Chindie Posted January 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 3, 2012 Play-offs are not something I would endorse for league winners. I don't really like the system for the Championship, though can see, somewhat, why it's there, and I also understand that the same argument that somewhat justifies it's existance for promotion chasers can apply to the Prem too (though perhaps a better utilisation would be for CL qualification...), but it would just feel wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Champions should always be champions.Play-offs should occur between the also rans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 They have playoffs in speedway, and for the last couple of seasons the league has been won by the team who finished 3rd of 4th. In 2009 and 2010 the league was won by a country mile, but that team were beaten in the playoffs, in the case of 2010 by Coventry who finished 4th and snuck into the playoff places on the last race of the season. Is this a good thing? I'm not sure. Also, I like how the OP idea was for a playoff system which stretches all the way down to 6th.. not top 4, like most playoff systems work.. Funny how it stretches to the position we can just about stilll regard as reachable.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islingtonclaret Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Easiest route to save the Premier League: follow European Rugby format. I.e. Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool (probably with Man City as well) **** off to their own European super league and leave us normal clubs without crazy international media engines to go about playing the game we love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted January 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5, 2012 Not a good idea. As much as I'd like to see smaller clubs with a chance for the title, it goes against the whole league system, imo. I mean for example, a team could win every game in the regular season and be miles ahead of anyone else, but then lose 1 or two games right at the end and not be champions. It's how they do it for the premiership rugby and I don't like it for that either. In sports with playoffs, teams never go undefeated in the regular season and lose in the final. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Never play offs for champions. Winning the league should be the team who finished top of the tree. A play off system for say 3rd/4th CL spot though for example i wouldn't mind between 3rd-6th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 maybe not good for title but play-offs for Champions League spots be interesting and can see it being mooted if Liverpool keep missing out on 4th For spot 4 Pick sides from 4th to 7th and have a playoff with the loser in the final getting Europa. THAT Could help break the big clubs and give opportunity to others. I would welcome that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Absolutely ludicrous idea and will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norton65ca Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 No, no no a thousand times no. and this from a resident of N America. Please no. Football is under such massive threats from all sides, what with 39th games, European Super Leagues and suggestions to trim the PL from Barcelona etc. The league structure mustn't change to that degree, leave it alone FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I mean for example, a team could win every game in the regular season and be miles ahead of anyone else, but then lose 1 or two games right at the end and not be champions. Aye. And this is why play-offs in a league system are bollocks. A league is fairly meaningless, IMO, if all teams don't play the same fixtures over a season, home and away. The league champions should quite simply be the team that scores the most points over a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2012 Want to improve the PL. the answer isn't in Mickey Mouse ideas like playoffs, the answer is to make the financial playing field more level. Playoffs won't have the slightest bit of impact on that and really would just serve as the top tier of clubs earning even more money, a nice little TV revenue boost at the end of the season for them too, it would make the league even less competitive than it is now, within a few seasons if not straight away, it would be the same clubs in it year after year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted January 9, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted January 9, 2012 I think the highest division should be called "Division One". The winning team should qualify for a (straight knockout) competition called "The European Cup". Radical, I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2012 I think the highest division should be called "Division One". The winning team should qualify for a (straight knockout) competition called "The European Cup". Radical, I know. There should be another European Competition called the European Cup Winners Cup and the UEFA thing should also revert back to a straight knock out competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted January 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2012 Reduce the squad size to twenty over 21's and reduce the bench to five substitiutes - instant reduction in wage bills and the same effect on Manchester City as on Norwich City when there's a spate of injuries - it brings a bit of the luck and the power of organising a squad and a team back into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted January 9, 2012 Reduce the squad size to twenty over 21's and reduce the bench to five substitiutes - instant reduction in wage bills and the same effect on Manchester City as on Norwich City when there's a spate of injuries - it brings a bit of the luck and the power of organising a squad and a team back into the game. Quite like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Reduce the squad size to twenty over 21's and reduce the bench to five substitiutes - instant reduction in wage bills and the same effect on Manchester City as on Norwich City when there's a spate of injuries - it brings a bit of the luck and the power of organising a squad and a team back into the game. Quite like that Yep, good idea. Mike's idea's is a good one too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Reduce the squad size to twenty over 21's and reduce the bench to five substitiutes - instant reduction in wage bills and the same effect on Manchester City as on Norwich City when there's a spate of injuries - it brings a bit of the luck and the power of organising a squad and a team back into the game. Quite like that Yep, good idea. Mike's idea's is a good one too! I like that a lot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Reduce the squad size to twenty over 21's and reduce the bench to five substitiutes - instant reduction in wage bills and the same effect on Manchester City as on Norwich City when there's a spate of injuries - it brings a bit of the luck and the power of organising a squad and a team back into the game. Quite like that Yep, good idea. Mike's idea's is a good one too! I like that a lot! Me too.. But it was only a few years ago they raised the squad size and amount of substitutes.. Whilst it royally **** up football, there must have been a reason they did it. Although I have no id£a wh£t th£t could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 If I were to change the league, initially you'd have to look at making the financial fair play actually FAIR. As it stands, the new rules will just make everyone stay in the same place - if you can spend 70% of your turnover on wages etc then teams like Manchester United will forever be untouchable - it maintains the status quo. If you're going to have a cap it should be a set value for all clubs, not a percentage. Percentages will only benefit those that already have excellent turnover and give others no chance to ever match them. Everyone can spend the same amount on wages then it will start being about teams again - making a team rather than just spending the most. But if you're looking at play-offs; I've always thought it might mae it more exciting at the BOTTOM of the league if, like the top 6, there was a bottom 6 - two automatically relegated and top two in Championship come up. Then 18th (Prem) play 3rd (Champ) 17th play 4th, 16th play 5th and 15th play 6th. More chances for promotion (also impacting on those who might get relegated, it not being a death sentence), league matters - higher up you get gives you a easier/ lower team in Championship. Likelihood is you'd have at least 15 teams still fighting til the last day to be in the top 6 or out of the bottom 6. Theoretically you could have six new teams in the Premiership one season - that'd mix things up a bit! Champions are still champions, worst team are still relegated - but invigorates the middle ground a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts