SPL Set Up

[dannyhatfield]

Has many of you probably know there might be an SPL 2, Im just wondering do any of you know how it would work? Personally I'd make a 14 team SPL, Play each team twice in the league and have a winter break as well. Then The SFL could have two 14 team divisions aswell.

[frasermc]

i haven't heard anything regarding an SPL2 for a while now.

i thought it was dead in the water.

[WelshCelt]

Has many of you probably know there might be an SPL 2, Im just wondering do any of you know how it would work? Personally I'd make a 14 team SPL, Play each team twice in the league and have a winter break as well. Then The SFL could have two 14 team divisions aswell.
There aren't 14 teams in the SPL good enough. If anything we should cut the size of the SPL and have a play off between the bottom team and the top of Div 1. Keep utter crap like Gretna out of the league.

The problem with the SPL is the weakness of other Scottish teams, its pathetic it really is. What the SPL really needs is one Dundee team and one Fife team. Then we would have a league with a bit more about it.

[Scottish_Morton]

There aren't 14 teams in the SPL good enough. If anything we should cut the size of the SPL and have a play off between the bottom team and the top of Div 1. Keep utter crap like Gretna out of the league.

Dunfermline, Dundee, Livi, St. Johnstone and Partick Thistle are the last 5 sides to be relegated from the SPL.

ICT, Falkirk and St. Mirren were the three teams before Gretna to be promoted.

(I'm sure you can figure out the rest of the argument yourself :rolleyes:)

The problem with the SPL is the weakness of other Scottish teams, its pathetic it really is. What the SPL really needs is one Dundee team and one Fife team. Then we would have a league with a bit more about it.

The problem is the majority of fans in any given area are Rangers and/or Celtic fans, it's pathetic really.

[Gordon EF]

There aren't 14 teams in the SPL good enough. If anything we should cut the size of the SPL and have a play off between the bottom team and the top of Div 1. Keep utter crap like Gretna out of the league.

The problem with the SPL is the weakness of other Scottish teams, its pathetic it really is. What the SPL really needs is one Dundee team and one Fife team. Then we would have a league with a bit more about it.

Hamilton, Dundee, St. Johnstone and Queen of the South have all beaten SPL opposition in the cups this year. Partick Thistle got a draw at Ibrox (more than Celtic could manage).

OF fans can't have it both ways. You can't shamelessly glory-hunt then complain when the opposition is too weak.

[frasermc]

Hamilton, Dundee, St. Johnstone and Queen of the South have all beaten SPL opposition in the cups this year. Partick Thistle got a draw at Ibrox (more than Celtic could manage).

OF fans can't have it both ways. You can't shamelessly glory-hunt then complain when the opposition is too weak.

hold the phone.

i don't and never have shamelessly glory hunted. i was born in Glasgow, raised in Glasgow, and have lived almost all my life in Glasgow. I chose to support Celtic at an early age even though i went to a protestant school. it would have been a lot easier for me to support the other side of the city.

i have no problem if the SPL wants to expand. the teams mentioned above would provide as good a game, if not better, than some already holding fort in the SPL. namely Kilmarnock, although i put a lot of their tedious displays down to their management team. i believe though, that the main opposition would come from the likes of Kilmarnock as i still think that they would have an outcry over having their four Celtic/Rangers matches halved to two.

as for holding them at ibrox. well done to the jags and lets not forget that this is a part of this terribly sad fixture pile up they now have. still, if they'd played a full team then they may not have had a replay to endure and another midweek date gobbled up...

[Gordon EF]

hold the phone.

i don't and never have shamelessly glory hunted. i was born in Glasgow, raised in Glasgow, and have lived almost all my life in Glasgow. I chose to support Celtic at an early age even though i went to a protestant school. it would have been a lot easier for me to support the other side of the city.

i have no problem if the SPL wants to expand. the teams mentioned above would provide as good a game, if not better, than some already holding fort in the SPL. namely Kilmarnock, although i put a lot of their tedious displays down to their management team. i believe though, that the main opposition would come from the likes of Kilmarnock as i still think that they would have an outcry over having their four Celtic/Rangers matches halved to two.

as for holding them at ibrox. well done to the jags and lets not forget that this is a part of this terribly sad fixture pile up they now have. still, if they'd played a full team then they may not have had a replay to endure and another midweek date gobbled up...

