between the 2 restructuring proposals.
12-12-18 with double split, leading to confusion, mini leagues, meaningless games all over the place. In addition, if rammed through for August 2013, makes rest of season meaningless for 75% of teams.
16-10-16 with NO split, simple promotion & relegation, and can be put in place at any time as it does not disadvantage ANY team. Under that idea, if started in August 2013, Rangers would STILL be in third tier, with 6 other teams from SFL2, and play 30 games total.
Top 4 teams from SFL2 (essentially promoted) & bottom 6 from SFL1 play (saved from relegation) together.
Top 4 from SFL1 get promoted.
2nd tier plays against each other 4 times (additional games softening blow from future relegation & gets upward travelling teams additional funds prior to promotion to top tier).
Top tier 30 games per season allows more rest for cup & euro games, probably bigger attendances at league games, which could ALL be at weekends, and less meaningless games.
Just tie in a sensible number of promotion & relegation places (say 3up/down per division) and you have a vibrant, active, funded set up.
So, just have to find either 2 brave SPL clubs or 8 sensible SFL clubs to put this joke of a suggestion of 12-12-18 right out the window.
Here's the difference
posted on 9/1/13
I think the 12-12-18 ticks the main box , that being money for the majority of clubs davie. This will see it through. Even if it means minimal change in real terms by the time it trickles down to the lowest tier they have the sweatener of a second bite of the cherry by getting your club for another season.
posted on 9/1/13
You can cut the numbers the same way the spl was set up by invitation only.
Theres always to generate funds.
posted on 9/1/13
scotscelt- they don't have the sweetener though.
At present, SFL2 teams can expect 2 home games v Rangers next season. 12-12-18 would give the majority of them 1 home game. So that itself is less cash.
Teams in a new second tier would expect Rangers to be there season after next, great you would think - they get 2 home games v Rangers. Except, they don't, 8 of them don't anyway (assuming Rangers finished in top 4 after 22 games). So that is less cash for current SFL1 clubs who by that time would be expecting Rangers to be current SFL 1 and all have 2 home games against them.
So, really, the only folk this works for is the SPL.
Strange that.
posted on 9/1/13
Didnt read all the posts but it looks like supporters for a 16 team top tier is favourite with 14 then 12 having support as well.
The point being that no matter what the teams vote for theywont please everybody and maybe not even half the people.
posted on 9/1/13
The system being proposed is stupid. Team finishing fourth bottom in the top flight can end up relegated.
And what happens when the leagues are split? Some teams have effectively played for nothing as points will be reset.
posted on 9/1/13
jbj - correct. The "middle 8 group" would have points set to zero.
Madness.
& Lawell has just come out in full support of it.
However, Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell insisted his side were "committed" to the SPL, and that the club supported the proposed reforms.
"We support the SPL, we're committed to the SPL," he said.
"We as a club support it. It's not perfect, but it's the best available, and I don't think you throw out the best in pursuit of the perfect.
"I think it will be beneficial to the game."
posted on 9/1/13
Davie aye but 11 sfl3 clubs get another game they wont get as it stands
posted on 9/1/13
scotscelt - so? Only takes 8 SFL teams to vote against this. And if it is for financial reasons, unless there is a HUGE pile of cash being flung their way by the SPL (seriously unlikely), the current SFL1 & 2 clubs ain't going to do this for financial reasons.
posted on 9/1/13
Will be tight mate because only 6 clubs miss out on your two game scenario, those being the bottom 6 of the current sfl2.
The rest are into an actual SPL setup with the chance of making the playoffs and also going to get Rangers the following season. Even the six get you once the first season and any of them would fancy their chances of being one of those who move up with you through an expanded playoff system.
WHo knows mate
posted on 9/1/13
Under new system, bottom tier gets to play Rangers at home once. So that is 8 teams currently in SFL2, expecting Rangers at home twice next season, immediately losing out. And only 1 of THEM (maybe) can go up with Rangers season after next.
SFL1 teams - only 3 are guaranteed 2 home games v Rangers, season after next (assuming Rangers finish in top 4 after 22 games), so remainder miss out on home game.
"Actual SPL setup" - wtf does that mean? Chance of making the playoffs? What does the logo on the league table mean that Hamilton, Livvy or Cowdenbeath suddenly have a better chance of not only beating all the other teams over 22 games to get into playoffs, but then beat 4 teams from top tier. Twice.
So right away, there is a min 8 no votes in the SFL at least.
Under 16-10-16, which ALL SFL teams approved, Rangers would remain in bottom tier, playing only once at each team's ground, but with more promotion slots, and 2 home games v Rangers in middle tier league the following season, it generates far more cash for teams.
And what is more it makes sense.
Unlike the bs from hampden.