Pyramid Leagues Superthread

[jamboinglasgow]

5 minutes ago, Flimsy said:

Spot on. Imagine turning round to the likes of Stranraer or Elgin and telling them they are immediately in the third tier with a decent shot at the second tier and they no longer need to trek to the other end of the country for a league match. Not to mention the likes of East Kilbride or Fraserburgh who could move two tiers up the pyramid. Why would any one of these teams reject this and why is nobody asking the question?

 

Because teams like Stranraer and Elgin know they have little chance of getting promoted when more from the pyramid come in. There is a reason why League Two clubs dont want change, because they know that teams in Lowland League and Highland league are better with more backing. 

[LarrysRightFoot]

3 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Because teams like Stranraer and Elgin know they have little chance of getting promoted when more from the pyramid come in. There is a reason why League Two clubs dont want change, because they know that teams in Lowland League and Highland league are better with more backing. 

But are they better off in League 2 going all over the country with no away support or are they better off playing regionally (within the national pyramid)?

[jamboinglasgow]

1 minute ago, LarrysRightFoot said:

But are they better off in League 2 going all over the country with no away support or are they better off playing regionally (within the national pyramid)?

 

I agree that they are better playing in the regional leagues, but thats not the clubs thinking, it is that they need to stay in the SPFL or they could never come back up.

[jamie1874]

26 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Because teams like Stranraer and Elgin know they have little chance of getting promoted when more from the pyramid come in. There is a reason why League Two clubs dont want change, because they know that teams in Lowland League and Highland league are better with more backing. 

And at the same time teams in the lowand league know teams in the west of Scotland Premier are bigger clubs, better support and more of a history in the game and are equally as frightened in allowing promotion to that league. 
 

 

[jamboinglasgow]

2 minutes ago, jamie1874 said:

And at the same time teams in the lowand league know teams in the west of Scotland Premier are bigger clubs, better support and more of a history in the game and are equally as frightened in allowing promotion to that league. 
 

 

 

Its why I never like the narrative of the bullied non-league clubs that is often put out about these ideas, because self-interest runs in every level of the game in Scotland. The problem is that the leadership is lacking because its member organisations which means no one can make a decision whats best for Scottish football, only whats in the interest of member clubs.

[jamie1874]

18 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Its why I never like the narrative of the bullied non-league clubs that is often put out about these ideas, because self-interest runs in every level of the game in Scotland. The problem is that the leadership is lacking because its member organisations which means no one can make a decision whats best for Scottish football, only whats in the interest of member clubs.

Agree. 
Ann Budge restructure plan in 2020 was a chance to fix all this. 
Increase the league, and allow the ‘winners’ from LL and HL into SPFL 2. 
But instead both their leagues were shafted and are still stuck with one promotion place from two leagues.

 

The LL then complain but act the same to the 3 Tier 6 leagues, then to add insult take the cash for colts teams to increase the league size. 
 

With Kelty and Cove coming up before we were in the current pyramid structure the original member clubs got scared of so many junior clubs doing the same. Hence the mess we are in now. 
 

Darvel beating Montrose, Aberdeen, Pollok beating Annan and narrowing losing to Ayr, Drumchapel getting to round 4 etc just enhances that fear and change is even less likely to happen until more clubs from T6 end up in the lowand league and vote based on where they have came from not for self interest. 

[LarrysRightFoot]

1 hour ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

I agree that they are better playing in the regional leagues, but thats not the clubs thinking, it is that they need to stay in the SPFL or they could never come back up.

That’s why I think a independent regulator charged with developing the game is the way forward rather than self interest permeating and holding back the game. 

[Sooks]

2 hours ago, Flimsy said:

This new conference league is a total joke. A hotch potch of pointlessness. Why on earth don't part time clubs want to regionalise leagues from the third level down? It makes perfect economic sense and will also see many clubs move up one or two levels in the league system. It could also accommodate B teams. 

Agree with this , but I would make the top division fully professional and full time with 18 teams , 16 in the next division but allow part time and semi pro . Teams would then be able to cut their cloth easier . Win promotion to top division you have to go full time professional though . Also no artificial pitches in top tier . Clubs can decide for them selfs if they are ambitious and want to keep a grass pitch and aim high , or languish in the lower divisions on plastic 

[jamboinglasgow]

1 hour ago, jamie1874 said:

Agree. 
Ann Budge restructure plan in 2020 was a chance to fix all this. 
Increase the league, and allow the ‘winners’ from LL and HL into SPFL 2. 
But instead both their leagues were shafted and are still stuck with one promotion place from two leagues.

