No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

There ARE other teams(we'd have no-one to play otherwise) and here's where all-comers can discuss the wider world of football......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply
daib0
Hopeful
Hopeful
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:42 am
Location: Spain-England
Contact:

No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by daib0 » Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:48 pm

The Guardian


EFL puts definitive end to controversial plan to include Premier League B teams

• Governing body also closes door on Celtic and Rangers joining league 
• League One and Two clubs reject idea of taking part in winter break


The 72 Football League clubs have definitively ruled out the prospect of Premier League B teams playing them in league football or Rangers and Celtic joining them as part of a planned revamp.

Really informative article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -structure" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

End phrase took my attention

"The mechanism for arriving at the new structure via promotion and relegation in the 2018-19 season is still to be decided. At its most extreme it could mean seven teams being relegated from the Championship that season and three coming up from League One. More likely is some form of compromise whereby fewer teams are relegated."

Thoughts?
'Royals Rendezvous' - a friendly Reading forum

daib0
Hopeful
Hopeful
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:42 am
Location: Spain-England
Contact:

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by daib0 » Sat Sep 24, 2016 1:13 pm

What about, if we have 5 leagues of 20 (I understand the idea is that 8 Conference/Vanarama teams come in to make it a 100 total, and that this idea is now on a roll):

Premier League
Championship
League Div 1
League Div 2 North - League Div 2 South


??

Then the 'poorer' clubs would have more derby matches and less distance to travel!
'Royals Rendezvous' - a friendly Reading forum

User avatar
Abdoulaye's Twin
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8478
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
Location: Skye high

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by Abdoulaye's Twin » Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:02 pm

What would the benefit be to have the extra division? Division 5 would still for all intents and purposes be the conference and I don't see how it would increase revenue for the bottom 3 divisions. A bit like calling division 2 the Championship - it's made zero difference.

boltonboris
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12957
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by boltonboris » Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:43 pm

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:What would the benefit be to have the extra division? Division 5 would still for all intents and purposes be the conference and I don't see how it would increase revenue for the bottom 3 divisions. A bit like calling division 2 the Championship - it's made zero difference.
Well you'd pay more money per match for a season ticket, which would suit the clubs
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"

User avatar
Abdoulaye's Twin
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8478
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
Location: Skye high

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by Abdoulaye's Twin » Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:59 pm

boltonboris wrote:
Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:What would the benefit be to have the extra division? Division 5 would still for all intents and purposes be the conference and I don't see how it would increase revenue for the bottom 3 divisions. A bit like calling division 2 the Championship - it's made zero difference.
Well you'd pay more money per match for a season ticket, which would suit the clubs
I doubt it'd make much of a difference.

boltonboris
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12957
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by boltonboris » Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:53 pm

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:
boltonboris wrote:
Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:What would the benefit be to have the extra division? Division 5 would still for all intents and purposes be the conference and I don't see how it would increase revenue for the bottom 3 divisions. A bit like calling division 2 the Championship - it's made zero difference.
Well you'd pay more money per match for a season ticket, which would suit the clubs
I doubt it'd make much of a difference.
It would to me. Because I like going to the match. So wouldn't be happy that I don;t get to see as many, unless we're back in the Premier League
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"

User avatar
Abdoulaye's Twin
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8478
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
Location: Skye high

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by Abdoulaye's Twin » Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:26 pm

boltonboris wrote:
Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:
boltonboris wrote:
Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:What would the benefit be to have the extra division? Division 5 would still for all intents and purposes be the conference and I don't see how it would increase revenue for the bottom 3 divisions. A bit like calling division 2 the Championship - it's made zero difference.
Well you'd pay more money per match for a season ticket, which would suit the clubs
I doubt it'd make much of a difference.
It would to me. Because I like going to the match. So wouldn't be happy that I don;t get to see as many, unless we're back in the Premier League
I meant to the finances of the club. I see no benefit to the club or football in general by messing about with the leagues/rebranding etc etc.

boltonboris
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12957
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by boltonboris » Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:56 pm

We'll they'd get the same pretty much the same income, but have less match-day costs to pay.

Less mid-week fixtures = Less (mahoosive) leccy costs for the floodlights

Less staffing costs

Less policing costs

Can see the benefit to them, but fvck em, football is for the fans - I'd personally support a 60 league game season from a selfish fan perspective
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"

User avatar
Abdoulaye's Twin
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8478
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
Location: Skye high

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by Abdoulaye's Twin » Mon Sep 26, 2016 5:26 pm

I don't know the attendance split between season ticket holders, but I assume there are a few thousand on top of the season tickets factoring away support. I can see there might be some savings, but I'm not convinced they're huge. Any structural changes would only be to suit the Premiership and they can fcuk right off.

boltonboris
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12957
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:27 pm

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by boltonboris » Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:44 am

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:I don't know the attendance split between season ticket holders, but I assume there are a few thousand on top of the season tickets factoring away support. I can see there might be some savings, but I'm not convinced they're huge. Any structural changes would only be to suit the Premiership and they can fcuk right off.
A few hundred I'd say
"I've got the ball now. It's a bit worn, but I've got it"

daib0
Hopeful
Hopeful
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:42 am
Location: Spain-England
Contact:

Re: No Premier B teams, no Rangers/Celtic

Post by daib0 » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:31 pm

phannson88 wrote:
Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:02 pm
What about, if we have 5 leagues of 20 (I understand the idea is that 8 Conference/Vanarama teams come in to make it a 100 total, and that this idea is now on a roll):

goldenslot
Yep, I've seen that mooted several times....
Tiers 1-3 national, then 4th tier North and 4th tier South!!
'Royals Rendezvous' - a friendly Reading forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest