|
Post by Del on May 20, 2020 14:26:34 GMT
Read an article from the Mail 17/5 stating that some clubs from EFL 2 and the National league were in talks to create an EFL2 North & South for next season and beyond.
Makes perfect sense as i have stated previously. Less travelling and more local derbies.
|
|
|
Post by Stewart on May 20, 2020 15:01:47 GMT
Read an article from the Mail 17/5 stating that some clubs from EFL 2 and the National league were in talks to create an EFL2 North & South for next season and beyond. Makes perfect sense as i have stated previously. Less travelling and more local derbies. It does make sense, however it would dilute the PL payouts to the EFL.
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 20, 2020 17:05:24 GMT
Read an article from the Mail 17/5 stating that some clubs from EFL 2 and the National league were in talks to create an EFL2 North & South for next season and beyond. Makes perfect sense as i have stated previously. Less travelling and more local derbies. It does make sense, however it would dilute the PL payouts to the EFL. It will be interesting to see if it develops further which i hope it will. "(Football league we're on our way ! )"
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 20, 2020 17:07:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on May 20, 2020 17:55:04 GMT
That would be a rather strange way to become a Football League club for the first time in our history.
But then we'd be back to the 3G issue. Would they relax that rule for one season, or would that look too much like setting a precedent?
|
|
|
Post by davef on May 20, 2020 17:59:43 GMT
Relax it ? Surely you would have to scrap it. The gloves are off. New game, new rules, throw a 6 to start
|
|
|
Post by amberchoc on May 20, 2020 21:54:32 GMT
I'm very much in favour of regionalising the divisions next season, but not by amalgamating National League and League Two. What you’d then have is a team like Chorley, 11 points adrift at the bottom, basically becoming a league team all of a sudden. There’s a thin line between radical and ridiculous.
There are sensible solutions without getting all weird and wacky. For instance, should the new season get to start in August, our division can be split into two sections of 12 (Call them perhaps National League Premier North and Premier South). Then each team can play each other 4 times, i.e. 44 games.
If the season starts late, then something along the lines of what I suggested on 3/5:
North and South, 22 games, plus the inclusion of a regionalised cup competition to include League Two (maybe on a group basis to pad it out a bit). Then, like they had during the War, the North Cup winners and South Cup winners could meet for the trophy.
As for the promotion/relegation issue, I wouldn’t like to see teams relegated on the basis of just 75% of a season. So, how about this neat little solution? Barrow start the new season off with +12 points, Harrogate (2nd on PPG) start with +11, etc, all the way down to Chorley who start on minus 11. Then all the teams go into their North and South leagues and they start from there. It’s a bit fairer than just saying “Tough luck, Barrow”.
|
|
|
Post by boomboom on May 21, 2020 9:30:50 GMT
Hi all I’m somewhat of a newcomer to the wonderful SUFC family having only bought my first ST a few seasons ago. Now a regular attender at GGL, and lurker on here, this is my first post. Some interesting comments about regional football. Here are my observations, relating to football generally rather than Sutton in particular: 1. There needs to be clarity as to whether “regionalization” (if that’s a word!) is seen as a short-term solution in response to the effects of the public health situation or some longer-term panacea. Over time, there’s been a move away from regionalization with the creation of FL Divisions 3 and 4, the Conference and NLN and NLS. Presumably there were good reasons for those changes: have those reasons now disappeared? 2. Regionalisation would clearly affect some clubs more than others, eg compare and contrast Dover and Solihull. For a few it might actually have an adverse effect with fewer derbies and more travelling. It all depends on geography: where the north/south dividing line is drawn and which clubs fall above and below it. 3. What do travel costs account for as a percentage of total expenditure and how much would regionalization reduce it by? My guess is both figures might not be all that significant. For example, trading Barrow and Gateshead for Plymouth and Exeter would (superficially) appear to make little difference. 4. Whilst there would be more derbies (for some, not necessarily all, clubs) I suspect the effect on overall attendances would be much less than most imagine. The proof of the pudding is in the eating: european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/nav/attnengleague.htm Regional football in the Football League ended in the 1957/58 season when average crowds in Div 3 N and S were 9,447. Attendances in Div 3 and 4 the following season averaged 9,253 – a fall of just 2 per cent, in other words a negligible difference. 5. Finally, and I guess this is my most important point, there’s not one but two elephants in the room. Long gone are the days when gate money is the overwhelming contributor to a club's income. Modern-day football is heavily reliant on sponsorship and TV. I just can’t see the proposed regional leagues being as attractive to national sponsors, TV companies and their audiences. My fear is such leagues would be seen as somehow second-rate or, dare I say, even “Micky Mouse”, compared to their national counterparts. The effect would be sponsors and TV companies moving their cash elsewhere (if at all), possibly to the PL, L1 and L2, thereby widening the gap between rich and poor even further. To conclude, I’m far from convinced that changing the structure is in the best interests of L2 and NL clubs. There are so many issues that need to be carefully thought through, accompanied by detailed number-crunching, before any considered and informed decisions are made. A short-sighted knee-jerk reaction to the pandemic's ramifications is the last thing that’s needed. In the meantime, the EFL should allow artificial pitches in at least L2, a no-brainer for its smaller clubs.
