Pyramid Leagues Superthread

[Mikey1874]

6 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

Conference league summary proposals.

 

https://twitter.com/SMMediaEnt/status/1657311604579487744?t=i6wzdMLMYj27vkKkuOIyGQ&s=19

 

So no promotion (or relegation) for B teams. The main point for Celtic and Rangers.

Edited May 13, 2023 by Mikey1874

[Footballfirst]

The full proposal as circulated to clubs.

 

[Mikey1874]

Which players from Rangers, Celtic B teams over 2 seasons have processed to the first team?

 

If that is the pathway to improvement. 

[Mikey1874]

Presume the full detailed proposal is still to come. 

[BlueRiver]

16 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Which players from Rangers, Celtic B teams over 2 seasons have processed to the first team?

 

If that is the pathway to improvement. 

 

There's a couple that have featured for the first teams but they're still pretty young. 

[Footballfirst]

Looking at the full proposal, there are a couple of scenarios that are just crap for teams in the Conference League.

 

You can finish 5th, but still get promoted by beating club 42 in a play-off.

 

You can also finish 5th and still get relegated, should you lose a play off to the loser of the HL/LL playoff. 

6th place can also be automatically relegated in that scenario. 

[merseyjambo]

If we are going to a higher standard conference league, then why are we still talking about a play off scenario. 
 

The document keeps mentioning England yet between League 2 and Conference, there are no second chances for the bottom team. 
 

Our play off system is ludicrous never mind this conference scenario. If they insist on a merger, An expanded 16 team league with automatic promotion/relegation is a much more appealing prospect. 
 

The other thing is the cost, why would teams like Buckie or Tranent want to be making costly trips to the Highlands/Lowlands a dozen times a year rather than playing locally.

 

There seems to be no benefit for these clubs to change the status quo.

[soonbe110]

21 hours ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Really do not see the point of it. 

It does create a clear pathway for Scottish youth footballers. Not sure if it’s the best one though. 

[davemclaren]

1 hour ago, merseyjambo said:

If we are going to a higher standard conference league, then why are we still talking about a play off scenario. 
 

The document keeps mentioning England yet between League 2 and Conference, there are no second chances for the bottom team. 
 

Our play off system is ludicrous never mind this conference scenario. If they insist on a merger, An expanded 16 team league with automatic promotion/relegation is a much more appealing prospect. 
 

The other thing is the cost, why would teams like Buckie or Tranent want to be making costly trips to the Highlands/Lowlands a dozen times a year rather than playing locally.

 

There seems to be no benefit for these clubs to change the status quo.

Can we expect it to be rejected then, given what you say?

[soonbe110]

13 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Which players from Rangers, Celtic B teams over 2 seasons have processed to the first team?

 

If that is the pathway to improvement. 

Reality is the pathway, for the vast majority, is through league 2, league 1 etc. it does provide more opportunity for Scottish youth than currently exists especially if other Premiership teams join at a later date. 

[OTT]

The SPFL is ran like a ****ing bowling club. Far too many things going to a vote which ends up requiring the idea be messed about with too much. What would the proposal look like in its organic form ? I.e not attempting to pander to anyone?

 

I'd much prefer 2 fully professional leagues with a conference of B-teams and semi-pro teams sitting below. An 18 team premiership, 12 team Championship and 18 team conference. The top flight urgently needs a shake up to try and make it more interesting for everyone. Its too cut throat below the OF and having to play each other so much is just shite and devalues the significance of games. 

[Mikey1874]

58 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

It does create a clear pathway for Scottish youth footballers. Not sure if it’s the best one though. 

 

Again I ask. Rangers and Celtic played B team for 2 seasons. Which players are even near to first team? Are they going to reduce their big money signings because its been such a success?

 

And I ask that due to the bold statements in the document. 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Mikey1874

[jamesm]

Even by scottish football standards this idea is terrible, the current pyramid system has done an excellent job of bringing ambitious clubs in to the league set up. If premiership teams want a b league, setup their own.

[davemclaren]

3 minutes ago, jamesm said:

Even by scottish football standards this idea is terrible, the current pyramid system has done an excellent job of bringing ambitious clubs in to the league set up. If premiership teams want a b league, setup their own.

Only 4 clubs want it.  

[jamesm]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

Only 4 clubs want it.  

Yep, which tells me the other 8 don't want it or can't afford it or both.

[davemclaren]

Just now, jamesm said:

Yep, which tells me the other 8 don't want it or can't afford it or both.

Can't afford it I imagine though Hibs are a weird one in that group.  

