New Premiership, Celtic and Rangers

Will never happen as the English clubs won't accept them and the sectarianism that goes along with some of the OF support. Also, the SFA will try to block any move since it will jeopardize the national structure before any legal move by the SPL and/or TV contracts.

The only way that the OF will get in is if a British league is formed and we have a single national association to run it, which will never happen either as people don't want to lose the national sides. The fans will also want instant success and won't want to lose the OF derby if one goes up and the other doesn't.

The OF and their fans just have to realize that the days of spending £5m+ on a player are long gone and the clubs need to get their spending under control.
 
In an ideal world... The old firm coming to the EPL (2) would guarentee 2 extra full houses a season for all clubs in their away support and probably their home support (england v scotland rivalry intensifying atmosphere and interest in games).

Leaving the SPL, could be a bad thing for SPL HOWEVER it would make the league more competitive, fans will turn up to watch their club if they believe their team can win the league and there will be chances of European football for other clubs in Scotland.

Positives for the old firm?:
- TV Revenue, increased gates, possible stadium enhancments, more exposure, better players, better football.

Negatives for old firm?:
- Will have to give up domestic success, cant see many trophies being won in the first few years at least (bar maybe the EPL2 :P)
- Will have to give up Europe, I would hope in time that Rangers would be challenging for European football on a consistant basis in the EPL.

Positives for the rest of english football?:
- Increased gates, increased tv money, more interest in EPL 2

Negatives for English football?:
- Some teams will complain that the old firm are "jumping ahead" even though the EPL 2 is a new league with nobody in it
- Fan trouble, whilst the old firm generally travel well behaved (Rangers took 1000's to Arsenal this year with no trouble), there have been minor incidents over the years (celtic in newcastle)

There are some top managers who are behind the plan, the likes of Moyes, O Neill, Redknapp, which I found funny because these are the managers of the teams that the Old firm would expect to eventually be in direct competition with, we have bigger stadiums and top training facilities to match.

Im all for the move, especially if we start in the EPL 2 (which isnt "at the top"), we will leave a lot behind but the bigger picture on a whole is better for English football.

Im just learning to accept whatever happens as what it is, we are not the ones asking for this change this time, its coming from a top dog in English football, Id love to play in the English league but if it doesnt happen, I wont be too disheartened.


EDIT:

Just been on Sky Sports News that an Old Firm move has been rejected, well there we go!
 
Last edited:
Speaking for the rest of Scottish Football, we'd be quite glad to see them go.

Decreases in revenue would be compensated by a vastly more exciting league and increasing fan base for the other teams.
 
The total estimated income of £16m from broadcasting and sponsorship rights generated through the SPL in 2009/10 divided between the 12 participating clubs, should be compared
and contrasted against the £29.5m received by the bottom placed club in the
English Premier League in 2007/08.
Click to expand...

That is an example of the money the old firm get, and yet we still compete (And I use that word very very loosely :P) in europe... No wonder a move to England has been rejected. They will keep a Swansea and a Cardiff in their league because they have nowhere near the potential the old firm do.
 
They can get lost, in the 90s with the sky sports money and being able to attract some world class players they thought they were it, plus only 4 teams have won the EPL and thats with double the teams so 2 teams dominating the SPL is about right.
 
Celtic and Rangers are a Championship side at best imo. mind you the Championship is miles better than the SPL.
 
From what i understand the scottish hate anything and everything english but now they want to join the english premier league

well they can **** right off

also who the hell is phil gartside anyway i know he is the chairman of the mighty bolton wanderers
but who does he think he is to proposes such an idea what influence does he have?

:rolleyes:
 
Sem said:
From what i understand the scottish hate anything and everything english but now they want to join the english premier league
Click to expand...

Then you understand wrong. There are a few who do but of the ~5 million in Scotland it is a very small proportion, the majority of what you will hear is simply intended as banter.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Personally I can't see a way to intergrate them into the top league, the only fair way is to drop them into a lower league and let them work their way up, Rangers will go bust as people don't go to see them play against Torquay, Celtic would probably get in a lot of debt before hitting the prem league. Letting them in the top tier would be completely unfair to other teams, but the only realistic way to have them join anyway.
Click to expand...
In fairness, if you did drop them in at the bottom of the league, I'm sure the Old Firm could negotiate some sort of five-year loan deal that balances any loss in revenues against the likelihood they'd go straight up from Leagues 1 and 2, at the very least.

