Spl Top 10?

[Bamber]

how?

 

do you not need to realise that spreading the wealth around the other teams would lead to better competition all round?

 

as an aside - what exactly do the old firm get, percentage wise and of what?

 

 

where is this extra money coming from

 

Just for easy maths say we get

[Red Dragon]

2% difference between 1st and 2nd. Then 5.5% difference between 2nd and 3rd.

 

They also get the lions share of the TV cash because nearly Every game shown is the OF against AN Other.

 

They also get to keep all their home gate receipts.

 

Its no wonder our game is in the state its in. The whole system is geared towards giving the OF as much as possible and to hell with the rest.

 

the above IS the distribution of the TV revenue. No longer is their a division based ion what games are shown.

 

why shouldn't they, or us, keep our home gate receipts? You'd be happy giving a team with a sh*t away support have the gate?

[Bamber]

2% difference between 1st and 2nd. Then 5.5% difference between 2nd and 3rd. yeah probably could be a bit better split but in a 10 team league i beleive that has been talked about anyway

 

They also get the lions share of the TV cash because nearly Every game shown is the OF against AN Other. All tv money is pooled into the prize money so they dont get any more for tv appearances in the laeague

 

They also get to keep all their home gate receipts.

 

yeah so do we - start of the season 12000 vs hamilton so at £20 a head we would give Hamilton £125,000 for bringing in about £4000 of income whereas they would give us about £50000 for bringing about £20000 income

 

so If recepits are split - our budget based one hamilton game home and away alone drops by 75k

 

- is it just me or is keeing the home recepits a good thing ???

 

Its no wonder our game is in the state its in. The whole system is geared towards giving the OF as much as possible and to hell with the rest.

 

 

 

 

if we average 10000 crowds for 10 games with an average away ctrowd of 500

 

our income is about £2 million of which you want to give away £1 million

[K-9]

if we are talking a 10 team league then would you expect them there? yes it may be they that have the easier run in and not us - but at the moment every season post top six split the other 4 always have hard games and hence it is never going to be easy to mount a title challenge come the end of the season, with no split ( be that 10 team league play each other 4 times or an unworkable 18 + team league) there would at least be an opportunity every so often to mount a challenge in the last few games of the season.

 

Any sort of split benefits the OF

A 18+ league is unworkable as the strength in depth isnt there

If a team is good enough they will mount a challenge regardless.

[beer gut]

the above IS the distribution of the TV revenue. No longer is their a division based ion what games are shown.

 

why shouldn't they, or us, keep our home gate receipts? You'd be happy giving a team with a sh*t away support have the gate?

 

Fans go to watch two teams play a match. There is no game without the away team. Is it fair that the away team gets nothing?

[Red Dragon]

Fans go to watch two teams play a match. There is no game without the away team. Is it fair that the away team gets nothing?

 

If there is a corresponding fixture at the opposing venue, then yes.

 

i unerstand the rationale for cup games but in a league with equal numbers of fixtures, i see no reason why the gates should be split since the bulk of the gate is invariably home support.

[Bamber]

Fans go to watch two teams play a match. There is no game without the away team. Is it fair that the away team gets nothing?

 

 

Is it fair that we give hamilton 125k for bringing 500 fans when they give us 50k for bringing 2000?

[beer gut]

Is it fair that we give hamilton 125k for bringing 500 fans when they give us 50k for bringing 2000?

 

Do you think the change to home teams keeping all the gates has improved or stifled competition within Scottish football?

[cammy-1995-dons]

I had my doubts about this 10 tier league but i see advantages,

More money from sky sports and ESPN

Not having to play agaisnt small teams, (Hamilton, St.Mirren)

More Exciting at the bottom

 

but

 

playing teams 4 times a season is far to much and possibly 7 times

If you have a bad season your screwed like Hibs or Aberdeen how we were a month ago

 

I think it can only work if,

Tickets are cut by

[RTYD]

Personally i think its a backward step. The game needs total reform from grass roots to fairer distribution of money etc etc etc. Changing to 10 teams will do eff all. I'd like to see a 20 team top division.

 

 

I watched it when it was 18. It was pure sh*te.

 

The Premier league was the making of Aberdeen and Dundee United.

[a1-don]

Is it fair that we give hamilton 125k for bringing 500 fans when they give us 50k for bringing 2000?

 

The fairest solution would be to give Hamilton our takings for those 500 fans and they give us their takings for the 2000 fans.

[paulkaneatemyhamster]

spliting a pie 10 ways is always going to give you more than spliting it 12 or 14 ways.

 

Still have many doubts, but Bamber makes a very good point about the possibilities at the top & the bottom come the end.

 

But this is all window dressing.

 

Wont change the quality of the teams or players, wont bring more fans back nor will it bring in more money.

 

There are major issues to be sorted in Scottish football to make it a much better game & experience , this should only be the start.

[donaldoni]

spliting a pie 10 ways is always going to give you more than spliting it 12 or 14 ways.

 

Still have many doubts, but Bamber makes a very good point about the possibilities at the top & the bottom come the end.

 

But this is all window dressing.

 

Wont change the quality of the teams or players, wont bring more fans back nor will it bring in more money.

 

There are major issues to be sorted in Scottish football to make it a much better game & experience , this should only be the start.

 

You sure about that? Depends on whether its split evenly or not. Now let me see is the SPL "pie" split evenly or the two fattest b*stards getting a bigger share? And by bigger I mean many times more than the others.

 

If its split more equally but we increase the number of teams do you think a team finishing 6th place would have more, less or the same amount of money?

 

(That's a rhetorical question because i haven't told you how many more teams I'm suggesting we share it with and how much more equally its shared, just to provoke a bit further thought on the more slices of the pie = smaller slices argument)

 

On expanding to 18 generally. The only really good argument I've seen against it is that there isn't enough depth of quality to sustain it EVEN WITH A LONG TERM PLAN in place to improve the "second tier teams". That could be true I'm not sure. Undecided on that and for me that is the most crucial, critical question this should be based on.

 

- If we can develop the depth for 18 teams we should go for it over an appropriate timescale and long at the bigger picture.

- If we cannot ever hope to develop the depth, even by splitting the cash better, bringing in rules for youth development and anything we can realistically do then yes I totally accept we just need to get the best 10 or 12 team league with a sensible calendar, simple 2/3 voting system, and more equitable split of income and get on with it.

 

All the other arguments about losing TV games, meaningless games too few fixtures etc can be worked around and I'm not really convinced by and I think could be worked around or accepted given a better product over all.

[RUL]

I watched it when it was 18. It was pure sh*te.

 

The Premier league was the making of Aberdeen and Dundee United.

 

Not doubting it was sh*te but Ferguson and McLean were the making of these clubs, not the change in league structure.

[Ron1903]

16 team league for me.

Under this new 10 team league there will be 8 teams every year sh!tting it that they could get relegated, can't see them putting much money/time into bringing youth through, giving managers time to plam for the future etc as few bad results and they'll be in a relegation battle.

 

Couldn't give a f**k about the Sky deal, we get what

[StandFree1982]

16 team league for me.

Under this new 10 team league there will be 8 teams every year sh!tting it that they could get relegated, can't see them putting much money/time into bringing youth through, giving managers time to plam for the future etc as few bad results and they'll be in a relegation battle.

 

Couldn't give a f**k about the Sky deal, we get what

[beer gut]

This.

 

Why does everything SPL related have to revolve around those two? Of course they are the two biggest clubs, but thats all they are...two clubs in a league of 12. They are getting more money regardless of how it's split, so why should they get even more money? Why are we making the rich richer and making the poor even poorer because of those b*stards?

 

I would have prefered a 14+ to prevent us playing the same teams over and over and over. There has been a lot of questions regarding "Would you go see us playing <insert generic little team> in the SPL?" I could honestly say I would. Mainly because it would be someone different. Who's to say that giving a bit of backing, the "smaller" clubs won't improve and become a regular decent SPL side?

 

I'd like to see a 2 up and 2 down system to ensure that we aren't stuck with the same 9 clubs every season. I'd like to see a small club coming up and being given a chance to test themselves against the might of the Dandies etc.

 

Fingers crossed that the SPL know what the hell they are talking about...

 

Exactly.

 

If the criteria for reconstruction is we must keep playing the OF 4 times a season then the options are very limited from the start. The OF aren't the big draw they used to be. People will go to watch a winning team regardless of who we play against. Just because the OF have more glory hunting fans doesn't mean they should be allowed to bleed the league dry while the other teams suffer. I hope the 10 team format is a success but i think it is doomed.

[StandFree1982]

Exactly.

 

If the criteria for reconstruction is we must keep playing the OF 4 times a season then the options are very limited from the start. The OF aren't the big draw they used to be. People will go to watch a winning team regardless of who we play against. Just because the OF have more glory hunting fans doesn't mean they should be allowed to bleed the league dry while the other teams suffer. I hope the 10 team format is a success but i think it is doomed.

In the words of one of the guys in the Apprentice.

 

"The Old Firm aren't big fish, they aren't even a fish!"

 

About 10 years ago when Rangers and Celtic had players like Laudrup, Larsson(sp?), Gazza, Kanchelskis etc it was worth paying money to see your team competing against them. Nowadays Rangers are full of sneering tinks, and Celtic are just a team of fairies and moaning b*stards! Or they sign players who are so far past their sell by dates that there should be mould around the edges!

 

F@ck the Old Firm....it's their fault the league is in such disarray nowadays!

[Bobby Connor]

Nothing more than re-arranging the deck chairs IMO. Will make very little difference.

[Bamber]

Basically exactly what i was going to write, there are also quality teams in top half of the 1st, and personally i think a 14 or 16 team league is for the best.

 

 

what difference does 14 make?

 

Still have the split - yep

Still play teams 4 times each - yep

 

16 teams gives 6 less games per season based on an average of 11000 per game means we need to add 2,200 to our average gate per game to make up for the loss of gates - or find an extra 1/2 million per year from somewhere - Oh and would sky pay more for a 16 team league that shows the OF twice less than before? doubt it - at best we would keep the same deal so we are splitting money 16 ways instead of 12. Much as we might hate the OF they are the draw for any TV deal we will get less money if they play each other less

 

Basically we could lose 10% of our annual turnover by going to a 16 team league

 

I just dont get it

 

10 play each other 4 times

 

12 or 14 you have a split and you play teams 4 times each

 

16 you loses 6 games (3 home gates and convert to 2 OF Gates to non OF- doesnt matter if you think they are not as big a draw as they were they still add 20% + onto our biggest crowd

 

18 or 20 isnt viable as there arent enough teams to ensure promotion is nt a constant swap of places of 4 teams year on year

 

if you want rid of the split - its 10 teams or 16,18 or 20

 

if you want to maintain income its 10 teams or 20

 

if you want to have a viable league with genuine promotion and relegation its 10 12 14 or 16

 

The only one that can fulfill all the criteria is 10 teams

[Bamber]

Its just based on half decent teams in the first not the split etc

 

It would give these so called smaller teams a better chnace of top level football. Better for Scottish football, rather than thinking of ourselves and the OF ruling everything.

 

 

And in a spirit of togetherness we can afford to drop our income by 10% ???

 

would be financial suicide

[Ron1903]

what difference does 14 make?

 

Still have the split - yep

Still play teams 4 times each - yep

 

16 teams gives 6 less games per season based on an average of 11000 per game means we need to add 2,200 to our average gate per game to make up for the loss of gates - or find an extra 1/2 million per year from somewhere - Oh and would sky pay more for a 16 team league that shows the OF twice less than before? doubt it - at best we would keep the same deal so we are splitting money 16 ways instead of 12. Much as we might hate the OF they are the draw for any TV deal we will get less money if they play each other less

 

Basically we could lose 10% of our annual turnover by going to a 16 team league

 

I just dont get it

 

10 play each other 4 times

 

12 or 14 you have a split and you play teams 4 times each

 

16 you loses 6 games (3 home gates and convert to 2 OF Gates to non OF- doesnt matter if you think they are not as big a draw as they were they still add 20% + onto our biggest crowd

 

18 or 20 isnt viable as there arent enough teams to ensure promotion is nt a constant swap of places of 4 teams year on year

 

if you want rid of the split - its 10 teams or 16,18 or 20

 

if you want to maintain income its 10 teams or 20

 

if you want to have a viable league with genuine promotion and relegation its 10 12 14 or 16

 

The only one that can fulfill all the criteria is 10 teams

 

Do something with the league cup to make up the number of games or adding on playoffs etc will also add to the number of games as well.

[Bamber]

Do something with the league cup to make up the number of games or adding on playoffs etc will also add to the number of games as well.

 

 

To make up for this missing 3 home games in the league we would probably need about 8 more home games in a league cup. What we going to do make a league cup league?

 

Not every team can be involved in a play off so thats no help

 

 

looking at it then financially its a 10 or a 12 nothing else makes any sense what so ever - unless we want to go out of business along with 5 or 6 other clubs

[AFCaketin]

I think going back to 10 teams is a good thing. Play each other 4 times. Then have a playoff competition for the bottom 2 of spl1 v top 2 of spl 2. This leaves 8 teams from spl1 and 8 teams from spl2 (after the bottom 2 teams go into a playoff with the 3rd tier of scottish football (which should be a 20 team league - top 4 go into a playoff with the bottom 2 of spl2)) to go into a 16 team knockout cup competition. Sorry for the presentation of this but im typing as it comes into my head...

 

SPL 1 = 10 teams, play each other 4 times = 36 games.

SPL 2 = 12 teams, play each other 3 times pre split = 33 games plus 5 games post-split = 38 games.

3rd tier = 20 teams, play each other 2 times = 38 games.

 

SPL 1 top 8 + SPL 2 middle 8 in non-seeded summer knockout cup = min 1 game, max 3 games.

 

SPL 1 bottom 2 and SPL 2 top 2 play each other once in a mini league = 3 Games

 

SPL 2 bottom 2 and 3rd tier top 4 play each other once in a mini league = 5 Games.

 

Scottish Cup and League cup still running...or scrap league cup and have every team in scottish cup from round 1.

 

With regards to gate receipts - away team takes 25% of away gate and 5% of home gate or something like that.

[K-9]

16 teams gives 6 less games per season based on an average of 11000 per game means we need to add 2,200 to our average gate per game to make up for the loss of gates - or find an extra 1/2 million per year from somewhere - Oh and would sky pay more for a 16 team league that shows the OF twice less than before? doubt it - at best we would keep the same deal so we are splitting money 16 ways instead of 12. Much as we might hate the OF they are the draw for any TV deal we will get less money if they play each other less

 

Basically we could lose 10% of our annual turnover by going to a 16 team league

 

I just dont get it

 

8 less games than right now which would be 4 home league games lost. 44k paying fans no longer paying and club losing big time. And that is before you factor in crowds for games against Cowdenbeath, Ross County, Raith and Falkirk insead of Celtic, Rangers, Hearts and United.

[Old Wing Stand]

Not sure what to think of this would be ok any tv money was divided equally but as usual the OF will grab the lions share.

[aberdeen mock chop]

i think its really bad that the fans havent been consulted,the spl is boring enough as it is and they want to reduce the teams.

 

i know a lot of lads who have said thats it for them if it goes through and they,ll only attend the cup games.I would still go to some games but the way the whole thing is being done shows a total disregard for fans up and down the country.

[razor89]

So to make the league more interesting, the solution is to let more sh*te teams into the league. I definitely think, competition wise, that it is more beneficial to play 'better' teams more often. Scotland cannot support a big league, we are a small country, people need to accept it, we cannot compare ourselves to England.

 

Imagine the lack of competitiveness in a larger league, it would be impossible for bigger teams to get relegated (good for us, but let's get real, we want competition). And imagine part-time teams playing in the SPL, surely wouldn't work.

 

I also think it would financial suicide for teams who get relegated from the league, the quality of the league below would be far too crap for it to be useful. I think a lot of the reason that the EPL has strength in depth is because the Championship is a very strong competitive league, helped by a large pyramid system. I think incorporating Junior Leagues and Highland League etc, into the Scottish pyramid would be good, reintroduces an element of competition into the leagues.

[aberdeen mock chop]

brainwashed already mate?

 

14-16 team would be a lot more interesting for fans,you could also give the league cup back its euro spot and play the games on a saturday..

 

but im afraid this new suggestion if anything is going to drive fans away ....and all this colts nonsense as well..its all suited for the old firm and old firm only.

[Bamber]

brainwashed already mate?

 

14-16 team would be a lot more interesting for fans,you could also give the league cup back its euro spot and play the games on a saturday..

 

but im afraid this new suggestion if anything is going to drive fans away ....and all this colts nonsense as well..its all suited for the old firm and old firm only.

 

 

14 teams = split = you play teams 4 times = no different than 12 = less money = no point

 

16 teams = only 2 OF games and 8 less games than now = less income through the gate = less interest from sky = less money from sky = 10% drop in turnover = financial suicide