With the league being reduced to 10 teams for 2009 does anyone know the number of games being planned? I assume 4 ties by 9 teams = 36 games?
For pofessional teams it makes it hard to survive having so little matches. Some leagues in other countries play well over 40 league matches eg Championship in England. The reason for this is economic, more games = more revenue which is essential to sustain professional teams.
With a lot of teams going pro now does anyone agree that its time to dramatically increase the number of games in a season? I know the Setanta and Euro help fill the gaps for some teams but at the moment 33 games is a very small number making it difficult for teams to scrape bye fiancially?
The deepest layer of human thinking and feeling somehow knows that God must exist - Pope Benedict XVI
Something i've always considered. 33 games isn't a lot and I'm sure extra games would help the clubs financially. 36 games is better, but seeing the same teams 4 times gets tedious IMO. Plus if a game is postponed, you could get a situation where you play the same team twice in the one week.Originally Posted by finnpark
But would more games make the league more drawn out and boring?? Would people like to see a 12 team league playing each other 4 times for a 44 game league??
If clubs want to play 40+ league games in a season then why not have a 22 club division?
Apparantly because they think there would be too many poor teams in the premier.
I'm not sure how I would feel about 22 club division. It could be great, it could be rubbish. I'm not sure.
Playing each team four times is plenty (too much if you ask me), and will be more for some teams because of Setanta Cup/FAI Cup/League Cup.
A 22 club division won't work. No promotion/relegation will mean that clubs will stagnate as there would be nothing to play for.
There are clubs stagnating in the first division as it is. Anyway, wouldn't you have an A league underneath?
Yes, but there aren't enough teams willing/able to make the step up. A 22 team league will see over half of the leagues clubs with nothing to play for. Galway's first division title challenge a couple of seasons ago saw interest rise in their team and this continued on into the Premier Division.
Also there's not enough quality throughout the league. The gap between Drogheda and Wexford would be huge. Playing in the First Division allows the smaller clubs a chance to gradually build their team until they are capable of playing against the bigger teams.
There is a gulf between top of the premier and the bottom of the first and there would be some big hammerings but over time the weaker sides could adjust and later compete eg bolton.
It would mean more midweek games but if the fixtures were to be sensibly put together then short trips should be arranged midweek.
The extra cost of the longer season for the smaller clubs would be offset by the bigger crowds eg County v Cork or Monaghan v Derry.
The smaller clubs might find it easier to survive as they would have a better product to sell to the corporate sector.
The A championship would then be used for promotion/relgation.
Thats not a good idea. I agree with reducing the number of teams in the premier as the pool of good players is very small in Ireland. The Irish League have something like that and the average quality of each team is unbeleivably poor.
I don't think we can support 22 pro teams but maybe 10 pro teams
The deepest layer of human thinking and feeling somehow knows that God must exist - Pope Benedict XVI
I agree with you, I'm actually just playing devil's advocate.
Anyway, I don't like the league going to 10 teams, 12 is fine but playing each team an uneven number of times is silly and 33 games is too few for the clubs to support each other.
I would prefer the 12 team league playing each other 4 times as was mentioned above.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks