I was just going to post this on the Pompey and Saints boards, as I'd normally do with a non club-specific discussion thread, but I thought I'd paste Newcastle in as well; being the busiest board on not606. ======= Rightly or wrongly, we seem to get more whining from managers and players alike in the Premier League [and some Championship sides] about fatigue due to the number of games being played compared to those in the top leagues in Europe. Should we therefore restructure the league system, if, as these people claim, it would make English teams more competitive in European competition? Also, with practically all teams in the Blue Square Premier full time these days and that league being âLeague Threeâ in just about all but name, should we restructure the lower leagues, incorporating the sides currently in that division? Below I have listed teams into a new league structure. I have been a bit crude in selection, having decided to take the current league positions (5th October 2011) as a âfinal tableâ and the lists are of divisions as they would start the following season. I have reduced the Premier League and Championship to 16 sides, meaning just 30 league games for each side instead of the respective 38 and 46. At the bottom you will see League Three North and South. This consists of the teams currently in the Blue Square Premier and all but the top four in the current League Two. I have made these leagues 22 sides each, which brings them in line with the next downward step, Blue Square North and South, which already consist of this number. This leaves 40 sides in the middle, which are placed in League One and Two, each of 20 sides. My reason for regionalizing League Three is to reduce the journeys for away fans in the lower leagues, which will hopefully boost attendances, as supporters of, say Newport County will now have shorter trips to the likes of Bristol Rovers, Hereford and Cheltenham instead of Gateshead, Darlington and Grimsby. I know the final tables will differ enormously from the current ones, but using them as a template, the new league structure would look as follows: Premier League and Championship with 16 teams each League One and League Two with 20 teams each League Three North and South of 22 teams each Premier League: Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea, Newcastle, Liverpool, Tottenham, Aston Villa, Stoke, Norwich, Swansea, QPR, Fulham, Everton, Wolves, Arsenal, Sunderland. Championship: West Brom, Wigan, Blackburn, Bolton, Southampton, Middlesbrough, Derby, West Ham, Brighton, Hull, Blackpool, Leicester, Cardiff, Ipswich, Leeds, Crystal Palace. League One: Peterborough, Burnley, Reading, Barnsley, Birmingham, Watford, Portsmouth, Doncaster, Nottingham Forest, Coventry, Millwall, Bristol City, Charlton, MK Dons, Preston, Sheffield Wed, Huddersfield, Sheffield Utd, Hartlepool, Notts Co. League Two: Brentford, Carlisle, Colchester, Tranmere, Oldham, Stevenage, Sc.unthorpe, Chesterfield, Rochdale, Bury, Walsall, AFC Bournemouth, Yeovil, Wycombe, Exeter, Leyton Orient, Southend, Crawley, Morecambe, AFC Wimbledon. League Three NORTH: Shrewsbury, Port Vale, Rotherham, Burton, Macclesfield, Accrington, Crewe, Bradford, Wrexham, Fleetwood, Gateshead, York, Mansfield, Tamworth, Southport, Barrow, Telford, Grimsby, Darlington, Stockport, Lincoln, Alfreton. League Three SOUTH: Oxford, Gillingham, Cheltenham, Swindon, Torquay, Northampton, Bristol Rov, Aldershot, Dag&Red, Barnet, Hereford, Plymouth, Braintree, Kidderminster, Luton, Cambridge, Forest Green, Hayes & Yeading, Ebbsfleet, Kettering, Newport, Bath City. What are your thoughts regarding this type of restructure?
Personally I would regionalise below the championship to help with the cost reduction in travelling and the encouragement of the smaller fan bases to travel to away games
Interesting idea. I think 16 is too low but I think the current 24 in the championship is too high. Perhaps 18 for PL and 20 for Championship would do it. Even then you'd have championship going down to 38 games from 46 which is a big reduction in revenue for some of those clubs. REdcuing number of games may reduce need for such big squads putting more players out of work too. With current squad sizes as they are I don't see what's wrong with the number of games played.
I did consider that. It would be pretty simple to do from the above lists: League One and Two would become League One North and South and the League Threes would simply become League Twos
Are travelling costs really that much? I think it's only because of the current trend for clubs to stay overnight for away games that have pushed up prices. Hiring a coach to go to Carlisle or to go to Brighton isn't that much difference as you hire them by the day normally. I can understand the cost argument for fans travelling less distances... but also see the point that it's half the fun of being an away fan going to new places a bit further afield. Normally they are the best away days. Keep things as they are. More likely the Top 5 will piss off to play a full time European league once the Sky deal is up anyway.
I think that you raise a very valid point. By drastically reducing the number of matches would have a detrimental effect on the income to the clubs involved.
Am I wrong or is that similar to what used to be but in a four league system up until the late sixties/seventies? Edited addition Also wasn't that the system almost, that used to apply pre world war 1?
On the players fatigue why not run premiership games along side internationals like in the cricket. Players get picked for England, clubs have to player younger players and the league will be shortened due to no international breaks, which we all can agree are getting ridicules
Reducing the size of the leagues by too much would reduce income through gate reciepts. Do the lower leagues need to be reduced that dramatically? Not like it will affect European football. Sorry if this sounds like a typical Prem club supporters reply.
Personally, I wouldn't mess with it. Players don't have that hard a life, and if they don't like it they can always get another job. After all, that's what everyone else has to do. The single thing I'd change about the whole system is that the media stop concentrating on the top 6 of the Premiership and give us news of clubs throughout the leagues. It staggers me to realise that I know as much about Wayne Rooney's bloody hair treatments and transplants than I know about my own club, and I promise you, the less I know about the goings on in clubs like ManU, Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal, the happier I'll be. Problem is, in looking for news of your own club you can't escape the crap.
I would have got on board and taken this more seriously, however, because the opening sentence reads...Rightly or wrongly, we seem to get more whining from managers and players alike in the Premier League [and some Championship sides] about fatigue due to the number of games being played compared to those in the top leagues in Europe. It is a simple and straight answer from me...NO! Fed up as a supporter of a lower league side, with everything being tailored around the pampers league. Don't get me wrong a good thread, which will create some good debate but that opening sentence just killed it for me.
leave it as it is. Is it a hard long season? yes. Why? Because the money grabbing geets decided hey should all be in the CL and voted for it. Then they all voted for the Europa League. Its a case of if you want success you have to work for it. If you want to win a cup, you play more games to win it. If there are too many games then quite simply lose the first game. So what if anything would I restructure? Put all the Euro comps back to how they were before the Champions League. i.e. straight knockout for all rounds. and only the CHAMPIONS should be in it. Put the Europa League back as it was and places 2-5 are in it. Re-instate the Cup winners cup and the cup winners (or runners up if the winners are in one of the other 2) Then the CL would be more interesting again. It is very boring watching 3 PL teams and 3 La Liga teams in the quarters every year. And that kindof answers the 'do better in europe' suggestion. For all the games played they don't seem to be doing too bad in Europe. As for the Internationals should be as it was too. Int breaks are fine but no point playing friendlies when everybody suddenly has 'injuries' just before them yet play for their club the following week. Andy
Hasn't it been tried before - reducing the size of the Premier League that is? Wasn't it a few years ago that UEFA wanted all the major European leagues to have 18 teams playing 34 games and although it was taken up by some countries - Italy were one - the majority except for Germany, reverted to 20 team leagues. Just can't see it happening in the Premier league as clubs won't accept the reduction in income.
Younger players who will probably be in U21, U19 etc teams? Just looking at us we'd lose our keeper, currently would jammily keep the back 4 (losing Santon), Cabaye, Tiote, Jonas and probably Ben Arfa all gone, with Ba and probably Best going too, leaving: Elliott Simpson Taylor Colo Taylor Marv Guthrie ---- Obertan Lovenkrands Ameobi You'd be praying to be playing a Big 4 club who'd be even shorter, ruining the integrity of the league even more than rotation pre Champions League.
Abeid due to it being a training camp hes currently at. Changes Ive made are from what we could pick currently on this international break. It would make the top 4 look at youth more and not splash ridicules amounts of cash on players
Sadly he hasn't yet... That second midfield spot is hard to fill too, Goslings an U21, Abeids thrown his hat in for Algeria, Smithys injured, wouldn't surprise me if Richardson gets an U19 callup eventually.
I don't see the point. La Liga has 20 teams, Serie A has 20 teams, Ligue 1 has 20 teams. Bundesliga, Eredivisie, Primeira have fewer, but it's been a long time since teams from those divisions have really challenged in the CL. The big difference between British football and the others is that we have the League Cup and the FA Cup - Whereas (as far as I know) most other top divisions only have one cup. Most of the clubs that have qualified for Europe field teams of youth or fringe players in these competitions anyway though, so I really doubt it has that much affect on their performances, and I think they're mostly just using it as an easy excuse for when they fail.
