League 1 restructuring

[GUBRATS]

5 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

This is the essence of my message which I have been trying to convey to you on this thread.  I have tried to expain it to you in different ways but you just are not getting it.

You make me repeat myself, "You don't see the end game do ya?"

Look at your post and this reply....isn't the answer plainly obvious?

The end game is a NH league of no more than 16 teams in a franchised system , with the rest either full on feeder clubs or a small league of heartland clubs little more than amateur playing completely seperate [ probably back in winter ] from SL under different rules with all ties broken

 

[GUBRATS]

10 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

This is the essence of my message which I have been trying to convey to you on this thread.  I have tried to expain it to you in different ways but you just are not getting it.

You make me repeat myself, "You don't see the end game do ya?"

Look at your post and this reply....isn't the answer plainly obvious?

As you havent answered my question , I will for you , you probably would lose interest having to play 2 nd string even if you were winning it all the time

Mr argyle would definatly not be supporting it

[Kayakman]

14 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

The end game is a NH league of no more than 16 teams in a franchised system , with the rest either full on feeder clubs or a small league of heartland clubs little more than amateur playing completely seperate [ probably back in winter ] from SL under different rules with all ties broken

 

Please answer this question (and don't avoid it this time)....I knows it sounds unrelated but its not...."How did you vote on the Brexit?"

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

Please answer this question (and don't avoid it this time)....I knows it sounds unrelated but its not...."How did you vote on the Brexit?"

Leave , and happy with a no deal if it comes to it

[Kayakman]

23 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Leave , and happy with a no deal if it comes to it

Now look...sometimes we have people who are what we call 'linear thinkers'...i believe you are one of them.   Such people have real strengths and are good at looking at singular things/problems or individual situations.  The problem is, while concentrating on the minute detail,  such thinkers can sometimes miss obvious solutions which are right in front of them...this has probably happened to you before in the past...like a missing thing was right in front of you all the time! 

Both of your answers are way off the mark...like WOW! not even near the target....I believe your decision on Brexit was not the clearly correct one, but I will let you folks hash that one out.  History will judge it.

But:

49 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

It wasnt " went down or stayed " ? , it was not allowed in ?

And your opinion on what Mr Argyle would do , if refused entry ?

Are you seriously telling me you don't see the obvious easy solution to this post you made.    Are you shittin me?

[Kayakman]

Come On Starbug.

[RP London]

15 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Isn't that exactly what I said RP, only that we may well differ on what is a good period to monitor, assess, gauge, appraise, evaluate and subsequently determine if the model in prototype (TWP) is worth going into production with, I chose 6 years that would be 3 years in the lower divisions and could well be 3 years  - or not - in the top flight where they prove or otherwise that tgey are a good fit, if it is deemed successful then by all means proceed with the N.American expansion, if not well.........

Very possibly in essence the same yes. I have 2 issues with what you are saying, they may well seem minor but i think they are the biggest stumbling blocks:

1. There is no "model" that will work for everyone, every case is different and the TWP "model" will not necessarily work for NYC or anyone else due to funding or just the fact times have changed but also every place is different and dynamics are different. one of RL's problems is thinking that 1 rule, 1 model will work for everyone (that and changing things all the time!).. every piece of expansion is different, every reason that people arent watching RL in that area is different so why is "changing their minds" going to be the same everywhere. 

2. my point is that if you say to NYC "ooh just hang on 3 more years we need to see where this goes first" NYC could potentially go "no you're alright we'll invest our money elsewhere as we need to be looking at a return in 3 years not investing in 3 years" (knowing also once the nod is given its probably another, at least, 1 year before they actually join). When the money/inclination is there you need to run with it. I'll use the example of London in the 1930s (very short version) and Sydney Parkes wants to form a "mini league" with 6 teams, the RFL are quite difficult and he ends up with 2 which both fail (for one reason or another) but a block of 6 would arguably have created more interest in the capital, given more momentum for the idea that the sport was "breaking out" etc etc and arguably could have worked. Sometimes you need to do things big and not wait around hoping that 1 works because its actually numbers 2 and 3 that really push everything forward. 

equally if TWP fail it is not a failure of expansion in North America per se it is a failure of TWP. Just becuase TWP fails does not mean NYC will, and in the same way if TWP is a massive success it doesnt mean NYC will be. But if the will is there right now, and they can fund it without an impact on funding of the game in England then you take it IMHO.

 

 

[FearNothing]

Err......guys....League 1 Restructuring?????

 

I personally don't think L1 is too far off. 2 up& 2 down from L1/Ch, and maybe 2-3 more teams would be good for a full home & away season. Other than that, nothing stands out as needing restructuring. It's been a decent comp these last couple of seasons.

[RP London]

4 minutes ago, FearNothing said:

Err......guys....League 1 Restructuring?????

 

I personally don't think L1 is too far off. 2 up& 2 down from L1/Ch, and maybe 2-3 more teams would be good for a full home & away season. Other than that, nothing stands out as needing restructuring. It's been a decent comp these last couple of seasons.

boooo stop bringing us back on topic. 

I'd like to see a couple more teams brought in, probably look to try and balance someone like a Bristol or Hemel with someone closer to the heartlands if we could.. but i would leave it with the 2 up and 2 down too.. i would also not try and bring i the likes of NYC and let them jump to the championship if they have huge funding and the exemptions of the likes of TWP as i think it could damage the teams in League 1 but would also take my lead from those actually involved heavily in those clubs for how they felt on that.. 

[Dave W]

I'd get rid of L1 altogether and have two parallel conferences of 10 teams (lets call them Championship A and B).

Everyone plays every else in their division home and away + 2 home and away games with teams from the the other conference.

The top 2 in each division go into the end of season play-offs, with the fifth team decided by a 2 leg play-off between the third place team in each conference

[fevtom]

1 hour ago, FearNothing said:

Err......guys....League 1 Restructuring?????

 

I personally don't think L1 is too far off. 2 up& 2 down from L1/Ch, and maybe 2-3 more teams would be good for a full home & away season. Other than that, nothing stands out as needing restructuring. It's been a decent comp these last couple of seasons.

Agree, I like to see slightly larger leagues to stop the games getting stale. Ideally I'd like to see three divisions of 14 but if this isn't possible, 12 is an alright number. I think one of the main arguments behind a restructure of league one is the gulf in ability between top and bottom but hopefully this will be less pronounced over the next few years.