"He has mentioned agendas a lot lately. Might need to spend some time reflecting on his own."

+1

Dragons already have modern branding and fans plus a championship to work with. If Cowan and co. have the cash and look sustainable they are the obvious option in my opinion.

Dragons to mix games up between State Centre and Hisense Arena. Many meetings taking place. The Melbourne rivalry will be reborn. Does this mean United goes back to the Tigers name?

Anon 506073 - I also agree!

The Dragons potentially coming back aside (and I would love to see this happen because goodness the league needs something to spark some sort or revival), I just want to know what is Boti's issue with Nick Marvin? OK, he doesn't have to be his biggest fan, but I don't get the little digs at him all the time. He's one of the very few people in the NBL that has a clue and has been brilliant for the Wildcats.

Marvin may have resigned as the chair of CEO.

If you did you would tell us.

Cowan has the money, the issue was the burn rate when he had the Dragons.

This is very exciting !! Donta Smith to return !!? :) :)

The South Dragons brand was amazing.

IMO, the best brand we've ever had. Even better than the Wildcats.

Momentum builds. Return of the Dragon. Could in itself lead to return of the Tiger.

Ingles has tweeted about the rumour. Utd have to become the Tigers again.

I feel that the NBL has suffered in the past from too many unstable and fly-by-night teams.
Teams, merging, moving, folding, renamed and re-emerging, only to fold again. That doesn't create fan loyalty and doesn’t help the overall credibility of the league.
IMHO the last thing they need is another rash of expansion teams.

I personally think that getting the Brisbane Bullets back should be a priority, but they have to ensure that it is financially viable. Which in the NBL means they need somebody with deep pockets, or an exceptionally generous long-term sponsor.

I don’t know anywhere near enough about Victorian basketball to know whether a 2nd team is a great idea. The potential for so-called "cross-town" rivalry is always touted, but such things take a long time to develop properly. There’s no doubt that the constant folding/merging of teams has hurt the NBL in Melbourne, so they need to make sure than any “new” (or returning) teams is here for the long haul.
Again, I don’t know much about the reasons behind Cowan folding the Dragons after they won in 2009, but it’s not a good look. Surely the NBL would want a rock-solid guarantee of longevity before they open that door again.

Personally I would like to see the Newcastle Falcons return. THE foundation club of the NBL, they are historically significant, and I fondly recall some great games against them. But same reservations apply.

Whenever a Perth team is successful, (Eagles, Wildcats, Glory) talk inevitably turns to a 2nd, Fremantle based team.
There is a natural basis for this. Perth is somewhat unique in that it was not founded as a port. The port city is Fremantle, and for the 1st hundred years or so they grew as two seperate cities joined by highways and separated by bush. Fremantle remains a focal point with a distinct identity. Furthermore the Perth metropolitan area is effectively split in two by the Swan River, leading to somewhat of a “cultural” separation between North and South. Hence there is a logical basis for an SOR team based at Fremantle.
That said, it costs a lot of money to run a successful NBL team in WA. It’s no secret that The Wildcats success has depended on the largesse of local squillionaires.
Also, unlike when the Dockers were formed, I'm not sure that there’s enough distinct “heritage”/support to bolster a Freo team. It’s as well to remember that when work began on the Dockers, The Eagles were still a very young club, and a lot of people still clung to their WAFL affiliations and/or were happy to switch allegiance. A new NBL team in WA would face 30 years of entrenched Wildcats support.

The cross-town rivalries have developed quickly in the past, but a big part of that has been the involvement of the Tigers, who fans from the boom times seem to love or hate (although that had hatred had dropped away for many in recent years).

It would be interesting to see if it could get any traction with two teams few people care about in the first place?

That's the question, how polarising are Melbourne UNITED? How big is their supporter base, and how big is the alternate base of those who love Basketball but hate MU?

And its not a matter of fly-by-night support. No doubt if The Dragons could repeat their success they'd draw some crowds but how much is there for the long-haul.

Sorry for another AFL example, but in the West the MEDIA constantly hypes the so-called "Western Derby." But the fact is that MOST fans don't buy into it, especially from The Eagles side. Rivalries with teams like Sydney, Essendon, and Collingwood assume a much higher profile.

I'm no expert on Victorian BBL. If there is genuine long-term support for another team, then that is fantastic news for the NBL. (With only 8 teams, and some of those looking shaky, the NBL is a couple of steps away from either collapsing or becoming a joke.)
Logically, Melbourne has the population, the demographics, and the money to support at least two teams. But they can't afford any more short-lived fiascos.

A lot of good questions. I think United has a tiny passionate fanbase, I doubt the anti-United base would be that big unless the Tigers were back in the league, and how much draw do the Dragons have given they struggled for crowds in their time in the league?

"I personally think that getting the Brisbane Bullets back should be a priority, but they have to ensure that it is financially viable."

It isn't. Some would suggest that's why Neill 'resigned'. The NBL currently will own the club and if it works out to be viable they will on sell it.
Again as many others have said why would United have to rename seeing as the NBL has approved the name change supposedly.

And that's the problem isn't it.
Running a successful NBL program is expensive, and unless you can guarantee massive crowds, you need either a long-suffering owner or sponsor, with DEEP pockets.

Again as many others have said why would United have to rename seeing as the NBL has approved the name change supposedly.

Normally with the NBL (at least under the old NBL) the licence to operate was tied specifically to a name. I doubt that has changed at all. So I would expect that the NBL did have to approve the name change.

Apparently the licenses are linked to a location and not a name so the NBL didn't have to approve the change. That's something that should definitely be looked at.

Yes I forgot the location bit Paul. I still think the name is part of the deal with the NBL. When applying for a licence they used to look at name, logo, colours etc as part of the assessment process. Or maybe the current NBL don't care any more. ;)

The statements at the time of the United change said it was only location.

Sorry there no invention here at all anonymous. I was talking about the process of applying for a licence not current owners.

Your lack of understanding of the process is abundant however.

Thanks Paul for the info.