Idiot alert scores level after two legs...

[GT49er]

Then play it over THREE matches, and the highest place team is home in TWO of them. Extra revenue, plus there is no worry over 46 games boiling down to 1.

We'd all love to play Wednesday over 270 minutes, right? (At least we'd have Dale back for the final if we made it...)

Let's make it the best of five, then, if we're dealing in silly ideas.

 

[GT49er]

Pennies. As stated earlier in the thread, the 'revenue generating' point of the play-offs is nothing whatsoever to do with crowds from the knock-out games themselves. Its about 12-15 teams (instead of 3-5) having meaningful (and thus well attended) matches for most of the season.

But it would still be a net loss of 50% of the semi-final revenue. The benefits to attendance in the later stages of the season would still apply, because there would still be the play-offs to go for. Still 50% of the semi-final revenue up the swanee though, with no revenue benefits elsewhere to compensate. Lots of pennies........

 

[GT49er]

Yes but that just happened to be the way it panned out. We had the chance to be the ones in the ascendant position that day,

The sixth placed team will have had 46 chances to finish in third place themselves, ahead of the team that eventually finished third (who would then be 4th.!

 

[Easy 10]

The sixth placed team will have had 46 chances to finish in third place themselves, ahead of the team that eventually finished third (who would then be 4th.!

Yes, we all know how a League works!

Starting a Playoff tie with only one team actually needing to go for a win is contrived nonsense though. That's just my opinion.

 

[Insel affe]

This is getting silly now....

Can we just for this season let the 3rd place team go up, whoever that maybe....

Oh it's us....

Bollox, where's my feckin mojo.....

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

But it would still be a net loss of 50% of the semi-final revenue. The benefits to attendance in the later stages of the season would still apply, because there would still be the play-offs to go for. Still 50% of the semi-final revenue up the swanee though, with no revenue benefits elsewhere to compensate. Lots of pennies........

I read somewhere that the team that wins the final at Wembley donate their portion of the revenue back to the losing team as the winner has won the riches of the higher divisiion.

I propose:
a) 5th v 6th [5th at home]
b) 4th [at home] plays winner of a)
c) 3rd plays winner of b) at Wembley [3rd has home dressing room and home kit + loser keeps all match takings]

All games to perform the penalty shoot-out BEFORE kick-off - means one of the teams knows BEFORE kick-off that they have to score - plus the crowd get the excitement of a penalty shoot-out in EVERY game !!

 

[Insel affe]

I read somewhere that the team that wins the final at Wembley donate their portion of the revenue back to the losing team as the winner has won the riches of the higher divisiion.

I propose:
a) 5th v 6th [5th at home]
b) 4th [at home] plays winner of a)
c) 3rd plays winner of b) at Wembley [3rd has home dressing room and home kit + loser keeps all match takings]

All games to perform the penalty shoot-out BEFORE kick-off - means one of the teams knows BEFORE kick-off that they have to score - plus the crowd get the excitement of a penalty shoot-out in EVERY game !!

That is actually very good I'd buy into that idea...

 

[GT49er]

I read somewhere that the team that wins the final at Wembley donate their portion of the revenue back to the losing team as the winner has won the riches of the higher divisiion.

I propose:
a) 5th v 6th [5th at home]
b) 4th [at home] plays winner of a)
c) 3rd plays winner of b) at Wembley [3rd has home dressing room and home kit + loser keeps all match takings]

All games to perform the penalty shoot-out BEFORE kick-off - means one of the teams knows BEFORE kick-off that they have to score - plus the crowd get the excitement of a penalty shoot-out in EVERY game !!

Plus commercial breaks and cheerleaders?

 

[GT49er]

If you read my post thats exactly what i am saying but reward the higher placed team in the play off system

No you're not agreeing with me - you're proposing 'ghost' goals, with one team being given a two or three goal start, depending on how far ahead on points they were. Goal starts? - that's NOT football.
My proposal, much more simple and logical, is that the team that finishes lower will actually have to beat the side that finished above them - a draw is not enough.

 

[GT49er]

Yes, we all know how a League works!

Starting a Playoff tie with only one team actually needing to go for a win is contrived nonsense though. That's just my opinion.

Yes, we all know how a league works, including me.

Nothing 'contrived' about the lower placed teams actually having to BEAT the higher placed teams to progress - a lot less 'contrived' than some of the other systems that have been suggested!

That's just my opinion.