North/South Divide

[oafc1955]

Would the attendance really increase that much?

 

Lets say we have 2 home games in a month at £20 a go, then away at Bury and Rochdale in the same month another £40. How many off us realistically are gonna spend £80 out of one months salary on watching Latics?

 

It will be same for away fans at BP, people will still pick and choose games.

 

Yes, people will still pick and choose but importantly they are far more likely to want to go to Bury and Rochdale than Yeovil and Southend!!

So in answer to your question...Yes,I think crowds would definitely increase!

 

[opinions4u]

Would the attendance really increase that much?

I'm not convinced. I only have a finite budget so doubt I'd attend more than one or two extra games a season because of such a change.

 

Lets say we have 2 home games in a month at £20 a go, then away at Bury and Rochdale in the same month another £40. How many off us realistically are gonna spend £80 out of one months salary on watching Latics?

Rochdale fans didn't flock to the League Cup game with us. Stockport and Leeds didn't sell out what we gave them. Huddersfield wouldn't have sold out the small RRE section if we'd given it to them. Tranmere? 1,014? How many would the Walsalls and Grimsbys of this world bring for a 3pm Saturday kick off?

 

It will be same for away fans at BP, people will still pick and choose games.

The home fans already pick and choose their games at BP!

 

The financial gains would be small.

 

The case in favour of regionalisation, while worthy of debate, is far from proven.

Edited March 24, 2009 by opinions4u

[oafc1955]

I'm not convinced. I only have a finite budget so doubt I'd attend more than one or two extra games a season because of such a change.

 

Rochdale fans didn't flock to the League Cup game with us. Stockport and Leeds didn't sell out what we gave them. Huddersfield wouldn't have sold out the small RRE section if we'd given it to them. Tranmere? 1,014? How many would the Walsalls and Grimsbys of this world bring for a 3pm Saturday kick off?

 

 

The home fans already pick and choose their games at BP!

 

The financial gains would be small.

 

The case in favour of regionalisation, while worthy of debate, is far from proven.

 

The 1st round of the league cup is hardly a good example is it?

 

Stockport still brought over 2000 and the Leeds game was on Sky.

 

"Huddersfield wouldn't have sold the small section"...and your point is???

 

Tranmere 1,014 is much better than Yeovil 250!!

 

As regards Walsall and Grimsby...they would certainly bring more than Leyton Orient or Southend!!

 

 

 

[rudemedic]

I'm in favour of a North/South lower league as I think it could well be the only way teams like Bournmouth stay in business. I can't see the Championship teams voting for it and some of the Midlands ones might not like it (as it would be them who switched between divisions) but they might get out voted and I think the football league is run like a democracy in that 1 club= 1 vote no matter the status. The odds of four teams (and I think it would have to be four) that come down all being northern/southern are remote and if it was say 2 northern teams, 1 southern and 1 midlands then instead of moving someone the midlands team should go into the southern league even if they were more northern than someone else.

 

Someone made the point though that the biggest expense in football is what we play the players and the only way for that to come down is start at the top. The Americans somehow make a salary cap legal is it not possible for the EU to do the same. It is ridiculous that the likes of Ronaldo and Lampard make in a week what the Prime Minister makes in about 9 months. Ronaldo and Lampard don't bring in anymore money to their club do they and you can't say it is as stressful a job as running the country. Until the wages of the 'superstars' comes down to reasonable levels which would mean the TV companies stop paying over the odds to show the likes of Wigan v. Hull then the wages at teams like Oldham will remain too high.

[opinions4u]

Maye mediocre points made during a break from work! The point is that visiting teams never quite bring as many as we expect.

 

I still say that while there will be gains, they won't be big gains. 2%-3% of turnover.

 

But who goes up, and who comes down?

 

So far we've had suggestions of 1 team out of 24 from each of the regional divsions (plus one via the play-offs) - which would be acceptable to the Championship and nobody else.