[BlueRiver]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Again I ask. Rangers and Celtic played B team for 2 seasons. Which players are even near to first team? Are they going to reduce their big money signings because its been such a success?

 

And I ask that due to the bold statements in the document. 

 

Lovelace is one from Rangers. There are a couple in the Celtic set up too that have featured for the first team. Rocco Vata I think. 

 

Rangers and Celtic B teams are pretty young players so expecting them to be first team staples after a couple seasons is unlikely. 

[BlueRiver]

Although I fully disagree with this idea that it provides a pathway for Scottish youth. Personally think that's just pretty window dressing for a honking idea. 

[jambo19]

2 hours ago, OTT said:

The SPFL is ran like a ****ing bowling club. Far too many things going to a vote which ends up requiring the idea be messed about with too much. What would the proposal look like in its organic form ? I.e not attempting to pander to anyone?

 

I'd much prefer 2 fully professional leagues with a conference of B-teams and semi-pro teams sitting below. An 18 team premiership, 12 team Championship and 18 team conference. The top flight urgently needs a shake up to try and make it more interesting for everyone. Its too cut throat below the OF and having to play each other so much is just shite and devalues the significance of games. 

All the TV and FA are interested in is providing 4 old firm derbies per year for TV and ensuring they're the top 2 for excitement.

 

Our product has so much potential, our fans are so passionate, clubs ingrained in communities and yet the structure is set up for the benefit of 2 only.

 

Imagine bringing in rules to have 23 man squad with X amount home grown. 

Or playing bigger leagues where you play each other once home and away.

We're denying our youth from 18+ the opportunity to play with no u20 or reserve league plus the rules don't stipulate we need home grown u20 in match day squads so there's no incentive.

 

Clubs hands are being forced into B teams to the detriment of those in the pyramid.

[Mikey1874]

56 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Lovelace is one from Rangers. There are a couple in the Celtic set up too that have featured for the first team. Rocco Vata I think. 

 

Rangers and Celtic B teams are pretty young players so expecting them to be first team staples after a couple seasons is unlikely. 

 

So how many games has Lovelace played?

 

Did he play yesterday?

 

The prospectus for the Conference league suggests young players should play at a young age.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Mikey1874

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

So how many games has Lovelace played?

 

Did he play yesterday?

 

The prospectus for the Conference league suggests young players should play at a young age.

 

 

 

 

 

He came on late as a sub. The boy is only 17 and has been getting minutes for Rangers in amongst playing for the B team. 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

He came on late as a sub. The boy is only 17 and has been getting minutes for Rangers in amongst playing for the B team. 

 

 

 

So what will Rangers do now? Not need to sign anyone in summer because they have all these great young players now. 

[BlueRiver]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

 

So what will Rangers do now? Not need to sign anyone in summer because they have all these great young players now. 

 

I'm not sure what we're discussing. Some of the Rangers B and Celtic B players have featured for the first teams is all I'm saying. 

 

I think it won't be long till players like Lovelace and Vata are part if their full XIs. 

 

I dunno why you're so laser focused on Rangers here with it either. 

[Footballfirst]

1 hour ago, BlueRiver said:

 

He came on late as a sub. The boy is only 17 and has been getting minutes for Rangers in amongst playing for the B team. 

 

Lovelace is English, although he also qualifies for Jamaica, so not exactly helping the national team.

 

Rocco Vata was born in Scotland (although his footballing dad was Albanian).  However, he has opted to play for Ireland, qualifying on the grandparent rule.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Footballfirst

[BlueRiver]

21 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Lovelace is English, although he also qualifies for Jamaica, so not exactly helping the national team.

 

Rocco Vata was born in Scotland (although his footballing dad was Albanian).  However, he has opted to play for Ireland, qualifying on the grandparent rule.

 

Whether it's helping our team or not I was only saying some B team players have featured. I'm sure there's a smattering of other teenagers that have probably made their benches too those were just the two standouts in my mind. 

 

Whether that's enough to justify these proposals isn't what I'm saying. 

 

 

[Hungry hippo]

8 hours ago, merseyjambo said:

If we are going to a higher standard conference league, then why are we still talking about a play off scenario. 
 

The document keeps mentioning England yet between League 2 and Conference, there are no second chances for the bottom team. 
 

Our play off system is ludicrous never mind this conference scenario. If they insist on a merger, An expanded 16 team league with automatic promotion/relegation is a much more appealing prospect. 
 

The other thing is the cost, why would teams like Buckie or Tranent want to be making costly trips to the Highlands/Lowlands a dozen times a year rather than playing locally.

 

There seems to be no benefit for these clubs to change the status quo.

 

Totally agree that there should be automatic promotion and relegation  but the reality is that it's unlikely to ever happen as the League 2 clubs would need to vote for it.

 

The conference proposal is a horrible idea but the pyramid playoff will remain whatever happens IMO.

[Footballfirst]

The proposal in its introduction highlights the following as a major issue:

 

The current reality is that as of the end of April, only 18 Scottish players aged 21 or under started a match in the cinch Premiership this Season. Of those 18, only eight have started 10 games or more.

 

According to data compiled by CIES Football Observatory, the average age of a player in the cinch Premiership is 27, which is in the top-10 leagues in Europe for oldest average age.

 

So the SFA has recognised an issue with introducing Scottish youngsters into the Premiership.  The "solution" is to introduce youngsters into a very restricted environment where they will face 6 adult sides (presumably a mix of experienced and younger players), and 3 other B teams 4 times a season.

 

Perhaps the SFA should review why Premiership managers don't play youngsters. Is it the critical  importance of every game? Just maybe, increasing the number of clubs in the top tier would allow managers to test out their youngsters a bit more. 

 

The proposal goes on to highlight how development at youth level stagnates

 

As players play repeatedly against their peers, their development stagnates: this has been highlighted by clubs electing not to participate in the reserve league, opting instead to arrange friendly matches against opposition from other countries to provide new challenges and development opportunities.

 

If that is true then why is it that the SFA are proposing that, for one third of the season, the B Teams will be playing against their peers?

 

Youngsters will develop best playing alongside experienced professionals, not in a team alongside their peers playing against experienced professionals for just two thirds of the season.

 

The proposal goes on to criticise Reserve teams.

 

The SPFL Reserve League regulations have been amended frequently to seek to make participation more attractive to clubs, but this has had no demonstrably positive impact. It is therefore the case that at our top clubs, some of their best players do not progress as they should. They are kept as part of first team squads, which limit game time, or go on loan to clubs lower down the pyramid with mixed results

 

The SFA has highlighted high profile players who have played "B Team" football in the past (you may wish to call then Reserve teams).  Kenny Dalglish is rated by many people as Scotland's best ever player, so let's look as his development (from Wiki). 

 

In his first season, Dalglish was loaned out to Cumbernauld United, for whom he scored 37 goals. During this time he also worked as an apprentice joiner.  Celtic manager Jock Stein wanted Dalglish to spend a second season at Cumbernauld, but the youngster wanted to turn professional. Dalglish got his wish and became a regular in the reserve team known as the Quality Street Gang, due to it containing a large number of highly rated players, including future Scottish internationals Danny McGrain, George Connelly, Lou Macari and David Hay. 

 

Dalglish's (and the other Celtic players of the time) appear to have done all right by starting off playing alongside adults at a lower level then progressing to a reserve side and onto the first team. Dalglish made his first start at age 18, but played with the reserves the following season. He was 20 before he became a regular starter. Why would you want to change a system that works.

 

The Proposal highlights the "success" of Brentford B in developing and selling on players.

 

Since Brentford left the EPPP system in 2016 to set-up their own B Team, arranging their own games programme against teams across Europe, 25 players have gone on to gain first-team experience.

 

That's an interesting positive slant, given that Brentford B doesn't play in any league and the earlier comments that clubs are already choosing to arrange friendly matches instead of playing Reserve football.

 

That's just a few of the criticisms I have of the paper, but I have many more about what it doesn't say, e.g. on the impact on clubs currently at tier 5 and below.

 

[Mikey1874]

3 hours ago, BlueRiver said:

 

I'm not sure what we're discussing. Some of the Rangers B and Celtic B players have featured for the first teams is all I'm saying. 

 

I think it won't be long till players like Lovelace and Vata are part if their full XIs. 

 

I dunno why you're so laser focused on Rangers here with it either. 

 

Because Rangers and Celtic have had B teams for 2 years. I accept it could take longer.

 

But Rangers and Celtic don't want B teams to develop young players.

 

Celtic and Rangers B team players have barely featured at all. 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Mikey1874

[RobboM]

42 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

 

So the SFA has recognised an issue with introducing Scottish youngsters into the Premiership.  The "solution" is to introduce youngsters into a very restricted environment where they will face 6 adult sides (presumably a mix of experienced and younger players), and 3 other B teams 4 times a season.

 

 

 

Lots to agree with there FF. On this particular point worth noting that one of the LL teams could be University of Stirling .... a team of students, mostly aged 21 and under?

Would be interesting if they had included stats from the teams in the Reserve League and how many U21 players made 1st team appearances this season in contrast to the 3 B teams

[RustyRightPeg]

Aberdeen reject conference league invitation. Expect more to follow. 
 

