Comment deleted by Site Moderator
So you don't see an issue with a team finishing 6th on less points than the team finishing 11 and facing a relegation play off?
That's just ludicrous Dave
I see positives in the split but there are also negatives too and to deny them is just turning a blind eye.
As for the 16 or 18 team league, I'm fed up of playing Hamilton, Killie and Motherwell 4 times in the space of 9 months. If it was just one game home and away then it doesn't have a boring and predictable element to it.
Hibernian, Falkirk & Raith Rovers could all easily make that step up, that's 15 teams straight away. I also fully expect Dunfermiline to do well in the championship next season, they have a pretty decent young side right now.
I'm not saying 16 or 18 teams would be perfect, but it's something we surely need to try.
My issue with playing each other so often is that teams often figure each other out - this makes it tough and turns a lot of games into defensive chess games.
It also makes it harder for teams to creep up on the outside as the teams will learn their strengths and counter them. I'd imagine Aberdeen would have had a better chance of winning the league this year in an 18 team league than a 12, and that's even with having a better head-to-head record against Celtic at the moment.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Free 1.75 litre bottle with this voucher (U9251)
posted 2 minutes ago
There was an article out there a few years ago basically saying from highland/lowland to SPL there are just far to many teams to benefit a country this size.
They were on about combining several clubs together caley/county/clach, the Dundees, Aberdeen and their provincial neighbours.
Get the money streamlined through bigger organisations, instead of thinly spreading it across 80+ clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And quite rightly that article was ignored for being utter nonsense.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
But they are fookin not.Essentially after the split it's two different leagues.Top of the top league are Champions(possibly Cetic this season)top of the bottom league become 7th for the doshing out of money.Not that hard a concept imo so if that's the gripe then the argument is lost
I get the fact the leagues are split but my point is I would be absolutely livid if my team finished in 11th place and had more points than someone who finished 6th.
The point I'm making is, even without the split, there is no guarantee the team in 11th wouldn't already be playing the teams in 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 12th anyway, it may be unlikely but even more than half of those games is absolutely plausible.
I would be absolutely livid if my team finished in 11th place and had more points than someone who finished 6th.
________________________________________
If I'm honest, that wouldn't bother me. It's just the way the league works.
I get that it looks ridiculous though.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Well Rangers and Celtic were big enough to compete!
______________________________________
Not in Europe they can't.
Glasgow City. That's your new name.
Or maybe Glasgow Panthers. That would be nice.
Or Weegie Warriors. Sounds a bit Rugby League though.
comment by Dave The Jackal (U7727)
posted 8 minutes ago
spr ... All about opinions, mate, but not sure how anyone can argue that having to play the better sides MORE times would DEVALUE a title win?! In an 18 team league, playing everyone only twice, the title will be decided by who pumps the Falkirks, Dunfermlines and Hamiltons more often ... aye, a real decider of who is the best team. OR a refereeing howler in one of the 2 OF games decides the title?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the point though the 4 times a season is actually what makes the league about who beats the other teams the most rather than the other way round.
And yes a real decider of the title is absolutely who beats all the other teams more often. In a league where you play each other twice it actually adds significance to how you perform against the top teams as it's actually your only way ahead.
Based on this season Aberdeen could finish with a significantly better head to head record against celtic. Yet celtic will likely still win by at least a 6 point margin. That's what 4 times a season does it actually makes it more about who pumps the other teams more often.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
That team has only finished with more points because they've been playing extra games against inferior teams to the top 6. Really don't see the issue here at all. Never have.
Like I said above, it's not ridiculous to suggest that team would be playing those teams without the split.
Don't forget the fixtures are done at the start of the season, they are redone when the league is split but if there were to be no split then it's not impossible for a team sitting 11th to play the teams around them anyway.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
A team in the bottom six doesn't need to play Celtic, Aberdeen, Hearts etc so there is a strong chance they will gather more points than those who do. This in turn means we can have a situation where a team in the bottom 6 ends up with more points than a team in the top 6.
I honestly can't see a problem with that.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
No but it is pointless as we have a split and all teams agreed toi it and all teams know what happens after the split.
Ah I see, I thought this was a discussion about trying to improve the league.
Didn't really it was all set in stone and that was the end of it.
Apologies
A team in the bottom six doesn't need to play Celtic, Aberdeen
They probably wish they could right now
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
NNH
I agree with the boys here. It's ludicrous to complain that a team in the bottom 6 end up with more points that a team in the top 6 after they split into two seperate leagues.
Mick agrees with them, I must be absolutely spot on
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sign in if you want to comment
Expanded SPL… Nows the time!
Page 4 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
So you don't see an issue with a team finishing 6th on less points than the team finishing 11 and facing a relegation play off?
That's just ludicrous Dave
I see positives in the split but there are also negatives too and to deny them is just turning a blind eye.
As for the 16 or 18 team league, I'm fed up of playing Hamilton, Killie and Motherwell 4 times in the space of 9 months. If it was just one game home and away then it doesn't have a boring and predictable element to it.
Hibernian, Falkirk & Raith Rovers could all easily make that step up, that's 15 teams straight away. I also fully expect Dunfermiline to do well in the championship next season, they have a pretty decent young side right now.
I'm not saying 16 or 18 teams would be perfect, but it's something we surely need to try.
posted on 28/4/16
My issue with playing each other so often is that teams often figure each other out - this makes it tough and turns a lot of games into defensive chess games.
It also makes it harder for teams to creep up on the outside as the teams will learn their strengths and counter them. I'd imagine Aberdeen would have had a better chance of winning the league this year in an 18 team league than a 12, and that's even with having a better head-to-head record against Celtic at the moment.
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
comment by Free 1.75 litre bottle with this voucher (U9251)
posted 2 minutes ago
There was an article out there a few years ago basically saying from highland/lowland to SPL there are just far to many teams to benefit a country this size.
They were on about combining several clubs together caley/county/clach, the Dundees, Aberdeen and their provincial neighbours.
Get the money streamlined through bigger organisations, instead of thinly spreading it across 80+ clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And quite rightly that article was ignored for being utter nonsense.
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
But they are fookin not.Essentially after the split it's two different leagues.Top of the top league are Champions(possibly Cetic this season)top of the bottom league become 7th for the doshing out of money.Not that hard a concept imo so if that's the gripe then the argument is lost
I get the fact the leagues are split but my point is I would be absolutely livid if my team finished in 11th place and had more points than someone who finished 6th.
The point I'm making is, even without the split, there is no guarantee the team in 11th wouldn't already be playing the teams in 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 12th anyway, it may be unlikely but even more than half of those games is absolutely plausible.
posted on 28/4/16
I would be absolutely livid if my team finished in 11th place and had more points than someone who finished 6th.
________________________________________
If I'm honest, that wouldn't bother me. It's just the way the league works.
I get that it looks ridiculous though.
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
Well Rangers and Celtic were big enough to compete!
______________________________________
Not in Europe they can't.
Glasgow City. That's your new name.
Or maybe Glasgow Panthers. That would be nice.
Or Weegie Warriors. Sounds a bit Rugby League though.
posted on 28/4/16
comment by Dave The Jackal (U7727)
posted 8 minutes ago
spr ... All about opinions, mate, but not sure how anyone can argue that having to play the better sides MORE times would DEVALUE a title win?! In an 18 team league, playing everyone only twice, the title will be decided by who pumps the Falkirks, Dunfermlines and Hamiltons more often ... aye, a real decider of who is the best team. OR a refereeing howler in one of the 2 OF games decides the title?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the point though the 4 times a season is actually what makes the league about who beats the other teams the most rather than the other way round.
And yes a real decider of the title is absolutely who beats all the other teams more often. In a league where you play each other twice it actually adds significance to how you perform against the top teams as it's actually your only way ahead.
Based on this season Aberdeen could finish with a significantly better head to head record against celtic. Yet celtic will likely still win by at least a 6 point margin. That's what 4 times a season does it actually makes it more about who pumps the other teams more often.
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
That team has only finished with more points because they've been playing extra games against inferior teams to the top 6. Really don't see the issue here at all. Never have.
Like I said above, it's not ridiculous to suggest that team would be playing those teams without the split.
Don't forget the fixtures are done at the start of the season, they are redone when the league is split but if there were to be no split then it's not impossible for a team sitting 11th to play the teams around them anyway.
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
A team in the bottom six doesn't need to play Celtic, Aberdeen, Hearts etc so there is a strong chance they will gather more points than those who do. This in turn means we can have a situation where a team in the bottom 6 ends up with more points than a team in the top 6.
I honestly can't see a problem with that.
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
No but it is pointless as we have a split and all teams agreed toi it and all teams know what happens after the split.
Ah I see, I thought this was a discussion about trying to improve the league.
Didn't really it was all set in stone and that was the end of it.
Apologies
posted on 28/4/16
A team in the bottom six doesn't need to play Celtic, Aberdeen
They probably wish they could right now
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 28/4/16
NNH
I agree with the boys here. It's ludicrous to complain that a team in the bottom 6 end up with more points that a team in the top 6 after they split into two seperate leagues.
posted on 28/4/16
Mick agrees with them, I must be absolutely spot on
posted on 28/4/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Page 4 of 7
6 | 7