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on May 21, 2020 10:00:16 GMT
If we took roughly the same dividing lines as VNL South and North do, it's worth noting that the better supported clubs will generally fit in the Northern section
From our league the best home attendances in the top 5 are all "North" (Notts C, Stockport, Wrexham, Chesterfield and Hartlepool). You have to go down to 6th (Yeovil) before you get a big crowd. Same at the bottom end - the bottom 8 only have 2 clubs which are "North" and all the bottom 4 are southern clubs. Things are a lot less polarised in L2 however.
Anyone fancy compiling a list of who would be in each divison?
|
|
|
Post by Amber Aleman on May 21, 2020 11:26:46 GMT
Anyone fancy compiling a list of who would be in each divison? Splitting a fixed national pool of clubs into equally-sized regional divisions is often problematic. Gloucester City have had to endure several seasons in National League League North, Oxford City have been shuffled between North and South, while Bishops Stortford also had a spell in the North. It's therefore no surprise that there's a similar problem in sorting the 24 clubs currently in the National League. It's quite easy to find eleven clubs for a northern division: Barrow, Hartlepool, Harrogate, Halifax, Fylde, Chorley, Stockport, Wrexham, Chesterfield, Notts County and Solihull. But who would be the twelfth? Maidenhead? Boreham Wood? Neither of those would want to be split off from the other twelve southern clubs. You could operate with a 13-11 split but that would be unsatisfactory. The southern clubs would then have more games and therefore more matchday income. There'd also be, on average, less travelling in the south because, with the exception of Torquay and Yeovil, all the clubs would be in Greater London, the Home Counties or Hampshire. I can see that there is an economic argument for regionalisation, but I hope the existing set-up can be preserved.
|
|
jr
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,166
|
Post by jr on May 21, 2020 11:58:46 GMT
That would be a rather strange way to become a Football League club for the first time in our history. But then we'd be back to the 3G issue. Would they relax that rule for one season, or would that look too much like setting a precedent? I think as, has been suggested elsewhere (although I can't find it!), L2 are broadly in favour of 3G, it's the clubs in L1 that aren't.
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on May 21, 2020 13:01:47 GMT
Anyone fancy compiling a list of who would be in each divison? Splitting a fixed national pool of clubs into equally-sized regional divisions is often problematic. Gloucester City have had to endure several seasons in National League League North, Oxford City have been shuffled between North and South, while Bishops Stortford also had a spell in the North. It's therefore no surprise that there's a similar problem in sorting the 24 clubs currently in the National League. It's quite easy to find eleven clubs for a northern division: Barrow, Hartlepool, Harrogate, Halifax, Fylde, Chorley, Stockport, Wrexham, Chesterfield, Notts County and Solihull. But who would be the twelfth? Maidenhead? Boreham Wood? Neither of those would want to be split off from the other twelve southern clubs. You could operate with a 13-11 split but that would be unsatisfactory. The southern clubs would then have more games and therefore more matchday income. There'd also be, on average, less travelling in the south because, with the exception of Torquay and Yeovil, all the clubs would be in Greater London, the Home Counties or Hampshire. I can see that there is an economic argument for regionalisation, but I hope the existing set-up can be preserved. I think that may not be as much of an issue as the article implies that L2 and the National League will merge into these 2 division. It looks like L2 has a nice split between north and south, with Walsall being the most southern side in a northern section and Northampton being the most northern in the southern. In that scenario, Northampton could move to the North (with its easy access to the M1) which means that it could well be feasible to have a N/S league. In summary L2 N (in no particular order) Carlise, Morecambe Bradford, Oldham, Salford, Scunthorpe, Grimsby, Macclesfield, Crewe, Port Vale, Mansfield, Walsall, Northampton, Barrow, Hartlepool, Harrogate, Halifax, Fylde, Chorley, Stockport, Wrexham, Chesterfield, Notts County and Solihull L2 S Cambridge, Cheltenham, Stevenage, Colchester, Newport County, Forest Green, Swindon, Leyton Orient, Crawley, Exeter, Plymouth, Torquay, Yeovil, Eastleigh, Aldershot, Maidenhead, Woking, BW, Ebbsfleet, Dover, Barnet, Bromley, Dagenham and Us. Funny how as far as I know in a projected L2 S, there's only 2 teams I think we've never played competitively! Of course it could get more complex if there are any projected promotions/relegations from L1 and the VNL s/N
|
|
|
Post by brisfitboy on May 21, 2020 13:16:43 GMT
Interesting news re EFL’s and ending seasons early, especially applicable to Barrow and Stevenage as League 2 has ended.
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 21, 2020 13:25:11 GMT
This could be a great opportunity to get 3G pitches accepted into the Football league because i don't see them changing the rules unless forced to. Also travel costs take a large chunk of the budget hence the reason the club needed to run the Amber 500 draw.
It would also solve the promotion and relegation issues of the National NLS & NLN this season together with the EFL 2. You could have two clubs promoted to League 1 from each of the EFL2 North & south divisions with feeders from National League North & south.
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 21, 2020 13:53:10 GMT
|
|