TOPIC: Possible Football League Division Changes

Football League Statement: po.st/Proposals

Nixon's way of getting us up from basement league!

First thought is 3 less home games per season means less money through the gate but players still on weekly wages. The proposal states "Football League Clubs should be in a financially no worse, or preferably better, position as a result of any changes;"


Don't see how they could guarantee this.

Less Tuesday night games, therefore increase in average attendances?

Not sure that's entirely true, just a thought.

To me the big thing that leaps out is the return of the 'b teams' proposal. It was a stupid idea 2 years ago when first announced and it remains a stupid idea now.

I also suspect the way that most clubs will get round the loss of revenue caused by having 3 less home games will be to put the prices up for the remaining 19.

The drive to reduce midweek games is presumably to mitigate the effect of European matches and extra PL games. We clearly do lose support on crappy nights when there's football on the telly so it's perhaps not a terrible idea. That said I like night games the best.

I've said for years we should have 20 team divisions, but I'd go further and go back to North/South after the top 3 divisions. Would need a reorganisation of Non-League too, but it's possible.

Definitely don't want B Teams or U21 anywhere near though!

Can see the FA Cup going midweek when this kicks in...

would we just scrape into the new league 2 if it was next season this happened? I assume bottom 4 of the championship would drop into league 1, thus forcing bottom 8 of league 1 dropping into league 2 and then bottom 12 of league 2 into the new league 3?
Wycombe down would form the new league 3 with the top 8 of the conference?


or is that too simplistic?

Why don't the Premier League set up their own league for 'B' teams rather than gate crash the Football League
They would be more than welcome to join as long as it was their first team and they disbanded the Premier League.

I suspect if 'B' teams were allowed to join, the Premier League would need to provide a substantial annual amount of cash
Seems a none goer as a maximum of 6 'B' teams could be entered to make the numbers up to 80. (The statement says no relegation from the Football League in 2017-18 so that guarantees two extra National League sides).
Don't think the other 14 Premier League sides would be happy in giving extra money to the Football League for no return and I don't think those Premier League clubs wanting to enter would want to pay the amounts themselves. In fact the FA don't even allow 2nd teams in the top 6 tiers of non-league football, never mind ours.

'B; teams should never be allowed in the Football League, but I would go along with the idea of 20 team leagues and CCU's idea of the bottom two leagues being North/South with the numbers made up from the National League.

mojo wrote:
Don't think that would go down very well anywhere tbh. The old addage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" seems apt to me, Is the system in need of fixing? Or is it all about the money as per usual?

Rough based on this season's finishing positions, a L2N could feature likes of Carlisle, Hartlepool, York, Morecambe, Fleetwood, Blackpool, Accrington, Crewe, York, Shrewsbury, Doncaster, Chesterfield, Mansfield, Notts County and others.

Far more appealing than trips to Crawley, Newport and Stevenage surely?

Yes, I would be up for that.
Would generate more interest and bigger crowds, though we may be biased on this one.
Where does the North end, would the boundaries have to be redrawn each season depending upon who went up and down?

Obviously there's a handful of Clubs who could switch from season to season, but it happens plenty in Non-League so isn't a new concept...

CCU wrote:

Does that make it right or fair though?

CCU wrote:
Not for the London Branch.

I'd be happy t go to a 20 team league but separating North and South would probably be the end for me.May as well be non league.

Bumble wrote: Why would it make any difference? Surely better to have shorter trips?

I foresee the Board declaring that in view of the possibility of a reduced number of home games in future seasons the billionaire has got cold feet and has pulled out..

Id hate the north/south divide. I know it would save money on hotels/travel and fans expenses etc but it's still a no from me.

I want the possibility of playing every team. A north/south divide would mean we'd probably never play certain teams. Leyton Orient for example might as well be SV Sandhausen.

Some tuesday night trips can be a pain in the arse, but isn't there something weirdly wonderful, about our fans going down to Luton on a Tuesday, to see us come back from 3-1 down and win 4-3? Or a trip to Crawley to see the worst 0-0 that ever happened... Yes tuesday nights can be a pain in the arse, but the fact they're a pain in the arse, can make them wonderful.

We are Carlisle, we don't do easy!!