Frankly we can increase revenue for the top teams by just making the Prem league 22 teams and have one season where a couple extra people get promoted from all leagues to get the teams. I don't know why we need to add Rangers and Celtic.
Click to expand...
Who has mentioned expanding the Prem to 22 teams? :confused:

Do keep up DM.


jakeke said:
It would be interesting to see how much Celtic have spent recently, anybody know the figures? Arsenal have made a profit on transfers recently (or haven't spent much) so I'm pretty sure money can't be an argument for poor performances
Click to expand...
We might make a profit on transfers, but on the other hand, our wage bill would destroy us if we were in the SPL, so you can't really say we're a good model for one of them to follow. Neither of them could afford to maintain a squad of the size we do.


FlippinEck said:
Leaving the SPL, could be a bad thing for SPL HOWEVER it would make the league more competitive, fans will turn up to watch their club if they believe their team can win the league and there will be chances of European football for other clubs in Scotland.
Click to expand...
The only trouble there is, without Rangers and Celtic, the SPL's UEFA standings would probably get shot to hell after a couple of years of Hearts/Aberdeen/the rest struggling badly in the CL, which would probably mean they'd drop to getting only one spot, possibly only through qualifiers. Which would drop even more money out of their pockets.


Sem said:
also who the hell is phil gartside anyway i know he is the chairman of the mighty bolton wanderers
but who does he think he is to proposes such an idea what influence does he have?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
What, are you only allowed to propose something if you're a top 4 chairman? :confused:

You are aware how the Premiership began aren't you? The chairmen of the old First Division went "Hey, we want more money", and bosh, breakaway league.
 
Last edited:
Weebull said:
What, are you only allowed to propose something if you're a top 4 chairman? :confused:
Click to expand...


maybe not necessarily a top 4 chairman so i get your point
but you should still be someone pretty damn important to propose such a drastic change

unless Gartside is more important than i think
 
How is chairman of a Premiership side not "important"?

All sorts of people should be allowed to propose changes, that generally makes a good system. It doesn't mean anyone else has to agree with them though.
 
jakeke said:
It would be interesting to see how much Celtic have spent recently, anybody know the figures? Arsenal have made a profit on transfers recently (or haven't spent much) so I'm pretty sure money can't be an argument for poor performances
Click to expand...

I agree with this. There is no innovation or great youth coaching to improve the quality of players and the league in Scotland though.

I'm doing these figures from memory so might not be perfect but I think Celtic spend approximately £7m a season when divided over the last 5 years. Under Martin O'Neill he got about £40m I think over his 5 year spell before that although he spent most of that building a quality team in his first year.

Celtic have no debt and one of the top 10 turnovers in football despite a lack of TV money so if they get the coaching right they can surely compete in European football without having to move to the English and Welsh league. I think it's a lack of vision and ambition.

We also have not one but two of the richest board-members in British football but they are more interested in getting their hands on the television money the Premiership gets than spending on the team in the Scottish league.
 
Weebull said:
We might make a profit on transfers, but on the other hand, our wage bill would destroy us if we were in the SPL, so you can't really say we're a good model for one of them to follow. Neither of them could afford to maintain a squad of the size we do.
Click to expand...

Good point, but I think that youth development and scouting should be paramount for clubs without much money.
 
While I have no doubt that with the fan base and history of these clubs, that after a couple of seasons of premier league money boosting their coffers, they would be able to compete directly with the top levels of the premiership, I think it would be a real killer for the SPL.

I would not back their introduction to the premier league.
 
I'm all for it but joining the EPL could have a negative impact on the Glasgow teams.

Without a 50/50 chance to win the league and no guarantee of playing in Europe it would make them much less attractive teams to play for, they could end up like Hull/Stoke etc. struggling to attract decent players and left feeding off the scraps.

It's better to be big fish in a small pond rather than small fish in a big pond I suppose?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom