tottenmfc Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Given that I'm obviously a bit thick, please show the your workings for this basic maths and common sense, be very specific with examples please. Despite having a maths degree (which I remember very little of) I have no intention of showing any working but perhaps the common sense approach is more important. If you are comparing a team's league performance against any other team then playing that team twice lowers the potential gap that can be established in matches between the two compared to playing that team 4 times. I may be missing something or over-simplifying and of course there will be anomalies and differences in ability which will still probably mean Celtic winning the league most years but that is the general structure of most leagues in the world is it not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Despite having a maths degree (which I remember very little of) I have no intention of showing any working but perhaps the common sense approach is more important. If you are comparing a team's league performance against any other team then playing that team twice lowers the potential gap that can be established in matches between the two compared to playing that team 4 times. I may be missing something or over-simplifying and of course there will be anomalies and differences in ability which will still probably mean Celtic winning the league most years but that is the general structure of most leagues in the world is it not? Clearly you don't have common sense degree too. If a team are that much better than you that you are writting off games against them, then there is absolutly no chance of beating them over the course of a league campaign. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madwullie Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Who is most likely to lose games against morton, livi, dungfermline etc...The OF or Motherwell. They would trounce these teams while we would slip up against them. It's a myth that 4x playing is maintaining the gap. It's their 50k+ attendances thats the cause 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tottenmfc Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 Clearly you don't have common sense degree too. If a team are that much better than you that you are writting off games against them, then there is absolutly no chance of beating them over the course of a league campaign. At no point have I said that a bigger league would throw up a different winner every year as most leagues tend to be won by the team with the best players. Also, at no point did I write-off ponts against anyone. My belief is that a 16 / 18 team league would be more competitive as it would naturally allow for the better teams to compete with each other, the not so good teams to compete at the bottom and some middle of the road teams to try different players / tactics without 3 quarters of the league worrying about the fear of relegation. Looking at this purely based on teams competing with Celtic as you have though, there is the following scenarios: Current 12 team league: 38 games = 114 points to play for 4 games vs. Celtic = 12 points at stake = 10.5% of total points available Ridiculous 8-8-8 nonsense: 36 games = 108 points to play for 4 games vs. Celtic = 12 points at stake = 11.1% of total points available 16 team league: 30 games = 90 points to play for 2 games vs. Celtic = 6 points at stake = 6.66% of total points available 18 team league: 34 games = 102 points to play for 2 games vs. Celtic = 6 points to play for = 5.88% of total points available Which of these scenarios increases the chance of someone closing the gap on Celtic before even considering that teams will take points off Celtic both home and away as has already been shown this season? As an aside, which scenario decreases these chances (albeit slightly)? You could also factor in the fact that it's more likely for teams to put a run together when they're not playing teams who know them inside out by the time it comes to the 3rd / 4th game against each other. Just my opinion mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 you need to factor in that moving to a 16 or 18 league reduces the income for every team. it's likely that we would lose a greater percentage of total income than celtic would which would widen the gap between the clubs even further. you need a strong squad to compete over a full season and no one outwith the old firm is likely to be able to afford that in an expanded league (no one can now). as madwullie says it's not the amount of teams in the league it is the difference in income. there is no league in the world where a team with £5m turnover is outperforming a team that turns over £40m. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tottenmfc Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 you need to factor in that moving to a 16 or 18 league reduces the income for every team. it's likely that we would lose a greater percentage of total income than celtic would which would widen the gap between the clubs even further. you need a strong squad to compete over a full season and no one outwith the old firm is likely to be able to afford that in an expanded league (no one can now). as madwullie says it's not the amount of teams in the league it is the difference in income. there is no league in the world where a team with £5m turnover is outperforming a team that turns over £40m. If the income was split more evenly and the majority wasn't diverted to Celtic (and Rangers eventually) then it wouldn't be that bad I don't think but I will stress again that I'm not saying we'd have all sorts of different teams winning titles in a bigger league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 In fact, when Dundee Utd and Aberdeen were winning the league it was a 10 team set up. Not sure what that proves either, tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 If the income was split more evenly and the majority wasn't diverted to Celtic (and Rangers eventually) then it wouldn't be that bad I don't think but I will stress again that I'm not saying we'd have all sorts of different teams winning titles in a bigger league. the majority doesn't go to the top to places at the moment. even if you split the money evenly 18 ways and the total funds being split remained at the current level (they wouldn't) it would still increase the advantage that the old firm hold over the other teams in terms of resources that could be spent on the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 At no point have I said that a bigger league would throw up a different winner every year I don't think for a second that's what you believe a bigger league would do. Also, at no point did