brissyger 8 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 Was thinking after some pretty strong performances from teams outside the SPL this year in the cups should the SPL be expanded? There's pros and cons to both sides. Cons are the top teams like Rangers will struggle even more to fit in extra games. There could end up being some pretty big losses and we only have to look at Gretna to see how poor some of the teams do when they get to the SPL but I think it would add a little spark to the bottom of the table. Maybe make it 14 teams and have 2 relegated each year. Maybe I'm just hurting that Hamilton is going t go up instead of Dundee Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,288 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 It was chopped back in the 70s because there were too many meaningless games ... perhaps the wee teams have one or two big performances in them per season that they save for the cups but can they really do it week in week out? Also setanta wouldn't be amused at having the amount of Old Firm games halved which would inevitably happen if we expanded the league further So a thumbs down from me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderhawk 0 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 To be honest the top 6 or 7 in the 1st aint "really" that far behind. Why not just make it a 18 team Premier, with a 34 game seaon??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac444 6 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 I'm all for expanding the top flight, and reducing the lower leagues, and have 2 leagues of 18 teams, with promotion and relegation from the Juniors/Highland Leagues. For the first few seasons some of the smaller clubs probably would get their ass handed to them by the majority of the big teams similar to what happened in the earlier days of the EPL, but it would level itself out and the teams capable of playing in the top flight would be there. The only thing that would be a major stumbling block would be getting rid of the 6 extra league clubs, but this could be done by encouraging small teams, from the same locality that struggle filling their respective stadia to emalgamate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
docspiderman 1,262 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 The whole structure of the leagues should be changed before increasing the spl.Teams in the second and third division are attracting crowds of between 200 and 600 supporters which is a nonsense as well as a drain on SFA resources. First division support is not that much better and there are few teams which would enhance the spl by way of quality, enjoyment, support and competition. Changes have to be made at the bottom level first of all, whether it means bringing in junior sides which often have bigger crowds than Division One, whether it means restricting Division 3 teams to 4 or 5 over 25's, or allowing the top 6 spl clubs to enter their under 19's in the lower leagues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coopermania 1 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 I would vote to expand it if I could. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ukrainian 51 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 It's possible to decrease to two clubs! Why anymore? What prospects? For the beginning of necessary to attract investments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueben_d 40 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 I think it should be, but for financial reasons it wont be Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam 0 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 The whole structure of the leagues should be changed before increasing the spl.Teams in the second and third division are attracting crowds of between 200 and 600 supporters which is a nonsense as well as a drain on SFA resources. First division support is not that much better and there are few teams which would enhance the spl by way of quality, enjoyment, support and competition. Changes have to be made at the bottom level first of all, whether it means bringing in junior sides which often have bigger crowds than Division One, whether it means restricting Division 3 teams to 4 or 5 over 25's, or allowing the top 6 spl clubs to enter their under 19's in the lower leagues. I'd like to see the U19's play lower league football, it happens in Spain and I if I remember rightly didnt Real Madrid meet Real Madrid B (or whatever) in a cup final? I think your right though, changes from the bottom up!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick1200 2,883 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 The whole structure of the leagues should be changed before increasing the spl.Teams in the second and third division are attracting crowds of between 200 and 600 supporters which is a nonsense as well as a drain on SFA resources. First division support is not that much better and there are few teams which would enhance the spl by way of quality, enjoyment, support and competition. Changes have to be made at the bottom level first of all, whether it means bringing in junior sides which often have bigger crowds than Division One, whether it means restricting Division 3 teams to 4 or 5 over 25's, or allowing the top 6 spl clubs to enter their under 19's in the lower leagues. I'd like to see the U19's play lower league football, it happens in Spain and I if I remember rightly didnt Real Madrid meet Real Madrid B (or whatever) in a cup final? I think your right though, changes from the bottom up!! I dont no if they met in a final or not, but i know that the b teams cannot get promoted into la liga Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_RFC87 762 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 No, because clubs like Killie and St Mirren would get less revenue from Celtic/Rangers and other lucrative games because they only play the OF once. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossDas 1,071 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 Yes, it's stagnate and the very least they could do is add another relegation slot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_RFC87 762 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 Yes, it's stagnate and the very least they could do is add another relegation slot. again, the reason why there isn't 2 relegation slots is because of financial reasons. The drop down is too big a hit. Who cares about the relegation anyway, it's all about the top of the league for us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeddieBear 0 Posted April 19, 2008 Share Posted April 19, 2008 I quite like the idea of playoffs for promotion/relegation. it would continue to excitement for the smaller clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
docspiderman 1,262 Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 Good reasons not to expand the spl: Dunfermline: Chairman Yorkston, whose influence and business accumen made the spl ditch the £20million Sky deal and end up getting about £5 million over 3 years from the BBC.. Livingston: Flynn, I do not neeed to expand. St Johnstone: Brown, another businessman who would drag the spl to the ground. Partick Thistle; small minded club who prefer to give rugby clubs preference over the football team regarding playing facilities. These clubs would be in with the best chance of getting into an expanded spl regardless of their league positions and since the tail wags the dog that is the spl who knows what the chairmen of these clubs could force through. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
excoriate 0 Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 Some folk are truly deluded. NO side outside the SPL wants to be a feeder club. NO side wants to merge with another. The sides near the bottom of the SPL that voted for the one up one down policy, are ironically, the ones now suffering and wanting to expand the league: Livi, St Johnstone, Dunfermline. Let them rot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fandangoman 0 Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 the clubs will never agree to this in the top 12 teams each team gets a vote. now you can get tv money for playing rangers say 4 times a year, and make 100,000. or choose to play them twice and then go on an play clyde twice a year. only making 40,000. the chairman would never go for it, as they will realise the stand to lose to much money, an for clubs like falkirk, st mirren, even to an extent motherwell etc they need that kind of revenue. what i would like to see is the way it use to be with relegations and playoffs. bottom team went down, 2nd bottom played 2 legs against 2nd top of 1st division. i use to like it when it was like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCLoyal9 53 Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 Yes it should be expanded , I am fecking fed up of Killie 4 times a season <_< Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam 0 Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 Yes it should be expanded , I am fecking fed up of Killie 4 times a season <_< Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gronaldo 38 Posted April 20, 2008 Share Posted April 20, 2008 It's all about the number of games. In reality you couldn't have a 14 team league because there'd either be too many or too few games. Assuming we do away with split systems the only option is to make it an 18 team top division. That means you need at least another 8 teams who can hold their own in the SPL because you need two to be relegated and promoted each year. I just don't think we have enough depth to make that work - St Johnstone, Dundee and the like could do alright, but after that we'd be scraping the barrel. Look at how outclassed Gretna have been this year and they won the First division last season. Routine 5-0 victories against Stirling Albion and the like are only going to hold people's interest for a short time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
followfollow21 0 Posted April 21, 2008 Share Posted April 21, 2008 I say form a European Super League....and get some of the Big TV money....and give the EPL a real run for their money! or, just let the top 2 or 3 sides in the SPL join the EPL....I know....NEVER gonnae happen! Idiotic in my opinion tho! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts