Would you support the plan?

This debate is now closed.

Following the collapse of ITV digital, football League bosses are meeting to discuss ways to help out the smaller clubs on the brink of financial ruin.

And one of the ideas on the table is to bring back the days when the bottom two divisions were divided geographically.

The Third Divisions North and South were scrapped in 1958, when the Fourth division was created.

But pitting teams against more local competition increases the amount of derby matches, drawing bigger crowds and increasing revenue.

And cash-strapped clubs would also be spared the expense of time-consuming trips to clubs at the other end of the country.

Is it time to return to a regional set-up?

Not keen on a regional split - but why not three separate parallel divisions formed from a pool of current Second Div, Third Div and Conference teams. Top team in each new division to get promotion to First Division with the three runners up and fourth from bottom of Div One in a four-team play-off to secure the remaining Div One place.

EVERY team would then have a chance each season of getting into Div One. The way things are headed at the moment, football will stagnate into an elite on the one hand and a wilderness of cash strapped, part time clubs with no realisable ambitions.
Mike, England

A few points to raise here. To the chap in Canada, I don't think you realise how poor these clubs are. They survive on gates of a few thousand, and towards the lower end, some of the players may only be part time players, so midweek games means taking time off work if the journey is long.

And what about the travelling fans. I have had too many trips getting back in the early hours of the morning, and going to work the next day. Kim Baker, what are you on, rich southern clubs? The north south divide doesn't exist in football (Manchester United, the richest club in the world).

My team, QPR, were in more debt than anyone. And to Dave Dennis, it would be a bit of a squeeze for Brentford to share with QPR, seeing as Wasps were, and now Fulham are tenants.
KC, UK

In regard to Glenn's point, how sensible is it for, say, Exeter to play Plymouth on a wet Tuesday in November?
John Chapoman, Brussels

To the examples of travelling - yes you, Gawain from Canada. You say that England can be done in "five hours" - sure it can, if we had roads like yours. You CAN travel from, let's say, Portsmouth to Carlise in five hours - if you travel at 1.00am, and are willing to lose your licence by exceding speeds of 100mph.
Ed K, UK

I see no value whatsoever in forming separate regional leagues. This would just create more administration. I believe that we should drop the Third Division from the professional league altogether.
Michael Crawley, Dubai

I disagree. I am a Plymouth Argyle fan and we don't want to play the likes of Exeter and Torquay. We fought to get promoted and earned the right to play in a higher league against better class teams.
Mark Beattie, Ireland

I support this idea as it will reduce the running costs of these clubs. It worked well until 1958 and still works well in countries like Spain and Italy. It would increase competition as the number of local derbies would grow. It would be more interesting watching Harlepool play Barnsley for example, than Torquay.
Ron Murray, England

I am an Exeter fan and think regionalisation is a nonsense. It's quicker to get to Bury than it is to Cambridge or Boston and I'd far rather go to somewhere like York than Dagenham. Long away trips are part of the culture in the West Country, so please don't speak on our behalf.
Geoff, UK

As an exiled Plymouth Argyle fan, I would not support a regional split in the lower leagues. It's all very well for those fans who live in the area of their club, but then they get all the home games anyway.

But what about those who follow their team from afar? Away games across the country may be the only chance they get to see their team.
Chris, London, England

Great idea. It's a sad reflection on England and sport that a country this tiny has to regionalise but if it saves just Carlise and Plymouth a few quid then it needs to be done.
Mark, England

Anything that will keep the smaller clubs in business has to be seen as a good idea, even if regionalisation was only a temporary measure. The clubs in the current Second and Third Divisions very often provide the future stars of the national team. As for the idea that clubs in the North would lose out financially due to TV rights, what's wrong with splitting the money evenly and different games being shown for different regions?
James Butler, UK

Leave things the way they are. Trying to get back to the south coast from Port Vale on a Wednesday night, or Swindon on Boxing Day, or even Doncaster on a Saturday adds to the fun.
Steve, USA

I think it's a good idea - would you want to spend 12 hours on a coach just to watch Torquay v Carlisle? The only difficulty would be figuring out the promotion/relegation situation.
Simon, UK

If it was right to split into Divs south and north, then why did we change to Divs Two, Three and Four? I have a friend who is a long standing Walsall fan who remembers that they played in both the north and south divisions and found it unsatisfactory.

If you have three divs, north south and Midlands, and one from each go up, who gets relegated - the worst finisher from each area? Leave it alone and it will sort itself out, I believe the current problems are being talked up by a few of the bigger clubs seeking to drive a wedge between haves and have nots - again.
John, Burnley fan, England

Absolutely, as long as there is sufficient contact between the regions to assure some parity between the groups.
Tom Roberts, USA (Former UK resident)

This is typical of the nonsense dreamt up by the cretins who run football. You cannot go forward by going back. The Conference is full of teams which could easily improve the league and are run profitably.
Steve, England

Great idea. It's a sad reflection on England and sport that a country this tiny has to regionalise, but if it saves just Carlisle and Plymouth a few quid then it needs to be done.

It's not the most important thing they need to discuss though. The whole league set up is prehistoric and 46 games in each division alone is ridiculous.

How about five divisions, 18, 18, 20, 20 and 20. With the bottom two being a north and south. It would create interest and competition right up until the end.
Mark, England

I support the idea of regionalising Divisions Two and Three. More localised games could only result in larger attendances, meaning more gate revenue for the smaller clubs.
Steven Yates, England

For a country that can be done by bus in five hours, this is laughable. Just how much does renting a coach cost in England anyway?
Gawain, Canada

I think it would be a great idea to recreate the Third Division North, but only as long as one of the League's most famous clubs - Accrington Stanley - are allowed to join.
Philip Carruthers, Brazil

I think it is a fantastic idea and will stimulate interest and much-needed finances for the lower divisions. Additionally, it will mean less travelling for teams and fans, and mean more derby games.
Jon E, England

Yes, with the cash-strapped lower divisions a three-way split between north, south and midlands, with the winner from each going up to the First Division, should replace Divs Two and Three and the Conference.

Any set-up should include the Conference sides as they should not have to face the disadvantages of national travel while the League clubs are allowed local derbies.
David Myles, UK

Yes, that would be a good idea to save money. However, I would like to see the 'big' money transfers be taxed (10%?) into a pot to be divided up equally by all clubs.
David, England

Whilst I would support regional leagues in principle, there are a couple of issues that would need to be addressed. Firstly, assurances would need to be made to ensure that the southern media bias does not lead to the lion's share of the money, promotion prospects and TV coverage going to the southern teams.

Secondly, what about those teams that currently play each other in derby matches twice a season, but end up in different regions. In these cases (probably in the midlands somewhere) the number of derbies would be halved.
Tony Bastin, Leeds, UK

No - a regional split will result in a set of rich southern clubs and the northern divisions reduced to one division as smaller clubs go to the wall.
Kim Baker, England

I believe this to be a bad idea. The increases on attendances and revenues would be minimal. I have recently returned from America, where they were astounded by the way our transfer system worked, it is the same in baseball, which is currently losing fans, because of the dominance of one financially well-backed club.

In England we have more than one of these teams, but surely the model should be based on American football, where the teams at the bottom get given more money by the league than the teams at the top, and this is scaled throughout the divisions.

This would reduce the problems and make the leagues more competitive, there would still be benefits to the bigger clubs. It is not total equality, but it will help smaller clubs.
Adam, England

As a Bradford City fan I would not want any other team or its fans to go through a summer like we have. Regionalisation is the answer, derby games generally produce better crowds. How sensible is it for, say, Exeter to play Carlisle on a wet Tuesday in November.
Glen, UK

Not only should Divs Two and Three be regionalised but local clubs should groundshare, eg QPR and Brentford.
Dave Dennis, England

Why not? The league is split in rugby. A sport which has suffered a fair amount of financial difficulty. If splitting the League means clubs find it easier to survive, then it is the only alternative.

The League can always be changed back once the current financial storm blows over. Survival of the game is the most important issue, at whatever level it is.
Stuart Field, UK

It's not regionalism per se that will help clubs, but turning semi-professional. Salaries are always going to be the number one expense of any organisation. A balance of cutting costs and increasing revenue through a more exciting competitive format is the road clubs need to follow now.
Mark Colburn, UK

I reckon that this will spoil the game of football even more. Fair enough, smaller clubs may be able to make more money but teams still need to play against opposition in different parts of the country, as styles of play may be different down South than in the North so teams would be inexperienced if they get promoted.
Jamie Pell, Middlesbrough, England

About time too! Just ask Carlisle and Torquay/Exeter fans about away trips. Then Rangers and Celtic can join the Third Division North!
Neil, UK