Opinion Of The Spfl

[shakey_student]

Hello all,

 

I am student who is studying towards a MS.c in Business and Management. As part of my course, I am to complete a project on the marketing on the SPFL. To do so, I am looking for the input of Scottish football fans on various themes, listed below, re the SPFL. If you would like to post any comments, regarding one or more of the themes, it would be much appreciated.

 

Themes:

 

1. How do you view the standard of the product

For example:

- do you think the players/facilities/coaches are good enough?

- is it too predictable/not enough variety?

-not exciting enough?

-is the absence of Rangers/Hibs/Hearts going to affect the top flight?

-does it represent good value for money?

 

2. Has the rebranding/restructuring of the SPFL made any initial differences

For example:

-does the logo and league structure differentiate the SPFL from competitors? (is very similar to the English set up)

-will Scottish football become improve or become more competitive?

-any issues re number of teams/schedule/winter breaks etc

 

3. Following Scottish football

For example:

-attend matches/through the media?

-is Scottish football under exposed in the media?

-is the product accessible enough (any issues attending, such as price of tickets/travel)

 

4. How would you improve the SPFL

 

 

Thank you for reading!

[StevieT1986]

The renaming of the leagues was a joke. Just copied and pasted from england.

 

The fact that there is still no league sponsorship is a joke. (Has the league cup and scottish cup got sponsors)

 

The fact they seem more interested in promoting the Championship league as apposed to the Premiership.

 

Paying TV companies to screen Rangers games is a disgrace.

 

The only thing I like is the pyriamid system for the lowland and highland league teams

 

But it's still the same inept and corrupt organisation under a new name and a new logo

[rossafc92]

Hello all,

 

I am student who is studying towards a MS.c in Business and Management. As part of my course, I am to complete a project on the marketing on the SPFL. To do so, I am looking for the input of Scottish football fans on various themes, listed below, re the SPFL. If you would like to post any comments, regarding one or more of the themes, it would be much appreciated.

 

Themes:

 

1. How do you view the standard of the product

For example:

- do you think the players/facilities/coaches are good enough?

- is it too predictable/not enough variety?

-not exciting enough?

-is the absence of Rangers/Hibs/Hearts going to affect the top flight?

-does it represent good value for money?

 

2. Has the rebranding/restructuring of the SPFL made any initial differences

For example:

-does the logo and league structure differentiate the SPFL from competitors? (is very similar to the English set up)

-will Scottish football become improve or become more competitive?

-any issues re number of teams/schedule/winter breaks etc

 

3. Following Scottish football

For example:

-attend matches/through the media?

-is Scottish football under exposed in the media?

-is the product accessible enough (any issues attending, such as price of tickets/travel)

 

4. How would you improve the SPFL

 

 

Thank you for reading!

 

 

1. - Last season showed that the SPFL can be exciting. Exciting doesn't necessarily equate to good quality football, but that doesn't really matter. Even with Hearts relegated long before the season's end, we still had high drama on the final weekend of the season in the lower half which culminated in Hibs finishing in the play-off spot and leading to an exciting play-off over two legs. In the top half (from a neutral perspective anyway!), the final day between Aberdeen v Motherwell, and the manner in which it finished, probably gave us one of the most exciting/interesting final weekends in years.

 

- Only way that having Hearts and Hibs relegated will affect things this season from a personal perspective is the 'quality' of stadium we go to. I'd rather be going to a venue like Easter Road or Tynecastle than New Douglas Park, but Hamilton deserve to be up in the top tier and I'd like to think that most fans appreciate that.

 

- I don't think it's ever good value for money if you're paying more than around £15/£20 for 90 mins of football, no matter where you are.

 

2. - I don't think the formation of the SPFL has made as much of a difference (at least from a fan's point of view) as some would say. We hear Doncaster and co talking about the importance of us having one governing body, but we are still without a title sponsor and the leagues remain the same format.

