank, 2nd last game of the season, a BIG win would win the league - we were still 8,000 short of capacity - EVEN THOUGH WE MIGHT HAVE WON THE LEAGUE THAT DAY!.

 

And it wasnt live on TV - that was the Aberdeen game when we drew 1-1 a week or so before.

[Hearts Heritage]

The problem is not structural . The 18 team league was a failure back in the 1970s which was why the Premier league was formed .

 

It is all about being competitive crowds flood back if you are challenging .

 

The Old Firm sucked that out over the last 26 years .

 

Since 1986 there have been 2 seasons possibly 3 if you count 2006 when the league has involved a team outside the OF

[I.T.K]

Postedbefore

 

Start with 20 team SPL,

 

The SPL then splits in to two leagues of 10. League A (best teams) and League B(diddy teams).

 

Each play home and away before winter break to make 18 games. At the end the 18 game the team at the top iscrowned winter champion. Then bottom 2 of league A go down to league B. and thetop 2 of League B come up to league A.

 

Wethen have a winter break.

 

After the winter break teams in both leagues play again home and away for another 18games and the winner becomes the summer champion.

 

For winning each league (A and the teams get some silverware, like championshipplayoff cup in England. (I.e. nice, but kind of meaningless.)

 

Again bottom 2 of League A go down top 2 of League B come up. Also bottom 2 teams ofLeague B gets relegated to 1st division.

 

At this point all the points from both seasons (Winter and Summer) are addedtogether to work out the overall SPL champion as well as European places. Notea team that plays in the B League at any point in a full season can?t will the SPL.

 

This set up will, give us 36 games a season.

 

Over time it will expose teams to more different teams depending on where youfinish. (12 teams a season minimum, but over years the churn of teams relegatedand promoted will allow more variety.)

 

Gives teams a chance to have more open games, I.e. if you do well in the B leaguehave a go at A league. If you struggle in the A league you go down and havemore of games in the B league.

 

Keepa number of big games. (i.e. TV get 4 OF games)

 

Reduce the number of meaning less games for big team's.

 

Will allow smaller teams a chance of an old firm pay day, not to mention Hearts.Hibs and Aberdeen.

 

Old firm will still get their 4 game a season.

 

Will give more exposure to league B (Current 1st division) teams. People will wantto see who is coming up and down and they will get TV games.

 

Will provide a mid-season finale which will attract more fans.

 

Less pressure on teams that get relegated compared with current format.

 

If this proposal were to run for say 5 years then reviewed, it would be easy torevert back to a 10/12 team league or to and 18/20 team league.

 

Also the added in the winter break that will allow coincide with the transferwindow. That will allow player exchanges between teams as well as time for theLeague to do admin items like produce fixtures dates for the summer league etc.The winter break could be as long as a 2 months in non World/European cup yearsto allow more summer time (fair weather) football. I also believe having thefinale of the SPL after the end of the English leagues would generate moreinterest from south of the boarder. (Or at least from TV company wanting toshow something before Wimbledon etc starts.)

 

It will introduce both a sprint and a marathon to the league. For example a teamcould have a shocking start to the season (or winter league) but still can havesomething to play for in the second half of the year (or summer season) whichwill encourage fans to stick with them. And vice versa.

 

Negative thing,, it still has a split but personally I think this idea ticks a lot ofboxes of what people want.

[I.T.K]

I see this something that ticks the boxes.

Postedbefore

 

Start with 20 team SPL,

 

The SPL then splits in to two leagues of 10. League A (best teams) and League B(diddy teams).

 

Each play home and away before winter break to make 18 games. At the end the 18 game the team at the top iscrowned winter champion. Then bottom 2 of league A go down to league B. and thetop 2 of League B come up to league A.

 

Wethen have a winter break.

 

After the winter break teams in both leagues play again home and away for another 18games and the winner becomes the summer champion.

 

For winning each league (A and the teams get some silverware, like championshipplayoff cup in England. (I.e. nice, but kind of meaningless.)

 

Again bottom 2 of League A go down top 2 of League B come up. Also bottom 2 teams ofLeague B gets relegated to 1st division.

 

At this point all the points from both seasons (Winter and Summer) are addedtogether to work out the overall SPL champion as well as European places. Notea team that plays in the B League at any point in a full season can?t will the SPL.

 

This set up will, give us 36 games a season.

 

Over time it will expose teams to more different teams depending on where youfinish. (12 teams a season minimum, but over years the churn of teams relegatedand promoted will allow more variety.)

 

Gives teams a chance to have more open games, I.e. if you do well in the B leaguehave a go at A league. If you struggle in the A league you go down and havemore of games in the B league.

 

Keepa number of big games. (i.e. TV get 4 OF games)

 

Reduce the number of meaning less games for big team's.

 

Will allow smaller teams a chance of an old firm pay day, not to mention Hearts.Hibs and Aberdeen.

 

Old firm will still get their 4 game a season.

 

Will give more exposure to league B (Current 1st division) teams. People will wantto see who is coming up and down and they will get TV games.

 

Will provide a mid-season finale which will attract more fans.

 

Less pressure on teams that get relegated compared with current format.

 

If this proposal were to run for say 5 years then reviewed, it would be easy torevert back to a 10/12 team league or to and 18/20 team league.

 

Also the added in the winter break that will allow coincide with the transferwindow. That will allow player exchanges between teams as well as time for theLeague to do admin items like produce fixtures dates for the summer league etc.The winter break could be as long as a 2 months in non World/European cup yearsto allow more summer time (fair weather) football. I also believe having thefinale of the SPL after the end of the English leagues would generate moreinterest from south of the boarder. (Or at least from TV company wanting toshow something before Wimbledon etc starts.)

 

It will introduce both a sprint and a marathon to the league. For example a teamcould have a shocking start to the season (or winter league) but still can havesomething to play for in the second half of the year (or summer season) whichwill encourage fans to stick with them. And vice versa.

 

Negative thing,, it still has a split but personally I think this idea ticks a lot ofboxes of what people want.

[Era Macaroons]

 

However, by increasing the number of teams, the quality is lower meaning about 6 or 7 teams could potentially put a challenge in for the league title which may increase the attendances of these 6 or 7 clubs, obviously meaning in the long term, more teams' fans would be contributing more money into the game which means it could gradually become more competitive.

 

 

Youve hit the nail on the head here, and IMO is the crux of the reason why we should move to a 16 team set up.....quite simply more clubs will feel they can compete.

 

Come the end of the season Relegation/Promotion can be increased to 2 teams, mib even include the popular play-off match for 3rd bottom/3rd top 1st div......the 3 or 4 clubs in the middle of league can breathe and blood new players.

 

Only playing the OF twice each will make a good result far more worthy, any team in the SPL can beat them once poss with a draw as well, but will generally lose out over the piece in a 4 match contest , as it stands just now any win/draw against the OF is negated by them having 3 other chances to redress the balance eg 3 points for us, 9 for them.....if we only play each other twice a win against them would really hurt them e.g 3 points for us and a max of 3 points for them.

 

a 16 team league would see an end to the nonsense that has both OF teams 20 points clear of the field, as teams like ourselves Motherwell/Dons/Utd/Killie (even Hibs) will also be gathering 3 points most weeks against the weaker clubs that make up the 16

 

So you have 4 or 5 clubs at the top of the league all 'doing well' ,all in with a shout of maybe achieving something that has been unthinkable for the last 30 years

4th v 5th or 3rd v 6th becomes a massive game in a 16 team league.....im convinced more fans would turn out for these games (more than 3rd v 6th in a 12 team league) .

 

A result against the OF has proper value to it for the whole season .......rather than 'good result today we're magic , but does ferkall for us in the long run'

 

Of course the number of teams in the league isnt the only problem....sensible ticket prices have to come in at the same time.....anything over ?20 is simply laughable.....eg ?30 to walk up and pay into the St Mirren Cup tie thats live on BBC at lunchtime......does not compute.

 

The 'chairmans fear' of losing 2 home matces against the OF is quite simply pathetic and short sighted easily dealt with if you have your house in order, and who knows your 'Rangers' fan that lives in Ayr might actually go along and watch the match involving a 4th v 5th clash between Ayr Utd and Killie/Hearts/Aberdeen....surely a more exciting prospect than trailing to Ibrox for a routine 3-0 win, which brings me onto another point that I'll just touch on....perhaps some of these glory seeking OF fans all over the country might start supporting their local teams if there was a chance of them doing well.

[Bert Le Clos]

I would definitely find a 16/18 team league more appealing. More varied opponents/away trips, less games v the OF, less derbies unfortunately but I don't think there will be that many seasons where we'll play Hibs 4 times a year under the leagues current guise anyway.

 

I think average attendances would rise. If you were to take the top 6 from Div 1 just now and form an 18 team SPL you'd have Ross County playing ICT and Aberdeen, a Dundee derby, Partick playing Hamilton and Motherwell and Falkirk and Livingstone relatively close to each other as well as Hearts, Hibs, Hamilton, Motherwell and Partick.

[Gorgie Boys]

Some people think hubz would be in the top league ?

[Sydney]

In 1998 we'd have won the title without the old firm...

 

We'd have won the title quite a few times without the OF...

[A Boy Named Crow]

10,12,16,18 teams, it doesn't make a difference. As long as the Old Firm.have stranglehold on TV money and on the gate receipts they get from filling their 50k+ stadia with bigots ever other week, there will be no competition in Scotland. Fans will only return when there is actually a competition to watch. The only way to bring about competition is to properly redistribute revenues.

 

The size of the league is a complete.non-issue, one that just deflects attention from the real problems in our game.

 

IMO, obviously.

[Rudy T]

There are two huge factors in what happens next to Scottish football :

 

1) Rangers

2) What is the Financial Benefit to all clubs of a restructure

 

1) The league needs Rangers but not the old Rangers it needs a heavilly sanctioned RFC, transfer embargo's, redistribution of their prize money if they are found guilty of illegal contracts etc etc. This way there will still be large travelling support and no more debate about sky withdrawing.

 

2) We can sit an debate 20/18/16 team leagues - but lets not forget the men in charge of the clubs will not change anything that is not financially benefical to them in the first instance and their club in the second.

 

Where I would start is with the 3 governing bodies - what a waste of cash that is - lets have one, the SFA will do but a fairly elected SFA - get rid of the oxygen theifs that are currently there and bring in guys who a. have a business brain and b. actually know and care about football.

 

Next I'd like to know where all the cash from the national team goes, the tv deals, the sponsorship, the attendances etc....lets get that pumped back into the clubs

 

Ticket prices would be the next step - they should be capped and standarised across the league. The best part of 30 quid to watch SPL football is actually funny its so ridiculous.

 

Then there's the marketing of the league - we need to talk our game up, in the last few years its been nothing short of an embaresment to this country, court cases, death threats, pitch invasions, referee strikes, administration... the list goes on.....we need to get money in from sponsorship so the league has to look at least professional.

 

The competitive side of the game will only come if the playing field level out a bit - only way to do that is to get more money into the game and distribute it more evenly - and then the clubs must take responsibility for their spending. They need to use this UEFA fair play ruling to start to get our game back in order.

[Jambo, Goodbye]

Bayern Munich charge 15 euros to stand and see a game, against all opposition. Imagine that!

[Rods]

I beleive we need to make it a 16 team league and only play two games.

 

Its never going to happen though so its only a pipe dream.

 

I feel this would suit Hearts more and give team a more realistic push at a title challenge.

[Mr Brightside]

 

The 'chairmans fear' of losing 2 home matces against the OF is quite simply pathetic and short sighted easily dealt with if you have your house in order, and who knows your 'Rangers' fan that lives in Ayr might actually go along and watch the match involving a 4th v 5th clash between Ayr Utd and Killie/Hearts/Aberdeen....surely a more exciting prospect than trailing to Ibrox for a routine 3-0 win, which brings me onto another point that I'll just touch on....perhaps some of these glory seeking OF fans all over the country might start supporting their local teams if there was a chance of them doing well.

 

This is a bit of myth that is trotted out by the media. The smaller teams who need the money the most typically only get 3 games a season against the OF with a 12 team league due to the split. So rough calculation of 3,000 OF fans at ?30 a ticket is ?90,000, surely this could be made up by splitting the TV money more evenly?

 

Maybe 15% of prize money for winner of the league similar to it is at the moment and then then the rest split evenly between the rest of league?

 

If we go to 16 team league make the league cup a group stage tournament played on a Saturday and include it in the season ticket package for fans to make up the shortfall of games?

