The split

[Blue Avenger 22,569]

39 minutes ago, TMB said:

I still think we Should have 3 divisions.  20 teams in each division.  38 games a season playing each team home and away.  Many will say the quality would be shit.  But, outside of the Old Firm, Hearts and Hibs, and Aberdeen, it’s all shit anyway.  

Get the best of the juniors in to make up the 60.

[glasgow argyle 1,093]

2 minutes ago, GA1972 said:

Belgium, Holland and Romania all have mental split-like ends to the season. 

Romanian set up would be far better in our league, play everyone twice then you play the other teams in your half of the league twice 

We’d have to add teams to the league to do that or it would be a 32 game season 

 

 

I have long suggested we should have a 14 team top tier. Playing home and away for 26 games. Then split top 6 play each other twice giving top teams a total of 36 games,  2 less than at present,  which should help for euro competitions . No unfair advantages by playing a different number of games at home or away. 

The bottom 8 also play each other twice giving them a total of 40 league games , which should give bottom clubs extra revenue,  also have bottom 2 automatic relegation and 3rd bottom in play off with championship play off winner. Keeps more clubs having something at stake.

[Jamie0202 13,177]

43 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Teams wont vote that in because they might lose the OF pound one game a season

You're probably right as Scottish football does tend to vote selfishly instead of what is good for the game. The thing is though as it stands they aren't guaranteed 4 home gates against the OF even if they finish top 6. Also a fair few of them have cut our allocation down anyway in recent seasons. It makes sense to go for a 14 team league. 

[GA1972 10,403]

5 minutes ago, glasgow argyle said:

I have long suggested we should have a 14 team top tier. Playing home and away for 26 games. Then split top 6 play each other twice giving top teams a total of 36 games,  2 less than at present,  which should help for euro competitions . No unfair advantages by playing a different number of games at home or away. 

The bottom 8 also play each other twice giving them a total of 40 league games , which should give bottom clubs extra revenue,  also have bottom 2 automatic relegation and 3rd bottom in play off with championship play off winner. Keeps more clubs having something at stake.

It’s definitely a good idea, I think we should just have a 20 team league and play everyone twice.
 

Id be all for them incorporating as many teams as you can find into the lower divisions and just make it bonkers, make the championship a 40 team gimmick league where they all play each other once or something and try to sell the 2 leagues as a package to a broadcaster

[Brackley 1,412]

1 hour ago, Jamie0202 said:

Make it a 14 team top league. Each team plays each other twice making a total of 26 games. Then split in to two leagues of 7 instead of 6 and play each other twice again for a total of 12 games. That gives you a 38 game season, 4 OF games, gives a fairer number of home and away games and makes it a more exciting end to the season where more points are likely to be dropped against the better teams. Same applies to the bottom 7 where each team is more likely to pick up points against the weaker teams. 

Problem with that is if you have 7 teams, one team will be without a game each week and in the last round of games could give a huge advantage to the teams with a game to play.

Eg Going into our last game neck and neck with the tims and we lose and the tims don't play their last game until the week after knowing a draw gives them the title.

[GersInCanada 7,775]

No solution bar expanding the league to where everyone plays each other once home and away makes complete sense.

The present arrangement is a farce. 

[glasgow argyle 1,093]

9 minutes ago, Brackley said:

Problem with that is if you have 7 teams, one team will be without a game each week and in the last round of games could give a huge advantage to the teams with a game to play.

Eg Going into our last game neck and neck with the tims and we lose and the tims don't play their last game until the week after knowing a draw gives them the title.

Don't have 7 teams mate. My suggestion is top 6 so 3 teams play the other 3.

Bottom 8 so its 4 teams against 4 teams each week.

Before split its 7 teams v 7 teams every week so no team has a free week at any time

[Jamie0202 13,177]

25 minutes ago, Brackley said:

Problem with that is if you have 7 teams, one team will be without a game each week and in the last round of games could give a huge advantage to the teams with a game to play.

Eg Going into our last game neck and neck with the tims and we lose and the tims don't play their last game until the week after knowing a draw gives them the title.

Oh well. I never actually thought of that. Back to the drawing board then. 

[tannerall 25,935]

16 teams in the Premier League, playing each other once..   And no split. 30 games a season. simple. 

Top 4 teams play in Europe the next season, but not in League Cup. 

This enables them to cut back on domestic fixtures and play international, big name or money spinning friendlies to raise standard and generate cash. 

As for the rest, the next 10 plus the bottom 2 qualifiers from regional league play in the League Cup the next season.

 

Then

16 teams in a regional Northern League. 

16 teams in a regional Southern League. 

Top team in Northern league and Southern League play in a group with  bottom two in Premier for places. Top two go into Premier League of 16.

The rest except the bottom in the regional leagues do not play in the league cup, but play in a newly formed Anglo-Scottish invitation tournament against English league 1 and 2 teams. 

Scottish Cup remains open to all. 

 

Main part is that the top 4 teams have  less domestic games a season, and have opportunity to earn money and experience with international friendlies, and the other Premier League clubs have the League Cup to themselves, to get a more often chance of glory. 

(I realise that is 36 teams so the bottom four would be gone, but I would suggest not really missed.)

 

 

[mickomagh 0]

What would happen if St. Johnstone are in the bottom 6 after the split?

[Johnstone Burgh 1,687]

1 hour ago, Gazzalivesforever said:

There's only 42 teams across four divisions in Scotland. Are you going to magic the other 18 teams out your arse like you did with this idea 🙈🙈

Yeah if you completely ignore the highland and lowland leagues

[AGM_72 4,086]

4 hours ago, Redwhiteandblue said:

Did we not win the league one time before the split? 

 

Hibs away 09/10, I think? Lafferty scored the only goal.

[James Rolle 514]

5 hours ago, Inigo said:

Me neither. More games against the better teams, fewer against the shite ones. More for teams compete for in the league as well.

The whole 7th can end up with more than 6th doesn't matter. Just alter your perspective a bit. Bit if an inflexible outlook to complain about that. It effectively becomes 2 separate leagues. 

Not perfect, but it has some good qualities and it allows a 12 team league, which is about right for me.

I’d prefer to go back to 10 teams in the top league - play each other 4 times (that’s screwed up but required for TV money) total of 36 games and scrap the split. It’s not fair the way it is - with unequal home and away ties against some teams. 

[Mcloy_72 26]

The splits pony.it's always gonna be us and taigs for title every season.let's not kid ourselves by saying aberdeen ,hearts,hibs,Kilmarnock are ever going to win a title regardless of splits or any other carryon.

[Colin Traive 23,933]

4 hours ago, tannerall said:

16 teams in the Premier League, playing each other once..   And no split. 30 games a season. simple. 

Top 4 teams play in Europe the next season, but not in League Cup. 

This enables them to cut back on domestic fixtures and play international, big name or money spinning friendlies to raise standard and generate cash. 

As for the rest, the next 10 plus the bottom 2 qualifiers from regional league play in the League Cup the next season.

 

Then

16 teams in a regional Northern League. 

16 teams in a regional Southern League. 

Top team in Northern league and Southern League play in a group with  bottom two in Premier for places. Top two go into Premier League of 16.

The rest except the bottom in the regional leagues do not play in the league cup, but play in a newly formed Anglo-Scottish invitation tournament against English league 1 and 2 teams. 

Scottish Cup remains open to all. 

 

Main part is that the top 4 teams have  less domestic games a season, and have opportunity to earn money and experience with international friendlies, and the other Premier League clubs have the League Cup to themselves, to get a more often chance of glory. 

(I realise that is 36 teams so the bottom four would be gone, but I would suggest not really missed.)

 

 

Great post mate, the regionalisation of the lower leagues especially.

Peterhead going to Stranraer and Annan going to Cove Rangers is insane.

[gj923 1,471]

16 hours ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

How? Can’t remember many if any of their clubs doing well in years 👍

They always have 2 or 3 clubs that do reasonably well each season is what matters. Take 2016/17 for example 3 of their clubs reached the last 16 of the Europa League which is not something you are going to remember but on that journey between the 3 teams they picked up 52.5 points. They do have bad years also sometimes.

Added to that what makes it easier for them to stay there is the clubs are ranked reasonably high - Anderlecht 33, Brugge 37, Gent 51 and Genk 60 so it means they will be seeded for qualifying draws and in higher pots for the group stages.

[gj923 1,471]

14 hours ago, tannerall said:

16 teams in the Premier League, playing each other once..   And no split. 30 games a season. simple. 

Top 4 teams play in Europe the next season, but not in League Cup. 

This enables them to cut back on domestic fixtures and play international, big name or money spinning friendlies to raise standard and generate cash. 

As for the rest, the next 10 plus the bottom 2 qualifiers from regional league play in the League Cup the next season.

 

Then

16 teams in a regional Northern League. 

16 teams in a regional Southern League. 

