|
|
Topic Originator: WoodmillKirky
Date: Mon 13 Oct 18:12
Once again being discussed. “ league of 10” being mooted for top tier in Scottish league. 🙄
It’s been a rollercoaster
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wetherby
Date: Mon 13 Oct 18:46
Completely the wrong direction
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dafc
Date: Mon 13 Oct 19:04
Will never get go ahead they way voting is done. You’ll need 11 votes in top flight, so essentially either 3 would be relegated and one promoted, or 2 relegated and no championship promotion. No team normally in bottom 6 of top flight
Going to risk that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Mon 13 Oct 19:38
Quote:
dafc, Mon 13 Oct 19:04
Will never get go ahead they way voting is done. You’ll need 11 votes in top flight, so essentially either 3 would be relegated and one promoted, or 2 relegated and no championship promotion. No team normally in bottom 6 of top flight
Going to risk that.
Rangers might not even vote for it then 😉
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 13 Oct 20:45
It`s genuinely distressing how shortsighted those involved in leading football in this country are. Are people genuinely that interested in watching Celtic play Rangers 4 or 5 (sometimes 6) times a season?
Get it so people play each other twice (home and away) in an 18 or 20 team league. Job done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: pars4life1
Date: Mon 13 Oct 20:49
" play each other twice (home and away) in an 18 or 20 team league. Job done."
Yeah job done in making the league boring as **** for most clubs, including us
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GJS93
Date: Mon 13 Oct 21:03
no talk of this in the media or forums, sure this isnt old news from April when it came out then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Mon 13 Oct 21:21
Nobody wants a top flight of 10 teams. Anyone that does wants to Scottish football go backwards.
The OF will dictate the future of our game, which is a joke. No b*lls in our game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: thebear
Date: Mon 13 Oct 21:40
18 or 20, more teams, more players, better share of wealth, more scots, better national team
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Mon 13 Oct 22:07
One thing forgotten is that it isn’t the Neil Doncaster’s who decide but club owners.
4 games a season means more revenue for the smaller teams from the big city teams but I’d dispute that isn’t such a big deal these days.
When Rangers went burst it was interesting to note that clubs were wavering to plant the new team in the premier league instead of the bottom tier.
Wasn’t until the fan bases started rebelling that they realised the game was up.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Mon 13 Oct 22:24
I think 18 or 20 is too big. We don’t have enough full time clubs to facilitate 20 clubs in the top division and it would throw out the setup of the leagues below to much IMO.
The overall prize money doesn’t get any bigger so there’s still going to be a drop off somewhere. If you increase the money for the clubs that would be joining the top flight from the championship, you’d have to decrease the money to the clubs in the leagues below. It would further increase the disparity between the clubs in the top league and the ones below. Relegation would financially catastrophic.
I think a 16 team league would suit better. Would still mean we’d need some sort of playoffs or something to make enough league games per season but it would keep league games to within 2 against most clubs and 3 games against clubs similarly placed in the league.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Back_oh_the_net
Date: Mon 13 Oct 22:39
Quote:
thebear, Mon 13 Oct 21:40
18 or 20, more teams, more players, better share of wealth, more scots, better national team
Only way to get a better national team is to produce better players I’ll probably get dugs abuse for what I’m about to say but fk it
Football at grassroots level in this country needs a complete overhaul to much focus is put on how many goals per game kids can bang in and not enough goes on their actual ability as a whole what happens to the kids that don’t score for fun? Are they left behind with no prospect of progression up through the age groups?
Same goes for every kid from every team getting a medal or a trophy just for taking part get it in the bin it’s a recipe for breeding soft as **** players who are happy to accept second best up until the point where they get older and discover that you get feck all like that as you get older
Rewarding kids just for turning up doesn’t breed winners it’s the complete opposite in short if your not good enough to get to the final and actually be in with a chance of winning it then you should nothing other than a better luck next time
I laugh when I hear people saying winning isn’t everything sorry but that’s p!sh winning in football is all that matters sorry if this upsets anyone but I’m just fed up seeing the so called golden generation seemingly going backwards again with no sign of it getting any better
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: coventrypar
Date: Mon 13 Oct 23:08
I`m old enough to remember the two league system in the late 60`s/ (early 70`s for me)
We were a yoyo club even then
When we weren`t, the issue was boring games mid table nothing to play for
The argument was you could blood your fringe players
We now have loans and bounce games
Clearly its about the money so sort the split of that ( and not 80/90% to the bigot brothers) and then we may have a consensus
"If you have no kind words to say you should say nothing more at all"
|
|
|
|
|
|
