New Football League proposals to revamp the League pyramid with five divisions of 20 clubs from 2019/20. One of the suggestions is that seven teams would be relegated from the Championship in one season to facilitate the changeover, I can't see it getting the 90% approval especially from the Championship clubs, turkeys don't vote for Christmas... http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/new-football-league-proposal-could-8008201
I'm in favour. It may well get approval. All Division Two clubs are very scared of relegation to The Conference. This might ease those fears for a few years.
I like the idea of 36 games a season. 46 makes my blood run cold. Would be good for the quality of the game, the anticipation of matches etc. Can't see it happening though. And if it did you could guarantee that we would lose out in some way.
Sorry if this sounds silly but what are the advantages of the changes? Less games maybe good for the teams, and maybe better standard of football...but surely bad for the fans?
Someone at the Football League mentioned that it would stop fans having long journeys for midweek games meaning that more games would be played at weekends and bank holidays... Well one way to stop fans having long midweek journeys is to stop the fixture computer spiting out Hartlepool vs Plymouth or Exeter vs Carlisle on a Tuesday night, how difficult can it be. Here's another idea stop the International breaks, especially over the Easter weekend. Back in the day the top 2 divisions always played 42 league games plus league cup, FA Cup and European matches if you were lucky without any problem, sometimes the cup ties needed 3, 4 or even 5 replays, did we complain? No........ By all means cut the divisions down to 20 sides, split leagues 4 and 5 into regional divisions, North & South but please don't anyone in authority pretend that they care about the fans that go to games, we all know they stopped caring when Sky waived its wad of cash in their faces......
Lots of conjecture on this proposal, lower league teams really not happy and the Bradford Chairman interviewed this morning said if the Championship teams want it then it will happen as it's not one team one vote, the voting is weighted according to the division each team is in and the Championship carries the majority...
This smells like something Greg Dyke has dreamed up, marketing rather than football input. The lower league teams are basically being sacrificed to make it easier for Premier 'B' teams to play in competitions that would be midweek whilst the existing teams will be offered minor compensation for the lost matches. Celtic and Rangers may be invited to join the fifth tier which would be something Sky would be wetting themselves over...
I think a better solution would be to have 1 league of 100 teams. 198 game season played out over a 7 year period. Winning club gets to choose one other to eliminate from the game altogether, bottom 11 relegated....straight back into the now 99 club league, but have to play the following season with their boots on the wrong feet. Mid table is not allowed, any club finishing between 45 & 55 must be punished (method of punishment decided by clubs finishing 44 & 56. All matches to be played on Monday and Thursday mornings, kick off 0645. It's a work in progress, but I'm sure you'll agree, it's coming on nicely.
Don't expect to see any Sky cash thrown at this. The big boys won't like it. Reducing the number of home games from 23 to 19 means a possible drop in revenue of 17%. Midweek attendances are said to be about 6-7% lower than those at the weekend, so we can reduce the overall loss to about 16%. Can the small clubs afford that? There is a school of thought that you would be able to have smaller squads because of fewer games, but I cannot see 8 games over a season making that much difference. The only reason there would be smaller squads is that clubs will not be able to pay them all. Then there is the suggestion that there could be Premiership B teams in the lower leagues. This would only serve to take away any up and coming talent. I am sure that young players would much rather play for a B team where their progress would be closely monitored by the A team. They would see it as a possible short cut to success. In that way the other clubs miss out on the best up-and-coming talent. You can bet your bottom dollar that suggestions such as this are only designed to help the few right at the top.
Typical 'we fear change'/ 'oh no we'll have to try harder' response. League Two clubs have an average attendance of 4,680, so they will 'lose' 18,720 paying guests a season. To make that up they need to add 985 fans per match. A less diluted 'product' (let's be honest) may help a bit, plus better marketing. And I am guessing that the tedious midweek games they will lose are actually lower attendances anyway, so the impact is lower. Or, with an average ticket price of £18.50, they will lose £346,320 of gate revenue. To make up for it the average ticket price has to go up so they get the same revenue, to £22.40. If they can add 500 fans they can reduce the price rise to about £1.50. But again all less given the midweek attendance effect. Challenging, but not impossible. All calculations exclude pie and bovril revenue. Written while Eamon was posting, I think our figures tally. But my point is that they are not passive actors in this.
far too late a kick off imho woody 3am would be much better that would make it between 2 and 4 pm here on a sunday perfect beer drinking match watching time
