It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Oh dear. B teams, Scottish teams, regional divisions. These are my fears already. I don't believe that Premier league are not pushing this.
Six new teams, which funny enough is roughly the number of Scottish clubs with sizeable followings.
Some of the outlined proposals have some merit, but after the Fl league clubs were well and truly shafted with the deal that allowed home grown products allowed to be poached for 40k.
You have to be deeply suspicious of the movers and the groovers behind this proposal.
I assume WWFC would vote against this, but regardless isn't this the kind of issue which should be put before members of the Trust?
They are selling it by reducing midweek games! So they must hope we have some mild winters! The Accrington Stanley Chairman said he wants 33 games at home not 19!
They keep saying 5 divisions of 20 teams. But nowhere do it say League 1 to 4 below the championship, so that even though they are not saying it means regional football. How boring will that become! The end for hundreds of exiles, so many people live many miles away from the towns they grew up in now. Surely fans want to see more football not less, but league football! What's the betting they will increase the pointless football league trophy to a group midweek league again.
scrapping FA Cup replays and moving entire rounds of the FA Cup to midweek slots. What a joke!
Potential to reduce squad size / Increased importance of reserve team football; How are these not polar opposites!
Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/article/2016/a-whole-game-solution-3119809.aspx#Ff3EbTWB84Pl6GcD.99
I may have jumped the gun!
It appears that 80 football league clubs and 20 premier league clubs, so a total of 100 clubs including the Premier league. Not a chance of it being accepted!
Its interesting to read the proposals but I still don't see what we hope to achieve. More money? Easy. Get the EPL to divi up a fair share of money flooding into the game? Better player development? Easy scrap the EPPP and the constrictions. More English talent? Go back to teams having to pay a fair price for a player that has been developed since youth. More attendance? Easy have a sensible fixture schedule that avoids Carlisle v Plymouth on a Tuesday. What happened to local derby fixtures being at Christmas?
These are the easy fixes that would improve lower league football in a heartbeat. But no Greg Dyke and his cronies wouldn't opt for any of these as it is considered too hard or would take money from the fat trough that is the EPL.
Utterly dreadful, built for the elite as usual. The clubs at the top will be fine with all the extra TV revenue but those at the bottom will lose vital matchday revenue
All this reducing the amount of football, you would think that those in charge hate the game if they want to see less of it
Agree with everything @TheAndyGrahamFanClub said. Can someone help my fuzzy brain this morning though please...
If we were to see regional football, and say, the bottom two divisions became a north and south, what happens when all of the teams relegated from the division above those are from the north? Do we end up with northern teams in the southern league? I don't actually know how this works in non-league.
In non league the North /South line is a moveable feast. This sounds more complex than in reality it is. It can lead to a 'long' division but overall it works OK.
@woodlands Haven't Oxford City been bounced around the North and South leagues a few times in recent seasons?
Sorry meant to add go and look at Evo stick North and South or even National League n&s as examples.
It's happened in the Conference National this season. Three of the bottom four (Altrincham, FC Halifax Town and Kidderminster) are headed for the Conference North.
It's usually mitigated either by moving teams between the Conference North and South (Oxford City having moved South recently) or else by placing relegated teams from the CN and CS into 'unbalanced' leagues.
In terms of geography, this might help.
I live in the East Midlands and there are a couple of teams nearby who get moved back and forth between Southern League and Northern Premier League every season or two, depending on who has been relegated from the National League Regional divisions above.
The regional structure doesn't work for everyone. I remember when Lowestoft Town got promited to National League Regional level in 2014 they were expecting to be in the South division, but were moved to the North division after Salisbury City were demoted to the South division. Lowestoft were very unhappy with this, as it resulted in significantly higher travel, etc. costs being incurred.
Lowestoft Town were even less happy when they were denied an application to be reinstated in the South division after Salisbury City were slung out completely; they had to compete in the North whilst the South was left one team short for the season.
This year's arrangements for steps 1 - 4 of the national league system (levels 5 - 8 of the "Pyramid") have been published: http://www.thefa.com/news/my-football/club-league/2016/may/club-allocations-step-1-4-2016-17-120516
The imbalance of three of the relegated National League Premier teams being placed into National League North has been redressed by placing only two of the promoted teams into that division and four into the National League South, with the one other relegated Premier team. Teams that remain at the same level but have been switched to different leagues to keep the numbers straight are highlihgted in yellow on the tables.
(Lowestoft Town, after their adventures in the National League North, now find themselves back in the Isthmian League next season following relegation).
I agree with Keith-Allens_Wig. This is not the plan of people who actually like watching football. What's wrong with midweek football? Personally I find it much more atmospheric even if the crowds are lower.
It seems to me to be all about packaging and marketing and sod the actual supporter
Way down the leagues, but didn't Flackwell recently turn down the chance of promotion, because they'd be in a different region if they went up, meaning way too long trips and expenses for the level of football they were?
Meaning they lost a lot of key players.
The only problems with midweek football are when they set stupid long distances.
Sometimes it's like they've purposely gone out of their way to set stupid trips up.
I can't see 66 of the 72 FL clubs voting for this, unless they are compensated for the loss of revenue. It must be a non starter if they need a 90% agreement
They'll find a way to bully/sweeten the deal to get what they want.
Do changes have to be in 3 years time, is there some rule on that?
The whole idea is utter dog squeeze. As someone mentioned in an earlier post, it will be purely for the benefit of those with their snouts in an already fully laden trough. They won't be happy until every chance of young players making it up the ladder has been takeaway. Then the hierarchy will blame & sack the England manager for failure. It's a recurring theme.
Powered by Vanilla
Hosting courtesy of Hactar