I didn't mean supporters like you. There are obviously plenty of genuine supporters of Celtic and Rangers, just like every other club. It's obvious though that people, mostly outside of Glasgow only support either of the OF because they win most of the trophies. That's shameless glory hunting. It's a bit rich for folk like that to then moan or sneer about the quality of opposition when the reason the playing field is so uneven is that half the people in most of the towns in Scotland who are football fans support the OF.

[frasermc]

I didn't mean supporters like you. There are obviously plenty of genuine supporters of Celtic and Rangers, just like every other club. It's obvious though that people, mostly outside of Glasgow only support either of the OF because they win most of the trophies. That's shameless glory hunting. It's a bit rich for folk like that to then moan or sneer about the quality of opposition when the reason the playing field is so uneven is that half the people in most of the towns in Scotland who are football fans support the OF.

that's a fair point.

unfortunately 'glory hunters' are found in every country, be it Scotland or England or anywhere else in Europe and beyond.

no doubt the league would be less unbalanced if people supported their local teams. those days are long gone though.

[WelshCelt]

Dunfermline, Dundee, Livi, St. Johnstone and Partick Thistle are the last 5 sides to be relegated from the SPL.

ICT, Falkirk and St. Mirren were the three teams before Gretna to be promoted.

(I'm sure you can figure out the rest of the argument yourself :rolleyes:)

Aye, and they'd have mostly won the play offs and gained promotion. However, we may have been spared the embarrassment of Gretna.


The problem is the majority of fans in any given area are Rangers and/or Celtic fans, it's pathetic really.
Aye, I do appreciate that. Although if their local teams are as rubbish as most of them are, I wouldn't blame anyone for wanting to see a team playing good football, and usually (although not always, the huns this season for example) the Old Firm is the best place to go for it.

By the way, I'd like to point out that as someone who started supporting Celtic during the Rangers 9-in-a-row whilst living in Wales, it really wasn't much of a glory supporting option. Plus, I only took away from Cardiff City's support, and they're a bunch of apes. :p

[WelshCelt]

Hamilton, Dundee, St. Johnstone and Queen of the South have all beaten SPL opposition in the cups this year. Partick Thistle got a draw at Ibrox (more than Celtic could manage).

OF fans can't have it both ways. You can't shamelessly glory-hunt then complain when the opposition is too weak.

There is no shame in choosing to support an ambitious club playing the best football in the league, especially when your local team is an embarrassment. You support East Fife for your reasons, don't criticise others for their choice.

Anyway, Cup shocks will always happen and its more likely considering the weakness of a number of SPL teams.

And so what if Partick got a draw at Ibrox, thats cup football and if you think that game was anything like an Old Firm then you're wrong.

[alexp92]

this thread seems familiar.:p
i call for an spl format superthread:cool:

http://http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=685534

edit: ah, link doesnt work. to lazy to change it.

[frasermc]

this thread seems familiar.
i call for an spl format superthread:cool:

http://http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=685534

edit: ah, link doesnt work. to lazy to change it.

that would mean our alcoholic mod :p would actually have to do a bit of work in the forum and merge the threads... :eek:

[alexp92]

Hamilton, Dundee, St. Johnstone and Queen of the South have all beaten SPL opposition in the cups this year. Partick Thistle got a draw at Ibrox (more than Celtic could manage).

greenock morton beat the scottish giants that are gretna.:o

[Gordon EF]

There is no shame in choosing to support an ambitious club playing the best football in the league, especially when your local team is an embarrassment. You support East Fife for your reasons, don't criticise others for their choice.

Anyway, Cup shocks will always happen and its more likely considering the weakness of a number of SPL teams.

And so what if Partick got a draw at Ibrox, thats cup football and if you think that game was anything like an Old Firm then you're wrong.

You can't automatically equate ambition with size. The reason that the OF are so much bigger than every other club is not that there's something, special, unique or different about them. It's partly to do with religion and mostly to do with glory-hunting.

It's a fact, there's not much anyone can do about it. All I'm saying is that it's a bit much to then criticise the others foir being shit when OF fans are a big part of the reason for why the gap exists.

All I was pointing out is that there isn't much difference between the bottom of the SPL and the top of the 1st. So letting a few more teams in probably wouldn't dramatically affect the quality of football.

[camerondocherty]

that's a fair point.

unfortunately 'glory hunters' are found in every country, be it Scotland or England or anywhere else in Europe and beyond.

no doubt the league would be less unbalanced if people supported their local teams. those days are long gone though.

just thought id say that my father was born and raised within walking distance of parkhead and brought me up a celtic supporter. just in case anyone has any "typical american bandwagoning on celtic" thoughts.

