So, what the ANZNBL?

Going down this path has been covered many times on this forum in the past.

Not going to challenge the concept, the model is obviously just a starting point. It has merit based on low populations of Aus and NZ, it also makes sense fincnially and it could be sustainable for sure.

Whether NBL teams would also come back down a notch and agree in joining in on such a concept, not sure they would, but maybe just the knee jerk the game needs...

Another possibility with this model is for universities to partner with the league to offer partial/full scholarships instead of player payments?

It wouldnt stop all players from going to the US but surely a few could be convinced.

eg. Adelaide uni partners with an SA based team to offer two full time scholarships, then two young guns are offered a three year deal in which they are provided a full time university course as well as possibly board and a few hundred a week for spending.

Instead of signing the guy to a 70k deal, you get him for around 20k for university fees + around 25k in rent and spending.

In regards to Anons option 3:

This could be seen as:
Starters 90k each per year (450k)
6-8 60k each per year (180k)
9-10 scholarship holders (90k)
11-15 training players ($0)
Totalling 690k

To be honest I dont think the league would even drop that much from a budget like this and would give younger guys more of a chance.

If run through winter along side a Summer super league style comp the top players would surely be happy to hang around after summer for an extra 90k

2 teams in Perth!! No. The Wildcats won't allow on that.
Way to many teams across the board in all states.
The suggestion is great in principal, but the simple answer is to expand the SEABL. It's already in place and is the premier competition under the NBL.

What about a 20 team league, take bigger markets of the SEABL and create the New National league, and then the remainder of the SEABL plus possibly some other state league teams form a national division two comp?

WA - 2 Teams: Perth + ?
SA - 2 Teams: Adelaide + ?
VIC - 3 Teams: Melbourne + Geelong + ?
TAS - 1 Team: Hobart/Launceston or united Tas team
NSW - 4 Teams: Sydney + Wollongong + Newcastle + ?
QLD - 3 Teams: Brisbane + Cairns + Townsville
ACT - 1 Team: Canberra
NT - 1 Team: Darwin
NZ - 3 Teams: Auckland + Christchurch + Wellington

Everyone plays everyone twice for 36 games?

If the league folds i'm guessing 5 of the current teams will join the ASEAN league, I doubt a stronger league will come of the league going to sh!t, the opposite will happen.

They won't join the ASEAN League, it's SEABL standard at best.

There has been noise about a 'dodo' league for a while.
Yet when the teams applying for new licences, the Marvin won that discussion.
Certainly a single entity privately run league is a possibility. However unlikely.

Fantasy possibility of each club being owned by a NBA club in the future, same setup as the AFL do

Keep taking the drugs mate.

For what it's worth, Cairns is sustainable and has been generating a profit for 3 years.

Don't worry Harry just dribbling shit, old shit just being rehashed over and over

Good on ya Blitz, believe your fantasy shit. I am sure it will come to fruition in your mind one day.

Loose change of the silver variety.

NBL even with the preseason only goes for a max 7-8 months yet they get paid fulltime salaries.

Put a league imposed cap on when the preseason can start and with the already shortened season it can be closer to 6 months and pay players accordingly.

Basketball could follow the lead of the netball and have a trans-Tasman thing happening.

Have a two tier competition. The elite number of teams, then a "reserves" league. For a town like Adelaide it would mean say the Sixers playing one week, then the "Buffaloes" playing the off week so that there was always a game at the Arena.

For teams playing in the "Reserves", you could organise a pro/rel thing happening every X years where if a team in the reserves say finished in the top 3 for 3 years, then they had the right to challenge the bottom ranked team for their place, or the right to go up to the top league. Alternatively, any team in the top league that finished in the bottom 2 for say 3 straight years have the right to drop down if they wanted too.

The salary cap would vary between the leagues, and the "Reserves" say limited to one import.

The current 8 Elite teams can't even get enough sponsorship, but you expect businesses to through money into a reserves competition to allow those teams to pay their players and travel etc.

