• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Premier League B Teams

So on the back burner for another 9 months then until June next year then.

Happy with that outcome for now, although I have no real objection to the two Glasgow teams joining the EFL, considering the Welsh are already in it anyway.
 
So on the back burner for another 9 months then until June next year then.

Happy with that outcome for now, although I have no real objection to the two Glasgow teams joining the EFL, considering the Welsh are already in it anyway.

To be fair the Welsh teams are in the English league because a Welsh League didn't exist when they formed, if the two Glasgow teams joined it would probably destroy the Scottish League once and for all, I know it's not very good anyway but I can't imagine fans of other clubs in Scotland would be too happy about it.

Anyway good news, it does sound like this 'League Three' is gaining momentum though which doesn't sound great, but we'll have to wait and see what the actual plans are.
 
Wasn't the proposal of the introduction of League Three mean that the other leagues would be smaller? meaning less games per season and in turn less income to the existing clubs? If so, I can't see any good news in that.
 
So on the back burner for another 9 months then until June next year then.

Happy with that outcome for now, although I have no real objection to the two Glasgow teams joining the EFL, considering the Welsh are already in it anyway.

no not for 9 months - its not going to happen for the forseeable future. Kavanagh and Harvey were very clear on this at the Fans forum and took a lot of (difficult) questions on this at the Fans forum

http://www.efl.com/news/article/201...wing-first-phase-of-consultation-3322371.aspx
 
no not for 9 months - its not going to happen for the forseeable future. Kavanagh and Harvey were very clear on this at the Fans forum and took a lot of (difficult) questions on this at the Fans forum

http://www.efl.com/news/article/201...wing-first-phase-of-consultation-3322371.aspx

I have miss read it then, the article gave me the impression this was some kind of 1st phase by the EFL in the discussion process.

I wasn't referring to solely the Premier League B teams, but changes in general (such as league 3).

The 4th paragraph begins with: "All clubs, who will potentially vote on a final proposal in June 2017".
[FONT=EFL_Regular]
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Wasn't the proposal of the introduction of League Three mean that the other leagues would be smaller? meaning less games per season and in turn less income to the existing clubs? If so, I can't see any good news in that.

I believe the idea was to compensate with extra TV money. So in theory a club like ours should not be worse off
 
I believe the idea was to compensate with extra TV money. So in theory a club like ours should not be worse off

If they stick to there word financially speaking that's re-assuring. I'm a bit rusty on the subject of late, so out of curiosity what kind of a reduction in games were they proposing?, for example (not including cup competitions) from once a week down to once very 10 days or so?
 
If they stick to there word financially speaking that's re-assuring. I'm a bit rusty on the subject of late, so out of curiosity what kind of a reduction in games were they proposing?, for example (not including cup competitions) from once a week down to once very 10 days or so?

If the divisions were all down to 20 teams then that would be 8 less leagues games for us. So no more trips to Bradford or Oldham on a Tuesday and a couple of spare Saturdays. If they were programmed as set weekends you could have any postponed games on those spare Saturdays.
 
If the divisions were all down to 20 teams then that would be 8 less leagues games for us. So no more trips to Bradford or Oldham on a Tuesday and a couple of spare Saturdays. If they were programmed as set weekends you could have any postponed games on those spare Saturdays.

Thanks Rigsby.

From a purely selfish perspective, that doesn't sound to bad, as I never make long away trips on a Tuesday night anyway. and like you say, any postponements or any cup replays could be used to plug the gaps.
 
Thanks Rigsby.

From a purely selfish perspective, that doesn't sound to bad, as I never make long away trips on a Tuesday night anyway. and like you say, any postponements or any cup replays could be used to plug the gaps.

Also our attendances are often lower on Tuesday home games due to the fact that many of us work in London etc. The meal options in the Centre Circle bar struggle to sell mid week. I think we suffer more than other clubs on night games.
 
What is the benefit of reducing the league and the number of matches played?

I don't see what the issue is that they are trying to solve.
 
What is the benefit of reducing the league and the number of matches played?

I don't see what the issue is that they are trying to solve.

