I don't disagree but there are 12 teams in the league this year, and they're adding another next season. Even then, six teams in the finals might be more reasonable.

Is that you 2002

For the Dragons or Adelaide to have a chance to get in the finals in pretty poor.

You should have to split almost half-half to finish the finals. ATLEAST. It would be more interesting if...

a) Grand final 3 games only (each game would be more valuable)

b) Top 6 (/13)

c) Fairer salary cap. It's boring having the same teams dominating each year time. It's all because the NBL lets Sydney, Brisbane etc. buy who they want and the other teams have to abide by the rules.

Especially for Sydney.

d) More time between regular season-finals- more build up

This would get more crowd, more media coverage, more interest and a better league.

One other thing...

To make the competition more interesting, teams that came last or have for a couple of years in a row being last, then they could get one extra player that isn't under the salary cap. That may be a European or a 10 point player.

Instant improvement, each year the league changes and would be more interesting. One player won't massivley change the ways for a team but it will help to get many more wins.

I don't think mediocrity is being rewarded if the 8th team on the ladder make it to the playoffs? So what if the 36ers make it to the playoffs. For the first half of the season they have had a poor win/loss ratio but with huge improvements in the second half, what makes them any worse than teams who have done well up til now and not so well in the second half? For any team to make top 8 from below that position means other teams currently in top 8 have to drop down to make room. To scrape into the top 8 means you really have your work cut out for you to progress further from there. Any team that can come from 7th or 8th to win the championship or even make the grand final, has worked their butts off to get there. Regardless of whether its in the regular season or post regular season. The top 8 format is designed to fit the number of teams in the league into the time frame of the season. Its a fair system that fans of the 8 teams all get the privilege of seeing their team play atleast one playoff game and hence keep their interest level up. Its not likely that any team other than the best will win in the end.

BTW, its 8 out of 12 not 11.

Yeah i think the top 6 would be much better.

I think someone needs to make it clear that there's 12 teams and not 11 this season...

Top 6 IMO would be a lot better. To reward a team of making the playoffs with a below 40% win loss ratio is ridiculous!
It's purely a money making thing for clubs and the NBL. More playoff games = more Moo-larrrrr!!!

123abc,

I think your first point (as with everyone else) about too many teams in finals is valid.

Your idea about the bottom team getting an extra player above the salary cap I am not so sure about. Would this not encourage the bottom 2 or 3 teams towards the end of the season to throw games to finish last for next year. There sould be no reward for finishing last surely. Also would that club be able to afford this extra import? Since they are bottom you wouldn't think they would be making bank from huge crowds? Sure good idea in theory to help the bottom team out in some way shape or form, i don't know how, but as I said rewarding bottom place...

I actually think more teams in the finals is better.

To say that teams "dont try as hard" is stupid, yes, teams may finish 8th, but it is very hard to win a championship from there, like the AFL, teams focus on the top 4.

Now people may say that that is reason enough to only have top 4/top 6 but isnt the more NBL the better, If the sixers finish 6th or 7th this season and get a home finals game (Probably doesnt happen but anyway) wouldnt you want to go see it?

Also, some teams peak at the end of the season, just because they had a slump through part of the season, if they can beat the top teams at the end of the season then they have proven to be the best team and isnt that who the championship is supposed to go to?

Proving you are the best team=Consistency...

Beating the best team at the end of the season...where they really playing their best team??

Beating the best team in a 3 game series after making it through the first round and then the semis...well that would be a different story..however the point is if you get in with a losing percentage, do you really deserve to be there??