Should we move to a 16 team league next season ?

[steviex]

I think that any changes to structures should have more than one season to cut in. That way nobody can say such and such a change was made to favour the elevation or continuation of a team at an elevated spot.

So if we move to a 16 team top league, and I can see both pros and cons, let it be the season after next.

There are no pros, every league reconstruction has proved the number of teams alters nothing.
Its like saying if you had another ***dred deck chairs on the titanic it wouldn't have sunk (or for my favourite posters on here , it wouldn't have sank).

[AguyIknow]

The pros of a 16 team league would be the sharing out of the funds from the top table in a slightly wider pool as well as the removal of the need for the divisive split.

Teams playing against higher quality opponents would bring them on a bit - conversely it wouldn't be as good for the better team but thems the breaks.

[happytim]

a 16 team league means a whole campaign where each team only plays 30 games.

teams who have no euro football or who exit the cups early will have few games to play all season.

i really think we need to cut it to 10, the way it was from 1975 onwards.

with 2 being relegated, i automatic and the other playing the 2nd top team in the championship for a place in the top tier.

[Lisbon_Lions_CSC]

I honestly think this is needed.No relegation from SPL and promote 4 from the championship.They can still do the split thing.
Then have one relegated and Second bottom of SPL play second top of championship in a Two legged play off.
Would offer more security for teams,and make it a better all round league.

[CB_1874]

It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Selik will still pysh it by 30 points whether there's 10, 16 or 20 teams in the league.

[GMessi]

The OP is at it.

The system we have now is not perfect but it's a million miles better than any alternative.

End of.

[Sir_Walter_Timslayer]

Refresh my memory, but didn't we have the reconstruction debate to end all reconstruction debates this time last season? The stupid 8-8-8 nonsense then the putsch that gave us the mess that we've got.

Most people on here seemed quite happy with it for some reason, but we seem to want to change things now.

[happytim]

we were quite happy with the 12-10-10-10 set up until rangers went bust and started as a newco, then the reconstruction topic came to the fore as the media, sfa and other assorted buns and ex buns desperately wanted a system that got them into the top tier as fast as possible.

[CB_1874]

With the money Rangers spent they were going to win the lower leagues regardless of the size.

[happytim]

but i think some wanted fewer leagues meaning they needed fewer promotions to get to the top.

another thing, is we never talked about play offs for years and now we have them. i dont really agree with them.