 

Or 2 from each. Which wouldn't be accepted by the Championship.

 

I certainly don't want to watch football where only 1 side can go up automatically.

Edited March 24, 2009 by opinions4u

[slurms mckenzie]

You'd be reducing the number of sides promoted from the current number of 7 to just 4.

 

And there is no way the Championship would say "we're happy to let another of our clubs take the drop".

 

Turkey's tend not to vote for Christmas.

 

As the Championship is in the football league, not sure how the voting would work. I'm sure all League 2 clubs and a fair number of League 1 clubs would prefer regionalisation. Not going to happen anyway, the big clubs generally run the game despite the fact that a lot of clubs will go into administration next season.

[OldhamSheridan]

It would work in the way that the Championship would tell us to do one and break off a la Premiership, taking more money than currently and leaving us with nothing. They may let us have the status quo in terms of Promotion/relegation, if we are lucky.

 

Can one of the 'elders' tell us why this was abandoned in the first place?

[oafc1955]

It would work in the way that the Championship would tell us to do one and break off a la Premiership, taking more money than currently and leaving us with nothing. They may let us have the status quo in terms of Promotion/relegation, if we are lucky.

 

Can one of the 'elders' tell us why this was abandoned in the first place?

 

Apparently it ran for 37years from 1921 and I think it was the lack of promotion opportunities to Division 2 that contributed to it's downfall in 1958.

 

I think promotion issues are probably the main reason we have never returned to that format.

 

[Lookers_Carl]

http://soccerlens.com/should-lower-league-...onalised/19227/

 

Have a goosey at this article, has some good arguments for and against

 

also shows the boundaries could sometimes be very very fine, eg at one stage both nottingham teams were placed in div 3 north, wheras derby were placed in div 3 south

[true blue]

so many good points raised for and against.

in regards to the promotion and relegation, it can still be kept as 3 up and 3 down if the playoffs combined the second and third teams from each division. top 2 get automatic promoton. 2nd plays 3rd from opposing league. winners play off for promotion.

that's when we'd get our big games against the pick of the southern clubs and travelling numbers would be big because of what's at stake.

let's face it, no club deserves to go up to the championship from 6th.

Edited March 24, 2009 by true blue

[opinions4u]

An excellent read.

 

I seem to remember (in a mis-spent youth) drawing a line on my Dad's road atlas and splitting the old 3rd and 4th divisions in to a north and south split.

 

Stockport, Tranmere, Stoke, Port Vale and Grimsby were in the south, based on the make up of the 48 sides in the 2 divisions at that time.

 

The geographical make up has changed since then, with promotions, re-elections and relegations.

 

To throw another idea in the ring, bring in the Confenrece and have three divisions. North, Central and South. I hate the idea, but others may like it!

[Lookers_Carl]

An excellent read.

 

I seem to remember (in a mis-spent youth) drawing a line on my Dad's road atlas and splitting the old 3rd and 4th divisions in to a north and south split.

 

Stockport, Tranmere, Stoke, Port Vale and Grimsby were in the south, based on the make up of the 48 sides in the 2 divisions at that time.

 

The geographical make up has changed since then, with promotions, re-elections and relegations.

 

To throw another idea in the ring, bring in the Confenrece and have three divisions. North, Central and South. I hate the idea, but others may like it!

 

I think the key issue regarding regionalisation is that of quality, the leagues would become more varied in terms of quality than the scottish prem, as in if thats how it was at the mo, we would be in the same league as grimsby and altringham!!!!

 

Other quality issues would be along the lines of one league could have significantly more stronger teams in it than another, eg a team which may be capable of winning league 1 south, would only finish mid table in league 1 north.

 

[oafc1955]

An excellent read.

 

I seem to remember (in a mis-spent youth) drawing a line on my Dad's road atlas and splitting the old 3rd and 4th divisions in to a north and south split.