I write-off ponts against anyone. I'd suggest that's exactly what you're doing here; Looking at this purely based on teams competing with Celtic as you have though, there is the following scenarios: Current 12 team league: 38 games = 114 points to play for 4 games vs. Celtic = 12 points at stake = 10.5% of total points available Ridiculous 8-8-8 nonsense: 36 games = 108 points to play for 4 games vs. Celtic = 12 points at stake = 11.1% of total points available 16 team league: 30 games = 90 points to play for 2 games vs. Celtic = 6 points at stake = 6.66% of total points available 18 team league: 34 games = 102 points to play for 2 games vs. Celtic = 6 points to play for = 5.88% of total points available You are aiming to limit the damage of dropping points against Celtic. That's because you don't fancy our chances of beating them head to head. And you're right to think that. Why are you right?... Because we are unable to compete at their level. Not in a 12 team league. Not in a 16 team league. Not in a 20 team league. Not even in a 40 team league as far as I'm concerned!!! My belief is that a 16 / 18 team league would be more competitive as it would naturally allow for the better teams to compete with each other, the not so good teams to compete at the bottom and some middle of the road teams to try different players / tactics without 3 quarters of the league worrying about the fear of relegation. Do you think the gulf between Celtic and us is greater or smaller than the gulf between us and the top half of SFL 1? Which of these scenarios increases the chance of someone closing the gap on Celtic before even considering that teams will take points off Celtic both home and away as has already been shown this season? As an aside, which scenario decreases these chances (albeit slightly)? "albeit slightly" Therein lies the problem. The old firm haven't been finishing ahead of the competition by a slight margin. I'd be surprised if the rest have been within 15 points of the champions at the end of any season over the past 20 years. The few points you're seeking to gain isn't even going to make a dent in that gap, let alone give the feeling of competition. Of course old firm donimance is nothing new. They shared 34 out of 35 titles between them (the majority of them won from a 20 team league) between 1905 and 1939. Given the financial disparity didn't exist at that point surely you'd expect a bit more competition from such a big league? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amber_nectar Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 As far as I can make out since the split was created it has only helped to weaken the other city clubs because once they end up in the bottom six revenue drops for the last round of games. This has brought benefits to the Kilmarnocks and motherwells of the league. In terms of revenue and fan base hibs hearts Aberdeen and Dundee united should by right have the best challenge to Celtic but hey just don't, so who's fault is that. It's not the league set up its the directors of the clubs in question and there mismanagement of their clubs. Motherwell and others have shown that by putting the right people in charge of the football side of things teams can be relatively successful. No one person can sort our game but the Scottish game needs strong leaders. Regan and Doncaster are in my opinion the wrong people to sort this mess out. The clubs cannot be aloud to map the destiny of our nation game because there is too much self interest. We need an independent body to do it with no connection to any club.The one up one down set up of our league is no good. This has helped to cripple so many teams. Once a team gets relegated they have very little chance of coming back up in the first second or third season in that division. This has created a fear factor for clubs in the top league and are now unwilling to change. This fear factor has also helped to stiffle the growth of the youth players coming through. Look at how many clubs are littered with none scottish players, our team included. Meaningful games are all well and good but how do we develop our youth players because again teams are frightened of failure. Send them to Dumbarton? They need to get games in the first team. Spl teams are starting to have to use there youth players to help with the financial problems they are having. As a motherwell fan of 35 years or so the most satisfaction I get from watching my club is seeing players like carswell, Murphy, Hutchinson, Hammell, Lasley, O'Donnell, McFadden and many others come through the youth system and make a name for themselves. Tommy McLean was great at team building as is Alex ferguson as is Stuart mcCall. They use youth and experience to build a team. Alex ferguson could probably buy all of his players from other clubs but still chooses to bring youth through and give them a chance. It's all about timing and knowing when they are ready.Our game is at ground zero and time for everyone to accept it. Stop chasing the impossible dream and sort our game out.Two leagues in Scotland 18-20. Two teams get promoted two teams get relegated then play offs between 16th and 3rd. 15th and 4th. Sensible pricing, with sensible kick off times and dare I say it beer tokens that can be bought on entry so you can at least have two beers whilst watching the footie. Bring back the derby weekends when all derbies were on the same weekend and give away teams a percentage of their travelling supports gate money. And a discount card for away fans that clubs could give different discounts. Either money off, bring a friend for half price, bring your kids for free or even just discounted food.Make it easy for fans to attend games in stead of having to walk half way round a stadium to buy at ticket then walk half way back round again to then gain entry. Kilmarnock FC take note. It's a joke.League cup with two legged games at quarter final and semi final stages.And decent tv coverage from the bbc Scotland. Sports scene is dire. BBC alba is better.Lots more I could add but even I am getting bored. Someone please get it sorted before it is too late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted February 18, 2013 Report Share Posted February 18, 2013 I've never been a fan of the split in general, but that last post could do with a few. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 I wouldn't say the split has weakened the city teams, I'd say the city teams being chucking money at shite managers and shite players has weakened the city teams. The resources that they've pished up the wall in signing up McGhee and Brown at Aberdeen, or Mixu, Hughes, Calderwood and Fenlon at Hibs is unbelievable. The number of players they've had in and out, on what must be decent contracts is unbelievable. That's even before you get to the financial clusterfucks of Dundee or Hearts. I do agree with a lot that you say though, Scottish football is going back to youth, we are producing better players again and clubs are getting back on an even keel. If Aberdeen get their stadium move, and United and Hibs keep clearing their debt then in five years, there will be three big clubs in Scotland without any debt, and if recent times are anything to go by, good youth systems and good facilities. From there on, the possibilities are endless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted February 19, 2013 Report Share Posted February 19, 2013 Would it be fair to say that there is pretty much no way of any other SPL club realistically closing the gap on Celtic? I don't know about any of you, but this season I've been pretty much ignoring them at the top of the league. We know they'll win it, it's just a matter of when. I don't really care to be honest. I don't think any change to the league setup is going to make a difference as far as the rest of the SPL closing the gap on Celtic goes. What will make the difference in my opinion is how long it takes Rangers to get back into the SPL and become competitive with them again. Until that happens we'll see their attendances slowly drop and interest in their season beyond what they can do in Europe diminish. Meanwhile the rest of us are playing in a highly competitive league where the majority of sides are split by not a lot. My main concern, and reason for wanting a 14 or even an 18 team league is because I want some variety in the games that Motherwell play every season. I want to see us play against the likes of Thistle, Accies, Morton & Airdrie on a regular basis, rather than playing Kilmarnock four times a season (no offence to Killie intended!). We need a bigger league with lower gate prices, it's really as simple as that. Without both of those factors I don't see the game in this country moving forward any. The added bonus of Charles Green pushing through and getting Rangers into England wouldn't go amiss either. As soon as that happened we'd see Celtic leave not long after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Snippet from Derek Weir on Sportsound, he think we are still on track for reconstruction. Vote on 15th April. Interestingly, the Ross County chairman seems to be on board now despite having reservations about the season ticket conundrum. Any word on meeting with fans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaag Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 And whit about the prize money situation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 And whit about the prize money situation? Swept under the carpet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaag Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Not for me, can't let this one go so easily. Bitter pill to swallow after 20+yrs of loyal supporting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 I'm sure there will be a lot of concessions on one thing to get another type negotiations going on. What I'd love to know is what everyone else got for allowing celtic to keep the money?? I get the feeling 12-12-18 is going to be pushed through, probably for the start of next season, regardless of what the fans think. I think the fans are all in agreement about wanting 1 governing body, fairer distribution of money, and more promotion/relegation opportunities through play offs. Most folk are a bit unsure of the current split, but we're told 16 teams is a non starter due to the finances and decrease in fixtures, which I can accept. 14 with a 6/8 split would seem a decent option, or make the other changes and keep the current 12 teams with split, it's not perfect, but with other changes would be good for now, and hopefully improved. The recent story that Neil Doncaster had been awarded a £28k pay rise to £200k per year gives an indicator of how much money we spunk on these clowns at hampden park! Streamlining that part of things would be step 1 for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texanwellfan Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 No way in hell should Doncaster be on $200K per year. The clubs need to sort that one out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GazzyB Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Not for me, can't let this one go so easily. Bitter pill to swallow after 20+yrs of loyal supporting. Nor me, no statement about this is completely unacceptable. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-in-Oz Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 On the topic of reconstruction i see that the SFL are going to be asked again about accepting the old firm colt teams into their league. The idea being should the senior teams piss off to Antartica or whoever the hell else will have them then it means they still have a presence in Scottish football. If that goes through watch the fans walking away in droves leaving empty stadiums & team after team folding. But hey the old firm will be happy so everythings fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_P Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 That actually infuriates me as much as the reconstruction proposals. For me it's the ultimate sell out and worse still it appears that it's actually being pushed by the League rather than the Old Firm themselves. If either of the Old Firm go elsewhere they should go lock, stock and barrel. No having their cake and eating it by having a foot in both camps, so to speak, to capitalise on being in Scotland and elsewhere. I've generally found the SFL to have a bit more integrity than the SPL but this suggests they have been blinded by the extra revenue that has come from Rangers being in Division 3 this season and believe they should be due a piece of it all the time. I'm sure being stuck in boardrooms with the likes of Doncaster for so many months is entirely coincidental... So again we seem to be reliant on our smaller clubs, those hangers on and the tail that wags the dog to hopefully do the decent thing and kick another nonsensical idea from the League Chief executives into touch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Who's doing the asking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-in-Oz Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 David Longmuir seems to be the brains behind this nonsense. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/chief-executive-david-longmuir-revives-1759883 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Initially had a bit of faith in Longmuir but he's quickly turned into as big a c**t as £200k a year Doncaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.