Supposedly it's so teams don't have to travel so many miles a season, although this seems to conflict with the fact the Checkatrade trophy forces us to travel extra miles for games we don't want.
 
What is the benefit of reducing the league and the number of matches played?

I don't see what the issue is that they are trying to solve.

They want to create an extra division, so that would mean 100 clubs. Would mean less mid table mediocrity as you could go from relegation danger to play-offs in a few wins. Obviously you could equally slip down from safety in a bad run.

Personally I think they could then make the 4th and 5th tier regional as this would save on expensive overnight stays and fans are more likely to travel away now days as long as its not Hartlepool.
 
Supposedly it's so teams don't have to travel so many miles a season, although this seems to conflict with the fact the Checkatrade trophy forces us to travel extra miles for games we don't want.

That only works if it's say Fleetwood, Scunthorpe, Bradford and Bury we lose and not Gillingham, Charlton, Oxford and Wimbledon and there's no guarantee of that.

They want to create an extra division, so that would mean 100 clubs. Would mean less mid table mediocrity as you could go from relegation danger to play-offs in a few wins. Obviously you could equally slip down from safety in a bad run.

Personally I think they could then make the 4th and 5th tier regional as this would save on expensive overnight stays and fans are more likely to travel away now days as long as its not Hartlepool.

Who is the "they" in this? Who's behind this?
 
I have miss read it then, the article gave me the impression this was some kind of 1st phase by the EFL in the discussion process.

I wasn't referring to solely the Premier League B teams, but changes in general (such as league 3).

The 4th paragraph begins with: "All clubs, who will potentially vote on a final proposal in June 2017".
[FONT=EFL_Regular]
[/FONT]

The decision that has been made is that any addtional teams will come from teh conference , not from anywhere else and therefore not B teams. (I don't know the answer to 'what if the Natinal league lets in B teams and they win the National leaue?). That is the only decision that has been made at this point
 
They want to create an extra division, so that would mean 100 clubs. Would mean less mid table mediocrity as you could go from relegation danger to play-offs in a few wins. Obviously you could equally slip down from safety in a bad run.

Personally I think they could then make the 4th and 5th tier regional as this would save on expensive overnight stays and fans are more likely to travel away now days as long as its not Hartlepool.

Supposedly it's so teams don't have to travel so many miles a season, although this seems to conflict with the fact the Checkatrade trophy forces us to travel extra miles for games we don't want.

What is the benefit of reducing the league and the number of matches played?

I don't see what the issue is that they are trying to solve.

I'm not sure that any of the above is correct
I am rubbish at finding stuff on here, but I wrote about this on the Fans Forum thread a little while ago where I put more info .
Sean Harvey explained at the fans forums The problem is that at the moment the FA is fined millions by UEFA for playing midweek games at the same time as European games. This happens as there simply are not enough free days to avoid the classes. Having only 20 games will allow the league schedule to be changed which will free up days making classes less regular- this saves the FA money.
The EPL likes this as it will allow more EPL games to be played on a Saturday when sides get bigger attendances and therefore more cash for EPL sides .

So from a financial perspective the FA and the EPL are both big supporters of this idea- although you are unlikely to see them ‘sell it’ like this

The FL has worked out how much cash teams would lose through fewer games and the EPL has already agreed to compensate clubs . HOWEVER this is where it gets interesting , the EPL and the FA are the winners here, not the FL. So for the first time in negotiating with the EPL the FL has something they want - and according to Harvey they intend to make them pay for it. There has been much written about the financial cost to FL teams if this proposal was to go ahead, that is a total red herring - the clubs will be far better off than they are today--- based on what Harvey said and Kavanagh nodded his agreement


From the article

In addition, our dialogue will continue with the Premier League as we focus on ensuring we achieve our specific and primary objective of improving distributable revenue to our clubs and reaching a format that benefits the EFL, its competitions and the wider professional game.
 
Last edited:
Not read through this ,but my idea would be North and South divisions as back in yesteryear...conference national joining in the fun too....Celtic and Rangers invited to join the lower tier and they pay the visiting teams expenses.
 
Back
Top