[frasermc]

just thought id say that my father was born and raised within walking distance of parkhead and brought me up a celtic supporter. just in case anyone has any "typical american bandwagoning on celtic" thoughts.

cameron I feel that there are plenty of american bandwagoning Celtic fans on BS. i see plenty of them with Celtic as a supported club below their avatar but i wonder how many take any note or show any concern on what happens to the club on a week to week basis.

you certainly don't fall into that bracket as you're a regular poster on the Celtic threads and the scottish forum in general. i think you've shown in your posts that you are a true Celtic supporter.

[bobbybhoy1]

Mon the Hoops..God bless the USA!!!!

[lovingthegreen]

There is no shame in choosing to support an ambitious club playing the best football in the league, especially when your local team is an embarrassment.

I understand where you're coming from, but unfortunately that creates a negative cycle. Without support, the local clubs are going to never have the funds to ever get better, while Celtic/Rangers will keep on getting better and better.

For what it's worth, I don't have a local professional team around where I live and, if I'm going to choose a club that I cannot attend games of, I would rather it be British (prestige, format of competitions, energy, etc.). And it was Celtic partly because it "felt right" and partly because I want to be able to watch video, preferably live, of all of my club's games, not just the "big" games. And I think Celtic is the only club in Britain that offers that (through Channel 67 on its website).

But if another club, such as Inverness CT, had the funds available to have live video of all of their competitive games, I may have chosen to support another club. So, I guess the size of the club did have a part in my choice, but not the same as it does for other people (I'm not going to stop supporting Celtic because of lack of trophies or anything like that). And Plymouth Argyle is my favorite English club and I don't see that ever changing - I just devote the vast majority of my supporter time and interest in Celtic.

But I am the type of person that if I lived in Britain, I would absolutely support my local club over a bigger one further away, probably down to around the SFL Third Division-Blue Square North/South level. But then I could see all the games because I could attend and watch them all in person.

Sorry about the marathon post ... as for the original question, I do like the idea of moving the SPL either down to 10 teams or just go all out and make it 20 teams (38 games in a completely even schedule both ways). And I am not a fan of a winter break - it appears that has not even been an issue most years.

[alexp92]

I understand where you're coming from, but unfortunately that creates a negative cycle. Without support, the local clubs are going to never have the funds to ever get better, while Celtic/Rangers will keep on getting better and better.

For what it's worth, I don't have a local professional team around where I live and, if I'm going to choose a club that I cannot attend games of, I would rather it be British (prestige, format of competitions, energy, etc.). And it was Celtic partly because it "felt right" and partly because I want to be able to watch video, preferably live, of all of my club's games, not just the "big" games. And I think Celtic is the only club in Britain that offers that (through Channel 67 on its website).

But if another club, such as Inverness CT, had the funds available to have live video of all of their competitive games, I may have chosen to support another club. So, I guess the size of the club did have a part in my choice, but not the same as it does for other people (I'm not going to stop supporting Celtic because of lack of trophies or anything like that). And Plymouth Argyle is my favorite English club and I don't see that ever changing - I just devote the vast majority of my supporter time and interest in Celtic.

But I am the type of person that if I lived in Britain, I would absolutely support my local club over a bigger one further away, probably down to around the SFL Third Division-Blue Square North/South level. But then I could see all the games because I could attend and watch them all in person.

Sorry about the marathon post ... as for the original question, I do like the idea of moving the SPL either down to 10 teams or just go all out and make it 20 teams (38 games in a completely even schedule both ways). And I am not a fan of a winter break - it appears that has not even been an issue most years.
im with you on this one. the season i really started to follow the game, it seemed like they only ever showed arsenal and man u games on tv. i had been to london and stayed close to arsenal, so they were really the first english soccer team i had ever heard of. started to pay attention to them, and they were my favorite team. then i got into morton, and now i see it a whole different way. dont know what's gonna happen when florida gets an mls team.:)

[bobbybhoy1]

im with you on this one. the season i really started to follow the game, it seemed like they only ever showed arsenal and man u games on tv. i had been to london and stayed close to arsenal, so they were really the first english soccer team i had ever heard of. started to pay attention to them, and they were my favorite team. then i got into morton, and now i see it a whole different way. dont know what's gonna happen when florida gets an mls team.:)So whats yor view on Buckfast and knockoff Burberry:D