BrahimHemdani 1 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) The replies in that tweet are so boring..I think some of them will implode when we get back up If you are interested in the history of the Club as your name suggests you should come along to hear Rangers Historian, Robert McElroy at the Gersnet Dinner after the match on Sunday! http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?69926-The-3rd-Semi-Annual-Gersnet-Dinner-with-Guest-Rangers-Historian-Robert-McElroy Edited May 14, 2015 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Due to TV, I think we need the 4 OF games. For a 16 team league you'd need to add something like the top four playing each other home and away once again to decide the title - 30 games plus 6 more giving a 36 game season. Or you could do the top 6 giving 40 games. It could keep a more exciting end to the season in place. You could do something similar at the bottom for relegation - but then what do you do for the middle except meaningless games or a lack of games losing income? The 10 team league is probably the best option for our top heavy league, if boring and stifling. Teams are guaranteed 4 OF home games and for TV there are 4 OF games, 4 Edinburgh derby games and possibly 4 Dundee derbies with the latter two also bringing in big gates for those clubs. TV would also appreciate the all the OF games against the next best challenging teams. However, who in the top tier would vote to remove 2 of them? None of them are totally safe from that, so it would be Turkeys voting for Christmas. Would they also vote for the play-off for second bottom to stay up, or would that be how the bottom club faces relegation? They say that the fear factor of relation makes for crap football, but then so does meaningless games. I think if they did do a 10 team league, it would be best to use the seeding to produce a fixture list where the top seeded teams all play each other for the run in at the end of the season. Something that does work in the current system (with Rangers in the league) is the top six playing each other at the end. I think the EPL really doesn't work where one team who can win the title having an easy run-in against the bottom teams and another having a very difficult one against the top teams. Weirdly, I actually do think the 12 team system kind of works to some extent, but only with Rangers in the league. With just one big club, it's a complete joke and is not very fair or beneficial where you get some teams with only one big home game a season compared to others with 2 on a random basis, and the anomaly of the odd team getting. But due to two Edinburgh teams and two from Dundee, our league will always be a bit crap with only two potential challengers with the real joke of the last few years of only being one and made even worse by the relegation of both Edinburgh sides. With TV money massively dwarfing gate money elsewhere, the whole thing in Scotland is doomed to obscurity without the top clubs joining a Euro league or the English league. It all looks to be rearranging the chairs in some low rent, back street, greasy spoon, which is only mildly interesting to local regulars. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,381 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 What about a variation on the Belgian Pro League: 16 team Regular Season; Championship play-off (1-6?); Europa League Play-off (7-14?); and a Relegation Play-off. Its quite complicated but everyone is playing for something and it appears to be quite exciting. Perhaps a variation on this? An increased league is what most people want--it's a bit 'same-y' after a while with 10 teams (and even 12). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Only thing about the Europa thing is that we only have 4 places so you're punishing the club that finishes an honourable 3rd (probably the best team after the OF) to give the place to the 7th club. Belgium have 5 places so while not so bad, they are still robbing 4th. If they moved up just one place from 10th to 9th in the rankings, they'd actually get another place, but that must be harder to do with your 7th best team playing instead of your 4th. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,381 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Yes, you're right. Perhaps narrowing the Championship group and extending the Europa League and Relegation play-off group? But then we'd still end up with meaningless games, but then again we get meaningless games now. We're trying to find a 'perfect' system, when perhaps we just need to find a 'better' one. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 An increased league is what most people want--it's a bit 'same-y' after a while with 10 teams (and even 12). This season with 10 teams in our league hasn't seemed too bad, but sometimes it used to be absolute torture even with 12 teams. Between the 08/09 & 09/10 seasons we played Hamilton Accies 10 times because we drew them in the Cups as well as playing the 3 league games per season against them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) Due to TV, I think we need the 4 OF games. For a 16 team league you'd need to add something like the top four playing each other home and away once again to decide the title - 30 games plus 6 more giving a 36 game season. Or you could do the top 6 giving 40 games. It could keep a more exciting end to the season in place. You could do something similar at the bottom for relegation - but then what do you do for the middle except meaningless games or a lack of games losing income? The 10 team league is probably the best option for our top heavy league, if boring and stifling. Teams are guaranteed 4 OF home games and for TV there are 4 OF games, 4 Edinburgh derby games and possibly 4 Dundee derbies with the latter two also bringing in big gates for those clubs. TV would also appreciate the all the OF games against the next best challenging teams. However, who in the top tier would vote to remove 2 of them? None of them are totally safe from that, so it would be Turkeys voting for Christmas. Would they also vote for the play-off for second bottom to stay up, or would that be how the bottom club faces relegation? They say that the fear factor of relation makes for crap football, but then so does meaningless games. I think if they did do a 10 team league, it would be best to use the seeding to produce a fixture list where the top seeded teams all play each other for the run in at the end of the season. Something that does work in the current system (with Rangers in the league) is the top six playing each other at the end. I think the EPL really doesn't work where one team who can win the title having an easy run-in against the bottom teams and another having a very difficult one against the top teams. Weirdly, I actually do think the 12 team system kind of works to some extent, but only with Rangers in the league. With just one big club, it's a complete joke and is not very fair or beneficial where you get some teams with only one big home game a season compared to others with 2 on a random basis, and the anomaly of the odd team getting. But due to two Edinburgh teams and two from Dundee, our league will always be a bit crap with only two potential challengers with the real joke of the last few years of only being one and made even worse by the relegation of both Edinburgh sides. With TV money massively dwarfing gate money elsewhere, the whole thing in Scotland is doomed to obscurity without the top clubs joining a Euro league or the English league. It all looks to be rearranging the chairs in some low rent, back street, greasy spoon, which is only mildly interesting to local regulars. For the reason you state there is no chance of a return to a 10 team league in the foreseeable future. The way round the additional games needed as well as 4 OF games a season is a return to the old sectional style regionalised League Cup, so Rangers would play Celtic twice at the start of the season in the LC and depending on success other clubs would have a chance of "extra" games v one of the OF. Also one of the OF would go out in the sections (group winners only go through), thus increasing other club's chances of winning the competition. This would guarantee all SPL teams an extra 6 matches, this bringing the League/League Cup total to 36 with additional games for whoever wins the sections. The SPL teams would be in 4 x4 and the rest if still 42 total - 4x6/7. Eight to qualify for the QF. When this was last mooted in 2011/12, the proposal was for 2 to qualify for a round of 16 which would mean that although Rangers and Celtic matches in the group stage would be much less meaningful, both would go through most times so that more of the rest would get extra games v the OF. The nature of this type of early season competition would be such that clubs could use these matches to try out youths, trialists, new players, different formations etc. Edited May 14, 2015 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 there can be no reconstruction until after the third year of the SPFL unless 42 teams vote for it. No way those in the Championship will vote for it if we're there next season 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,416 Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 I wonder when this issue will raise it's head again? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) I wonder when this issue will raise it's head again? Yup. Said that on another thread, id expect a minimum 14 team top flight in 12 months time with possibly no relegation next season from the SPFL. Who was the previous guy who ran SFL before the SPL takeover (merger - no laughing at the back)....if he had stuck to his guns the SFL profile and worth would have grown hugely. He already had the biggest trump card in Rangers and this past season the SFL would have had the Edinburgh clubs in there as well. They should have reconstructed the bottom 3 divisions when they had the chance. And Financially another season upcoming with Rangers and Hibs. Edited June 1, 2015 by Gribz 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.