Top team in Northern league and Southern League play in a group with  bottom two in Premier for places. Top two go into Premier League of 16.

The rest except the bottom in the regional leagues do not play in the league cup, but play in a newly formed Anglo-Scottish invitation tournament against English league 1 and 2 teams. 

Scottish Cup remains open to all. 

 

Main part is that the top 4 teams have  less domestic games a season, and have opportunity to earn money and experience with international friendlies, and the other Premier League clubs have the League Cup to themselves, to get a more often chance of glory. 

(I realise that is 36 teams so the bottom four would be gone, but I would suggest not really missed.)

 

 

With 8 less games including up to 2 old firm visits most clubs would lose a significant sum in revenue from reduced season ticket prices, reduced tickets sold overall, hospitality, catering and old firm visits. For some clubs that would be a 7 figure loss and we would probably loss a few million from this at least.

The league cup provides prize money along with gate money - that would no longer be there without the top 4 clubs in it. Again we would lose out on revenue from tickets and prize money

Who exactly would we play friendlies with? Given that the majority of leagues are ongoing during ours?

[loyalfollower 1,543]

Shows how unattractive the league actually is for tv deals to focus on 4 old firm games per season.    If these no mark unambitious clubs aren’t interested in investing and making the league a 3-4 horse race then what is the point? They may aswell Jack it in

[OhW 4,695]

15 hours ago, GA1972 said:

Belgium, Holland and Romania all have mental split-like ends to the season.

No mate OP said only in Scotland. 

[folkestoneger 9,138]

17 hours ago, DBBTB said:

The TV companies want four Old Firm games a season and the current set up is basically the only way to do it. They aren’t going to sacrifice that to add teams like Queen of the South and Ayr to the league.

It’s not.

Back to play each other home and away twice and scrap the league cup

[The Dude 20,027]

17 hours ago, bluenoz said:

I cannot believe after 20 years we still have this in our game after the first 33 matches. Does any other league have anything similar? I can only imagine this was concocted by a few computer geeks who never really played the game.

If by some way we managed to claw ourselves back into this title, there will be derision from one side of the city or the other for sure. It is flawed and cannot be fairly balanced. Only in Scotland.

Yes. Switzerland has (or at least had) similar iirc.

[TerryTibbs 250]

Personally, I like the split. 
 

makes it more exciting at the end of a season. Also gives us a fighting chance if we can somehow manage to only be a few points behind going into the split  

[onefootwillie 1,519]

On 18/02/2020 at 19:02, glasgow argyle said:

I have long suggested we should have a 14 team top tier. Playing home and away for 26 games. Then split top 6 play each other twice giving top teams a total of 36 games,  2 less than at present,  which should help for euro competitions . No unfair advantages by playing a different number of games at home or away. 

The bottom 8 also play each other twice giving them a total of 40 league games , which should give bottom clubs extra revenue,  also have bottom 2 automatic relegation and 3rd bottom in play off with championship play off winner. Keeps more clubs having something at stake.

This 100% , it's what I have always said.  Fair to everyone 

[glasgow argyle 1,093]

13 minutes ago, onefootwillie said:

This 100% , it's what I have always said.  Fair to everyone 

A previous poster advocated a return to the 10 team set up playing home and away 4 times for 36 games,  my contention is that has been tried and failed,  partly due to potentially playing an opponent 6 times if drawn in cups.  One of the reasons widely quoted as a reason for Van Bronkhurst leaving. Also I.m.o. this set up is too tight and would lead to even more negative tactics than at present, as  too many teams would be afraid of being relegated .

Hence the views I have propounded earlier for a 14 team set up should have more attack minded teams.  It's ok playing in top 6 after split against the best teams  4 times,  that gives the lucrative septic games , but avoids playing e.g. Hamilton Accies  4 times. The bottom 8 teams will of course play each other 4 times but the extra gate money from bottom 8 playing a total of 40 games  over the whole season should help them out financially . The top 6 playing a total of 36 games will help teams playing in Europe as this is 2 matches less than the current ludicrous format, like playing a side once at home and 3 times away or vice versa. 

[NixonRFC 1,598]

On 18/02/2020 at 17:15, teddybear1975 said:

Read today that if the top six remain the same until split the scum play five of there 6 games at home?

20 year deep into this shite format and cunts still don't know how it works 😂

 

If the eventual  top six are the current top six then we would be due to play two of the top six for a third time at Ibrox while they would be due to play 2 of the top six away from home for a third time.