 

[davemclaren]

21 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

Aberdeen reject conference league invitation. Expect more to follow. 
 

 

Interesting why they were invited? I assume they must have changed their mind. 

[jamboinglasgow]

16 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Interesting why they were invited? I assume they must have changed their mind. 

 

Yeah, I am a bit sceptical of Aberdeen's reasons here. There is no way that all the discussions happened if Aberdeen were not on board up till now. So as the question what changed their mind

Edited May 15, 2023 by jamboinglasgow

[Anderson5]

34 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Yeah, I am a bit sceptical of Aberdeen's reasons here. There is no way that all the discussions happened if Aberdeen were not on board up till now. So as the question what changed their mind

They’ve given the reason behind their change of heart in their statement. In short, costs. 
 

“We have young players who need experience at higher levels in the pyramid. To accommodate that, and have a full-time B team, we would need to have around 55 full-time players. We estimated additional annual costs of around £400,000.”

[RobboM]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

Interesting why they were invited? I assume they must have changed their mind. 

It really emphasises what a back of a fag packet piece of bullshit this is from the SFA

[Footballfirst]

12 minutes ago, RobboM said:

It really emphasises what a back of a fag packet piece of bullshit this is from the SFA

My understanding is that the proposal was formulated by SFA President elect Mike Mulraney (he's due to replace Rod Petrie at the AGM next month).

[RobboM]

18 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

My understanding is that the proposal was formulated by SFA President elect Mike Mulraney (he's due to replace Rod Petrie at the AGM next month).

That just makes your heart sink at the mediocrity at the head of the SFA ,the Liz Truss of the SFA

[Niemi’s gloves]

3 hours ago, Anderson5 said:

They’ve given the reason behind their change of heart in their statement. In short, costs. 
 

“We have young players who need experience at higher levels in the pyramid. To accommodate that, and have a full-time B team, we would need to have around 55 full-time players. We estimated additional annual costs of around £400,000.”

  
This raises the question of whether the ridiculous number of subs on the bench at every level is part of the problem. Further up the thread @Footballfirstmentions Kenny Dalglish and several other future Scottish international players (McGrain, Hay, Macari and Connelly) playing together in Celtic’s Reserve side. That was way back in 1968-69 when there was only one first team sub and the Reserve sides generally had a significant number of seasoned pros looking to show that they were worthy of first team football. 
 

i wouldn’t go back to a single sub. But limiting  match day squads to 14 or 15 players and making participation in a Reserve League compulsory for premier teams would help to resolve quite a lot of the issues raised in this thread. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Niemi’s gloves

[RobboM]

24 minutes ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

  
This raises the question of whether the ridiculous number of subs on the bench at every level is part of the problem. Further up the thread @Footballfirstmentions Kenny Dalglish and several other future Scottish international players (McGrain, Hay, Macari and Connelly) playing together in Celtic’s Reserve side. That was way back in 1968-69 when there was only one first team sub and the Reserve sides generally had a significant number of seasoned pros looking to show that they were worthy of first team football. 
 

i wouldn’t go back to a single sub. But limiting  match day squads to 14 or 15 players and making participation in a Reserve League compulsory for premier teams would help to resolve quite a lot of the issues raised in this thread. 

I think it is part of the issue Niemi.
We have a first team squad with starting XI and cover in every position. Then we have a completely separate B team squad. It's not one big squad it is 2 almost entirely separate teams. Pre COVID I went to a lot of Hearts Reserve matches. They were played midweek, Craig Levein almost always in attendance watching. A good performance in the reserves could earn a call up to the 1st team squad on the Saturday. Hickey made his breakthrough that way and plenty of others Irving, Henderson, Connor Smith, Moore, Currie, Cochrane earned chances. Fringe first team players like Wighton, Ryan Edwards, Garuccio even Vanecek had outings with the Reserves to keep them match ready  ... or not in some cases. Some experienced players played too, Bozanic always took it seriously and was a great encouragement to youngsters, Uche less so. 
The B team doesn't operate in the same way. Games are almost always clashing with 1st team fixtures. Appearance rules means you don't have the same ease of movement between the 1st team and the B team to the extent it could actually stifle opportunities.
I agree with you, I'd like to see a Reserve league as part of being a Premier division team, open to others to join voluntarily.

[jamboinglasgow]

Queens park are offering to take Aberdeens place and put a B team in the conference league.

[Footballfirst]

2 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

Queens park are offering to take Aberdeens place and put a B team in the conference league.

Would be better investing their spare cash in getting their ground completed.