 

The LL then complain but act the same to the 3 Tier 6 leagues, then to add insult take the cash for colts teams to increase the league size. 
 

With Kelty and Cove coming up before we were in the current pyramid structure the original member clubs got scared of so many junior clubs doing the same. Hence the mess we are in now. 
 

Darvel beating Montrose, Aberdeen, Pollok beating Annan and narrowing losing to Ayr, Drumchapel getting to round 4 etc just enhances that fear and change is even less likely to happen until more clubs from T6 end up in the lowand league and vote based on where they have came from not for self interest. 

 

Completely agree.

 

While there was self-interest from us in restructuring plan as it meant we were not demoted, I do think there was also a genuine desire to take an opportunity to restructure. But most clubs asked whats in it for them, and even if it didn't change things for them but improved Scottish football they stopped it.

 

I would say the whole B team issue also comes from a lack of any serious action on youth development for a while. While I am always suspicious of the Old Firm reasons, for clubs like Hearts (and I think Aberdeen would use it well for player development in the conference league) I think its a culmination of how else can you do it effectively. Since 2009, we have had a reserve league scraped leaving only U19 football, changed to U20 football, then reserve league brought back but the Old firm and a couple of other clubs walked away, then other half hearted options. We have clubs who didn't want reserve football because they felt they didn't want a bigger squad because it costs too much, at the same time play very youngsters (which would help them save money) and sign as many journeyman players as possible.

 

The SFA and SPFL provide little strong leadership or initiative expect half hearted reviews. The current system of sending players out on loan does seem to produce very mixed results (would be interested to see some way to measure how successful the system is.) Its all a bit of a mess with no signs of anything unifying behind a common approach.

[jamboinglasgow]

56 minutes ago, LarrysRightFoot said:

That’s why I think a independent regulator charged with developing the game is the way forward rather than self interest permeating and holding back the game. 

 

Completely. Someone acts in the interest of whats best for Scottish football, guide by principles of fairness, development of players, marketing the game correctly etc. But sadly unless the government can implement it, you will never get the clubs to agree to give up control.

 

Instead we have the SFA where those on the board are clining to positions at their clubs so they can stroke their egos and get on the gravy train, rather than whats best to do.

[LarrysRightFoot]

6 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Completely. Someone acts in the interest of whats best for Scottish football, guide by principles of fairness, development of players, marketing the game correctly etc. But sadly unless the government can implement it, you will never get the clubs to agree to give up control.

 

Instead we have the SFA where those on the board are clining to positions at their clubs so they can stroke their egos and get on the gravy train, rather than whats best to do.

It’s pretty incredible there’s no fan representation at organisational and governance level either.  

[davemclaren]

3 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Completely. Someone acts in the interest of whats best for Scottish football, guide by principles of fairness, development of players, marketing the game correctly etc. But sadly unless the government can implement it, you will never get the clubs to agree to give up control.

 

Instead we have the SFA where those on the board are clining to positions at their clubs so they can stroke their egos and get on the gravy train, rather than whats best to do.

Surely the clubs should run it, as they do?

[OTT]

I can't pretend to know the individual needs of clubs in league 2, but what I do know is that their needs are different that ours. I would like a pyramid structure that essentially keeps clubs in the lanes best suited for them. I don't like that semi-professional teams are voting on stuff that impacts professional sides, and vice versa. I think boiling the SPFL down to two truly professional leagues would increasing the size of the top flight would be good. What happens below there, I'm not fussed on. A regional conference and premier conference where teams can be promoted into alongside B-teams might offer the right sort of competition. 

[Hesh]

Does anyone know, how promotion/relegation works between regional and national competition in England?

[Footballfirst]

51 minutes ago, Hesh said:

Does anyone know, how promotion/relegation works between regional and national competition in England?

From Wiki

 

Promotion and relegation rules for the top eight levels[edit]

1. Premier League (level 1, 20 teams): The bottom three teams are relegated.
2. English Football League Championship (level 2, 24 teams): Top two automatically promoted; next four compete in the play-offs, with the winner gaining the third promotion spot. The bottom three are relegated.
3. English Football League One (level 3, 24 teams): Top two are automatically promoted; next four compete in play-offs, with the winner gaining the third promotion spot. The bottom four are relegated.
4. English Football League Two (level 4, 24 teams): Top three teams are automatically promoted; next four compete in play-offs, with the winner gaining the fourth promotion spot. The bottom two are relegated.
5. National League (level 5, 24 teams): The champions are promoted; next six compete in play-offs, with the winner gaining the second promotion spot. The bottom four are relegated to either North or South division as appropriate.
6. National League North and National League South (level 6, 24 teams each, running in parallel): The champions in each division are automatically promoted; next six teams in each division compete in play-offs, with the play-off winner in each division getting the second promotion spot, with four teams qualifying to the National League in total. The bottom four teams in each division relegated to either Northern Premier League, Southern League or Isthmian League as appropriate. If, after promotion and relegation, the number of teams in the North and South divisions is not equal, one or more teams are transferred between the two divisions to even them up again based on geographic factors.
7. Northern Premier League Premier Division, Southern Football League Premier Central, Southern Football League Premier South and Isthmian League Premier Division (level 7, 22 teams each, leagues running in parallel): The champions in each division are automatically promoted; next four teams in each division compete in play-offs, with the play-off winners also promoted. The bottom four teams in each division relegated to a level 8 division as appropriate. If, after promotion and relegation, the number of teams in the divisions is not equal, one or more teams are transferred among the four divisions to even them up again.
8. Northern Premier League Division One East, Northern Premier League Division One Midlands, Northern Premier League Division One West, Southern Football League Division One East, Southern Football League Division One West, Isthmian League Division One North, Isthmian League Division One South Central and Isthmian League Division One South East (level 8, running in parallel, 20 teams in each division): The champions in each division are automatically promoted; next four teams in each division compete in play-offs, with the play-off winners also promoted. The bottom two teams in each division are relegated to a level 9 division as appropriate. If, after promotion and relegation, the number of teams in the divisions is not equal, one or more teams are transferred between the divisions to even them up again.

For the 2024–25 season, every level 8 division will expand to 22 clubs and it is intended that the number of relegations from that division will increase to four.^[4]

[Niemi’s gloves]

38 minutes ago, Hesh said:

Does anyone know, how promotion/relegation works between regional and national competition in England?

The key feature in England is that clubs can be moved between geographic regions (and not just the clubs that are involved in promotion/relegation). That means  it’s a simple matter of two up from each of two leagues and four down from the league above. There are playoffs to determine the second promotion club but relegation is automatic. That’s how it works between tier 6 and tier 5 (national league north & south to national league). It is also how it works between tier 7, where 4 leagues cover England, and tier 6 with its two leagues. 
 

I think this must require active  intervention by the FA to determine which clubs are moved when this is necessary (for example if three relegated clubs from the National League are located well in the north of England, it may require a team in the midlands to be switched  from National League North to National League South). 

[Footballfirst]

17 minutes ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

The key feature in England is that clubs can be moved between geographic regions (and not just the clubs that are involved in promotion/relegation). That means  it’s a simple matter of two up from each of two leagues and four down from the league above. There are playoffs to determine the second promotion club but relegation is automatic. That’s how it works between tier 6 and tier 5 (national league north & south to national league). It is also how it works between tier 7, where 4 leagues cover England, and tier 6 with its two leagues. 
 

I think this must require active  intervention by the FA to determine which clubs are moved when this is necessary (for example if three relegated clubs from the National League are located well in the north of England, it may require a team in the midlands to be switched  from National League North to National League South). 

I think that the key feature is that the champions of each league are promoted automatically.

 

In Scotland there is no automatic promotion from Level 5 (HL/LL) and no automatic promotion from Level 6 (NRJFA, Midland, EOS, SOS, WOS).

 

Geography does come into play in Scotland, e.g. the number of relegation places from the LL is dependent on who is promoted or relegated to/from the SPFL. e.g. if Brechin is promoted from the HL and Albion Rovers is relegated from the SPFL, then both Dalbeattie and Edinburgh University would be relegated. Conversely, if Spartans is promoted to the SPL and Elgin is relegated to the HL, then no teams will be relegated from the LL.  

Edited April 28, 2023 by Footballfirst

[Hesh]

14 minutes ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

The key feature in England is that clubs can be moved between geographic regions (and not just the clubs that are involved in promotion/relegation). That means  it’s a simple matter of two up from each of two leagues and four down from the league above. There are playoffs to determine the second promotion club but relegation is automatic. That’s how it works between tier 6 and tier 5 (national league north & south to national league). It is also how it works between tier 7, where 4 leagues cover England, and tier 6 with its two leagues. 
 

I think this must require active  intervention by the FA to determine which clubs are moved when this is necessary (for example if three relegated clubs from the National League are located well in the north of England, it may require a team in the midlands to be switched  from National League North to National League South). 

Cheers 

[Hesh]

19 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

From Wiki

 

Promotion and relegation rules for the top eight levels[edit]

1. Premier League (level 1, 20 teams): The bottom three teams are relegated.
2. English Football League Championship (level 2, 24 teams): Top two automatically promoted; next four compete in the play-offs, with the winner gaining the third promotion spot. The bottom three are relegated.
3. English Football League One (level 3, 24 teams): Top two are automatically promoted; next four compete in play-offs, with the winner gaining the third promotion spot. The bottom four are relegated.
4. English Football League Two (level 4, 24 teams): Top three teams are automatically promoted; next four compete in play-offs, with the winner gaining the fourth promotion spot. The bottom two are relegated.
5. National League (level 5, 24 teams): The champions are promoted; next six compete in play-offs, with the winner gaining the second promotion spot. The bottom four are relegated to either North or South division as appropriate.
6. National League North and National League South (level 6, 24 teams each, running in parallel): The champions in each division are automatically promoted; next six teams in each division compete in play-offs, with the play-off winner in each division getting the second promotion spot, with four teams qualifying to the National League in total. The bottom four teams in each division relegated to either Northern Premier League, Southern League or Isthmian League as appropriate. If, after promotion and relegation, the number of teams in the North and South divisions is not equal, one or more teams are transferred between the two divisions to even them up again based on geographic factors.
7. Northern Premier League Premier Division, Southern Football League Premier Central, Southern Football League Premier South and Isthmian League Premier Division (level 7, 22 teams each, leagues running in parallel): The champions in each division are automatically promoted; next four teams in each division compete in play-offs, with the play-off winners also promoted. The bottom four teams in each division relegated to a level 8 division as appropriate. If, after promotion and relegation, the number of teams in the divisions is not equal, one or more teams are transferred among the four divisions to even them up again.
8. Northern Premier League Division One East, Northern Premier League Division One Midlands, Northern Premier League Division One West, Southern Football League Division One East, Southern Football League Division One West, Isthmian League Division One North, Isthmian League Division One South Central and Isthmian League Division One South East (level 8, running in parallel, 20 teams in each division): The champions in each division are automatically promoted; next four teams in each division compete in play-offs, with the play-off winners also promoted. The bottom two teams in each division are relegated to a level 9 division as appropriate. If, after promotion and relegation, the number of teams in the divisions is not equal, one or more teams are transferred between the divisions to even them up again.

For the 2024–25 season, every level 8 division will expand to 22 clubs and it is intended that the number of relegations from that division will increase to four.^[4]

Thanks for that too

[Sooks]

Yeah I did initially feel a bit of sympathy for the lowland league not being able to get automatic promotion to league two but that evaporated when they did the same thing to the East of Scotland League ect . All well and good whining about not getting automatic promotion at the top , but if you do similar at the bottom then sympathy will just dry up because of the hypocrisy 

[Hesh]

25 minutes ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

The key feature in England is that clubs can be moved between geographic regions (and not just the clubs that are involved in promotion/relegation). That means  it’s a simple matter of two up from each of two leagues and four down from the league above. There are playoffs to determine the second promotion club but relegation is automatic. That’s how it works between tier 6 and tier 5 (national league north & south to national league). It is also how it works between tier 7, where 4 leagues cover England, and tier 6 with its two leagues. 
 

I think this must require active  intervention by the FA to determine which clubs are moved when this is necessary (for example if three relegated clubs from the National League are located well in the north of England, it may require a team in the midlands to be switched  from National League North to National League South). 

Just had a look at maps for HL and LL team locations not sure the practicality of moving between these two leagues would be. That being said could see something in it for sos,was and eos and promotion relegation to from LL

[BlueRiver]

16 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Because teams like Stranraer and Elgin know they have little chance of getting promoted when more from the pyramid come in. There is a reason why League Two clubs dont want change, because they know that teams in Lowland League and Highland league are better with more backing. 

 

Bingo. Christ even the Lowland League is a bit slow to change for that reason as its packed with teams that would disappear further down the pyramid. 

[BlueRiver]

16 minutes ago, Sooks said:

Yeah I did initially feel a bit of sympathy for the lowland league not being able to get automatic promotion to league two but that evaporated when they did the same thing to the East of Scotland League ect . All well and good whining about not getting automatic promotion at the top , but if you do similar at the bottom then sympathy will just dry up because of the hypocrisy 

 

Exactly mate! Lowland League has some good sides but there's a right load of pish in it too with teams in the WoS and EoS much, much better than a lot of whats on offer. They know that they'd never get themselves back to that level so we're stuck with a trickle of change. 

[Sooks]

7 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Exactly mate! Lowland League has some good sides but there's a right load of pish in it too with teams in the WoS and EoS much, much better than a lot of whats on offer. They know that they'd never get themselves back to that level so we're stuck with a trickle of change. 

Like that , Scottish football in a nut shell ……………….. a trickle of change 

 

 

[davemclaren]

3 minutes ago, Sooks said:

Like that , Scottish football in a nut shell ……………….. a trickle of change 

 

 

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. 

[Sooks]

Just now, davemclaren said:

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. 

True , they just waddle around looking stupid , living a miserable existence , and then die young any way 

[pheonix55]

I know it was shot down at the time because Petrie was behind it but a 12/12 splitting to an 8/8/8 does actually offer a good set up as long as the point revert to 0 after the split, which will piss off the Uglies.

[Sooks]

4 minutes ago, pheonix55 said:

I know it was shot down at the time because Petrie was behind it but a 12/12 splitting to an 8/8/8 does actually offer a good set up as long as the point revert to 0 after the split, which will piss off the Uglies.

The insistence on a set number of games between and against the old firm is the biggest problem and also the biggest barrier . No to the split in any format is my preference . Just be a normal league like every where else on the planet and play home and away 

[davemclaren]

17 minutes ago, Sooks said:

The insistence on a set number of games between and against the old firm is the biggest problem and also the biggest barrier . No to the split in any format is my preference . Just be a normal league like every where else on the planet and play home and away 

Some other countries do have splits. I'm not against it in principle but the uneven matches is a serious flaw. 

[LarrysRightFoot]

20 minutes ago, Sooks said:

The insistence on a set number of games between and against the old firm is the biggest problem and also the biggest barrier . No to the split in any format is my preference . Just be a normal league like every where else on the planet and play home and away 

Fans deserve to know if this 4 OF game thing is in any contract - I’m not sure it can be given theoretically they might not both end up in the top 6 (aye right). We also had a TV deal when Rangers weren’t in the top flight for 4 seasons. 

[Sooks]

Just now, davemclaren said:

Some other countries do have splits. I'm not against it in principle but the uneven matches is a serious flaw. 

The single solitary reason we have a split in the SPFL is to accommodate as many games between and against the old firm as possible . The two biggest barriers to us ever improving competitiveness are the league format/size and the voting structure 

 

@Bull's-eye was getting a bit of abuse earlier , but one thing he did say that is unequivocally true , is that the stupid tinpot set up of our league is a barrier to ever improving it . How can we expect a TV company to give a shit about the other clubs out side of the old firm when our entire set up is formulated around maximising the occurrence and coverage of the games involving them 

 

 

[Sooks]

Just now, LarrysRightFoot said:

Fans deserve to know if this 4 OF game thing is in any contract - I’m not sure it can be given theoretically they might not both end up in the top 6 (aye right). We also had a TV deal when Rangers weren’t in the top flight for 4 seasons. 

I doubt it says as much because that would infer and point to corruption , but they can easily get around that by just insisting on keeping the current format , knowing that it achieves this materially any way 

[davemclaren]

6 minutes ago, Sooks said:

The single solitary reason we have a split in the SPFL is to accommodate as many games between and against the old firm as possible . The two biggest barriers to us ever improving competitiveness are the league format/size and the voting structure 

 

@Bull's-eye was getting a bit of abuse earlier , but one thing he did say that is unequivocally true , is that the stupid tinpot set up of our league is a barrier to ever improving it . How can we expect a TV company to give a shit about the other clubs out side of the old firm when our entire set up is formulated around maximising the occurrence and coverage of the games involving them 

 

 

The split was introduced to get 12 teams in the league, avoiding 44 games, and also to get 4 old firm matches as you say. 

[Sooks]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

The split was introduced to get 12 teams in the league, avoiding 44 games, and also to get 4 old firm matches as you say. 

All of those reasons were based on the old firm . Why not have more than 12 and ditch the four rounds format ? Purely so that teams could play the old form more and the TV companies had more old firm games to show . You could have easily avoided 44 games by increasing the size of the division and playing home and away once over two rounds , but that would reduce the number of games that the old firm play each other , and it would take away the laughable prize of making the top six so you get to play them more and possibly fill your stadium for more cash . They are the sole reason we have a split and a small division size 

[davemclaren]

Just now, Sooks said:

All of those reasons were based on the old firm . Why not have more than 12 and ditch the four rounds format ? Purely so that teams could play the old form more and the TV companies had more old firm games to show . You could have easily avoided 44 games by increasing the size of the division and playing home and away once over two rounds , but that would reduce the number of games that the old firm play each other , and it would take away the laughable prize of making the top six so you get to play them more and possibly fill your stadium for more cash . They are the sole reason we have a split and a small division size 

There wasn't an appetite amongst the clubs to go back to an 18 team league. Extra home games against the old firm was a factor as well as clubs had got used to that since the spl was introduced in 1975.  

[Sooks]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

There wasn't an appetite amongst the clubs to go back to an 18 team league. Extra home games against the old firm was a factor as well as clubs had got used to that since the spl was introduced in 1975.  

Lets be absolutely honest here , the reason was 100 per cent because teams wanted more games vs Rangers and Celtic , and the TV companies want more old firm games . That is it , every thing else was just convenient excuses to get it done . The voting system now has us locked in to it though , so we can not even try and get it scrapped through a majority , now that it has been proven to be a pile of stinking cow dung 

[davemclaren]

7 minutes ago, Sooks said:

Let's be absolutely honest here , the reason was 100 per cent because teams wanted more games vs Rangers and Celtic , and the TV companies want more old firm games . That is it , every thing else was just convenient excuses to get it done . The voting system now has us locked in to it though , so we can not even try and get it scrapped through a majority , now that it has been proven to be a pile of stinking cow dung 

All these things were voted on and agreed by the clubs who still mainly believe it's in their own interests.  There seems little impetus for change even among the non OF clubs.  

[Sooks]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

All these things were voted on and agreed by the clubs who still mainly believe it's in their own interests.  There seems little impetus for change even among the non OF clubs.  

I know but it was purely down to clubs wanting more games vs the old firm and the TV wanting four old firm games . You are correct that that is the reason we have this tin pot shite set up . Part of the problem though is that clubs are short sighted and think old firm coin is more important than any thing else , and even if fans managed to change the minds of some clubs , the ludicrous voting system would stop even a majority 

[Rogue Daddy]

28 minutes ago, LarrysRightFoot said:

Fans deserve to know if this 4 OF game thing is in any contract - I’m not sure it can be given theoretically they might not both end up in the top 6 (aye right). We also had a TV deal when Rangers weren’t in the top flight for 4 seasons. 

Yeah, can you believe that!? 4 whole seasons where there were no uglies derby’s and no clubs went bust due to not receiving boosted crowds for an OF game! 
How did SKY survive?! How did the league survive!?  It was a miracle!

The sooner everyone wakes up to the fact that the uglies aren’t the be all and end all - the sooner we can get on with improving Scottish football. And for the avoidance of doubt (SFA/SPFL/SKY) ‘improving Scottish football’ does not mean ‘the uglies getting richer’. 
The Rangers and Celtic need Scottish football more than Scottish football needs that them.  Of that I have no doubt. 

FTSFA FTSPFL FSKY FTOF

[Sooks]

Another thing that would need to change would be for some older fans to get their heads around this current system not being any better than the larger league system that they seemed to think was so harrowing , despite every other serious league on the planet having that system , and the fact that our system is laughed at by everyone else , down to embarrassing things like clubs not getting an equal number of home and away games and a racket in the top six that would prevent any non old firm club getting over the line if they were close with five games remaining , and flunking an easier run in . As it stands , if Hearts had a once every few decades top side , and it was close with five games left , we still have to play Rangers and Celtic in the run in , and not potentially five smaller clubs . The current set up takes away the tiny slim chance we would have , like tying the stitch up in a bow

[Mikey1874]

5 minutes ago, Rogue Daddy said:

Yeah, can you believe that!? 4 whole seasons where there were no uglies derby’s and no clubs went bust due to not receiving boosted crowds for an OF game! 
How did SKY survive?! How did the league survive!?  It was a miracle!

The sooner everyone wakes up to the fact that the uglies aren’t the be all and end all - the sooner we can get on with improving Scottish football. And for the avoidance of doubt (SFA/SPFL/SKY) ‘improving Scottish football’ does not mean ‘the uglies getting richer’. 
The Rangers and Celtic need Scottish football more than Scottish football needs that them.  Of that I have no doubt. 

FTSFA FTSPFL FSKY FTOF

 

We had all 4 Aberdeen v Hearts games live on TV the season before Rangers returned. 

 

Now one of the biggest games in years ignored. 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Mikey1874

[Bazzas right boot]

9 minutes ago, Rogue Daddy said:

Yeah, can you believe that!? 4 whole seasons where there were no uglies derby’s and no clubs went bust due to not receiving boosted crowds for an OF game! 
How did SKY survive?! How did the league survive!?  It was a miracle!

The sooner everyone wakes up to the fact that the uglies aren’t the be all and end all - the sooner we can get on with improving Scottish football. And for the avoidance of doubt (SFA/SPFL/SKY) ‘improving Scottish football’ does not mean ‘the uglies getting richer’. 
The Rangers and Celtic need Scottish football more than Scottish football needs that them.  Of that I have no doubt. 

FTSFA FTSPFL FSKY FTOF

 

 

The finance in regards to TV, competition and prize money misleads folk as well.

 

The OF have taken around 45% of all the money from this,  season after season( reports i looked at ranged from 43%to 51%).So any TV deal could be almost 50% less and all other clubs would as they are just now.

 

They'd just be 2 places higher in the league and in a competition they could win.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Bazzas right boot

[Footballfirst]

48 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

The finance in regards to TV, competition and prize money misleads folk as well.

 

The OF have taken around 45% of all the money from this,  season after season( reports i looked at ranged from 43%to 51%).So any TV deal could be almost 50% less and all other clubs would as they are just now.

 

They'd just be 2 places higher in the league and in a competition they could win.

The financial distribution model changed 10 years ago when Rangers were in the 3rd tier.

 

League Position	Percentage Share
1	13.40%
2	9.60%
3	8.25%
4	7.25%
5	6.75%
6	6.25%
7	5.75%
8	5.50%
9	5.25%
10	5.00%
11	4.75%
12	4.50%

[Bazzas right boot]

14 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

The financial distribution model changed 10 years ago when Rangers were in the 3rd tier.

 

League Position	Percentage Share
1	13.40%
2	9.60%
3	8.25%
4	7.25%
5	6.75%
6	6.25%
7	5.75%
8	5.50%
9	5.25%
10	5.00%
11	4.75%
12	4.50%

 

 

That's just prize money, not tv money?

 

Around 25%, so a deal could be 25% worse and we'd be the same. 

 

https://www.totalsportal.com/football/scottish-premiership-prize-money/

 

Based on that the OF scooped £15.5m from £34.55m.

 

45% cash to the OF

 

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Bazzas right boot

[Footballfirst]

5 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

That's just prize money, not tv money?

 

Around 25%, so a deal could be 25% worse and we'd be the same. 

 

https://www.totalsportal.com/football/scottish-premiership-prize-money/

 

The SPFL takes it's League income from TV, sponsorship and other sources, puts it in a pot, and distributes it using the model above.

 

The League Cup is a stand alone competition with its distribution coming from TV and sponsorship. 

[Niemi’s gloves]

3 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

I think that the key feature is that the champions of each league are promoted automatically.

 

In Scotland there is no automatic promotion from Level 5 (HL/LL) and no automatic promotion from Level 6 (NRJFA, Midland, EOS, SOS, WOS).

 

Geography does come into play in Scotland, e.g. the number of relegation places from the LL is dependent on who is promoted or relegated to/from the SPFL. e.g. if Brechin is promoted from the HL and Albion Rovers is relegated from the SPFL, then both Dalbeattie and Edinburgh University would be relegated. Conversely, if Spartans is promoted to the SPL and Elgin is relegated to the HL, then no teams will be relegated from the LL.  