 

- The logo/branding of the SPFL has been well done, but I think that the names given to the leagues remain an embarrassment. 'Premiership' is very 2004, and the 'Championship' isn't even a championship. Whilst it can be argued that it is the 'Championship' of the old Scottish Football League, it is clearly just trying to mirror the naming of the English leagues, especially given that the third and fourth tiers are named 'League One' and 'League Two' respectively.

 

- As for number of teams, there are too many 'professional' football clubs in Scotland. But it would be unfair to throw the smaller clubs (such as those who occupy the bottom two tiers) out of the professional governing body just because they're smaller. In 20-50 years time, I can't see many of those clubs still being around.

 

- In terms of the schedule, I'm not really a fan of summer football myself (as in playing a March-October calendar for example). However, I'd like to see earlier starts like in the 2010/11 season when we started around 20th July (?).

 

- This season the scheduling has been a bit of a disgrace - why a midweek fixture card in the first week of the new season? Made even more ridiculous when the likes of ourselves are given our furthest away trip. If there was any common sense then this wouldn't be the case. Seems as if it's what the computer came up with and nobody bothered to alter it.

 

- As for Scottish football becoming more competitive, the only 'competition' left would of course be for the Premiership title. The money gap is too big. There'll be no competition there for the forseeable future given the financial gulf between Celtic and the rest. Outwith that, though, it is pretty competitive, as last season's Premiership exemplified.

 

3. - Scottish football is definitely underexposed in the media. Struck me when I was in the cinema last night and there were two pre-film adverts about the start of the EPL. Not a cheep about anything to do with the SPFL. Television adverts etc, there's nothing. You only ever hear about the EPL.

 

- The cost is too high - explained feelings on this above.

 

4. Improvements:

 

- League reconstruction: a couple of years ago this was all that was being talked about but it seems to have been forgotten since we eventually ended up cherry-picking from the initial round of talks in 2013 and formed the SPFL.

 

- I would like to see the following: top tier of 12, second tier of 12, third tier of 16; top two tiers operate as the Premiership does at the moment; 1st in the second tier replaces 12th in the top tier, and there's a two-legged play-off between 11th in the top tier and 2nd in the second tier; the third tier operates on a 30 rounds basis (allows for a winter break to benefit clubs who perhaps don't have a plastic pitch or undersoil heating) and winners replace 12th in the second tier, whilst 2nd, 3rd and 4th enter a play-off system like is already in place in lower leagues with the 11th placed team in the second tier; bottom two play off against winners of Highland and Lowland League respectively (ie. 15th vs. HFL winner: winner plays in SPFL third tier; 16th vs. Lowland winner: winner play in SPFL third tier).

 

- I would scrap the current names of the leagues and simply call them SPFL 1, SPFL 2 and something like 'SPFL Conference' for the third tier of 16 (or just SPFL 3).

 

- There's a whole host of things that can also be improved: alcohol at games, standing sections, better highlights show/package, reduce costs, title sponsor etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Good luck and hope this helps.

[Dandyesque]

How many students do "papers" on Scottish Football these days? Seems to be a survey by one every month or two.

 

Get a proper job min!

[fine-n-dandy]

SPFL is shite & is still just a vessel to filter as much cash as possible to the West coast because the whole concept is run by the West coast mafia.

Scottish football cannot improve until the West coast accept that in their efforts to strengthen the two arse cheeks, it has only served to weaken the rest & then have the West coast BLAME the rest for the weakening of the two arse cheeks causing them to lose their bowels because of the weakening cheek effect.

 

Moral is. Feed the whole body & eventually it will all find it's way through the arse cheeks rather than throwing good money straight into the arse cheeks.

[caledonia]

The Scottish Professional Football League

QUEENS PARK ARE NOT THAT

[shakey_student]

thank you for your responses!

[shakey_student]

Obviously from your point of view you feel as if the "new" SPFL lacks any from of credibility? This is certainly something i agree with, and is a disaster to be honest. Does this at all affect your interest in following your team? Or will you continue to tune in despite the poor quality of matches and inept organisation that runs it all?

[Stoney]

Its fucking shite.

 

Probably the worst most lopsided league in Europe.

[RUL]

Is it? Don't think it's much different from other leagues in Europe, hence why we competed fine against Groningen.

 

I think the SPL big problem is the shadow of the EPL and that we fucked up years ago allowing Sportscene to disappear and so on. Now we have no highlights on a Saturday night. When I was a kid, we had Sportscene Saturday and Scotsport Sunday. There was even a show on a Friday night previewing the action.

 

The only decent coverage in Scotland is Radio Scotland. They give lots of coverage to the game.

 

I also think the SPL lost the plot as it tried to be like the EPL. I think we've missed the boat and it'll take a long time for the game to get back to respectable levels but like any other league, when you allow yourself to be dictated to by the best, rather than catering for all, you leave yourself up shit creek. What does Doncaster et all even contribute? Who sponsors this league anymore? Or the cups? What are the government doing to promote the national game? There are countries where the government take a lead to sponsor trophies etc.

 

Football is by far the most popular activity in Scotland but nobody wants to invest, baffling.

[Merkie84]

For my tuppensworth I agree that the route of all problems have been catering for two teams only but also the obsession with those who govern scottish football for us to copy England at every turn.

 

England is a far bigger country than us with far bigger clubs who have a global fanbase. We are never going to have a league like that.

 

We should focus on ways we can make it as different from the EPL as possible, safe standing, noisy passionate atmosphere ( does not necissarily come from large crowds) clubs who are a pillars of their local community instead of soulless corporate logos, generally football being something that you enjoy inside a football stadium with friends and family instead of being anTV programme people enjoy.

[StandFree1982]

The number of league winners in the last 20 years of the "top" leagues (+ Scotland):

 

 

League | No. winners | No. Teams | %

 

France 10 / 20 (50%)

Germany 6 / 18 (33%)

Holland - 5 / 18 (28%)

England - 4 / 20 (20%)

Spain - 5 / 20 (20%)

Italy 5 / 20 (20%)

Scotland - 2 / 12 (17%)

 

The percentages will be skewed by the possibility of the number of teams changing in the last 20 years, but it does look like we've the worst percentage of league winning clubs per number of clubs! If you take out the fact that we only had 10 teams in some of those years, it would be even worse.

 

France have had a whopping 10 different teams winning their leagues in the last 20 years!

[dave_min]

I'd be willing to bet €20, that the French League will only have 2 different winners for the next 20 years.

[RUL]

Indeed, Ajax have won last 5 titles in Holland, I think psg last 2 with 1bn still to spend that won't change, I just think Scottish league reached the dead end of competitiveness before others.

[StandFree1982]

If I could be arsed, i'd have looked at the last 10 years and compared. Looking at how competitive leagues were before and after the "money explosion" in football and the "Champions" League. It would undoubtedly become much more of a 2 or 3 horse race in pretty much ever league.

[NPRC]

Seem to be giving very loaded questions in your survey...got a conclusion in mind, aye?

[BrianFaePerth]

If I could be arsed, i'd have looked at the last 10 years and compared. Looking at how competitive leagues were before and after the "money explosion" in football and the "Champions" League. It would undoubtedly become much more of a 2 or 3 horse race in pretty much ever league.

 

A competitive league doesn't mean a successful league. The Scandinavian countries are good examples there. The interest is low, mainly because everyone supports Manure, Liverpool or the like, and the local leagues are viewed upon with disdain.

[Stoney]

The number of league winners in the last 20 years of the "top" leagues (+ Scotland):

 

 

League | No. winners | No. Teams | %

 

France 10 / 20 (50%)

Germany 6 / 18 (33%)

Holland - 5 / 18 (28%)

England - 4 / 20 (20%)

Spain - 5 / 20 (20%)

Italy 5 / 20 (20%)

Scotland - 2 / 12 (17%)

 

The percentages will be skewed by the possibility of the number of teams changing in the last 20 years, but it does look like we've the worst percentage of league winning clubs per number of clubs! If you take out the fact that we only had 10 teams in some of those years, it would be even worse.

 

France have had a whopping 10 different teams winning their leagues in the last 20 years!

 

EPL Cant be right?

 

Blackburn

United

Arsenal

City

Chelsea

[StandFree1982]

I cut it off at the season after, think I counted 20 from there to current....it's not an exact science or anything and was done fairly quickly, so i'm not being held responsible for any inconvenience caused by any inaccuracies!

 

No a competitive league doesn't mean it's successful, but it makes it much more exciting for the fans if their team actually has a hope in hell of winning the league. Currently in Scotland there is nobody outside of the Tims who'll win the league in the current state.

[dave_min]

Didn't Middlesborough win the Premiership in 2003/04?

[BrianFaePerth]

Didn't Middlesborough win the Premiership in 2003/04?

 

No it was Warbury Warriors

[AndrewW]

Obviously from your point of view you feel as if the "new" SPFL lacks any from of credibility? This is certainly something i agree with, and is a disaster to be honest. Does this at all affect your interest in following your team? Or will you continue to tune in despite the poor quality of matches and inept organisation that runs it all?

 

Fucking hell why are all these surveys so negative? Just fuck off and watch guffy football then you tit.

 

We are a small country - the quality is fine and last year was extremely exciting.

[shakey_student]

Im not trying to be negative here, and the the questions are not intended to be lopsided. Apologies if it comes across this way.

 

Most of the feedback you have given me re the quality of the game and the SPFL has been negative, so I am trying to figure out why you continue to attend. Is the branding and marketing of the SPFL irrelevant to most of you? Do you attend purely to supports your team and to socialise, and what is happening on the pitch is secondary?

[AFCaketin]

Im not trying to be negative here, and the the questions are not intended to be lopsided. Apologies if it comes across this way.

 

Most of the feedback you have given me re the quality of the game and the SPFL has been negative, so I am trying to figure out why you continue to attend. Is the branding and marketing of the SPFL irrelevant to most of you? Do you attend purely to supports your team and to socialise, and what is happening on the pitch is secondary?

The branding and marketing of the game makes bugger all difference to me and probably anyone who goes to any games. The point is, they don't do a very good job of promoting it to those who need prompting to go along. The guys running our game are negative as fuck about the game, don't have a clue and look like pricks, especially Doncaster - you can just tell he was last pick in PE and got fitba's pelted at him from all angles and he'd try save everything with his feet no matter the height.

 

If you support a team, you aren't going to stop going if the league is sponsored by Shitty Pish Aids Ltd., I couldn't give a fuck.

 

What happens on the pitch isn't secondary, you go to be entertained have a laugh with your pals and a few pints. The more that is at stake, the more likely people are to go along i.e. there has to be something to play for...if you are challenging for trophies and winning games, people will go along. If you are in a relegation dog fight, fighting for survival, people will go along. If you are playing for absolutely nothing and the system is set up to favour some clubs more than others, more and more people will just give up.

 

EDIT: I think Jim Shhhpence said that if they didn't find a sponsor they should gift the sponsorship to a charity or something - this is Jim Spence, a man who can't even brush his hair, coming up with more ideas than those muppets.

[StandFree1982]

Im not trying to be negative here, and the the questions are not intended to be lopsided. Apologies if it comes across this way.

 

Most of the feedback you have given me re the quality of the game and the SPFL has been negative, so I am trying to figure out why you continue to attend. Is the branding and marketing of the SPFL irrelevant to most of you? Do you attend purely to supports your team and to socialise, and what is happening on the pitch is secondary?

I think it's just the leading , negative, questions for example :

 

is it too predictable/not enough variety?

Not exciting enough?

 

Personally, i'll always follow AFC even if we ended up in the Championship, or worse. Of course what happens on the pitch is important but you're core, proper fans will support the team through thick and thin.

[Merkie84]

"Most of the feedback you have given me re the quality of the game and the SPFL has been negative, so I am trying to figure out why you continue to attend."

 

And there we have modern football in a nutshell. The idea of supporting your local team because you are a football fan who enjoys watching football at their local stadium with friends and family seems totally alien to a lot of people. Yes I wish Aberdeen had players as good as Real Madrid but I don't support Real Madrid because they are better than aberdeen because they are not my team. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

As for sponsorship etc, what a load of nonsense , who you care who sponsors it. The modern footbal fans obsesion with finance is baffling to me. Football flourished for well over a century before it started being branded left right and centre with corporate logos. The spfl could have the best most desirable company sponsoring it, it doesn't change the fact that it is a poor league designed for 2 teams to flourish at everyone else's expense

[shakey_student]

Point taken re the negative questions, was not intentional. Again thank you for your comments.

 

I can understand that you do not care about sponsorship/finance. Would you therefore say that these are not important aspects of the modern game? Re Merkie, football did flourish before, but TV money and the media have vastly changed the modern game whether we like it or not. Do you think that the clubs/leagues have to adapt to this?

 

The reason that I want to know why you guys turn up, is because your the ones that fund the league through attending matches and watching on TV. The Scottish game needs more of them. If, as some people say, the quality is not so good, and there is no immediate remedy for that, should the league/clubs be focussing on value for money and the experience around match days? One of the earlier posts suggested safe standing, alcohol at games, lower ticket prices, affordable family deals etc. Would this in your opinion bring more fans to the games?

 

If it is just to support the local team, is this because you have been going from a young age?

[Merkie84]

I think they are sponsorship and corporate deals are important for the clubs and the leagues but not for the fan. I don't care how much tiger woods gets from Nike or Andy Murray gets from Robinsons. I only care about what they do in a sporting capacity. Same with football teams.

 

I think football has to find a better balance between business and sport as especially the champions league is getting very boring and predictable although massively financially beneficial for clubs involved.

 

I would also point out that one of the reasons I love football, as well as millions round the world, is that it does not need to be played at an elite level to be a spectacle. The World Cup and champions league finals were good, but so was this seasons scottish cup final, highland league games can be great to watch, so can junior football or your kids school football game.

[fifered]

The spfl is run by inept over paid morons. Doncaster etc do nothing but run it down in the media. By contrast all you hear in the media about the epl is how it's 'the best league in the world' even though it most likely isn't. Their publicising of their game is a lesson for all to learn whether you like the epl or not. Doncaster etc just go on about how hard it will be to find a sponsor and that without the huns we were heading for 'Armageddon' . Utter bullshit which has been proven so over the last two seasons and yet he is still in a job. We have another member of the spfl board who was at the heart of the biggest scandal ever to hit Scottish football, taking ebts from the huns. Why is he even still tolerated in our game? If it wasn't for fans, Doncaster etc would have swept that whole huns debacle under the carpet in order to continue with the status quo of the time. Blatant corruption.

 

Cunts like Deila come in to our game and the first thing he talks about his that he thinks everyone else is pish, a line no doubt fed to him by that fucker lawell. We've gone from a duopoly to a monopoly with that man at the heart of shaping the top league into what is best for celtic. When anyone gets close to them the negative stories start to appear in the press, see Neil Lennons fairy story at the semi at tynecastle for proof of that.

 

The only shining light for me in Scottish football is Derek mcinnes and what he has done for our club. If it wasn't for him and the team we have and that he is building I'd have stopped going to games. In fact I did for a few seasons around the McGhee debacle.

 

In short, my interest or lack of in Scottish football is entirely associated to the dons and how they are performing. The rest is corrupt biased bullshit weighted in favour of the bigots from Glasgow.

[rumpus]

This student guy must be laughing his head off as he timely nudges repliers to his thread to respond and do all his work for him.

 

Fucking parasite, think for yourself instead of plagarism.