 

Now where could QPB ground share in the meantime?

[davemclaren]

2 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

Queens park are offering to take Aberdeens place and put a B team in the conference league.

This gets more bizarre by the day...

[Mikey1874]

Spoiler

Still Celtic loving pricks but...

 

Queens Park actually have an ambitious youth programme and given the history too it's a good outcome.

[Footballfirst]

The SFA/SPFL have taken the first step in establishing a Conference League.

 

 

The sole shareholder is the SPFL. Its directors are Calum Beattie (COO of the SPFL) and Neil Doncaster.

Edited May 17, 2023 by Footballfirst

[Mikey1874]

At least the Lowland League is free of the B teams after the next season.

[Hungry hippo]

6 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The SFA/SPFL have taken the first step in establishing a Conference League.

 

 

The sole shareholder is the SPFL. Its directors are Calum Beattie (COO of the SPFL) and Neil Doncaster.

 

Setting up a different entity as a new limited company seems a complete waste of time to me. They must have some sort of motive but I really don't understand what couldn't have been achieved without doing this.

 

Regardless of the ltd company, have the SPFL board voted for their resources to be put down the Conference League route?

 

All seems very weird that Neil Doncaster and also the SFA are leading this project given I suspect very few of their member clubs appear likely to support it.

[Footballfirst]

3 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

Setting up a different entity as a new limited company seems a complete waste of time to me. They must have some sort of motive but I really don't understand what couldn't have been achieved without doing this.

 

Regardless of the ltd company, have the SPFL board voted for their resources to be put down the Conference League route?

 

All seems very weird that Neil Doncaster and also the SFA are leading this project given I suspect very few of their member clubs appear likely to support it.

Because it's a new company, it doesn't have to conform to the rules of any existing league, i.e. it doesn't nominally need approval of the other leagues (although approval would make it a simpler process).  The SFA Board however, in its articles (18 and 21.1), has the ability to accept the new league into its structure, placing it according to the standard of clubs/players. 

 

[Hungry hippo]

44 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Because it's a new company, it doesn't have to conform to the rules of any existing league, i.e. it doesn't nominally need approval of the other leagues (although approval would make it a simpler process).  The SFA Board however, in its articles (18 and 21.1), has the ability to accept the new league into its structure, placing it according to the standard of clubs/players. 

 

 

Thanks. Hadn't considered that making it a different company would allow them to circumvent their own rules.

[Footballfirst]

1 hour ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

Thanks. Hadn't considered that making it a different company would allow them to circumvent their own rules.

Article 18.4 allows new leagues to be set up.

 

18.4 All applications for consent to operate leagues and competitions other than leagues or competitions which come under the jurisdiction of an Affiliated National Association shall be lodged with the Secretary on a form approved by the Board accompanied by a copy of the applicant body’s relative constitution and rules, and applications for continuance must be made on this form annually to be lodged with the Secretary not later than 30th June along with notification of any proposed alterations to such constitution and rules which must be approved by the Board before becoming operative.

 

Article 18.2 allows affiliated associations, e.g. the SPFL to set up new leagues and at an appropriate level.

 

18.2 An Affiliated National Association may, where appropriate, and subject to the overriding authority of the Scottish FA, give consent to the formation of an association, league or other combination of clubs, officials or players which would normally be expected to participate in that grade of football.

 

Article 21.1 which is referred to in the Conference League proposal allows the SFA Board to approve new competitions.

 

21.1 Subject to the terms of Article 18.4, a recognised football body or club may not participate in, organise or promote a football match or football competition, whether or not within Scotland, which is not approved by the Board and, where appropriate, the National Association in whose territory the football match or football competition will be held and of FIFA, except in exceptional circumstances. When seeking approval for such a football match or football competition such football body or club must submit the relevant football match or football competition regulations to the Board for prior approval. Prior written notice of such match or competition shall be lodged with the Secretary by the recognised football body or club concerned, unless otherwise pre-determined as specified hereinafter. If a match or competition is or is to be arranged through the services of an agent, such agent must be in possession of a FIFA and/or a UEFA match agent’s licence

 

 

[Stanley_]

But wouldn't any changes to promotion playoffs to League Two need to be approved by the clubs?

[Footballfirst]

7 minutes ago, Stanley_ said:

But wouldn't any changes to promotion playoffs to League Two need to be approved by the clubs?

That's the bit I'm uncertain about, but once its's set up, it will be sold to the L2 clubs as, "Should you end up as Club 42, do you want relegated to the LL where you will be guaranteed £0, or to the Conference League where you will be guaranteed £40k"