|
Post by Stewart on May 2, 2020 8:02:29 GMT
....I’m sure fans in league one and two wouldn’t be keen. However with many clubs struggling post Coronavirus should the ELF and the NL consider regional football? Is this a possible view of future leagues? Taken from the Hartlepool forum. Dos has interesting views on the subject, it’s well worth the time to listen to his thoughts on the issue. www.mixcloud.com/henry-deacon/paul-doswell-update-april-22/
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 2, 2020 14:04:29 GMT
No i don't believe so. More likely that EFL 2 & the National League combine into a North & South with feeder leagues from National League South & North.
|
|
oohaah
Top Performer
Posts: 3,074
|
Post by oohaah on May 2, 2020 14:17:44 GMT
I agree with delboy. The Hartlepool suggestion would seem like relegation to most people - King's Lynn anyone?
|
|
jr
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,166
|
Post by jr on May 2, 2020 15:06:45 GMT
....I’m sure fans in league one and two wouldn’t be keen. However with many clubs struggling post Coronavirus should the ELF and the NL consider regional football? Is this a possible view of future leagues? View AttachmentTaken from the Hartlepool forum. Dos has interesting views on the subject, it’s well worth the time to listen to his thoughts on the issue. www.mixcloud.com/henry-deacon/paul-doswell-update-april-22/I'm sure Weymouth would be a tad upset with that table! A 48 game league!!
|
|
|
Post by medwaysider on May 2, 2020 15:58:16 GMT
No if you're in the Football League, you should be expected and able to travel anywhere in England. Not sure there would be a great deal of financial benefit to be gained by regionalisation. Plus, just the same old teams you're playing, year in, year out.
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 2, 2020 16:23:59 GMT
No if you're in the Football League, you should be expected and able to travel anywhere in England. Not sure there would be a great deal of financial benefit to be gained by regionalisation. Plus, just the same old teams you're playing, year in, year out. That was then and this is now. Travel costs are enormous especially including overnight stays so to say there would not be a great deal of financial benefit is an understatement. Also there would be a benefit from increased crowds.
|
|
|
Post by medwaysider on May 2, 2020 16:39:38 GMT
No if you're in the Football League, you should be expected and able to travel anywhere in England. Not sure there would be a great deal of financial benefit to be gained by regionalisation. Plus, just the same old teams you're playing, year in, year out. That was then and this now. Travel costs are enormous especially including overnight stays so to say there would not be a great deal of financial benefit is an understatement. Also there would be a benefit from increased crowds. I suppose it depends where you are located in your "region" on a club by club basis. For example, I've spent much longer travelling to Plymouth and Exeter than I have "up north" to games. Overnight stays for longer trips also aren't necessarily the norm for a lot of smaller EFL clubs. Regarding the crowds, that's a difficult one to predict. In the short term I'd agree with you but I've found that when you play the same sides every season, crowds tend to diminish a bit (away following more than home but even so). I think it's almost impossible to guess how this whole situation will work out at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Del on May 2, 2020 18:26:10 GMT
That was then and this now. Travel costs are enormous especially including overnight stays so to say there would not be a great deal of financial benefit is an understatement. Also there would be a benefit from increased crowds. I suppose it depends where you are located in your "region" on a club by club basis. For example, I've spent much longer travelling to Plymouth and Exeter than I have "up north" to games. Overnight stays for longer trips also aren't necessarily the norm for a lot of smaller EFL clubs. Regarding the crowds, that's a difficult one to predict. In the short term I'd agree with you but I've found that when you play the same sides every season, crowds tend to diminish a bit (away following more than home but even so). I think it's almost impossible to guess how this whole situation will work out at the moment. Just out of interest why do you believe you would be playing the same teams every season. Surely with promotion and relegation it would be the same as at the present. Say two up from EFL north & 2 up from EFL South into League 1.
|
|
|
Post by medwaysider on May 2, 2020 19:45:55 GMT
I suppose it depends where you are located in your "region" on a club by club basis. For example, I've spent much longer travelling to Plymouth and Exeter than I have "up north" to games. Overnight stays for longer trips also aren't necessarily the norm for a lot of smaller EFL clubs. Regarding the crowds, that's a difficult one to predict. In the short term I'd agree with you but I've found that when you play the same sides every season, crowds tend to diminish a bit (away following more than home but even so). I think it's almost impossible to guess how this whole situation will work out at the moment. Just out of interest why do you believe you would be playing the same teams every season. Surely with promotion and relegation it would be the same as at the present. Say two up from EFL north & 2 up from EFL South into League 1. If you're talking about League 1 then you're right, using the system you've used as an example there would still be a mixture of teams from across the country being promoted and relegated into that league. If however you happen to be League 2, there's only so many teams that could be considered "north" or "south". I wasn't around in the days of Div 3 North and South but a glance across a few seasons worth of fixtures will show you what I mean. Of course, that's my view as a fan who likes to ground hop which isn't the priority of a professional club but for the reasons stated in my previous post I'm not convinced the financial benefits would be much more than meagre.
|
|
jr
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,166
|
Post by jr on May 3, 2020 0:43:07 GMT
Can any of you explain why you think a 48 game season is a good idea and why Weymouth who were 3rd in NLS should be excluded?