[Stanley_]

This is a bit of myth that is trotted out by the media. The smaller teams who need the money the most typically only get 3 games a season against the OF with a 12 team league due to the split. So rough calculation of 3,000 OF fans at ?30 a ticket is ?90,000, surely this could be made up by splitting the TV money more evenly?

 

 

Yeah, you're right. The teams that regularly finish bottom six only get three games against the Old Firm each season plus they have the risk of getting relegated. If there was a 16 team league then a few teams would be almost guaranteed two games against the Old Firm every season and they'd be far more likely to stay in the SPL.

 

The first priority for the SPL should be having two relegation spots. It's an absolute joke that only one team can go down. What kind of top league has only one relegation spot? I'd be shocked if there are many comparable leagues in Europe with only one relegation spot regardless of how big their top league is.

[i8hibsh]

Altho I do agree that it is the only solution you have to think tho that we don?t have 16 teams decent enough (stadiums, fanbase) etc for top flight football.

[decullio]

Your memory is good - but not quite spot on.

 

21,000 at home to Clydebank, 2nd last game of the season, a BIG win would win the league - we were still 8,000 short of capacity - EVEN THOUGH WE MIGHT HAVE WON THE LEAGUE THAT DAY!.

Sorry I do have a bad memory it's my old age

And it wasnt live on TV - that was the Aberdeen game when we drew 1-1 a week or so before.

[Era Macaroons]

Increasing the no. of middle of the table, meaningless games and reducing the no. of games that make us money and bring us excitement is not going to help anyone i'm afraid.

 

 

Your speaking as if our current set up has no meaningless games!!! lol of our current 11 opponents only 3 seem to have any meaning.....so as it stands we have over 25 meaningless league games a season already!

 

of course if we only played each other twice they have a lot more meaning

[Era Macaroons]

This is a bit of myth that is trotted out by the media. The smaller teams who need the money the most typically only get 3 games a season against the OF with a 12 team league due to the split. So rough calculation of 3,000 OF fans at ?30 a ticket is ?90,000, surely this could be made up by splitting the TV money more evenly?

 

Maybe 15% of prize money for winner of the league similar to it is at the moment and then then the rest split evenly between the rest of league?

 

If we go to 16 team league make the league cup a group stage tournament played on a Saturday and include it in the season ticket package for fans to make up the shortfall of games?

 

good point , your Bang On......and yes change the league cup format back to mini league group stages.....the OF wont like that of course as they think they belong in Champ league groups not SFL groups...however ...welcome to the REAL world which is Scottish Football...Ferk them.

[Coco]

The most successful period for Scotland internationally and in European games (outside of the 2 Glasgow teams European wins) was when the league had 10 teams - early 80s. Was also the time when the league was perhaps the most competitive since the early 60s.

[Era Macaroons]

The most successful period for Scotland internationally and in European games (outside of the 2 Glasgow teams European wins) was when the league had 10 teams - early 80s. Was also the time when the league was perhaps the most competitive since the early 60s.

 

 

Agree, a golden era for Scottish football...hey we were even in the World Cups back then

 

However we are talking about the modern game, not when everybody from every team was playing for 60 quid a week!

 

the game has 'run away' from this period you talk about.....it quite clearly isnt successful NOW, and thats why it needs changed to apsire to a fairer, more competitive, playing field for all.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

The problem is not structural . The 18 team league was a failure back in the 1970s which was why the Premier league was formed .

 

It is all about being competitive crowds flood back if you are challenging .

 

The Old Firm sucked that out over the last 26 years .

 

Since 1986 there have been 2 seasons possibly 3 if you count 2006 when the league has involved a team outside the OF

 

Agree with this, the biggest problem we have is that the vast majority of football fans in this country support either of the OF.

 

However, until that or something else important changes, I would rather have a larger league with only two games v each opponent. That is just my personal preference though really.

 

Rangers and Celtic have killed football in this country and until something is done to help redress the top-heavy support pattern, nothing much will change. The reasons for a bigger league are not ones that will find parity, they are to do with just making the big games more worth waiting for and the four games versus teams the size of St Johnstone a thing of the past.

 

I would rather play different small teams twice a season, rather than the same ones four times personally. As for the less derbies and games v the larger sides? So what? It makes each one twice as big and important.