stocky Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 19 minutes ago, JasMc1973 said: rangers and Celtic playing in Scotland fixed it, same argument applies to both teams... not a strong one.. but same ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jock strap Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 Berwick ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giblet Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 Cheerio Ugly Sisters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoofitharder Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 It is just the EPL teams wanting to have B teams in a proper league rather than development squads or academy teams. if the pay off to the the FL is big enough it will go ahead.The conference national is basically division five now so i can't see what the big difference would be unless they allow EPL B teams. ian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggy Jim Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 Be hilarious if the Football League accepted Celtic and Rangers, they work their way through the divisions, earn promotion from the Championship and then the Premier League says no thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckielugger Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 There is no way u could have Celtic or Rangers playing in the bottom division of a league. ...oh wait. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckielugger Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 Seriously this proposal will have nothing to do with Celtic or Rangers or any other Scottish or non English club It May though involve B teams for Man Utd Chelsea Arse nal etc but as a supporter of a team currently languishing in the conference I certainlyhope all new clubs come from the conference cos we are too ccrap to win promottion otherwise ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in London Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 In principle, I think this is a good idea. There are huge swathes of clubs with professional aspirations who deserve a chance on the ladder. AFC Wimbledon are a case in point. 13 years old, about to play at Wembley in a playoff to move in to the same league as the "club" that replaced them. Come on, that's what football is all about. Any promotion (commercially or otherwise) of small clubs should be applauded. I maybe wrong, but I can't see the dilution of the lower leagues with B and C teams like we see in Spain and Germany. The pyramid is too strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 (edited) I think on the face of it most objections will be as much to do with a sentimental attachment to "the 92"; it's what English supporters grow up on & I've been trying to reach a point where I'd seen Huddersfield play on "all 92" since I was a kid. In reality though automatic promotion & relegation to the conference have created what I have thought for a long time is a sort of 'virtual division 5'; especially when you look at the number of ex-league teams in there now. I don't particularly see it as any sort of conspiracy this time & don't think it's about Celtic & Rangers. I actually think there's a high level of opposition to them joining amongst most lower division English teams & the EPL don't really need them. I agree with Dave as well that there's no real need or great desire for B teams so don't think that's what it's about. There are far too many aspirational non-league teams for that to be seen as fair. Teams in the top half of the conference can often pull in crowds of 2000+ so are able to sustain a basic professional set-up. What does always aggravate me though is the 'fixture congestion' argument. This is really about the elite teams. If you support a team that generally drop out of the cup early on & only see Europe on a package holiday then the season is about right. They could resolve their issues by reducing the number of CL games but I somehow doubt that will happen. So, all I ask is that the new 8 are mainly grounds I've been to so that my "all 100" quest doesn't get more complicated. Oh and a cup run involving Man Utd, West Ham, Liverpool, Spurs & Man City away would help. Edited May 21, 2016 by Huddersfield typos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Och Aye Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 (edited) Always thought Rangers / Celtic should sell up Ibrox / Celtic Park and buy out a struggling northern English club, for example Darlington, then invite the other half of the Old Firm to ground share. Access to the glorious English league achieved and we are shot of the bigoted glory hunting chunts. Their fans are used to travelling from all over the country so an extra few miles won't make any difference. Edited May 21, 2016 by Och Aye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 4 minutes ago, Och Aye said: Always thought Rangers / Celtic should sell up Ibrox / Celtic Park and buy out a struggling northern English club, for example Darlington, then invite the other club to ground share. Access to the glorious English league achieved and we are shot of the bigoted glory hunting chunts. Their fans are used to travelling from all over the country so an extra few miles won't make any difference. I think they may have tried that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Nation_F.C. This lot were a very strange outfit playing in the umpteenth tier but attracting professional managers & big sponsorship. Obviously they were playing very close to the border which I think led many people to think they were some sort of Trojan Horse club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.