Quite frankly it's a load of bollocks. Until we have an inkling when next season will start and it could be as late as January, then no one has a clue what will happen.
|
|
|
Post by amberchoc on May 3, 2020 8:29:12 GMT
Can any of you explain why you think a 48 game season is a good idea and why Weymouth who were 3rd in NLS should be excluded? Quite frankly it's a load of bollocks. Until we have an inkling when next season will start and it could be as late as January, then no one has a clue what will happen. The Hartlepool suggestion would indicate a 46-game season (24 teams), i.e. the same as it currently is.
I think Stewart was asking for opinions on the idea rather than the minutiae. With 48 places up for grabs, plenty of teams would miss out, unless I suppose you make it three regional divisions, North, South and Midlands.
Here's a further thought:
If the 20/21 season were to start late (as seems almost certain at this stage), there might be an argument for splitting the National League top division into North and South. Then there wouldn’t be an issue fitting the fixtures in by May 2021. Could then add in a League Cup......and if League One and League Two introduced the same split, we could have a League Cup encompassing those divisions as well.
|
|
norman1
Youth Team Player
Clacker Band!
Posts: 186
|
Post by norman1 on May 3, 2020 11:29:49 GMT
Regionalisation/Local fixtures are the only option going forward as many many Clubs are now technically bankrupt.
Their owners, who were once quite wealthy are no longer and its going to take a long time to grow confidence and rebuild finances.
So we have to get real its local football or nothing!! We certainly don't have the money for any other formula.
|
|
|
Post by medwaysider on May 3, 2020 12:03:11 GMT
Regionalisation/Local fixtures are the only option going forward as many many Clubs are now technically bankrupt. Their owners, who were once quite wealthy are no longer and its going to take a long time to grow confidence and rebuild finances. So we have to get real its local football or nothing!! We certainly don't have the money for any other formula. Disagree. I'm not saying you won't be proved right but I'm inclined to think you won't be and the truth is nobody knows enough yet to be able to predict with any accuracy. I think the other side of the coin is that when football returns (properly, I don't mean watching behind closed doors games on the laptop, sod that, football without fans is nothing), there will be a surge in attendances for quite a while because so many of us will be overcome with the sheer relief of being able to do what we love again, with our friends.
|
|
jr
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,166
|
Post by jr on May 3, 2020 12:25:47 GMT
Can any of you explain why you think a 48 game season is a good idea and why Weymouth who were 3rd in NLS should be excluded? Quite frankly it's a load of bollocks. Until we have an inkling when next season will start and it could be as late as January, then no one has a clue what will happen. The Hartlepool suggestion would indicate a 46-game season (24 teams), i.e. the same as it currently is.
I think Stewart was asking for opinions on the idea rather than the minutiae. With 48 places up for grabs, plenty of teams would miss out, unless I suppose you make it three regional divisions, North, South and Midlands.
Here's a further thought:
If the 20/21 season were to start late (as seems almost certain at this stage), there might be an argument for splitting the National League top division into North and South. Then there wouldn’t be an issue fitting the fixtures in by May 2021. Could then add in a League Cup......and if League One and League Two introduced the same split, we could have a League Cup encompassing those divisions as well.
But it's not though is it? Their suggestion is 25 teams thus 48 games and they haven't included Weymouth who finished 3rd in NLS yet they include teams that finished much further down. So you would need to ditch one of the other teams to include Weymouth. Ridiculous though isn't it? With that many teams you'd have to play the league over 2 seasons. Remember next season may not start until January. What would be better is to split the NL in 2 (North & South) and play 24 or 22 games. No playoffs, the winners of each league get promoted to he EFL. That's if next season starts late of course.
|
|
|
Post by amberchoc on May 3, 2020 12:56:49 GMT
The Hartlepool suggestion would indicate a 46-game season (24 teams), i.e. the same as it currently is.
I think Stewart was asking for opinions on the idea rather than the minutiae. With 48 places up for grabs, plenty of teams would miss out, unless I suppose you make it three regional divisions, North, South and Midlands.
Here's a further thought:
If the 20/21 season were to start late (as seems almost certain at this stage), there might be an argument for splitting the National League top division into North and South. Then there wouldn’t be an issue fitting the fixtures in by May 2021. Could then add in a League Cup......and if League One and League Two introduced the same split, we could have a League Cup encompassing those divisions as well.
But it's not though is it? Their suggestion is 25 teams thus 48 games and they haven't included Weymouth who finished 3rd in NLS yet they include teams that finished much further down. So you would need to ditch one of the other teams to include Weymouth. Ridiculous though isn't it? With that many teams you'd have to play the league over 2 seasons. Remember next season may not start until January. What would be better is to split the NL in 2 (North & South) and play 24 or 22 games. No playoffs, the winners of each league get promoted to he EFL. That's if next season starts late of course. Just to clarify, JR, you’re mis-reading the attachment. There are 25 lines, but the top line is only the name of the League.
|
|