New League Structure

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

20 teams per division. Only 38 games each season.

We finished 73rd this year so that would mean Tier 4 next year.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

20 teams per division. Only 38 games each season.

We finished 73rd this year so that would mean Tier 4 next year.

Only effective from 2019/20. May even be fifth tier by that time.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

20 teams per division. Only 38 games each season.

We finished 73rd this year so that would mean Tier 4 next year.

I think smaller divisions is a good idea, try to make the leagues less of a slog and up the quality, though with Jimmy the non investor and community/bucket Rattling Si, we will be happy with mid table in division five

Spanner in the works is obviously less games, less revenue. Like turkeys voting for Xmas. Can't see it happening unless there are sweeteners somewhere along the line.

If its not broke dont fix it.

Czarcasm wrote:

Spanner in the works is obviously less games, less revenue. Like turkeys voting for Xmas. Can't see it happening unless there are sweeteners somewhere along the line.

This was my first thought as well. There's also talk of a winter break and certainly in France and elsewhere, that falls over the Christmas period. I can't see clubs being happy about the loss of 4 home games and those big Christmas crowds...

The Christmas/New Year period without any football sends shivers down my spine.

Get rid of the play offs.......season can them start mid august finish mid may.
Quality improves....no finishing 20points behind amd getting promoted.

Elias wrote:

Get rid of the play offs.......season can them start mid august finish mid may.
Quality improves....no finishing 20points behind amd getting promoted.

P'raps the extra clubs would be Prem reserve sides?

tigertony wrote:

Elias wrote:

Get rid of the play offs.......season can them start mid august finish mid may.
Quality improves....no finishing 20points behind amd getting promoted.

P'raps the extra clubs would be Prem reserve sides?

yeah because that idea went down well the last time.

My thumbs up was for Elias post. (bit confusing)

I read the plan and thought ''is this a sneaky way of getting the Prem reserve sides in'' I can actually see no reason to change the present set-up. Improvements should be made in scheduling.

It all feels a bit like a marketing ploy with no substance, rather than good for the game. Doesn't solve any of the issues that really need addressing, like rack and stacking English kids for one.
Next to no chance of this being agreed.

The only way I think it would make any sense whatsoever is if used in conjunction with the old election/re-election method of joining the league and scrapping the national league with just conference south and north below.

What will happen otherwise is more clubs spending beyond their means to get to the league. Truro is an example of this where they have thrown the kitchen sink at getting to the conference and are now broke having missed.

Even then it just seems bonkers, there isnt enough to go around as it is.

The premiership was supposed to be for the good of the game. Look how well that has worked for clubs like Argyle!

It makes sense if aligned with regional leagues in the bottom two divisions feeding into a Championship 2 and then the CCC. 

Whilst clubs lose matchday revenue they also benefit from significantly reduced travel costs. If we get promoted look at some of the slogs we'll have next season particularly if Millwall get promoted. One of the drage of being in league 2 are the pitiful away crowds not helped by playing the likes of Carlisle midweek.

Hugh Watt wrote:

The only way I think it would make any sense whatsoever is if used in conjunction with the old election/re-election method of joining the league and scrapping the national league with just conference south and north below.

What will happen otherwise is more clubs spending beyond their means to get to the league. Truro is an example of this where they have thrown the kitchen sink at getting to the conference and are now broke having missed.

Even then it just seems bonkers, there isnt enough to go around as it is.

Truro, like the Cardiff of the South West lol.

Fewer home games means less revenue. Lower season ticket prices. Less Matchday income. Won't happen.

Homeslice wrote:

Fewer home games means less revenue. Lower season ticket prices. Less Matchday income. Won't happen.

That's what I thought but one of the reasons they were giving for doing this was more revenue for clubs? Jimmy may like to lower his wage bill a bit mind you.

If the Prem and the FA want it to happen it will, its up to the Football league to squeeze as much money out of them as possible. It could lead to a brighter future for us small comunity clubs

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

If the Prem and the FA want it to happen it will, its up to the Football league to squeeze as much money out of them as possible. It could lead to a brighter future for us small comunity clubs

Last time the FA let the premiership call the shots it ruined football forever.

The press release talks about more ''teams'' not ''clubs''. It concerns me that this is a back door route to get Prem 'B' teams into the league. If Liverpool, for example, want to get their 'B' team into the league then they could do that by calling the 'B' team something else like 'Anfield Rovers' and starting at the very bottom of the pyramid. The FL seemed to have used the poor publicity around fans, travelling long distances and fixtures as a catalyst to launch their latest attempt to drag the Prem further away from the masses. We actually have a Lge 3 now called the ''conference'' so if promotion into Lge 2 was based on ''top 3 up and next 4 play-off'' and it was 4 down from Lge 2 then job done. I just don't trust anyone in FA/FL/Prem who are really not interested in lower league clubs.
Can't see it being agreed.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

The premiership was supposed to be for the good of the game. Look how well that has worked for clubs like Argyle!

This. With knobs on.

It's only old fogeys like me that will recall how the PL was sold to us at its inception:

"The England team has struggled for too long because the top players play too many games." The spin went on: "By reducing the size of the top division fewer games will be played meaning the players will be less tired and less likely to be injured for the Summer tournaments."

We're now 20 years or so in and how has it panned out? The England team has been just as disappointing as it ever was; every international tournament seems to see an injury brouhaha surrounding a star player and a metatarsal or a hamstring injury.

On top of which there is barely an English player playing for the top English teams and the top teams have greedily expanded the European Cups as were into the Champions and Europa Leagues so the ones who do play at the highest level play just as many games, as long as they do not get injured, as they ever did!

This is clearly a ploy to get their B teams into the League structure and must be resisted fiercely because they care diddly squat about the likes of us so our interests will be trampled underfoot without so much as a second thought.

Sadly the PL is wash with more cash than it knows what to do with so you can bet your bottom dollar that the cash shortfall caused by the 20 team divisions will be compensated for, and maybe even enhanced a little and all the games lower division owners like James Brent will see is slightly higher risk-free guaranteed income and the turkeys will fall over themselves in the headlong rush to vote for Christmas and the inlationary spiral it tightens will gobble up any financial benefit before you can say "Bosman ruling".

If, however, the proposal is B team free and results in 5 full-time professional divisions then I can't see a problem: smaller divisions would mean fewer end of season pointless games because everybody would probably be either close to being relegated for longer or in with a shout of being promoted for longer and with 4 lots of non-PL promotees and relegatees each season instead of 3 there could be more movement up and down the divisions which would only be good.

Of course, the same "B team" accusation could be leveled at the likes of Argyle, who have often had their youth team in the South West Peninsula league going back half a century and more.
Big fish, little fish.
I still don't understand how the NFL in a first past the post/no room for losers country like America still manages to even up it's clubs every year with rules like the national player draft and shared merchandising. But then it's a closed shop with no promotions/relegations, I believe. I can only guess the NFL must be a cartel full of rather plump owners. Maybe even part of cementing the Union itself.

I think fat rather than plump...