Bruntonpasty wrote:
Theres a simple solution to the " Tuesday game " problem when the divisions teams are known the league ask every club to tell them 3 clubs theyd be happy to play Midweek and 3 they wouldnt want to play midweek home and away and then enter those preferences into the parameters when the " fixture computer " compiles the games and that way the clubs would be seen to be getting what they want.

But the best thing would be supporter involvement and knowledge would iron out a lot of the stupid matches you get now for example the away capacity at say Morecambe and Accrington is about a thousand and we would be just as likely to sell that for a night match as we would for a Saturday game.so make them away night matches.

We wouldnt want to play teams from a distance who would potentially bring a good following like lets say Portsmouth Plymouth and Oxford as night matches so they would be home Saturday games

Its called common sense but organisations like the Football League who can produce crap like this clearly arent capable of that

The stuff in the Guardian tomorrow is very telling and gets a bit nearer what this is really all about.

Less mid week games if we adopt this?

What would the TV companies say?

They would say there will be more folk watching the European shite.

CCU wrote:
If we're not having Premier League B teams in the football league why should York get two teams in it?!

Too many decent boozers to do in one trip...

My first reaction when hearing this on the radio was why not do North and South in the lower 2 divisions?

More likely to get decent away followings, saves money for club and supporters on overnight trips/long journeys.

I'd rather be playing Morecambe, Accrington, Bury and Blackpool than Crawley, Yeovil, Bristol Rovers or Cambridge.

I think the only ones who wouldn't support this are the Ex - pats (fair enough) and the Mental Minority who seem to think that spending every other weekend and a big slice of your wages trailing up and down the motor way network somehow gains you kudos.

A bit of cold hearted business logic suggests reducing costs and increasing possible matchday income is a sensible move.

Not really arsed either way. End of the day, I go to watch Carlisle and I do this regardless of what league they're in or who they're playing.

North/South divide wouldn't bother me.
B teams wouldn't really bother me either if I think about it, but think it's a non-starter.

Don't see the point in the proposed changes that said. Not broke, don't fix it comes to mind.

The club will save on the electric bill for night games lol.

Its a decent idea but would not want B teams involved, would need to include promoting from Conference. Maybe the bottom 2 divisions could be 22 sides, to help maintain the number of games

Barrow'll be wetting themselves. With their owner and aspirations they could soon become Cumbria's premier league side.

I don't mind the reduction of games and I don't even mind a north south split in the bottom two tiers... it makes financial sense. My big concern is that this is simply a way of shoehorning the stupid B team idea in again. Clubs have reduced income as they have 3 fewer home games per season... so the Premier league B teams buy their way into the league structure to make up this shortfall. Having seen a match involving a B team in tier 2 Spain first hand I believe this would be awful for our league. B teams take zero away fans... the atmosphere is crap.... their teams vary massively in quality throughout the season... one week you could be playing against a team full of stars who are coming back from injury... the next week it could be just a bunch of kids. It means the league isn't a level playing field.; The B team system is generally disliked in Spain and would probably mean reduced interest and lower crowds in our league system, just like it has there. There is very little logic behind the whole argument anyway... if Premier League clubs want young players to get experience they can loan them out to proper lower league clubs, like us. If B-teams are allowed all you will get is Premier League clubs stockpiling even more good young players than they currently do. Our inept owners will probably be dazzled by the silver on offer though....

Northumbrian wrote:
Agreed and on top of that
a) how many supporters of Arsenal B are going to come up to watch them at Carlisle when Arsenal are at home the same day?
b) it's not like we'd get to go to highbury / old trafford etc for the return fixtures. Arsenal Reserves for example play at Borehamwood's ground. Newcastle reserves play at the home of West Allotment Celtic. It'd be like playing at Gillford Park 8 times a season.

I'd have no real complaints about changing the league structure and 'promoting' some more NL sides but absolutely do NOT want any B teams involved.

