|
Post by LeedsShrew on Dec 2, 2003 22:35:40 GMT 1
In light of the financial crises hitting more and more clubs I'm starting to think that the divisions below the 1st should be regionalised so that clubs can cut travel and accomodation costs and benefit from higher attendances at derby matches, I would suggest three divisions, North, Midlands and South
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2003 22:38:21 GMT 1
For sides like ourselves (if we get back in the league) and other midlands based clubs how would regionalisation help?
It wouldn't.
We would still either face trips as far North as Carlisle/ Darlo/ H'Pool if in a Northern league or would face trips as far South as Torquay/ Plymouth/ Exeter in a Southern league.
Also it may be the case the we are in a different regional offering to Chester/ Wrexham for example - thus missing out on potential extra revenue from bigger derby day gate receipts.
In my opinion, regionalisation is a no go area.
As Scooter says on the Wrexham thread - traveling costs are minimal compared to the wages that sides in trouble are paying out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2003 22:39:54 GMT 1
I'm sure it would be surer financially but I'd hate it.
Travelling to perculier places like darlington or Gravesend and trekking the length of the country is what makes it interesting.
How boring would it be if you were playing teams around your neck of teh woods all the time? One off local games attract much larger crowds - this would be lost by regionalisation
|
|
|
Post by Leedshrew on Dec 2, 2003 22:52:33 GMT 1
How boring would it be if you were playing teams around your neck of teh woods all the time? One off local games attract much larger crowds - this would be lost by regionalisation This could have an interesting side effect of making cup matches more interesting. Personally I don't think it would ever become boring playing local teams any more than it is now playing teams from around the country. Maybe the playoffs could be extended to some sort of mini national league at the end of the season for the clubs who have achieved most. In answer to Ant's point about not being good for Midlands clubs, obviously the regions would have to be drawn up in a way so that all the key-rivalries, or as many as possible, would be maintained, but even if we do miss out on Wrexham and Chester, what about the extra games against Stoke, Vale etc. If that DID happen?
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorPatPending on Dec 2, 2003 22:55:45 GMT 1
There was a scheme of this kind proposed last year by an ex-advisor to the FA and the Football League.
It proposed merging division 3, the Conference and a few clubs from lower divisions into three regional third divisions, north, south and midlands.
The restructure would result in a twenty club division 1, a twenty club division 2 and three, twenty club regional third divisions.
The positive side of this coming to fruition would be an immediate return to league status, the downside is that only the champions of each regional division would be guaranteed promotion with the three second placed teams from the regions playing off for one further place with the fourth bottom placed team in division 2.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2003 22:56:46 GMT 1
But it would surely be more than just one North division and one South division?
The likeliness is that we would play no more derby games that we have been doing anyway.
Also - take a look at the regionalisation of the feeder leagues - the ryman (south) - the dr martens (midlands) and the unibond (north)
Dover Athletic are in the Dr Martens division and have/ will face trips to places like Hendesford and Stafford this season - those are hardly local games.
Also - Prof Pat's post makes interesting reading - leagues with only one promotion spot means that for the vast majority of teams their seasons would effectively be over with many games left. This would lead certainly to decreased attendances and less money.
|
|