IF the Rangers and Celtic football club of Glasgow decided to be part of a bigger league, an expanding English Premier League, would they stay in the Scottish Premiership?

Would they continue to dominate their "home" league just as they have done since 1890-91 with Rangers winning 55 titles and Celtic claiming 52, including the most recent under the stewardship of Australian Ange Postecoglou?

What sort of teams would they field in the Scottish Premiership while working their best line-ups against the English and Welsh clubs in the EPL? There would be no limitations to recruiting, salaries and rules on dropping back players from the EPL would there?

Rangers and Celtic "leaving" Scotland for the EPL has been well-roasted chestnut of British football for the past 20 years.

Celtic great Martin O'Neil entered the most recent debate on the Scottish powerhouses being part of a Super EPL saying: "The sceptics say, 'Why do it?' I'm talking about enhancement."

The Port Adelaide Football Club answered the South Australian version of the Scottish-EPL question in 1990 when it decided the time had come to "enhance" its standing by playing in the best competition in Australia, not that of South Australia.

And since 1990 we have been arguing about Port Adelaide's presence in the SANFL, the competition it joined as a foundation club in 1877 when it formed the oldest league competition in Australian football.

In 1990, Port Adelaide was threatened with eviction from the SANFL for daring to embrace the VFL's vision for an expanding national football competition known today as the AFL.

In 1993-1994, Port Adelaide was part of a vigorous bidding process for the second SA-based AFL licence. The SANFL guidelines for the licence declared the successful applicant would leave the State league so that it could re-establish an eight-team competition without the weekly bye.

In 1997, Port Adelaide entered the AFL - and the SA Football Commission dictated that there be two separate entities: One Port Adelaide in the AFL; another Port Adelaide in the SANFL. The two were not to share Alberton Oval as a training venue. The two were not to sell merchandise at the same vending point. Rarely has there been such folly in South Australian football.

In 2012, the "One Club" reunification of the Port Adelaide Football Club was accepted by all.

In 2014, with the release of the AFL licences from SANFL hands, Port Adelaide won the right to keep all its AFL-listed players at Alberton rather than farm them across the SANFL through an annual mini-draft.

And ever since - with Port Adelaide stripped of recruiting zones on the LeFevre and Eyre peninsulas and denied its junior teams - there has been a seemingly endless debate on how Port Adelaide stocks its SANFL team. The AFL list does not work for two teams in two leagues when there is a high injury count.

Port Adelaide's presence in the SANFL - and living up to the traditions established from 1877 as the league's most-successful team - is a difficult topic of debate and, generally, it is difficult full stop. As club president David Koch said a year ago at an SA Press Club lunch, "Being a foundation member of the SANFL - and a big contributor to its development - we want to stay in the SANFL ...

"But it (the league) makes it very hard for us - very hard," Koch added.

"You do feel more than a little unwanted when you don't get invited to put a women's team in the local competition.

"(And) when the SANFL goes out on a limb - unlike any other second-tier competition - with its own rules (for game play) that differ from the AFL's we finish up with our players playing under one set of rules (in the SANFL) and another in the AFL.

"That's a massive disadvantage to the two (South Australian) AFL clubs.

"We'd love to stay in the SANFL, but if we're disadvantaged too much further, you say to yourself, 'Well, why?'"

Port Adelaide chief executive Matthew Richardson last week made it known - in his note to members - that the why question is still on the agenda at Alberton.

"The rules under which the AFL clubs compete in the SANFL mean our competitiveness is significantly impacted by the availability of AFL listed players. This is not a new issue, but has become more acute due to AFL list sizes (reduced from 45 to 42) and the age profile of our list in recent years.

That said, if we have a healthy list, we should be highly competitive at SANFL level.

We’ve made it clear that Port Adelaide values its participation in the SANFL. We are a foundation club with a history of success pre-dating the SANFL, back to 1870.

We need to ensure we are participating in a competition that best develops our players for our AFL team, and gives us a chance to win and respect our legacy.

Whatever structure we exist under it must not compromise our ability to win premierships and develop players.

We understand that this is a complex, multi-faceted issue. There is a high-performance football component, but also a broader club issue as to what Port Adelaide represents at SANFL level.

Whether the current SANFL model genuinely allows for this is an important strategic topic we are exploring at board level."

Matthew Richardson

Port Adelaide Football Club chief executive

Port Adelaide in the SANFL has been a difficult theme since 1990. Today, more than ever before, it seems too difficult to live in two leagues.

The "complex, multi-faceted" points noted by Richardson include how the AFL would establish a second-tier national reserves competition. Would recruiting zones return for all AFL clubs? How does the AFL national draft avoid being compromised by these recruiting zones and the potential academy teams they would generate? Does the "pathway" concept established with the "NGA" (next generation academy system) live on?

But there is no doubt that keeping an AFL club's players together in one program - rather than spread across differing competitions such as the VFL, SANFL and WAFL - has increasing merit. Actually, it always has had merit. Look back to 1979 when the SANFL wanted Port Adelaide and Central District to play their top-of-the-table clash at Football Park as part of a double-header at headquarters at West Lakes - with the less attractive North Adelaide-West Torrens clash as the curtain-raiser (rather than as a stand-alone game at Football Park the next day).

Central District rejected the idea arguing it did not want its reserves team denied a match at Football Park. Club boss Kris Grant said: "We want our club to stick together. We have a training list of 30 players and we don't like the idea of half our players going somewhere else when the league side is playing."

Imagine one Port Adelaide, playing under the auspices and rules of one governing body - the AFL.

One Port Adelaide with ... one big playing squad, one song ... one jumper.

And this is where it gets emotional for Port Adelaide. That black-and-white jumper of 1902 as the Showdown jumper in the AFL and AFL reserves - and even the AFLW - has more and more merit.

On that note ... it is time to watch a Scottish Premier League match featuring Celtic.