Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
prot651

Relegation Promotion or not

Recommended Posts

Is it better to have a league with out Relegation or have 2 leagues with Relegation and Promotion ? .

Does it make a league stronger not to have it as then you are not getting weaker teams into the league

Edited by prot651

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you talking about IRL or in FM?

As an Englishman, living in New Zealand, I follow both types of league IRL - the A-League is franchise-based and has no promotion/relegation. As a Wellington Phoenix follower, this is both a blessing and a curse, on the one hand, we have never been relegated which is 'Good'. On the other, we don't win many games and as a result get low attendances, poor atmosphere and the best players don;t wanna play for us, which is 'Bad'. So poor has the atmosphere been that there is talk of us losing the Franchise altogether which is 'Bad', so not just relegation, but total oblivion - the 'club' wouldn't exist any more which is also 'Bad'. Had there been a Div 2, and we got relegated, we would at least have had the joy of winning games and perhaps promotion. Instead, once it becomes a certainty that teams can;t reach the playoffs, it gets a bit stale, so 6 out of 10 teams get to the playoffs!

As an Englishman however, the promotion and relegation scraps are fantastically exciting, which is 'Good'- whether you are desperately hanging on to league status for the last few games, or whether you are gunning for automatic promotion or the playoffs. From top two automatic places, then four playoff places for promotion, it's not that big a drop before you can find yourself in a relegation dog-fight. 'Mid-Table Mediocrity' is a treacherous line to walk, and very few teams can afford complacency - whereas A-League, 40% of the teams can switch off.

The argument that weaker teams are entering the league is balanced by the fact that they are replacing weaker teams anyway, and they deserve a shot at the big time as they were the strongest teams in their league. 

Maybe a way to do it would be for  the bottom three of one league, to playoff with the top three of the lower league to see who gets/stays up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Competition usually makes for more interest from the buying public so in my view, 2 leagues are much more preferable than one.  There has to be an incentive to succeed ( promotion) and to stop from failing ( relegation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Snorks said:

Maybe a way to do it would be for  the bottom three of one league, to playoff with the top three of the lower league to see who gets/stays up?

I don't know if it's like this any (there are constant changes I feel), but here in Norway it is (used to be?) a playoff between the 3rd placed in the 2nd tier and the third last in the first tier. So top two in the 2nd tier gets automatic promotion and bottom two in the top tier gets relegated while the two other teams (3rd in 2nd tier and bottom 3rd in 1st tier) meet in a two legged playoff. Winner is in the top tier, the loser in the 2nd tier.

Now, that I'm thinking of it, I think we have a playoff in the 2nd tier, but the bottom 3rd from the top tier enters it at some point? I don't quite remember and can't be bothered to look it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Snorks said:

Are you talking about IRL or in FM?

Maybe a way to do it would be for  the bottom three of one league, to playoff with the top three of the lower league to see who gets/stays up?

I disagree with this completely, as you are rewarding failure. Any side that is in the relegation zone, is there for a reason, & should be relegated. , Any playoffs should always be between sides in the league below fighting to get up.

I look around the leagues in Europe & England is one of the few who does it this way, & in my opinion the one that is correct. So many times I see clubs who have been dross all season, get into a relegation playoff game/s then win it too be able to stay up & stink out their leagues for another season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, YOUNGSTEVE said:

I disagree with this completely, as you are rewarding failure. Any side that is in the relegation zone, is there for a reason, & should be relegated. , Any playoffs should always be between sides in the league below fighting to get up.

I look around the leagues in Europe & England is one of the few who does it this way, & in my opinion the one that is correct. So many times I see clubs who have been dross all season, get into a relegation playoff game/s then win it too be able to stay up & stink out their leagues for another season.

Yet in the USA it seems to work well as with all there top sports there is no relegation just huge franchises . No team seems to stay at the bottom too long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Snorks said:

Are you talking about IRL or in FM?

As an Englishman, living in New Zealand, I follow both types of league IRL - the A-League is franchise-based and has no promotion/relegation. As a Wellington Phoenix follower, this is both a blessing and a curse, on the one hand, we have never been relegated which is 'Good'. On the other, we don't win many games and as a result get low attendances, poor atmosphere and the best players don;t wanna play for us, which is 'Bad'. So poor has the atmosphere been that there is talk of us losing the Franchise altogether which is 'Bad', so not just relegation, but total oblivion - the 'club' wouldn't exist any more which is also 'Bad'. Had there been a Div 2, and we got relegated, we would at least have had the joy of winning games and perhaps promotion. Instead, once it becomes a certainty that teams can;t reach the playoffs, it gets a bit stale, so 6 out of 10 teams get to the playoffs!

As an Englishman however, the promotion and relegation scraps are fantastically exciting, which is 'Good'- whether you are desperately hanging on to league status for the last few games, or whether you are gunning for automatic promotion or the playoffs. From top two automatic places, then four playoff places for promotion, it's not that big a drop before you can find yourself in a relegation dog-fight. 'Mid-Table Mediocrity' is a treacherous line to walk, and very few teams can afford complacency - whereas A-League, 40% of the teams can switch off.

The argument that weaker teams are entering the league is balanced by the fact that they are replacing weaker teams anyway, and they deserve a shot at the big time as they were the strongest teams in their league. 

Maybe a way to do it would be for  the bottom three of one league, to playoff with the top three of the lower league to see who gets/stays up?

While this is true for Wellington the USA and Australia sports do not have relegations . AFL in Australia has no relegation systems . The A-League also has none but these codes do have finals which gives incentives to finish higher . Australia is a very big country to have a relegation system as lower clubs just cant afford to travel for away games . Obviously in the UK etc being smaller it involves less travel costs . I hope Wellington stay and I think another team from NZ would be good . Auckland City for instance would also create a rivalry in the country

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, prot651 said:

Yet in the USA it seems to work well as with all there top sports there is no relegation just huge franchises . No team seems to stay at the bottom too long

 

I don't care about American sports. MLS is 2nd rate precisely for this reason, & always well be if it doesn't change its ways.

Edited by YOUNGSTEVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, prot651 said:

Yet in the USA it seems to work well as with all there top sports there is no relegation just huge franchises . No team seems to stay at the bottom too long

One hand that is quite true, it prevents a top 2 or 3, or 5, with the same teams winning all the time.

But there is major negative in my view. The franchise model, prevents the creation of small town team to go and win the league. Stories like Leicester are not possible or the Eibar story, where small town team, is able to win the premier league or like Eiber reach the La Liga in Spain, where in franchise system, they would never exist. Eibar is  managed financially, structurally and work, quite well, there trade off is making the big money of the La Liga. Which for me is also part of what makes a team successful, not only how they are managed on the field, but off it too. Trust me if Rangers situation was any clue, a big team if run poorly, can close down or relegated to lower division.

You only need to look at the English leagues history, there is not a 30 or 32 teams history, but much more teams who such a rich history who are not part of Premeir League and that makes pro/rel even more interesting.

It make me extremely confusing and frustrating when I see teams in USL, but more in the NPSL and PDL, teams open one season and the following season they close or move to another division. Or closing the league down, because the league has gone bankrupt, like both NASL leagues. And then you have the cases like the whole situation of Columbus Crew moving to another town, which confuses the hell out of me. If Benfica or Milan happen there would be a revolt by fans.

Despite the negative points of Pro/Rel, I prefer it. I hope USA do move from the franchise model to pro/rel. Sure many people say is not financially viable. I think these are excuses. You can adapt to size of USA and make it viable. If Russia and Brazil does it, so can USA. Also I prefer to be fan of a team who is in the third and fourth divisions, then the ever possibility that if my team is no longer financially viable by “Owners”, they decide to relocate teams because “owners” think they can milk (milk they do) more money from another city. I prefer the Leicester type of team win the league once every 10 years, then to be fan of team no longer exists or is in risk of leaving their respective towns.

Every time this debate surges on other forums, I can’t stop thinking about the fans of San Diego Chargers, St. Louis Rams, the Oakland Raiders and the potential Columbus Crew, feel about this discussion, I think they were in favor of pro/rel, because if their team moved to another town, they could easily form a new club and fight to climb the pyramid and win the top league of the team. Not to mention the highlight of a league is normally the end when you see the intense fight to keep on the top division or a team fighting for promotion. It adds an extra layer of drama to it, which makes fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, YOUNGSTEVE said:

I disagree with this completely, as you are rewarding failure. Any side that is in the relegation zone, is there for a reason, & should be relegated. , Any playoffs should always be between sides in the league below fighting to get up.

I look around the leagues in Europe & England is one of the few who does it this way, & in my opinion the one that is correct. So many times I see clubs who have been dross all season, get into a relegation playoff game/s then win it too be able to stay up & stink out their leagues for another season.

I agree with you, but not that you are rewarding failure - was just looking at other ways of doing it to answer the OPs point about 'weak' teams coming into the league each year. The top vs bottom playofs would, at least, give some indication that the league has the better group of teams. If the top of Div 2 can't beat the bottom of Div 1 they don;t go up. 

I think it gives the bottom teams a chance to survive, rather than being rewarded for failure. Let's not forget, the current system was brought in to give teams a 'boost' in revenue and to keep the league competition exciting to the end - in the old days (yes  I am old enough to remember) the season was often effectively over around March/April, the playoffs at least give teams lower down something to play for to the final game.

I prefer the way it's done in England if I am honest. 

Edited by Snorks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, prot651 said:

While this is true for Wellington the USA and Australia sports do not have relegations . AFL in Australia has no relegation systems . The A-League also has none but these codes do have finals which gives incentives to finish higher . Australia is a very big country to have a relegation system as lower clubs just cant afford to travel for away games . Obviously in the UK etc being smaller it involves less travel costs . I hope Wellington stay and I think another team from NZ would be good . Auckland City for instance would also create a rivalry in the country

Sadly,  I just don't think the Kiwi sports fan would support a 2nd team. I would love a top-team nearer to me rather than a 7hr drive away.  A real 'lethargy' in this country when in comes to fandom - if you ain't winning I ain't coming to watch - mentality. The travelling distances are a huge obstacle though, and the US and Australian domestic leagues have had to find ways around it - in England of course Level 6 and down is regional as well because of travel.

The S.American method of being relegated based on previous three season's performances would be an interesting one - not that I am supporting it - but it would at least maintain an element of standards in each league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Th US franchise system also has a 'balancing mechanic' - hence the bottom team doesn;t stay bottom for long - in the draft system. The weaker team of the season gets choice drafts for the following season and therefore better players in the squad.

Australia A-League whilst a franchise system, doesn't have this, so the poor teams can be poor for a while (Phoenix?). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...