 

Stockport, Tranmere, Stoke, Port Vale and Grimsby were in the south, based on the make up of the 48 sides in the 2 divisions at that time.

 

The geographical make up has changed since then, with promotions, re-elections and relegations.

 

To throw another idea in the ring, bring in the Confenrece and have three divisions. North, Central and South. I hate the idea, but others may like it!

 

It is definitely worth discussion at the top level as lower league football is dying on it's feet.

 

On a personal point we are the longest serving club in this division and I for one am board sh***ess of seeing the same teams year after bloody year.

 

A change to a new league format would see us playing new and local teams and it could give supporters a boost.

 

As we are deep in the middle of a reccession, I think, if we sit here and do nothing, one way or another, clubs will definitely go to the wall!!

 

[Stitch_KTF]

altringham!!!!

 

Altrincham? Don't worry, until recently I too thought it was a G.

[Lookers_Carl]

Altrincham? Don't worry, until recently I too thought it was a G.

 

Whoops

 

can mods ban themselves for poor spelling

 

[real]

An excellent read.

 

I seem to remember (in a mis-spent youth) drawing a line on my Dad's road atlas and splitting the old 3rd and 4th divisions in to a north and south split.

 

Stockport, Tranmere, Stoke, Port Vale and Grimsby were in the south, based on the make up of the 48 sides in the 2 divisions at that time.

 

The geographical make up has changed since then, with promotions, re-elections and relegations.

 

To throw another idea in the ring, bring in the Confenrece and have three divisions. North, Central and South. I hate the idea, but others may like it!

 

So, from 6 teams in Lge 1 and 7 in Lge 2 all having a chnace of going up (5 auto, 8 play offs), and 4 teams in Lge 1 and 2 teams in Lge 2 going down, we'd change to 3 teams in each going up (2 auto instead of 5 and 4 play off instead of 8) and then how many going down to non-league? 1 from each?

 

That would end the season earlier, possibly negating any increase in attendances completely, both from a promotion and relgation perspective.

It might also really hack off the clubs that get moved around every year to accomodate the teams relegated from the championship, often missing out in playing many of their local rivals?

[nzlatic]

Some of my favourite away games have been down south as it's a weekend away. But I know I would have gone to more away games over the course of a season if there had been more local games. It's a time cost as well as the match ticket. And I would say that there would be a big increase on the away gate if you replace Brighton/Yeovil with Rochdale/Bury etc

 

As for quality, granted there would be a big gap at first, but would this even out over the course of a few years?

 

For me the biggest problem would be the promotion/relegation. How about increasing the Championship to 26 teams then having top 2 from league 1 north and south going up automatically and a play off in each league 1 div to find a 5th team. They could even play off against 5th bottom in the champ to decide that final team.

 

There would be complaints from Championship teams over any suggestion that rocks their boat, but the FL is the FL and the bottom 3 leagues come under it so surely if something is good for the majority of those clubs it'd get some traction.

 

There are 2 major problems that are going to finish off a few teams unless they are addressed - reducing costs and increasing revenue. Having a N/S league could help with both. But I agree, wages need to be addressed. And this has to happen from the top, which means it probably never will.

[oafc1955]

 

This is the reply I received from Alan Hardy regarding Regionalisation of Divisions 2 & 3

 

 

 

 

Hi Graham

 

 

 

This matter has been brought up for discussion occasionally at Football League meetings but not in the past couple of years.

 

 

 

In the past there has not been sufficient support, for numerous reasons, to take it forward to a vote.

 

 

I think in some ways it has its merits but Championship clubs would view it as making it more difficult for those relegated to get back at the first attempt if all three were relegated to the same division. This is only one of the many obstacles that were brought up at the various times.

 

 

 

Alan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alan Hardy

 

Chief Executive/Director

 

Oldham Athletic AFC

 

 

 

T: 0871 226 2235

 

F: 0871 226 1715

 

E: alan.hardy@oldhamathletic.co.uk