What do you think a major sponsor of an elite level team will do if that team is relegated to reserves. I think they'll keep their money associated with a team in the top league.
I also think most of the players from a relegated team would move to a top level team - becasue thats wherer the money is.
If the Hawkes were being relgated this year then Foreman, Martin, Cooenraad, Erivn, Davidson etc would all be snapped up by the elite level teams or by team being promoted from the reserves.
Why isn't there more of a push for a second team out of WA. More than twice as many people in Perth attend NBL matches each week as they do in any other city. Wildcats have a business model that works. Would local competition make it work even better?

There's exactly the same number of games, they're just played over a shorter period. It doesn't make a difference to the number of tickets available.

"At least the Wildcats came out and said more games/longer season is required and they are the only ones who know how to make money so it is a extremely valid point.

Other clubs have made money in the past. Just because the Wildcats are profitable now does not give them an iron grip on being right.

So the answer to an unsustainable league is to add a lot MORE unsustainable teams???

Once you have a national league, a lot of your overhead costs become fixed. It's no use shaving a few hundred thou off the salary cap if your travel and overhead costs don't come down.

As discussed elsewhere, a 2nd team from NZ should be a priority. But trying to bring in a stack of NZNBL teams would simply bankrupt everyone with travel.

As discussed elsewhere, a divisional approach might work, because the majority of potential 2nd division teams would be based in the East, drastically reducing travel costs.

Keep in mind that ultimately the power teams have a lot of sway. So any proposal to downgrade the NBL is NEVER going to be considered. The Cats and Breakers will force the NBL to 6 teams before they agree to lower the salary cap

I have always hated the talk of divisions &/or conferences.

We don't have the population or even the interest to sustain a complex comp.

Look at the AFL, NRL & even the A League.... they are one comp with everyone in the same league... no confusing conferences etc. This isn't UK where a 3rd tier soccer game can still attract crowds of 10k plus with major sponsorships.

I remember when the NBL was hot. It can be again .... just need grounding followed by sustainability ... not whizbang fly by night "concepts".

Get back to basics & market this game properly. Show ads of people having a good time watching high quality athletes. Make people feel like they OWN a stake in the team through loyalty and tribality to YOUR team. This is how the top leagues are successful.

The difference is that the AFL makes squillions from TV and sponsorship, and so can afford to prop up the smaller clubs, plus the majority of power clubs are raking the money in. In the NBL I suspect only the Cats and maybe breakers are truly profitable, and that is only a recent thing. Even big city clubs with a reasonable following struggle.

The point of a 2nd division would not simply be segregation, but to make that division cheaper and therefore sustainable for the smaller markets.
The Hawks have failed both on and off the court this season. Put them in the 2nd division, with a reduced salary and overhead cap, plus without the costs of travelling to Perth, Adelaide, and NZ. Not only could they stay afloat with their smaller crowds, they would be competitive against similar teams.

As for fans not liking it, I'm not suggesting that Cairns be FORCED into the 2nd tier. But ask fans of the Crocs and Hawks whether they would prefer their team folds or play in the 2nd tier.
Then ask fans in Newcastle, Canberra, Gold Coast, Geelong, Launceston and Hobart if they would like to have their NBL teams back playing in the 2nd tier.

A two tier competition sounds interesting to me, but I can't help thinking it would end up being pretty much SEABL and NBL, with not too much chance that a team can get up into the NBL from the second tier.

I could be wrong however, and I am not totally against the idea if it was thought through and introduced after some seriously careful and concise due dilligence, also some heavy marketing pre-season.

What do we think it would look like? Anyone prepared to have a go, or are there too many of us against this concept? I suspect current NBL power team owners wouldn't be keen...

I don't think pro/rel works for points already outlined (player movement, uncertainty for fans), but tiers could work. I have my half-baked suggestion here.

Shaving $x00k from each of the base team's costs through salary cap would have more of an impact than lowering travel costs. No idea what they *do* budget, but even allowing $10k per away game for a team means you have to knock off 10 games just to save yourself $100k.

$10k / 15 players and staff = $666 each to cover return flight, accommodation, van hire and per diem. Accounting for some sort of flight and accommodation provider sponsorship, that shouldn't be miles off?

Tweaking the salary cap for the smaller teams but giving the big teams an outlet to go bananas has to be the way if we don't want to keep losing teams but still provide a good number of opportunities to our players.

The anon talking about better use of the year is right. Makes sense to make more money from the players you're already paying. The compression of the season only really works for attracting imports.