The whole concept of reducing divisions to 20 sounds, on the surface, reasonable. However, the loss of revenue - even for Lge 2 teams - makes it a no go based on simple accounting. Carlisle could lose up £200k from the loss of these games and that is factoring in the costs of the three fewer away games. at say £2k a match. As to the North/South split it's groundhog day again. The reason why Lge Div 3 North/South was abolished in the early 1960s was because supporters were becoming tired of seeing the same teams season after season. Let's be honest given an average season United aren't going to take anymore to these games than they are now and nor are the likes of Bury and Rochdale going to be bringing anymore to BP. Remember some of our biggest away support came from the likes of Portsmouth, Luton and Oxford this season.

As to 'B' teams enough said. As has been mentioned, if you look at Spain and Germany the lower leagues have been blighted by the involvement of these teams. Crowds and thus incomes are severely effected not to mention the types of grounds matches would be played at (as previously mentioned) or the fact that fewer players will be released on 1/2 or full season loans to lower league clubs. It would be a further example of the rich getting richer and the poor - being stuffed forever.

Whoever has come up with this crap needs filled in!

All about 'B' teams and I'm another who is dead against it. I'm also against the North/South divide. It's been tried&tested; and didn't work so why go back. I like how it mentions fixture congestion and the prospect of playing three less games but then they want to re-introduce the group stage to the FL Trophy.

Let common sense prevail and stick as is. I also think given the parachute payments from the Premier Lge the second tier will be full of cash rich clubs competing to get back into the big league and those going up to that level are going to have a harder time to try and stabilise in that division than it already is.

It will also be another ambition for the Horseman to stabilise in the League Three a tarted up Conference if you like.

This proposal is so bad I can fully see FL Chairman voting for it.

Wukkie wrote:
Well i havnt found any club whos in favour yet Brentford could best be described as luke warm.

And dont forget youre talking about having a season where 7 clubs go down from Championship to League one no way the Turkeys are going to vote for xmas

Not a hope in hell as it apparently needs 65 out of the 72 clubs to vote for it

Am I the only one who questions, does not 24 - 20 = 4?

flumeblue wrote:
And that would be on top of the 3 who would be relegated anyway otherwise if non were relegated non would be promoted and that way youve just lost any votes you might of had from league one clubs.

Whole things a joke and wont see the light of day The conference have now said they wont have anything to do with it

I don't mind the 5 professional leagues idea in principle so long as the extra teams came from the national league and not any of this B team nonsense.
The B team idea would ruin the integrity and passion of the competition.
I'm not a fan of the north south divide either. We are a small country so it is not that unmanageable to travel and I love going to different places regardless of distance. Familiarity breeds contempt in many ways. Like in Scotland, we would soon get bored of playing the same teams each season and our current board would be happy to see us bobbing between leagues 4 and 5.
20 team leagues maybe. The rest - not for me.

orfc wrote:
I think id demand we play at highbury even if it meant we had to play on someones back garden .

Dancingbear wrote:
Ha, that was just a deliberate mistake to distract from the fact Newcastle won't be having a Premier League B team any time soon.

Anyone who votes yes certainly needs a straight jacket.
Only change i would have is 3 up 3 down in the bottom tier and conference. Otherwise things are ok as they are.

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

So you'd leave 4 down from L1? Only division it happens in!

Pass me a straight jacket as I think 46 games is far too many a season...

Nowt wrong with 46 games.. as lower clubs said why reduce it..lost revenue.. but as its been said they need to rethink these tuesday long away trips for teams and avoid at all costs. Better still why arent fans consulted on surveys and this way maybe get a truer reflection on what fans would prefer..not what some office suits think.

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

markredfox73 wrote:
Better still Mark why not get rid of the ar*seholes who are responsible for ideas like these and have the real supporters run the game

Just take a look at all the Non Entity jobs there on massive salaries and start standing up to the Premier League.properly

Myself i would take the matches off Sky/BT and create a dedicated platform the cost of which would be included in Season/Matchday tickets that way the clubs involved could decide when they want to play not some TV executive.

markredfox73 wrote:
So you say 46 is fine, then bemoan long midweek games. Never get any better for us with our location!

CCU wrote:
I agree that 46 is fine but a little bit of logistical leeway could be applied to some fixtures, to prevent having an away at Plymouth or Exeter on a Tuesday night.

The travel issue would be the biggest irk with many fans...but its clear the hierachy are not listening to fans concerns....Its like being a broken record every year but still nothing gets done.

CCU the straight jacket is for the B team ideas



Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk