EFL Rule OUT B Teams!

[DarkSithLord]

Whole Game Solution: Premier League B Teams ruled out following first phase of consultation

The EFL and the 72 clubs it represents have collectively ruled out including Premier League B teams in future plans to reform the structure of English football.

Following a meeting of its clubs on Thursday (22 September), the EFL confirmed that the inclusion of Premier League B Teams, clubs from non-English leagues or those outside the English football pyramid will not form part of any ongoing discussions for the ‘Whole Game Solution’.

EFL clubs have been collectively discussing the fundamental issue of reforming the structure of English league football for the first time since agreeing to assess ideas put forward by the EFL Board at last summer’s Annual General Meeting.

Those suggestions, which aim to improve the format of EFL competitions and the revenues received by clubs, posed a number of critical questions and these have been the subject of a consultation process with clubs during this past six weeks.

All clubs, who will potentially vote on a final proposal in June 2017, have been considering the specific issues of regionalisation, the number of teams per division, divisional restructure, winter break and from where in the game the additional teams will come from.

The majority of these issues, including how the funding redistribution model will work in the future, will continue to be assessed as the discussions are shaped over the next two months, but the option of sourcing additional clubs from anywhere but the National League has been withdrawn.

In addition, the feedback has confirmed that clubs in League One, Two and the proposed League Three would want to play through a winter break if introduced.

EFL Chief Executive Shaun Harvey said: “At the very outset of this process it was made clear that any decisions in respect of the future direction of the Whole Game Solution would be taken by clubs themselves and our announcement today comes as a result of their valued input. I am extremely grateful for their candour and support during the first part of this consultation that will ultimately help shape a final proposal for voting on in June next year.

“The logical place for many was to source the additional teams for League Three from the National League but we felt it important that the debate was introduced at an early stage and an opportunity was provided for all Club owners’ and executives’ to voice any opinions and, where applicable, table concerns. We will now continue our consultation with the National League with a little more certainty as to what any change could mean for them. These conversations will include the FA in their capacity as the Governing Body not a competition organiser.

“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.

“The next round of consultation will also see us undertake some work with fan groups and other stakeholders to ensure that those people who are invested in the future our game are given an opportunity to register their views.”

Read more at http://www.efl.com/news/article/201...consultation-3322371.aspx#PRZpEtXwFEi784mt.99

 

[Silver Stone]

That part is good, the proposed League Three is still fucking terrible.

 

[Chris FGR]

“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.

So they haven't really ruled out B teams then. If the Premier League want them in, they're in a strong negotiating position, just like with EPPP. Doesn't matter what a few Football League chairman say, whatever suits the big clubs is what will happen.

Hopefully the whole thing is voted down next year, can't see any benefit to it. The only change I'd make is regionalise league 1 and 2 into league 1 north and south, with 2 leagues feeding that.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Have you been sniffing glue? Why would you want to regionalise anything?

 

[Chris FGR]

Have you been sniffing glue?

What I sniff/snort/inhale is my own business pal, it's got fuck all to do with you.

Why would you want to regionalise anything?

Regional football = more derbies; bigger crowds and less travelling.

 

[JaggerCFC]

Regional at league 2 at least. How are the B teams doing in the johnstones paint trophy????

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Richard Cranium]

Anyway, It's not Sunday League 'pal'.

 

[Habbinalan]

So they haven't really ruled out B teams then. If the Premier League want them in, they're in a strong negotiating position, just like with EPPP. Doesn't matter what a few Football League chairman say, whatever suits the big clubs is what will happen.

Hopefully the whole thing is voted down next year, can't see any benefit to it. The only change I'd make is regionalise league 1 and 2 into league 1 north and south, with 2 leagues feeding that.

Yes, they have ruled out B teams and Celtic/Rangers - couldn't be much clearer.

They've also ruled out a winter break for all but Championship - and presumably only if Premier League go for the break option. That could benefit L1, L2 and any new L3 by offering more TV money opportunities and less competition for a few weeks.

Just need to get rid of regionalisation (can do it below L3 if that's what Nations League clubs want) and I could live with a smaller L1/L2 and fewer league matches if the clubs can make the sums add up.......or we could keep present numbers and perhaps offer 3 up and down to the National League. That would be 1st, 2nd and play-off winner or (if regionalised) 1st N, 1st S and winner of playoff between playoff winners or 2nd places in N & S.

 

[Chris FGR]

Just need to get rid of regionalisation (can do it below L3 if that's what Nations League clubs want) and I could live with a smaller L1/L2 and fewer league matches if the clubs can make the sums add up.......or we could keep present numbers and perhaps offer 3 up and down to the National League. That would be 1st, 2nd and play-off winner or (if regionalised) 1st N, 1st S and winner of playoff between playoff winners or 2nd places in N & S.

What's wrong with regionalising? More local derbies, bigger crowds and less travelling sounds good to me.

And just because The EFL, and particularly Harvey (who's always been full of shit), say something, doesn't mean it's set in stone. They're weak as piss when up against the Premier League. If the Premier League want b teams in, they'll get in.

 

[Habbinalan]

What's wrong with regionalising? More local derbies, bigger crowds and less travelling sounds good to me.

Depends where you sit on the map. Some of us would lose a lot of local matches and still have the joy of either Hartlepool, Gateshead, Carlisle, Barrow and Morecambe or Plymouth, Exeter, Newport and Torquay.

How would you feel about Forest Green in a West Midlands and North L2 with us in an East and South L2 - perhaps draw the line from Bristol to the Wash via Swindon and Oxford?

 

[Chris FGR]

How would you feel about Forest Green in a West Midlands and North L2 with us in an East and South L2 - perhaps draw the line from Bristol to the Wash via Swindon and Oxford?

Would prefer to be in a league with all of Cheltenham, Bristol Rovers, Swindon, Newport, Oxford, Plymouth, Exeter and Torquay, that would be brilliant for us. Lots of big crowds in there.

 

[Habbinalan]

Would prefer to be in a league with all of Cheltenham, Bristol Rovers, Swindon, Newport, Oxford, Plymouth, Exeter and Torquay, that would be brilliant for us. Lots of big crowds in there.

I'm sure you would but Cheltenham and Gloucester have found themselves in the "North" in other competitions, as have ourselves and Lowestoft and Braintree. Not a long stretch to add Stroud to the footballing north.

Even if we stop making it personal to our clubs, there are plenty along the N/S line, wherever it is drawn who would lose a lot of local matches and still have plenty of distant ones.

 

[Raymondo316]

Don't something like 80% of the 92 league clubs have to agree to this?? if so pretty much no chance this will get voted through.

Also a season with 8 teams getting promoted from the Conference would be an absolute train wreck......over half the league spending themselves into oblivion to just try and get in the top 8.

It would all end very badly

 

[Silver Stone]

Don't something like 80% of the 92 league clubs have to agree to this?? if so pretty much no chance this will get voted through.

Also a season with 8 teams getting promoted from the Conference would be an absolute train wreck......over half the league spending themselves into oblivion to just try and get in the top 8.

It would all end very badly

It's actually 90%.

 

[Raymondo316]

It's actually 90%.

Well i cant see many league 2 teams voting for this when effectively 12 of them would be getting relegated.

Like i said no chance this will get voted through.

 

[Silver Stone]

Also it's 90% of the FL, so 72 clubs. I don't see 65 saying yes outside of ridiculous Premier League interference.

 

[Murphy]

Having previously been completely opposed to a winter break across the board, I think the idea of a break for the Premier League and potentially Championship while leaving the rest to play for a couple of week is quite a smart idea. Market it and brand it properly and you could potentially drive up attendances and give clubs a few more bob in the coffers.

I don't generally like the Whole Game Solution rubbish, but the winter break for the top two leagues is something I could get on board with.

 

[Chris FGR]

Also a season with 8 teams getting promoted from the Conference would be an absolute train wreck......over half the league spending themselves into oblivion to just try and get in the top 8.

You mean 8 teams avoiding relegation? Because that's what it would be. 16 relegated from step 5 to 6.

There would be mass relegations throughout the EFL as well. Who the fuck would vote for that?

 

[Gladders]

Don't something like 80% of the 92 league clubs have to agree to this?? if so pretty much no chance this will get voted through.

Also a season with 8 teams getting promoted from the Conference would be an absolute train wreck......over half the league spending themselves into oblivion to just try and get in the top 8.

It would all end very badly

Its 90%, and there wouldn't be any promotion anywhere except the championship the year they brought it in, just lots more relegation for all leagues. The only "promotion" the 8 national league sides would get is in status, they would still be at step 5

 

[rudebwoyben]

Regionalisation is also a bad idea as a regional division would have a greater gap in quality between top and bottom. For us, it may mean that we got a club like Millwall in our division but we'd also have someone like Bromley or Sutton Utd in there too. No disrespect to those two clubs, but I'd rather play Blackpool or Carlisle Utd as league fixtures. Besides, we've been playing at a national level since 1979, I don't want to throw away that.
The League 3 idea is terrible too.
What's so wrong with keeping things as the way they are?

 

[Luke Imp]

Regional football = more derbies; bigger crowds and less travelling.

Tbh, I think the novelty would wear off.

Your casual fan, or ones who can't afford to get to too many games, will choose the derby games because they're one-offs. The Clubs would be hit with higher policing/stewarding bills as well.

I understand the logic behind that, but I don't think it's quite as simple as that.

