I'd prefer seven to none. Domestic cricket has run at six for eons.

The NBL's language in that article sounds very indifferent to me.

The Hawks dire situation has put a dampener on the NBL grand final series, which starts on Friday night in front of a sell-out crowd in Cairns.

It is a dampner, but a sell out crowd always makes us smile, at least for a while..

"I also wonder if a new Television broadcast deal with every game live on a combination of FTA and FOX Sports is still possible without Brisbane?"

As if that was a realistic chance of happening anyway!

Extremely disappointed if it's only 7. The league/country has the players to expand beyond 8 and not have the quality of play diluted too much. Reducing it to 7 just means less minutes and less opportunities for players which is really disappointing .... and that's not even taking into account all of the other reasons why a 7 team competition is no good.

While only yesterday, an nbl ad on tv.
'watch the nbl on one friday nights and on ten, sunday afternoons, or buy tickets at nbl.com.au.'
Succinct.

With 7 teams should they reduce imports to 1 rather than 2? This will keep the majority of the Aussies employed...

Agreed tornado.

"it's only 3 to 4 games televised per week."

I'm sure most rounds had either 5 or 6 games.

Just because you really really really like the idea, it doesn't mean its achievable.

Tornado, the league doesn't need LESS imports. If anything, it needs more. If a few nobodies deep in the bench have to find other work, so be it. Assuming there even is an NBL next year.

With 7 teams I would keep the 2 imports with upcoming retirements like Ballinger and maybe Crawford some spots will open up. I would also increase points cap marginally as it would be a shame to see the likes of Forman, Coenraad and R Martin miss out on jobs next season.
I'm also in favor of a seabl/ trans tasman style league the following year and like the big bash league concept which would run over a shorter season but could attract bigger names

Just don't like it one bit, 7 teams, 4 teams, 2 teams, 10 teams! It's all the same if we do it all the same, Like Boti says, deficiation of insanity is doing the same thing time and again but expecting a different result.

The bigger picture is not our NBL competition with less teams, it is actually changing the whole thing and starting fresh with something sustainable...


IMHO that is!

...definition of insanity...

Don't allow naturalised imports if you want to keep the Aussie players in jobs.

Question for you Bear: How do you make it more sustainable?

Lets take a Big team here. Do you want the Wildcats who now draw on Average 10,000 people to a game to move back to an old run down venue where there are less seats for that 10,000? Where they might be lucky to sit 4000?

Basketball is a Business as much as it is a game. Teams cannot just 'start over'. They have creditors and debtors, they have deals with sponsors, organisations, ABN's etc. Even when a team goes into Voluntary administration there are still steps they need to go through, the same with Bankruptcy.

Even if teams play in Small venues and fill up every seat, you will still be paying out on your playing Roster far more than the venue can generate each night in sales for seats/ food other. So then it comes down to sponsorship. If I a team dosnt have enough sponsors then its gonna fall over. It might last a year or 2, but at the end of the day its a death sentence for the club.

There really is no way to just 'Wipe the slate clean and start again'. Sounds horribly romantic and idealistic, but finacially and realistically its next to impossible.

Thanks @Matthew, it may be idealistic, but how do we sustain the current model? Do we wait until the league is actually broke, or down to 5 teams?

Whether we are forced into change because of neglect and complacency or we move towards change in a strategic and uniformed manner, the end result may be the same.

I am not going to offer the new plan here on a forum, I will leave that to those better equipped and in a position of knowledge, but I have for some time now advocated a change is necessary, along with a leader who can actually initiate and see it through...

Yes, there would be problematic issues to take care of, but if we can put a man on the moon, can't we fix a basketball competition?

I will add this, where you may be expecting a huge drop in quality and appeal if the NBL restructures, I see opportunity for expansion and rivalry to excite the people and build a new following for the game.

It may start off slowly, but instead of going backwards, or stagnating, perhaps there is a chance to grow and get people to become passionate.

1. One game in a one team town = 10,000 spectators.

2. Four games in six team town = 20,000+ spectators.

Taking into account each team is presented in a smaller franchise in option 2, with no financial problems and has the opportunity to grow, whereas in option 1 it may have already reached its limit of growth and continues to struggle to put on a show and survive every season...

GWB, I wasnt suggesting 1 import was the way to go - I was merely asking the question.

Tornado, if anything we may see owners opt for three imports per team as clubs can often get more value for money.

Matthew, no sane plan would wipe the Perth situation clean. They might play in a rebooted league(s), but any good plan would have them retaining fans, stadium, etc.

I have posted in a couple of other threads about how a two-league strategy would work to give the NBL the best of each approach available to them.

Anon, Isaac is Oscars brother.

Isaac, 3 imports was going to be by next question. Reason being, would that lift the standard of play especially with a reduced number of teams and spots available therefore making it a better showcase for fans/tv/sponsors, etc...

I think the situation reads like this, Perth, Cairns and NZ are profitable or close to...

When the league and their clubs meet during the off season it should be THOSE teams speaking up most and trying to assist other clubs in better game night experience, how to market, sponsorship and the like. Most sponsors are region orientated so it isn't like we have had much sponsors stealing as could be prevelent in AFL.

The profitable and not the 'rich' are the clubs that need to be the most vocal or we won't have a league!

As much as I'd accept the promotion/demotion aspect of NBL and allowing a greater chance for a Newcastle, Canberra, Geelong revival in thenBL, the 5-8 teams isn't enough for the top division and hopefully something improves.

It truly breaks my heart to see what's happening and in the past 3 years I've really put my money where my mouth is but it looks like I'm only making Perth Wildcats richer!

Does anyone want a single owner of the league like Bendat or Slepoy?

I think the situation reads like this, Perth, Cairns and NZ are profitable or close to...

When the league and their clubs meet during the off season it should be THOSE teams speaking up most and trying to assist other clubs in better game night experience, how to market, sponsorship and the like. Most sponsors are region orientated so it isn't like we have had much sponsors stealing as could be prevelent in AFL.

The profitable and not the 'rich' are the clubs that need to be the most vocal or we won't have a league!

As much as I'd accept the promotion/demotion aspect of NBL and allowing a greater chance for a Newcastle, Canberra, Geelong revival in thenBL, the 5-8 teams isn't enough for the top division and hopefully something improves.

It truly breaks my heart to see what's happening and in the past 3 years I've really put my money where my mouth is but it looks like I'm only making Perth Wildcats richer!

Does anyone want a single owner of the league like Bendat or Slepoy?

I understand Cairns are set to make in excess of more the $1/2 mill profit this season. G/f and best of 3 would make that a lot more as well.

I think the size of Cairns' profit is irrelevant. The fact is they spend within their means, the extra revenue from the playoffs is just icing on the cake.

The Cats have been around for over 30 years. For most of that time they have lost money and relied on the largesse of generous owners. NOW they make money, on the back of a successful brand and a state-of-the-art venue.

Clearly what they are doing now works, and its something to be looked at and considered seriously by every other club. But I'm not sure its a business plan. 30 years of losses before you make a profit isn't going to entice investors.

The fundamental problem is that Basketball is just not that big in Australia. Back in the 90's it was the fastest rising sport in the country. Longley, Vlahov and Gaze were household names. AFL & NRL responded to the threat with new business plans and better marketing. BA responded by shoving their heads even further up their own...

I don't know if Basketball can be grown to a sustainable level in Australia, but I do know that it won't happen without some new and exciting marketing. It's not like the days when your only option was tv. Now there is the net, social media, etc.

Can iask the forum a question?... Why is wollongong in a position of voluntary administration. I am going to be one of their creditors and i thought that the owners / club had to give the NBL a 1million dollar gaurrantee so this sort of thing didnt happen. Will the NBL STEP IN and pay creditors from that bond as the NRL DID with tinkler and the newcastle knights. .

I don't think the $1 million guarantee was a requirement for the new NBL after the clubs took it back from BA.

& Dazz, I think your assessment is spot on. The NBL only exists because a lot few rich guys have thrown a lot of money into funding teams over many years. The fact that only 3 current teams are profitable suggests this situation isn't going to change any time soon.

People keep looking back to the golden years of the 90s and speculating about why basketball became the flavor of the decade then and how to do it again. I really do not think that the NBL or clubs at the time really did much to make basketball popular but rather they rode the wave of popularity the already existed. Much of that was NBA driven and the medium that created the grassroots interest was basketball cards. Every kid had them, even though most had never seen a game of basketball.

I think the $1mill surety is waived now. Ask the NBL directly. They changed the rules.

Are Townsville safe for next season?

Not as far as I know, but it seems they have secured a good deal with the TECC, so there's reason for optimism.

I wonder if there is scope for a multi-divisional competition?
The big-city power clubs Power clubs form a "premier" division.
Regional Cities form the 1st division, and hopefully they can bring back teams form Newcastle, Canberra, Geelong, Hobart, etc, and maybe entire a couple of SEABL teams.
Naturally the 1st div teams would have a much reduced salary cap, and without Perth, Adelaide, & NZ their travel costs would be greatly reduced.

To counter the reduced number of teams, they could have limited inter divisional games: Either 1~2 games per team as part of the regular season, or run a simultaneous all-divisional knockout cup.

Successful regional teams (such as Cairns) could have the option of promotion to the premier div if they could find the cash, whilst the 1st div would also provide an easier path for new teams.

@Dazz, cant see fans getting behind that league format suggestion.