League Reorganisation, Again…

[Diamond Scot]

41 minutes ago, KirkieRobRoy said:

And home fans stay away in greater numbers as 1) It's a hugely unpleasant experience and 2) They are likely to get humped. And the policing costs are greater as well.

 

I get really fed up with eedjits trying to maintain that the evil twins are some sort of largesse-sprinkling benefactors to poor wee diddy teams. They run the game through their chums at Hampden to keep wee diddy teams down, more like.

Not sure where I said the old firm were a positive. Im just pointing out the facts which are so often ignored by fans who dont operate in the rrql world.

If clubs didnt financially gain from the old firm then they wouldnt bend over backwards to move their own fans, open other stands etc.

Its also a fact that viewing numbers show that its the old firm that the TV companies want. People might not like this but its the reality.

 

[Rolling hIlls]

42 minutes ago, KirkieRobRoy said:

And home fans stay away in greater numbers as 1) It's a hugely unpleasant experience and 2) They are likely to get humped. And the policing costs are greater as well.

 

I get really fed up with eedjits trying to maintain that the evil twins are some sort of largesse-sprinkling benefactors to poor wee diddy teams. They run the game through their chums at Hampden to keep wee diddy teams down, more like.

Infamy.infamy. everybody's got it infamy. Its the diddy teams that run the sfa. Nothing to do with rangers. Loony tune.

[dandydunn]

6 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Not sure where I said the old firm were a positive. Im just pointing out the facts which are so often ignored by fans who dont operate in the rrql world.

If clubs didnt financially gain from the old firm then they wouldnt bend over backwards to move their own fans, open other stands etc.

Its also a fact that viewing numbers show that its the old firm that the TV companies want. People might not like this but its the reality.

 

Simple answer there then. 
 

OF fuck odd to wherever they want, sky sports subsequently fuck off, rest of us get football at 3pm on a Saturday. 
 

Hey, we’ll never win the champions league this way, but by fuck, it’ll be enjoyable again. 

[Diamond Scot]

17 hours ago, dandydunn said:

Simple answer there then. 
 

OF fuck odd to wherever they want, sky sports subsequently fuck off, rest of us get football at 3pm on a Saturday. 
 

Hey, we’ll never win the champions league this way, but by fuck, it’ll be enjoyable again. 

This is part if the problem with Scottish football. Ppl wishing away issues rather than trying to work out a better solution with all of the pros and limitations.

[dandydunn]

1 hour ago, Diamond Scot said:

This is part if the problem with Scottish football. Ppl wishing away issues rather than trying to work out a better solution with all of the pros and limitations.

What’s part of the problem?

Clubs, Sky TV and the association bending over backwards to keep two sets of scumbags happy as they’ll just throw their toys out the pram if they don’t get their own way?

Get them to fuck, hey sky sports ti fuck out of the game, let us get on with it, most fans would have a great time at football again  

 

[Diamond Scot]

10 minutes ago, dandydunn said:

What’s part of the problem?

Clubs, Sky TV and the association bending over backwards to keep two sets of scumbags happy as they’ll just throw their toys out the pram if they don’t get their own way?

Get them to fuck, hey sky sports ti fuck out of the game, let us get on with it, most fans would have a great time at football again  

 

Wishful or unrealistic thinking is part of the problem.

The Old Firm aint going anywhere. Nomatter hoe much they want it or non Old Firm fans want it.

Scottish football will never move forward until people start working with the tools we have. 

How do we find the balance between using the exposure / money the Old Firm genetate but not go so far to bend over backwards to them.

[Auchinyell Sox Change]

Now being out of the EU ; cant they not implement the 3 foreigners rule ( was it 5 ????) to develop national talent ; or is this classed as xenophobic these days ?

i recall gerry mcnee used to get bent out of shape by that one 

[dandydunn]

19 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Wishful or unrealistic thinking is part of the problem.

The Old Firm aint going anywhere. Nomatter hoe much they want it or non Old Firm fans want it.

Scottish football will never move forward until people start working with the tools we have. 

How do we find the balance between using the exposure / money the Old Firm genetate but not go so far to bend over backwards to them.

So we’re stuck with the status quo. 
 

They won’t give up the money, sky won’t give up 4 games per season, so that’s that. 
 

Switch aff the lights and everyone go home. 

[Diamond Scot]

1 minute ago, dandydunn said:

So we’re stuck with the status quo. 
 

They won’t give up the money, sky won’t give up 4 games per season, so that’s that. 
 

Switch aff the lights and everyone go home. 

You can improve Scottish football whilst still having Sky and 4 Old Firm games a year. I actually like the split.

I would have a 14 team top league and Championship. Splitting to a top 6 bottom 8. 

Straight 2 up 2 down. No relegation from Championship. All teams must be full time with a minimum amount of money spent on youth teams / academy. No astro pitches. Closer prize money between top of Championship and bottom of Prem.

Imo that would level the playing field for youth development, forcing teams to develop youth.

[Rolling hIlls]

Hey DD.  We are not in Kansas anymore.

[mr mojo risin]

In order of priority I'd say there are 3 reasons to change the league structure

1. Competition - in the post Bosman, Sky, Champions League era I don't think anything can be done to stop the same 2 teams winning the next 100 titles. Pretty much the whole country supports them and on the back of it our governing bodies only market them and broadcasters tell the world they're the only teams we have. it's a nightmare getting a young kid to support their local team.

2. Quality - you can still have a high standard with little competition (e.g. Germany). However, as per point 1, most people in this country are only interested in the teams that win while the rest can't hold onto good players for any decent time before some lower league team in England snaps them up. So without more money it's hard to see how this can improve either.

3. Entertainment - you can have exciting games without competition or quality and this is perhaps the one thing that might improve with a bigger league and less fear of losing.

[Diamond Scot]

22 minutes ago, mr mojo risin said:

In order of priority I'd say there are 3 reasons to change the league structure

1. Competition - in the post Bosman, Sky, Champions League era I don't think anything can be done to stop the same 2 teams winning the next 100 titles. Pretty much the whole country supports them and on the back of it our governing bodies only market them and broadcasters tell the world they're the only teams we have. it's a nightmare getting a young kid to support their local team.

2. Quality - you can still have a high standard with little competition (e.g. Germany). However, as per point 1, most people in this country are only interested in the teams that win while the rest can't hold onto good players for any decent time before some lower league team in England snaps them up. So without more money it's hard to see how this can improve either.

3. Entertainment - you can have exciting games without competition or quality and this is perhaps the one thing that might improve with a bigger league and less fear of losing.

I dont think many people would disagree but the harder thing is suggesting something that would work and clubs would actually vote for.

[KirkieRobRoy]

On 7/15/2021 at 4:43 PM, Rolling hIlls said:

 Its the diddy teams that run the sfa. Nothing to do with rangers. Loony tune.

There you go, laddie, safe in your cossetted OF delusion.

[Haggis_trap]

Scottish football needs to view the league (... rather than individual teams) as the product.  For sure, Celtic and Rangers, are the biggest teams in league.  However I would hazard a guess that the total supporters of the other 38 teams are actually the majority ? 

The problem with Scottish football is that the Old Firm demanded ever larger slice of the pie (tv money, sponsorship, prize money) is their futile pursuit of champions league glory.   Youth development would be far better served if that money was better distributed among sides like Hamilton or Ross County where young players are developed and often get their break in the first team.  From what I can see Scotland seems to develop great players upto age of 15 or 16.  However after that they have little progression (it is first team or bust).  Countries like Croatia seem to have much better progressive pathway for developing talent to achieve their potential.

Here is what i would like to see

- Larger premier league (16 or 18 teams).  Scottish football can't afford to have sides like Hearts, Kilmarnock or Dundee Utd out of the top flight.  In addition there are lots of well supported sides (say Partick Thistle) that would be better served by regular top flight football.  Playing the old firm x4 times a season is boring and no longer an event. 

- Fairer split of revenue among all teams.  Prior to 1990s the gate money at all SPL games was split 50:50.  This would make a huge difference to smaller sides.  If St Mirren don't turn up at Parkhead then there is no game to watch.  So why shouldn't they get a fairer split of the revenue ?

Ultimately re-distributing wealth in Scottish football wider should mean better facilities and youth development across the nation.  Additionally a larger top league (with less relegation stress) can only help give young players a better platform and opportunity to shine.  Unfashionable Scottish teams are where young talent is going to emerge from...

[Auchinyell Sox Change]

On 7/20/2021 at 7:03 AM, Haggis_trap said:

Scottish football needs to view the league (... rather than individual teams) as the product.  For sure, Celtic and Rangers, are the biggest teams in league.  However I would hazard a guess that the total supporters of the other 38 teams are actually the majority ? 

The problem with Scottish football is that the Old Firm demanded ever larger slice of the pie (tv money, sponsorship, prize money) is their futile pursuit of champions league glory.   Youth development would be far better served if that money was better distributed among sides like Hamilton or Ross County where young players are developed and often get their break in the first team.  From what I can see Scotland seems to develop great players upto age of 15 or 16.  However after that they have little progression (it is first team or bust).  Countries like Croatia seem to have much better progressive pathway for developing talent to achieve their potential.

Here is what i would like to see

- Larger premier league (16 or 18 teams).  Scottish football can't afford to have sides like Hearts, Kilmarnock or Dundee Utd out of the top flight.  In addition there are lots of well supported sides (say Partick Thistle) that would be better served by regular top flight football.  Playing the old firm x4 times a season is boring and no longer an event. 

- Fairer split of revenue among all teams.  Prior to 1990s the gate money at all SPL games was split 50:50.  This would make a huge difference to smaller sides.  If St Mirren don't turn up at Parkhead then there is no game to watch.  So why shouldn't they get a fairer split of the revenue ?

Ultimately re-distributing wealth in Scottish football wider should mean better facilities and youth development across the nation.  Additionally a larger top league (with less relegation stress) can only help give young players a better platform and opportunity to shine.  Unfashionable Scottish teams are where young talent is going to emerge from...

One of the reasons for dismantling old first division and moving to premier league in 70s was too many meaningless games - between the euro spots and relegation zone…

i do believe things are different now ; am not convinced that 3pts for a win has changed things that much , but game itself obviously changed loads

playing the old firm 4 times ( and money that comes from that ) would be hard to turn down for some though

agree with clubs you mentioned being too good/ well suported to be in lower leagues - but no guarantee that your hamiltons etc rise to top

 

[Haggis_trap]

On 7/16/2021 at 5:42 PM, Diamond Scot said:

How do we find the balance between using the exposure / money the Old Firm genetate but not go so far to bend over backwards to them.

Split gate money 50:50.

Make the league, rather than old firm, the product?

[Diamond Scot]

2 hours ago, Haggis_trap said:

Split gate money 50:50.

Make the league, rather than old firm, the product?

I confess I dont know the numbers involved but ive always wondered what difference this would make. Most fans who favour splitting the gate money also want a bigger league with playing each team twice.

So instead of a bottom half team getting 3 home games against the old firm where they keep all the gate receipt, they would get 2 home and 2 away where they only get half the money.  And for club like Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts. Would what they gain from the old firm not be lost to clubs like Ross County, Hamilton etc. Ie Hearts would be giving half their 15k attendence to Ross County and getting half of 3k in return. 

Im not sure if any other league adopt this model. How does it work for season tickets etc. Would the Old Firm effectively have to hand over half their season ticket money to the other clubs? Theres something really unfair about that to me.

[Haggis_trap]

9 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

And for club like Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts. Would what they gain from the old firm not be lost to clubs like Ross County, Hamilton etc. Ie Hearts would be giving half their 15k attendence to Ross County and getting half of 3k in return. 

Im not sure if any other league adopt this model. How does it work for season tickets etc. Would the Old Firm effectively have to hand over half their season ticket money to the other clubs? Theres something really unfair about that to me.

 

Hearts, Hibs, Killie, Inverness and Dundee Utd have all been out of the top flight recently.
Can Scottish football afford that ?

An Edinburgh derby is worth just as much to the Edinburgh sides as a visit from the old firm.
Similarly for Aberdeen - a game against Dundee Utd can pull 15K, where as the old firm might bring 17-18K.
The argument that Scottish teams are entirely dependent on 4x games against the old firm doesn't wash - not least given the league did just fine when Rangers were away playing Berwick and Cowdenbeath x4 times a season 🤣 In reality only 2x of those x4 fixtures are home games anyway!

2 final points.

1) Turning up at Tannadice, Pittodrie or Easter Road to watch the ugly sisters win 4-0 and roll out the sectarian song book while lording it over the rest of the league isn't a pleasant experience.  As a Dons fans I would much rather take my 7 year old son to a match against Ross County or Hearts than either of the Glasgow teams.  Firstly we might have a chance of winning.  Secondly he won't need to witness the buckfast fuelled bile that comes with an Old Firm visit.

2) Scotland has lots of teams (Kilmarnock, Partick Thistle, Inverness, Hamilton) that would benefit from a bigger top league.  These are the kind of clubs we should ensure have the finances to develop youth players and be part of local community.  A 16 team premier league would mean adding teams like Partick, Killie, Inverness and Hamilton to existing 12 SPL sides.  Are those sides any worse than then bottom 4-5 teams already in the premier league ?

[Diamond Scot]

47 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

 

Hearts, Hibs, Killie, Inverness and Dundee Utd have all been out of the top flight recently.
Can Scottish football afford that ?

An Edinburgh derby is worth just as much to the Edinburgh sides as a visit from the old firm.
Similarly for Aberdeen - a game against Dundee Utd can pull 15K, where as the old firm might bring 17-18K.
The argument that Scottish teams are entirely dependent on 4x games against the old firm doesn't wash - not least given the league did just fine when Rangers were away playing Berwick and Cowdenbeath x4 times a season 🤣 In reality only 2x of those x4 fixtures are home games anyway!

2 final points.

1) Turning up at Tannadice, Pittodrie or Easter Road to watch the ugly sisters win 4-0 and roll out the sectarian song book while lording it over the rest of the league isn't a pleasant experience.  As a Dons fans I would much rather take my 7 year old son to a match against Ross County or Hearts than either of the Glasgow teams.  Firstly we might have a chance of winning.  Secondly he won't need to witness the buckfast fuelled bile that comes with an Old Firm visit.

2) Scotland has lots of teams (Kilmarnock, Partick Thistle, Inverness, Hamilton) that would benefit from a bigger top league.  These are the kind of clubs we should ensure have the finances to develop youth players and be part of local community.  A 16 team premier league would mean adding teams like Partick, Killie, Inverness and Hamilton to existing 12 SPL sides.  Are those sides any worse than then bottom 4-5 teams already in the premier league ?

Why hasnt it been done then? I think theres a clear difference between what fans want and what the owners of their clubs want.

If clubs wouldnt lose money in attendence money or TV deal then clubs would havr voted to increase the league several times by now. It would be in all clubs interests outwidth the Old Firm. So why do we never hear of it being tabled as a motion?

Theres no reason why clubs like Aberdeen, Dundee, Dundee Utd, Hibs and Hearts shouldnt have full crowds every home game and thereafter no reason why they shouldnt be able to challenge the Old Firm. Its only the last 20 odd years that the Old Firm have consistently been 1st and 2nd every year.

Why did Aberdeen vote against changing the voting structure? Surely that would have put the power in the hands of the other clubs?

[Haggis_trap]

2 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Why hasnt it been done then? I think theres a clear difference between what fans want and what the owners of their clubs want.

Do you think Scottish football (as a whole) is attractive product ?

Or do you think we should just carry on making the same mistakes ?

Financially Scottish football didnt really miss Rangers when they were out of the SPL.  Many would argue it was better without them!

[Diamond Scot]

34 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

Do you think Scottish football (as a whole) is attractive product ?

Or do you think we should just carry on making the same mistakes ?

Financially Scottish football didnt really miss Rangers when they were out of the SPL.  Many would argue it was better without them!

No and ive suggested previously how I would chamge it within what I believe to be the current restraints.

Again I ask, if finances and everything were fine when Rangers werent in top league, why did Aberdeen reject changing the voting structure (which basically gives the Old Firm a veto). Why havent chairman made motions to change the structure away from what it currently is. They must know the thoughts of their fanbase?

Why do Chairman move season their own fans to open up more of the stadium to the Old Firm. Why wasnt league reconstruction seized upon when the Covid situation presented them with an ideal opportunity.

Either financially Chairman dont think its as viable as you do or they dont care what their supporters think as they prefer the Old Firm to dictate what happens with the league. Which imo would be a strange position for them to take.

[Haggis_trap]

14 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

why did Aberdeen reject changing the voting structure (which basically gives the Old Firm a veto).

You go back almost a decade to dig that up!
As an Aberdeen fan I would say that was an error. 
However : it wouldn't be the first time that I have disagreed with board at Pittodrie.
Also : What you describe is vast over simplification. 

"There’s a perception the voting regime is 11-1 but very few matters are 11-1. The vast majority are 8-4, some are 10-2 and a few are 11-1.

“The motion put forward would make everything 9-3 but there will be further debate. It requires an 11-1 vote to get that through.”

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/moves-to-change-spl-voting-structure-1393897

Edited August 9, 2021 by Haggis_trap

[vanderark14]

3 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

As an Aberdeen fan I would say that was a huge error.

However it wouldn't be the first time that I have disagreed with board at Pittodrie.

Aberdeen voted against because milne is spineless. It was the wrong decision and it just shows how out of touch he was from the fans

[Haggis_trap]

3 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

Aberdeen voted against because milne is spineless. It was the wrong decision and it just shows how out of touch he was from the fans

It was also at a time when Rangers were out the league - arguably making Aberdeen the second biggest team.

Though as you say : it was spineless and short sighted.

 

[vanderark14]

2 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

It was also at a time when Rangers were out the league - arguably making Aberdeen the second biggest team.

Though as you say : it was spineless and short sighted.

 

I doubt he saw us like that, he wanted and even if he did he should've known rangers would bounce back because every one else knew it. He did nothing to change Scottish football.

My memory might not be perfect here but didn't he only vote to deny rangers entry to the top flight only after severe fan pressure?