 

[LeWhites]

Tbh, I think the novelty would wear off.

Your casual fan, or ones who can't afford to get to too many games, will choose the derby games because they're one-offs. The Clubs would be hit with higher policing/stewarding bills as well.

I understand the logic behind that, but I don't think it's quite as simple as that.

We used to get bigger crowds in the Ryman leagues than we do now. Surely playing against teams from places people have actually heard of has to have some impact on that?

8 years ago today we played Ramsgate at home in front of 1,400. Less than 800 turned up for the Forest Green game.

 

[rudebwoyben]

We used to get bigger crowds in the Ryman leagues than we do now. Surely playing against teams from places people have actually heard of has to have some impact on that?

8 years ago today we played Ramsgate at home in front of 1,400. Less than 800 turned up for the Forest Green game.

That is a non-issue at League 2 level, although it certainly is at National League level.
I don't think that is the only reason why your crowds have gone down though.

 

[Look Out There Are Llamas]

I'm sure you would but Cheltenham and Gloucester have found themselves in the "North" in other competitions, as have ourselves and Lowestoft and Braintree. Not a long stretch to add Stroud to the footballing north.

Even if we stop making it personal to our clubs, there are plenty along the N/S line, wherever it is drawn who would lose a lot of local matches and still have plenty of distant ones.

Bishop's Stortford also. Which was absolutely ridiculous.

 

[rudebwoyben]

That well-known northern Hertfordshire outpost.

 

[JaggerCFC]

3 up 3 down from L2, which will never get voted in

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[LeWhites]

That is a non-issue at League 2 level, although it certainly is at National League level.
I don't think that is the only reason why your crowds have gone down though.

Of course it's not. But we'll still get a decent number when Maidstone come down, we always did with Ebbsfleet and usually get half decent gates when any local side come, or a big side. Although I agree that it doesn't really apply in League 2, until it gets filled with Eastleighs, Forest Greens and Fyldes

 

[Jemfy]

You mean 8 teams avoiding relegation? Because that's what it would be. 16 relegated from step 5 to 6.

There would be mass relegations throughout the EFL as well. Who the fuck would vote for that?

Let me correct your terminology slightly, because it has become ambiguous. You're talking about tier 5 to tier 6.

Step is used to refer to tiers of the non-league system, step 1 being the conference national.

 

[Jemfy]

For the main point of the thread, turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Football league teams don't want b-teams hoovering up all the good prospects at the same level as them. It will kill their ability to get players in on loan or sign promising youngsters who have to prove themselves from below. The latter mostly being because they can offer first team football to develop the players that the big clubs cannot (directly anyway).

As for reforms to the football league - I don't see too much of an issue there one way or another. Would it affect anyone who attends non-league games if they were effectively an extra division away from the top while still facing the same teams, with the same incomes etc? I don't think so. It might slightly reduce the media presence of the non-league scene, but that's relatively non-existent on the national scale as it is (outside of those looking specifically for it).

There then become some more interesting points as to the potential to regionalise at L2 level (or thereabouts). I can't see a way where if that were to happen the conference structure could logically fail to follow suit and have the top level regional. I don't have a problem with that in terms of the football, but I think that really would kill the media coverage of non-league. The Cambridge fan above does raise an important point - that it is dangerous for teams that exist on the borders of the regions. We've just experienced being shifted between divisions at the same level and it has big knocks in terms of player recruitment, fan attendance at games etc. The conference north/south border has become a joke (although we can debate the reasons why it has crept south, the fact remains it has). Clubs are protected from being shifted in consecutive seasons to prevent it getting too bad but they can be shifted every other season if the borders suggest it is the better move.

As others above have said, the idea of a Christmas break only for the Championship and Prem is a good move IMO. The media will shut up about it when England continue to flounder at major tournaments, but it doesn't force it on clubs who don't want it. If anything it draws more attention on to the lower clubs when they are the only ones playing, giving TV opportunities and potential attendance boosts. If 50,000 man united and 50,000 City fans (or whatever the numbers are, I don't really care) are left with no games when they would normally go, you've got to think that's going to translate to at least 100 extra through the gates of one or two of the greater Manchester clubs who will be playing. That kind of exposure boost is huge for clubs.

 

[Greenacres]

This might sound like a bit of a sweeping statement, which to a large degree it is, but I don't think many Man Utd or City fans really care about any football other than what their club is playing. I know that we can all bang on about our own teams, but if you engage the average Man Utd fan in a conversation about football then you have to be prepared to be bored to death about their team! It is immediately apparent that they know little else, lack of knowledge is usually greatest amongst those whose teams regularly finish near the top of the Premiership. It would be wonderful to think that all those who go to watch Premier League and Championship teams will go to a non-league game if their team is on a winter break, but I'm not too optimistic that all that may will do.