Football League To Reform From 2019/20 Season

[CosbehFox]

But regionalised league could potentially be so unfair some seasons. What happens of you have a shit load of North teams? And say Donny have to play in the south. Then they go in the North when a southern team joins the league. Could mean teams hop from one league to another. Wed be a good example of this being a central team (if we were down there)

In conference North for example Gloucester have been in that league for a while. Gloucester. Gloucester who had to play for example away at Blyth. All because a shit load of southern teams and they were furthest north.

Can't really work well at a professional level I'd say. And some one already correctly made the point about revenue if you lost a big team from North or south due to regions

The non league problem is caused by a bottle neck of 3 divisions below it which comprise of a Northern League, a Southern League and a league containing London and South East. Therefore there's an imbalance and you get situations like the Gloucester example.

[act smiley]

One of the main factors is less games but then one of the proposals is a the league cup having groups, am I missing something because it seems contradictory.

The teams in the Championship want less games, the teams in League 1/2 generally don't but going to 20 in the Champ means rearranging the lot as you can't have 26 teams in League 1 & 2.

By having more cup games where they can stagger the entry so only L1/2/3 teams show up in the early rounds, everyone gets what they want - the bigger teams get less home games, the middle sized ones protect their revenue and the teams who're stuck in the conference get to come back into the league. Everyone wins, except the smaller teams in the conference national league, who lose their big games against 'fallen giant' types.

[Aus Fox]

You'd have to do promotion on relegation in stages, reduce each division to 22 one season and then 20 the following.

My idea would be

4 from the championship down 2 up

5 from league 1 down 1 up

Leaving the championship at 22 and league 1 at 22

League 2 would then be at 28, the bottom 8 clubs would form league 3 with 8 conference clubs making league 2 20 clubs and league 3 16 clubs.

The following season the championship would again be 4 down 2 up putting it at 20.

League one would be 5 down 1 up meaning it as at 20.

League 2 would be 5 down 1 up putting it at 20 and league 3 would have no promotion or relegation in the first season rising it to 20 clubs.

The missing home games would be made up by the league cup having regional groups of 4 teams, all local derbies so limited travel.

For example

Notts county

Burton

Mansfield

Forest

This would more than make up for the missing gates as they would gautentee big crowds, particularly if in round 1 teams like forest, derby, villa, Newcastle, wolves, Leeds etc. are seeds ensuring a big away following.

It's the only way I can see it working without mass relegation.

[stripeyfox]

possible way of getting Rangers and Celtic to join by shuffling the divisions?

[CosbehFox]

The non league problem is caused by a bottle neck of 3 divisions below it which comprise of a Northern League, a Southern League and a league containing London and South East. Therefore there's an imbalance and you get situations like the Gloucester example.

I just split the bottom 32 teams of this years FL and the top 8 of the National League.

Your Northern division could start as low as Oxford, Northampton and Luton

[Raw Dykes]

possible way of getting Rangers and Celtic to join by shuffling the divisions?

 

I hope not, and I don't think that will happen. I don't think anyone in England, or anyone in Scotland outside those two clubs, wants that.

 

It would just mean more competition for English clubs, less chance of smaller clubs reaching the PL/Championship, and the SPL becoming even worse than it already is.

[Raw Dykes]

You'd have to do promotion on relegation in stages, reduce each division to 22 one season and then 20 the following.

My idea would be

4 from the championship down 2 up

5 from league 1 down 1 up

Leaving the championship at 22 and league 1 at 22

League 2 would then be at 28, the bottom 8 clubs would form league 3 with 8 conference clubs making league 2 20 clubs and league 3 16 clubs.

The following season the championship would again be 4 down 2 up putting it at 20.

League one would be 5 down 1 up meaning it as at 20.

League 2 would be 5 down 1 up putting it at 20 and league 3 would have no promotion or relegation in the first season rising it to 20 clubs.

The missing home games would be made up by the league cup having regional groups of 4 teams, all local derbies so limited travel.

For example

Notts county

Burton

Mansfield

Forest

This would more than make up for the missing gates as they would gautentee big crowds, particularly if in round 1 teams like forest, derby, villa, Newcastle, wolves, Leeds etc. are seeds ensuring a big away following.

It's the only way I can see it working without mass relegation.

 

Yeah. I like this idea. It's way less drastic than trying to do it all in one season.

 

I love the idea of regional rounds early on in cups. More guaranteed local derbies a season and minimal travel. Can't see a downside to it at all. Everyone's a winner.

[stripeyfox]

I hope not, and I don't think that will happen. I don't think anyone in England, or anyone in Scotland outside those two clubs, wants that.

It would just mean more competition for English clubs, less chance of smaller clubs reaching the PL/Championship, and the SPL becoming even worse than it already is.

I'm not sure how it would happen, but I think it definitely could. The benefits to Celtic and Rangers are obvious - massively increased revenue, providing they can "rise" to the top league(s). But where would they start off? That's why I thought with this potential "reshuffle" it may allow them to be parachuted in to the second or third tier, and chuck a wedge of compensation for the clubs which have to make way. I guess the league clubs in England would also recognise the "pull" of having the two big Scottish clubs on board.

Having said all that, I think I'd prefer to see them continue to fester in their crappy Scottish Sunday league....

[Raw Dykes]

I'm not sure how it would happen, but I think it definitely could. The benefits to Celtic and Rangers are obvious - massively increased revenue, providing they can "rise" to the top league(s). But where would they start off? That's why I thought with this potential "reshuffle" it may allow them to be parachuted in to the second or third tier, and chuck a wedge of compensation for the clubs which have to make way. I guess the league clubs in England would also recognise the "pull" of having the two big Scottish clubs on board.

Having said all that, I think I'd prefer to see them continue to fester in their crappy Scottish Sunday league....

 

Obviously, Rangers and Celtic would benefit, as you say, but does anyone else? I don't think most English clubs would go for it. The last time it was proposed, I'm pretty sure 90-something % of them voted against. The Old Firm does have some pull, but I don't think it's enough to outweigh the cons. It wouldn't really add a lot to the PL, which is already the most watched league in the world, if I'm not mistaken.

 

If you're a Championship club, then you know it will be even more difficult than it already is to get into the PL, and I doubt anyone will see past that. The Championship is already an insanely competitive league. That's why it's impossible to predict. The money at stake is staggering. The last thing they want is more competition.

 

Also, it would totally ruin the Scottish league. The Old Firm are the only 2 big clubs. If they leave, the Scottish league wouldn't be that much bigger than the Welsh or Irish leagues.

 

I think it would be of benefit to Rangers and Celtic, but at the expense of everyone else in England and Scotland.