This morning, I put up a piece about how Celtic are trapped in the SPFL Doom Spiral—and how part of that is down to us having had a hand in designing the system the way it works at the moment.
That article was about the planned reforms, the league structure proposals that are dead on arrival and never going to get off the ground. It was about how, in building a system that requires 11 out of 12 teams to vote for any changes, we locked ourselves into this cycle of destruction.
Now, Sky Sports is reporting that those votes are already lost because, by their understanding, there isn’t enough support around the table to make the 10-team Premier League proposal a reality.
It’s exactly as I said this morning—getting everyone around the table to discuss this is a waste of time and effort, and that’s exactly what Sky Sports is now claiming.
They’re talking about hopes for a 14-team Scottish Premiership. As far as I’m concerned, you can take that idea and throw it as far as possible. It’s not going to happen, and it should not happen.
The whole point of the 10-team league was to reduce the number of domestic fixtures for clubs involved in European competition, who already have more games to play than ever before. Losing two league matches from the schedule would not have been a disaster, nor would losing the split—which, in recent years, has become a farce thanks to Celtic’s tendency to wrap up the title early.
A 14-team league does nothing for us. It’s done to benefit clubs who get four games against us every season, yet won’t even offer our fans a decent ticket allocation. To hell with them.
Maybe some of these people haven’t done the maths on what a 14-team league would do to the fixture list. The whole reason the split exists in the current 12-team format is because the league would otherwise be too long in terms of total games. We created this daft system to prevent a 44 game season.
Expanding it to 14 makes that even worse—unless we introduce an even earlier split, with even more mid-table games that don’t matter at all.
And people wonder why we can’t get sponsorships, TV money, or serious commercial interest in Scottish football? It’s because it’s a joke. It’s run like a joke. The clubs allow it to be run like a joke.
With all this in mind, I should not have been in the least bit surprised that Neil McCann, currently assisting his buddy Barry Ferguson at Ibrox and thus sparing us his drivel on the BBC for a while, has chipped in with his two bob’s worth. Unbelievably, he says he supports a bigger league, although—by his own admission—he doesn’t know how a 14-team league would work or how it would be structured.
Well, colour me surprised.
He likes the idea but has no clue how it would function.
How are we supposed to take that seriously? How are we meant to respond to that other than with scorn? “Yeah, let’s bring it in, and we’ll figure out the details later.” What kind of stupidity is that?
And then there’s his assertion that even if it creates dead rubber games, it will somehow be beneficial because it will give clubs a chance to introduce their young players.
Well, since his club faces nothing but dead rubber games between now and the end of the season, let’s see how many academy players he and Ferguson actually introduce before the campaign ends.
I’ve looked at every possible scenario for a 14-team top flight, and I cannot find a single one that doesn’t involve some convoluted nonsense to get the right number of games.
The only way to make it work without increasing the total number of fixtures is to split the league even earlier than we do now.
Only one 14-team scenario makes any remote sense:
Each team plays each other home and away (26 games). Then the league splits into two groups of seven. Each team plays the six others in their group home and away (12 more games). Total: 38 games—the same as now.
Which defeats the purpose, since we’re trying to reduce the number of fixtures.
How many clubs will vote for that? Very few. And that’s the best we’re going to get. Because every other format either increases the total number of games (which nobody wants) or is so convoluted and idiotic that it would never pass a vote.
So when Neil McCann sits in front of the media and says he doesn’t know how it would work, you better believe it.
He has no idea how it would work—because even if you fed this into AI and asked it to find a solution (and I did) every other alternative would be so ridiculous that we might as well not bother wasting our time talking about it. Only the 38-game, 26-then-split-into-7s model even comes close to making sense.
Like I said this morning, this is an immensely frustrating subject because we do need some form of league reconstruction. But there’s no better system than a 10-team top flight.
In a 10-team league, almost every club that isn’t chasing Europe is fighting relegation. That means high stakes every week. Fewer meaningless games. Better competition and greater fan engagement.
Anything else creates dead rubbers for the sake of it, based on some half-baked hope that teams will suddenly start developing youth players.
Clubs have failed to do that under the 12-team format, even when their seasons have been functionally over with weeks to spare.
The system has failed.
It doesn’t help our game one bit when ignorant pundits sit in front of cameras making cretinous points about a change they don’t even understand.
Our latest podcast is up now folks! Please watch, like, share and subscribe!
The international set up does not help any with many weeks lost to that.
What about 11 team league, 40 games? 1 Relegated the other in play off. Is there any reason my foggy brain cannot think of to have an even number of teams in a league?
Advocated Summer football for ages, less postponements, bigger crowds, better pitches. We’d need to negotiate Summer tournaments of course but Do-able.
Definite NO to summer football JimBhoy…
Everyone is on holidays for a start, and Celtic would suffer tournaments more than most – Advantage Sevco…
And The Champions League is in it’s business end in what would be our winter break…
I get that a mother taking two or three young kids would possibly prefer it to the weather that was at Parkhead last weekend etc but most guys and Ghirls are big enough to cope with a wee bit of rain now and again…
The pitches would certainly be better but it’s still an absolute no no from me…
All about opinions though !!!
This highlights yet another issue in Scottish football. The hun media and authorities seek the opinions of ex huns.
The Ibrox team has failed for over 20 years but our airwaves n newspapers are manned by Ibrox sympathisers who see it as a way to link up with their loser heroes. What achievements merit them any right to comment on anything.
Broadcasters proudly boast they meet their Diversity requirement percentages. So they have x% male x% female x% for ethnicities and other requured groups.
What that doesn’t cover is that 9 out of ten are ex huns who have no right nor ability to analyse matches, players etc when they were hardly earth scorchers themselves and won feck all over their careers. So who are they to pontificate on anything.
Now I am sure they are lovely lads but there are some we could mention who failed misrerabky at their club but now say they cant cope with the mass of media work they are gettting.
If we are relying on majorly serial losers and underperformers to deliver a brighter future then god help us.
Zany idea but how about talking to a club stacked with serial winners.
One problem with a 10 team league is that we had it before and the fans got sick of playing the same teams 4 times a season in the league alone.
It’s good for those who want at least 4 “O.F.” games a season though.
14 team league that splits after two rounds of fixtures into a 6/8. The each group plays two more rounds of fixtures ( so none of this extra home/away nonsense) and the bottom teams get more games (more of which should be televised to increase revenue) and allows teams to blood young players in competitive football.
do the same with the rest of the leagues leaving us with 3 leagues of 14 teams.
Top six lose two games per season and the bottom teams get (hopefully) additional fan and tv revenue. Some sort of play off system introduced that keeps interest flowing in the division.
Not sure what do do with the other leagues in the pyramid other than to allow promotion to, and relegation from, what would be the Scottish Div 2… something like that
The proposal is to review 4 options: 10, 12, 14 and 16 club top division. The misconception comes from the fact Donkeyaster wants a 10 club SPL. To my knowledge only one person has agreed with him to date! It’s a horrendous idea which would make Scottish Football even more of a closed shop with even less opportunities for youngsters coming through. I refuse to pay in to watch the same league match twice against the same opponent, just to prop up the selfish agendas of the self appointed chosen few. If it’s an 18 club division and every single match is unique then I’m in for a season ticket tomorrow!
18 team top flight, play everyone home and away. No split. 34 games. Fixture congestion sorted.
Yep – Would like this for sure – I was alive when it was last going but certainly canny remember it…
Only playing Sevco twice a year would be bloody lovely !
I agree James, the 10 team League is the only way of reducing the number of games played and remain interesting. Anybody wanting to increase the number of teams to 16 or 18 surely can’t remember what the League was like before the reconstruction in the 1990’s. There was a glut of dead rubber games, there is no doubt the present format brought more excitement across the Leagues with the play offs at the end of the campaign. Anyone thinking that a larger League would bring more competition is living in cloud cuckoo land. Celtic and The Rangers would finish 1st or 2nd whatever the format was, economics dictate mostly who are successful in any League in the World. Think Paris SG in France, Bayern Munich in Germany, Barca and Real in Spain those Leagues are richer than ours by a mile, yet these teams win their title most seasons.
There is just no easy answer for Scottish Football, but the people in charge definitely don’t help with their amateurism.
There hasn’t been an 18 team Scottish top division for 50 years pal. It went to 10 after turning to Premier Division in 75′ and hasn’t risen above 12 teams ever since.
Sorry 10 team league supporters but that suggestion is a loser because the fans don’t want it and didn’t in the past and that’s why it was changed. Thankfully there’s not many of you.
Of all the proposed league reconstruction proposals being forwarded a 10 team league is a backward thinking move and is the daftest and most unwelcome. Anyone thinking it’s a great idea is forgetting it’s an old idea, a rejected idea and contributes to at least 2 more Glasgow derbies than is necessary
My hat goes in for 18 teams, with a bit of new thinking.
The rock/ hard place is: Sky demanding 4 derbies (adding cup ties has given us 6+ before), and teams needing an ease of fixtures/ winter break.
No matter what we agree- TV finance will be the final arbiter, like it or not.
Internet streaming and online presence is where it’s at. We must develop it as a package, sellable worldwide to all Scottish football fans. If we’re honest, many of us bought a firestick and an ‘IPTV patch’ for less than £100, to watch all the games- and then it’s the ONLY thing we use it for- rather than pricey subscriptions piled on each other. Who wouldn’t pay that for a more stable (and legal) product?
Imagine getting SPL online going properly- with sole rights to our games in our hands- no other way to watch. Let’s say we get 500k home subscribers worldwide between ALL our clubs, paying roughly £100 a season to watch ANY SPL game live, don’t include pubs/ clubs/ venues yet- now that’s £50m per season (and yes, 500k is a modest assumption). It exceeds what we get now in rights, sole exclusivity could double it- and there’s also some prime advertisement slots for sale there!
