Reorganisation of Scottish Football

tigger

tigger

Well-Known Member
The defeat of Aberdeen by Darvel is glorious and I for one have enjoyed it. However, are we missing something here. Does the result highlight that teams from the Junior leagues will strengthen the SPFL rather than diminish it? Does it highlight (if it really needed to previously) that there has to be a root and branch reorganisation of Scottish football with a change to the way clubs are promoted and relegated.
 
This might be a bit controversial but for me I think we should have 2 leagues of 22 and 20 and have some more relegation and promotion at the top level of the game. Instead of the 4 divisions we have now.

I feel like teams are placed in a position where they find it hard to bring through youth and stick with them just now for fear of relegation etc... It would also mean if a team in the bottom 20 do bring through a good group of youths they can go up to the top league and have a crack at the best in the country quickly.

To be honest I don't see many arguments against it now that we don't have minimum stadium requirements in the top league. The only argument is the 4 old firm games would be down to 2 but I think having a better variety of opponent and more Scottish youths getting game time is much more beneficial.
 
Darvel have had money thrown at them. If the money men walk away then what happens? Can say the same for Cove, Kelty (to a lesser extent) and Queens Park. Compare that to the struggles Bonnyrigg are having trying to be competitive in League Two. They're trying to do things sustainably and that means dealing with challenges without resorting to unsustainable spending. Pollok spent money on facilities to allow them to enter the Scottish Cup. That'll pay off in time, but they had to raise the money. Clydebank have invested in youth development, community football and women's football.

I think we need to be very careful when we talk about non-league sides showing ambition. Ambition isnt some rich benefactor spunking some money for a few seasons and then ultimately walking away, leaving the club in the financial shitter. I'd much rather see the likes of Pollok and Clydebank work sustainably towards being real assets to their community and ultimately keeping football accessible than Darvel being used as a play thing. We don't need boom and bust in Scottish football.
 
derek145 said:
Many junior clubs are happy as they are
Click to expand...

If you're Kilbirnie, Beith, Kilwinning or Irvine then why would you want promotion? Leave behind some red hot local rivalries that attract decent crowds for trips to Elgin or Annan? It's not particularly attractive for a lot of sides. But those 4 clubs have close rivalries and solid supports. They're a way of people remaining attached to the game, either by offering folk a way of continuing to play football or offering fans an affordable way to follow football on a Saturday afternoon. Why would those 4 sides want to give up their local rivalries for away trips to the north of Scotland?

We need to start valuing football more as a country. We need local communities to start valuing their teams and for people to put football back at the heart of their saturday afternoon.
 
There needs to be a decent pathway for clubs to find their level. Straight promotion and relegation for top, bottom clubs. None of this loaded play off system where 2 or 3 teams have to play off to then face another tie against the bottom of a division.
There are a few Clubs bigger than the small ones in the SPFL that could do it and stay there and others, like Darvel, who are bankrolled and would sink when the money goes.
 
Last edited:
iaatpies said:
Darvel have had money thrown at them. If the money men walk away then what happens? Can say the same for Cove, Kelty (to a lesser extent) and Queens Park. Compare that to the struggles Bonnyrigg are having trying to be competitive in League Two. They're trying to do things sustainably and that means dealing with challenges without resorting to unsustainable spending. Pollok spent money on facilities to allow them to enter the Scottish Cup. That'll pay off in time, but they had to raise the money. Clydebank have invested in youth development, community football and women's football.

I think we need to be very careful when we talk about non-league sides showing ambition. Ambition isnt some rich benefactor spunking some money for a few seasons and then ultimately walking away, leaving the club in the financial shitter. I'd much rather see the likes of Pollok and Clydebank work sustainably towards being real assets to their community and ultimately keeping football accessible than Darvel being used as a play thing. We don't need boom and bust in Scottish football.
Click to expand...
For this, read Gretna
 
If it brings decent playing surfaces into the senior game the more the better. It's embarrassing the standard of pitches and the standard of players who seem to relish playing on ploughed field like pitches. The very fact the spfl members are not interested in the betterment of standards and many do as they're bid by celtic there will always be barriers in place to halt progress of lower division teams.
Scottish football if a backwater run by incompetent self serving supporters of one club and ensure the standards slip season by season. This season was a standout of how bad it is when you look at European results especially early season qualifiers. Embarrassing and I'm including our club's inability to compete with the best. Standards will never improve as long as the clowns remain in office
 
iaatpies said:
Darvel have had money thrown at them. If the money men walk away then what happens? Can say the same for Cove, Kelty (to a lesser extent) and Queens Park. Compare that to the struggles Bonnyrigg are having trying to be competitive in League Two. They're trying to do things sustainably and that means dealing with challenges without resorting to unsustainable spending. Pollok spent money on facilities to allow them to enter the Scottish Cup. That'll pay off in time, but they had to raise the money. Clydebank have invested in youth development, community football and women's football.

I think we need to be very careful when we talk about non-league sides showing ambition. Ambition isnt some rich benefactor spunking some money for a few seasons and then ultimately walking away, leaving the club in the financial shitter. I'd much rather see the likes of Pollok and Clydebank work sustainably towards being real assets to their community and ultimately keeping football accessible than Darvel being used as a play thing. We don't need boom and bust in Scottish football.
Click to expand...
I think we need to be very careful when we talk about non-league sides showing ambition. Ambition isnt some rich benefactor spunking some money for a few seasons and then ultimately walking away, leaving the club in the financial shitter.

A good example of what you stated was Gretna.
 
tigger said:
The defeat of Aberdeen by Darvel is glorious and I for one have enjoyed it. However, are we missing something here. Does the result highlight that teams from the Junior leagues will strengthen the SPFL rather than diminish it? Does it highlight (if it really needed to previously) that there has to be a root and branch reorganisation of Scottish football with a change to the way clubs are promoted and relegated.
Click to expand...

The only change that'll make a difference is to make the league competitive. At the moment its embarrassing.
 
We have the highest percentage of people in the world probably who go to games yet empty stadiums all over the place and one of the worst TV deals because of our relationship with England and Sky TV. Reorganization implies there is some.
 
Rob the Ranger said:
Changes to the structure of Scottish football has been required for years.
Click to expand...

It doesnt matter how many times you shuffle the pack. The only way to make things better is to make the league competitive. This isnt possible with only 2 teams hoovering up what little money is available.
 
Kubala said:
We have the highest percentage of people in the world probably who go to games yet empty stadiums all over the place and one of the worst TV deals because of our relationship with England and Sky TV. Reorganization implies there is some.
Click to expand...

Do you know why no one wants to watch the "diddy" teams?
 
vicbex said:
Getting rid of teams wont make the "diddy" teams better and wont make more people pay to watch them lose.
Click to expand...
If England had the same number of teams across its top four divisions, there'd over 200 odd.

I've also never seen anything remotely conclusive around fans not going to merged teams like Inverness Caledonian Thistle. They go when they're doing well, and they don't when they're shite.

To an extent, the same as ours.
 
PaxBritannica said:
League will never expand as it relies on 4 old firms to survive.
Click to expand...
We get paid peanuts for this discredited league system with 4 Old Firms per season.

Scottish football gets a poor TV deal because it’s a boring, uncompetitive product.

A league of 18 with all the teams only facing each other twice per season is the way to go. No split either.

Four teams relegated per season.

Get fans back into the stadiums. Let supporters have a drink. Give away free tickets to local schools. Bring in safe standing.

If anyone thinks this idea is worse than what we currently have then I’d love to see their working.

Scottish football has been in decline ever since it rejected Sky’s new deal in the early 2000s. That’s over 20 years ago now and it ain’t showing signs of recovery.

More of the same means more of the pain.
 
SmileyBear said:
This is it build themselves up just to stop flair players from playing.
Click to expand...

Scottish refs give young flair players no protection and their careers get ended by injury.

What I find remarkable is how Scotland produces almost no good strikers. The situation is so bad that Scotland national team's two main strikers are not even Scottish they are Australian and English.

You have to go back really far to find someone who you could say was a top class Scottish striker. Off the top of my head the last brilliant Scottish striker who was actually Scottish was probably Ally McCoist. Kris Boyd was pretty good but I wouldn't say he was brilliant.
 
Glorious as it was to see the sheep humbled last night it opened up another, legitimate, avenue of criticism and humiliation from the rest of world football about the poor quality of the Scottish game in general.
 
Saturnblue said:
Scottish refs give young flair players no protection and their careers get ended by injury.

What I find remarkable is how Scotland produces almost no good strikers. The situation is so bad that Scotland national team's two main strikers are not even Scottish they are Australian and English.

You have to go back really far to find someone who you could say was a top class Scottish striker. Off the top of my head the last brilliant Scottish striker who was actually Scottish was probably Ally McCoist. Kris Boyd was pretty good but I wouldn't say he was brilliant.
Click to expand...
Kenny Miller has very similar goal returns at international level to McCoist.
 
Kubala said:
Kenny Miller has very similar goal returns at international level to McCoist.
Click to expand...

Kenny Millier was another good striker, but if you look over the last 30 years good Scottish strikers have been few and far between.

It's really strange because there have been lots of good defenders and midfielders but very very few strikers.
 
DavieM said:
A town the size of Darvel can't really strengthen Scottish football nor can (m)any of the Junior sides support base.
Click to expand...
There are far too many clubs for the size of this country.

Realistically, if you imagine say Arbroath, Forfar, Brechin and Montrose all as one team. Essentially that adds 4 small fanbases into one, combines wealth after selling off 3 old stadiums and building a purpose built community hub or something along those lines, and potentially sees a greater challenge from that area.

Dunfermline, Raith, Cowdenbeath and East Fife.

Falkirk, Stenhousemuir, Alloa etc

The list goes on and on.

The fanbases (albeit Rangers and Celtic have a lot to answer for with folk bypassing their local clubs to support a team hours drives away etc) are minuscule and generally the standard is so, so low.

Scottish football should work from 2 senior divisions maximum with say 12 teams in each division. 3 up and 3 down. Bottom tier then has a relegation playoff and an auto relegation place with the Highland and Lowland league winners.

How much better does that sound that the drab crap served up just now?
 
A bigger league with 18 teams playing each other twice. No split. 3 relegated and 4th bottom play-off against 4th top of the 2nd division. Summer football.

Gets my vote.
 
TW14 said:
There are far too many clubs for the size of this country.

Realistically, if you imagine say Arbroath, Forfar, Brechin and Montrose all as one team. Essentially that adds 4 small fanbases into one, combines wealth after selling off 3 old stadiums and building a purpose built community hub or something along those lines, and potentially sees a greater challenge from that area.

Dunfermline, Raith, Cowdenbeath and East Fife.

Falkirk, Stenhousemuir, Alloa etc

The list goes on and on.

The fanbases (albeit Rangers and Celtic have a lot to answer for with folk bypassing their local clubs to support a team hours drives away etc) are minuscule and generally the standard is so, so low.

Scottish football should work from 2 senior divisions maximum with say 12 teams in each division. 3 up and 3 down. Bottom tier then has a relegation playoff and an auto relegation place with the Highland and Lowland league winners.

How much better does that sound that the drab crap served up just now?
Click to expand...

It really doesnt. You're not going to get fans of the 4 Angus teams following Angus Athletic. They'd simply walk away from football.

If the EPL offered Rangers and Celtic the option of joining on the condition that they join as Glasgow United, are you supporting the new bastard offspring?

Merging clubs is a bonkers notion put forward by fans of big teams who can't understand that supporters of smaller clubs love their sides as much as a big team fan loves theirs. It's a nonsense idea and should be thrown in the bin.

Community clubs can keep football affordable and accessible to people who would otherwise be unable to follow football as a live spectacle on a Saturday afternoon. There's also an argument that they're a better way of keeping people playing the game. They give youngsters rejected by top flight youth sides a 2nd chance at professional football.
 
It's the lack of technical ability that's the problem, not how the leagues are put together. A competitive match or even league doesn't mean its technically decent.
 
iaatpies said:
It really doesnt. You're not going to get fans of the 4 Angus teams following Angus Athletic. They'd simply walk away from football.

If the EPL offered Rangers and Celtic the option of joining on the condition that they join as Glasgow United, are you supporting the new bastard offspring?

Merging clubs is a bonkers notion put forward by fans of big teams who can't understand that supporters of smaller clubs love their sides as much as a big team fan loves theirs. It's a nonsense idea and should be thrown in the bin.

Community clubs can keep football affordable and accessible to people who would otherwise be unable to follow football as a live spectacle on a Saturday afternoon. There's also an argument that they're a better way of keeping people playing the game. They give youngsters rejected by top flight youth sides a 2nd chance at professional football.
Click to expand...
Whilst I agree with the sentiment of the loyal fanbase. Their fanbase average age must be pretty high - and most kids now have zero interest in watching part time football with all respect to the players and staff.

Its a pretty simple notion, adapt or dont exist beyond your existing fanbases lifespan.

Rangers and Celtic don’t have any need to merge - your comparison is poor.
Our youth team can draw a larger support than most of the league 1 and 2 sides.

Scottish football has too many clubs for the size of the country, with a sub par product that not many want to watch for free let alone pay to see.
It would be interesting to see how many clubs we directly kept in business during our journey through the divisions.
 
The glaringly obvious on this basically is that when the SPL was in healthier state 15/20 years ago a result like last night was nigh impossible as a thriving Rangers generally benefits all the rest of the club’s as much as they all hate a thriving Rangers but going back to that wretched satanta tv fiasco followed by the utter rubble of the last 11 years with our removal from the league and the journey back up the divisions
 
There is only one professional league in Scotland.

No matter how your label the rest, they are part time apart from the odd clubs in the championship that yoyo into the prem every so often
 
TW14 said:
Whilst I agree with the sentiment of the loyal fanbase. Their fanbase average age must be pretty high - and most kids now have zero interest in watching part time football with all respect to the players and staff.

Its a pretty simple notion, adapt or dont exist beyond your existing fanbases lifespan.

Rangers and Celtic don’t have any need to merge - your comparison is poor.
Our youth team can draw a larger support than most of the league 1 and 2 sides.

Scottish football has too many clubs for the size of the country, with a sub par product that not many want to watch for free let alone pay to see.
It would be interesting to see how many clubs we directly kept in business during our journey through the divisions.
Click to expand...
It completely ignores that Caley Thistle managed to bring in crowds when they were doing well, and struggled when they weren't. The same person has replied with the same answer about 10 times when the evidence that both sides pre-merger were getting any higher numbers isn't available if I remember right.
 
Luca Stroppi said:
The glaringly obvious on this basically is that when the SPL was in healthier state 15/20 years ago a result like last night was nigh impossible as a thriving Rangers generally benefits all the rest of the club’s as much as they all hate a thriving Rangers but going back to that wretched satanta tv fiasco followed by the utter rubble of the last 11 years with our removal from the league and the journey back up the divisions
Click to expand...
It was 28 years ago that the sheep were getting embarrassed by Stenhousemuir
 
Premiership teams outwith us, Hearts and the Torbett's should really be looking at Darvel as an example to follow.

As good as they were their pitch was the thing that stood out to me the most.
 
tigger said:
The defeat of Aberdeen by Darvel is glorious and I for one have enjoyed it. However, are we missing something here. Does the result highlight that teams from the Junior leagues will strengthen the SPFL rather than diminish it? Does it highlight (if it really needed to previously) that there has to be a root and branch reorganisation of Scottish football with a change to the way clubs are promoted and relegated.
Click to expand...
We’ve got far too many SPFL clubs as it is.
I’d halve the number of divisions to 2 leagues comprised of full time teams plus 1 or 2 others to make up the 2 divisions.

Scotland doesn’t have the population to sustain 42 professional clubs.
The rest can play in other leagues and if possible arrange on a regional basis to cut costs.
I would have a system to enable other junior clubs to join the ranks of the other 2 leagues as there is no real difference between them and our current league 1+2 teams In ability or crowds.

All a bit woolly and it will never happen as far too many vested interests.
More a prototype suggestion than fully joined up thinking I admit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top