Jump to content

Rangers Propose League Change (Inc "B Team")


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

As for the bottom 8, imagine one team gets isolated at the bottom, a gretna if you will, another 2 are playoff candidates, that leaves 5 teams post split who are basically playing meaningless games, some will be playing them way before the split, 

Its a certainty that by middle of February there will be teams who are too shite for the top 6 but too good to go down, imagine all their pay on the day punters trying to work up the appetite to go see a meaningless game against say inverness or dundee united, 

This will cost clubs a fortune

Will this really be materially more of an issue than it is already? We already get this from the current structure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 197
  • Created
  • Last Reply
46 minutes ago, billscott said:

at the end of the day these games are still friendlies  we need  competitive games for the young players this idea they would get kicked to bits is rubbish  these lads can handle themselves after all we got to the challenge cup final  beating one of the biggest hammer thrower teams in non league in england

By all means leave them in the fish supper cup but I see little reward in having them play glorified junior sides twice a week. It may well toughen them up but at a cost for overall development.

It's a NO from me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, GersInCanada said:

By all means leave them in the fish supper cup but I see little reward in having them play glorified junior sides twice a week. It may well toughen them up but at a cost for overall development.

It's a NO from me.

What would the cost to their development be?

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Creampuff said:

Will this really be materially more of an issue than it is already? We already get this from the current structure.

Hibs even voted for a proposition that saw them drop a league place into the bottom 6, whole things a joke.

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Creampuff said:

Thanks for your detailed response, mate.

You have simplified it .Don’t think it’s a simple choice between the two tbh mate 

There seems to be much of that going on here .And it’s creating a little divide .The people that back the board or the ones that hate Scottish football and our enemies .And pretty much don’t like the board 

I’m in neither category .I absolutely hate them all 😄

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Our under 21s playing competitive football in house week in week out against men is great for our player development. We are a football club and furthering that should come first above all other considerations.

Until results don’t go our way and murty starts throwing all the young lads under the bus to save his own arse 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Creampuff said:

Will this really be materially more of an issue than it is already? We already get this from the current structure.

Thats my point, another 2 teams with loads of pointless games, will their chairmen or owners go for it, doubtful 

Plus playing each other twice instead of 3 times, thats a guaranteed one less home game against either us or the tarriers, no way will clubs give up that cash

Right now, a team has a 3 in 4 chance of playing a third home game against either us or the tarriers, without even thinking about post split games, this drops to a 0 in 4 chance, theres not a chance teams like Hamilton, st johnstone, killie etc all vote to give up a quarter of a mill minimum

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Creampuff said:

Thanks for your detailed response, mate.

He's right though. It is nonsense.

The whole thing stinks - thanks in no small part to our club.

How is wanting to see Hearts relegated, if they are dishing out winners prizes at the other end of the table showing a hatred? 

The benefit of this to us is minimal. We pulled our unders out of a competitive league a couple of years ago in order to play European teams in challenge matches instead. One of the ideas in doing this was to play top opposition to the benefit of our players so we didn't have to play the Scottish dross and jobbers in sub-standard environments and facilities and we've probably got the best group and set-up at that level now that we've had in literally decades.

Now our club want to go back to that, and even pay these teams that are dying for money at least 3k every time we visit their stadiums despite them showing no appetite for change or an investigation into the corruption in our game?

Rangers don't need a strong Scottish game to flourish that's an absolute myth. We were still flying the flag high in Europe up until the other month and remind me what the standard of the game both domestically and nationally is? it's not very strong or to any decent standard. We need a strong Rangers not a strong Scottish football. 

I'm actually feeling ashamed of the pish we do and promote. Some of our support are as clueless as the fuckwits that run our club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a colt side in the lower leagues would be fantastic for youth development. 
 

It’s no surprise that the clubs with the strongest youth academies in Europe e.g. Ajax, Barca have benefited from similar systems for years. Playing against lower league senior pros is far better for players development than just playing youth games, that’s almost universally agreed by most DOFs. 
 

As well it would be fantastic to get the odd Colts game to go to when the seniors are playing away/Sunday KOs. We could easily get a few thousand for a youth game if the first team was playing the next day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 05/06/2020 at 20:32, mclovin9091 said:

Only point i disagree with is the number of away tickets to be purchased. A little more admin required but we should not be obliged to buy any more away tickets than the home team has at thier away games. 

i.e. Elgins average number of travelling fans for away games the previous season is say 120 we then therefore are only obliged to purchase 120 tickets when we play Elgin. Montrose only have 50 fans on average then we only have to purchase 50 tickets for games the B team play them.

 

Otherwise clubs will get one season of additional revenue then when we are promoted that revenue goes away to the next league up. 

I think the 200 tickets from us and them is to ensure teams are compensated for losing 1 home game per season versus the current set up. 18 teams will mean 1set of home and away so only 17 home games versus current 18.  Average attendance in league 2 is around 500 so 400 guaranteed extra for these 2 games sound about right. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, BlueThunder said:

The Ross County chairmen says no to the colts idea, saying it isn’t the right time.

The more no's the better - but I think the majority of the no's will come from the lower leagues who's noses might feel out of joint at our colts getting shoehorned in besides them.

A lot of the fans of these clubs boycotted the Tunnock's games when our B-teams came into the competition.

That said, the cash incentive of at least £3K each time we visit might sway those teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, tm91 said:

The 14 team proposal is the most likely reconstruction option to be considered, because of the 4 Old Firm games requirement. I wonder if we are almost deliberately trying to sink it by being the first club to properly propose it publicly, because the mere fact it's Rangers proposing it will attract opposition, particularly from fans of other teams, celtic fans included. If the rest of the league still somehow find it acceptable, we get something out of it by finally getting a Colt team and it ensures celtic also benefit, which is obviously the most important factor in the current climate. Win-win for us and no way of losing out for them, and it ties them into the proposal, because we have a mutual interest in the existence of Colt teams in the league structure.

I honestly think you're giving our lot in charge way too much credit there mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, British_Empire said:

The more no's the better - but I think the majority of the no's will come from the lower leagues who's noses might feel out of joint at our colts getting shoehorned in besides them.

A lot of the fans of these clubs boycotted the Tunnock's games when our B-teams came into the competition.

That said, the cash incentive of at least £3K each time we visit might sway those teams.

In the George Floyd thread you were claiming there would be people on this board congratulating ǝpɐbıɹq uǝǝɹb ǝɥʇ on changing street signs in Glasgow, basically slurring bears without a shred of evidence.

Yet here you are wanting other clubs to vote no to our own fucking club’s proposal!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, McEwan's Lager said:

In the George Floyd thread you were claiming there would be people on this board congratulating ǝpɐbıɹq uǝǝɹb ǝɥʇ on changing street signs in Glasgow, basically slurring bears without a shred of evidence.

Yet here you are wanting other clubs to vote no to our own fucking club’s proposal!

 

More pish from you - there's plenty of evidence (the responses in the previous comments in that thread where so many are sympathetic to the hard left causing all this shite)

The evidence is there to make that assumption. Whether you want to sit with your head up your arse is upto you.

That has zero relation to the point you are making in this thread. Not one bit.

Our own clubs proposal stinks. It says a lot that you back it. I can't wait until it's rejected in fact. If I thought for one minute it would put some real pressure on the ones running us and making these decisions I'd open a beer to celebrate it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was discussing the proposal yesterday and made the comment that it had very little chance of being accepted for one significant reason, it was proposed by us.

Lo and behold this morning I read that the tarrier lover McGregor from Ross County is against it.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, British_Empire said:

The more no's the better - but I think the majority of the no's will come from the lower leagues who's noses might feel out of joint at our colts getting shoehorned in besides them.

A lot of the fans of these clubs boycotted the Tunnock's games when our B-teams came into the competition.

That said, the cash incentive of at least £3K each time we visit might sway those teams.

Who?

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Brubear said:

I was discussing the proposal yesterday and made the comment that it had very little chance of being accepted for one significant reason, it was proposed by us.

Lo and behold this morning I read that the tarrier lover McGregor from Ross County is against it.  

 

 

The Orks want it through as well

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Brubear said:

I think the 200 tickets from us and them is to ensure teams are compensated for losing 1 home game per season versus the current set up. 18 teams will mean 1set of home and away so only 17 home games versus current 18.  Average attendance in league 2 is around 500 so 400 guaranteed extra for these 2 games sound about right. 

 

But why should we have to subsidse them? Attract more of your own fans to pay for your own club.

 

Did a certain club not get breated for apparently living outwith thier financial means..

Link to post
Share on other sites

As with all reconstruction proposals, there are good and bad points, and invariably some benefit and some will lose.

Add to that, the fact that the majority of clubs in this country will only vote for something that benefits them, then the chances of this being implemented are very slim.

Scotland (and particularly football clubs in the country), is probably one the most narrow minded countries I’ve ever been to. 

I can see that the club may benefit in terms of development of young players, and we are prepared to pay for the privilege, but we could have saved a lot of time and effort, because football in this country is literally beyond help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mclovin9091 said:

But why should we have to subsidse them? Attract more of your own fans to pay for your own club.

 

Did a certain club not get breated for apparently living outwith thier financial means..

The point is it keeps them income neutral. No one is going to vote for a proposal which makes them financially worse off. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership

×
×
  • Create New...