Now the ‘new’ stuff.
We play in a league of 12, where a minimum of 8 teams are geared for survival from relegation- because ALL have the potential for the trapdoor. This is giving us a low- block, defensive division, ambition suffers when trying to survive.
A top tier of 18, with 2 down and a play-off for a possible 3rd each season- suddenly we see 8 or even 10 clubs behind the big 2 who are far more confident of survival at the beginning- far more teams able to breathe in the league, hence, they come out and play, far less ‘low-block’ monotony.
The key is telling Sky we won’t renew under any circumstances- while we start laying the groundwork for the above.
Smaller clubs will fear this and will need assurances that their bills are met- ambition, courage (+mutual benefit) by the big 2, can meet those challenges.
VAR has caused much controversy, but oddly, not in how it was financed. Everyone paid pro-rata, based on income/ size of club. It sort of broke a 4th wall- clubbing together for the benefit of ALL.
Celtic and Rangers will soon be paying £10m per player or we won’t be happy- and will STILL be Euro minnows.
So imagine a league with at least 2 or 3 other teams who can give us both REAL competition- in a financial environment that eventually raises all boats, where players even WANT to come and play here.
Anyone see co-efficient benefits there?
Our current imprint on Europe won’t improve under the status quo. Imagine a talented Motherwell side getting to a Europa semi-final, or a great to watch Hearts coming home with the Europa league- while we have 2 sides in the champions league with a puncher’s chance of actually fucking winning it!
Look what Celtic have banked- while TRFC could soon be financially stable- with decent yearly turnover already anyway.
We could both put together a fund that gives assurance to the rest- day to day running costs and a parachute payment over a couple of seasons while SPL online gets it’s ducks in a row- before exploding our game. All in the run up to telling Sky to fuck off with their 4 derbies and dodgy Morelos interviews- their disdain for Scotland has put us here.
Detractors (and the odd bigot), will naysay on money and i’ll say we didn’t include pubs/ clubs/ venues/ advertising- or that we’re the best attended league per capita on the planet.
I also think the rarity of 2 derbies per season can make those games more than just big- they’ll be global fucking box-office- once at each venue, the same for Edinburgh/ Dundee – also 18 teams give potential for other local rivalries- Ayrshire or Fife anyone?- and all with a better, more reliable funding model.
It can mean losing a league and not having to sell an asset to break even when you think about it.
Even a drop in ST sales won’t buckle us when EVERY Scottish fan renews for next season’s SPL content.
It’s not pie in the sky, it’s the way the world’s going, we have to do some variation of this or it’s League of Wales- while stupidly waiting with our begging bowl for the likes of Sky to help.
We often talk about the importance of calling out refs while we’re winning- so let’s apply that here. Celtic will pay more, pro-rata, to set a league sustenance fund up with TRFC- at a time when we could likely take most upcoming honours anyway- so it’s not about helping only us, it’s about the big 2 downing sticks to save AND vastly improve the Scottish game that we ALL love- and need.
While it’s about equal on trophies at the moment it gives less room for suspicion or cynicism- no immediate gain for either, simply mutual benefit, fuck we might even call it the Old Firm again after some time, given they were originally named that way for working together!
So it’s been a while in the raising and typing, my rheumatoid won’t thank me in the morning- and if anyone jokes about the tone of this being a bit like that mad Rangers post about crossbar challenges and bouncy-bouncy castles with walkie-talkies- fuck off in advance.
This is our game, this is OUR money pouring in for zero respect in Europe, with a repetitive model on it’s knees.
I may never see the real benefits if (when), some variation of this happens- but my boy will.
Let’s save our game, not just move the deckchairs on the Titanic again.
Nb- Fuck, just crossed my mind that the Hibees banter would be brutal if they won the conference.
Peace out
Sid
10 team league was, and would still be stupid for Scottish football. You mention about every game meaning something because they’d be fighting relegation. How about that it means effectively 8 teams start the season trying to avoid relegation? Defensive football trying not to lose for the majority of teams. If I mind right when all this talk was going around when we were in a 10 team league, I think there was a minimum amount of fixtures needed, and I don’t know if that’s still the case, but the only real solution would be 16 team league if 30 games were allowed. I’m sure some form of split at some stage could get you past the minimum, even if it was the top 4/6 etc. Benefits would be less domestic games, more do important to the better teams playing in Europe. Get rid of the 4+ games against same teams every season (could give some form of lower chance/promise of no relegation to get clubs to not worry so much about losing so much games against big clubs. Would hopefully allow teams to take more of a chance with youth tactics etc. possibly attract players as they’re not playing the same teams so much. This 16 team could then be underpinned by 1 other top flight division and in my opinion lose some of the teams as Scottish football is so diluted that the game in Scotland suffers