I get the points you’re making but I think you’re potentially confusing two issues: (1) how to make geographic splits work and (2) how to ensure adequate promotion and relegation between leagues when there is strong self interest at play. 
 

On the geographic issue, there are two basic patterns. On one pattern, clubs are permanently part of a particular local area, then a particular region and then the country as a whole. If a club is relegated, it goes down to its own designated region or at a lower level, to its own  particular area. I think this is broadly how Spain and perhaps Germany work. On the other pattern, the geographic regions aren’t fixed and you may have to switch clubs between regions to balance numbers. The advantage of the second pattern, as in England,  is that you know at the start of each season exactly how many clubs will be promoted and relegated in each league or division. It doesn’t depend on what happens further up the pyramid. 
 

Where the issues of geography and adequate promotion come together is in the need for a country’s FA (or sub-committees) to have substantial power over what happens down the pyramid. In England it is possible for Phoenix clubs to be placed at an appropriate level by the FA,  depending on the financial  resources, business plans and evidence of on-going popular support. This is an issue that doesn’t seem to have been addressed in Scotland. Suppose a club like St Mirren or Kilmarnock went into liquidation; but supporters were united behind a potential new club with adequate financial resources. Are we really saying that he only option now is for that club to start at tier 9 (4th level of the WoSL)? Or should it be possible for that new club to be placed by the SFA at a higher level (as happens in England)?

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Niemi’s gloves

[Bazzas right boot]

2 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The SPFL takes it's League income from TV, sponsorship and other sources, puts it in a pot, and distributes it using the model above.

 

The League Cup is a stand alone competition with its distribution coming from TV and sponsorship. 

 

Unsure about the lc but that model shows around 45% of the money going  to 2 clubs.

 

I checked 3/4 seasons a while ago and it was all about the same.

 

So in theory if the OF pissed of,  a deal around 55% of the current one  would leave the clubs as they are.

Folk tend to point to the top line increase in Tv/ sponsorship/ competition money and the drop it would take if the OF left,but when the OF bank  a large chunk of it, a smaller overall package without the OF could very well leave us the same or if we had any ambition even better off, despite the actual overall figure being smaller. 

 

For example a £25m deal without the OF would have every club better off despite  being a smaller than the £35m( ish) pot in the figures I provided. 

A £20m pot leaves us us is, etc.

 

Sack Doncaster and another £500k can be added to the pot....

 

 

 

 

 

[Footballfirst]

39 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Unsure about the lc but that model shows around 45% of the money going  to 2 clubs.

 

I checked 3/4 seasons a while ago and it was all about the same.

 

So in theory if the OF pissed of,  a deal around 55% of the current one  would leave the clubs as they are.

Folk tend to point to the top line increase in Tv/ sponsorship/ competition money and the drop it would take if the OF left,but when the OF bank  a large chunk of it, a smaller overall package without the OF could very well leave us the same or if we had any ambition even better off, despite the actual overall figure being smaller. 

 

For example a £25m deal without the OF would have every club better off despite  being a smaller than the £35m( ish) pot in the figures I provided. 

A £20m pot leaves us us is, etc.

 

Sack Doncaster and another £500k can be added to the pot....

I'm not familiar with the website figures you linked to.  There is no "TV Bonus" cash to be distributed that I am aware of, and nothing in the current SPFL Articles of Association that suggest the existence of such a payment.

 

There may be some confusion with potential earnings from the PPV matches that will be available to clubs as part of the new Sky deal. 

[Chuck Berry]

On 27/04/2023 at 18:48, RobboM said:

Couldn't agree more. It's a ****ing shit show. A woeful idea. Dismal thinking, ****ing brainless. Sack the clueless ****ers who think this is the solution to ANYTHING in Scottish football.

 

I get the feeling you like it 😆

[Unknown user]

On 09/04/2023 at 21:53, Chuck Berry said:

 

Rossvale is probably not dissimilar, although their choice of new name is bizarre, and I'd be surprised if the SFA give it the green light.

 

We have the rangers, Berwick rangers, Cove rangers, Arniston rangers, etc.

No reason we couldn't have Caledonian Thistle and Inverness Caledonian Thistle.