Hoops

BA planning second tier under NBL

Agreed Paul - Im not wanting to be negative on any idaes people are putting out there - just giving an opinion on them from a different perspective. Im sure my ideas are full of holes too, anything that gets a new slant on the sports problems and possible solutions is good IMO. Lets hope Larry is looking outside the square and taking in all options before any hard and fast decsions are made

That's probably true Statsman, but it is important to throw as many ideas around as possible.

I just hope BA are ding that before they rush headlong into upgrading state league/ABA comps.

The idea is to link grassroots with the elite level, but I think the ABA clubs have enough issues connecting with their junior ranks as it is, and I dont see changing the nature of the ABA comps helping the top level competition in any way.

Love the ideas Paul, for me the idea of a 'superleague' that is concentrated both in talent and time frame is very appealling and would give the players in the NBL something to aspire too and also bring some overseas players back to play at home at an elite level. It would also be easier to market to the general public and in turn build awareness of the sport.

Isaac - while the idea of relegation/promotion would be awesome I cant it working. How you would have say the Blaze winning the NBL and going from a salary cap of say 400k and immediately jump up to a cap of say 1.5mil? Same goes in the other direction, how many people would stay on at the Sixers (players as well as other staff) if their salarys were cut by 60% if the finished bottom?

And yes, I like the idea of an Elite team called South Queensland or something that represents the same, which is linked to GOld Coast and Brisbane in the NBL.

My draft proposal has teams from Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne X2, Geelong, Hobart, Wollongong, Sydney (prob West), Brisbane, Gold Coast, Cairns, Townsville and two of Darwin, Newcastle and Canberra - whatever fits.

It is a very similar makeup to the NBL in it's heyday. The idea is to keep clubs alive and revive towns that did have NBL teams but in a more sustainable competition than they were in previously.

I guess the best way to explain it is a 1 ½ tier league. It is a continuation of the current NBL, expanded to 12-14 teams. The an 8 team league is put on top – at a different time of year - that only takes the very best players.

So the standard is still good (slightly below the 2008 level), and the league is still the NBL with mostly the same teams.

Sorry, not quite getting this. Would the 2nd tier "NBL" have teams from the major cities in them too? Or would it just be Cairns, Townsville, GC, Newcastle, West Sydney, Wollongong, Canberra, Bendigo, Ballarat, Geelong, Hobart, Mt Gambier, Darwin and Freo?

If this is the case, I can't see 1000 people, let alone 2500 people turning up in the 'Gong to see Wollongong V Hobart. If I'm a Hawks fan, I would be majorly pissed that my team is in the 2nd tier, in a B-grade product, and probably wouldn't be all that interested.

And what TV network would be interested in that?

Understand, I'm not being critical of the idea, in fact I think it's awesome, I just can't see it working in this country, where basketball cannot support it's top tier right now.

Yeah agreed with a capital city focus, but not make it 100% about the capital city. Sure the teams would be based in Perth/Adelaide/Melbourne/Sydney and Brissy (although a couple ecould be played on GC) but to garner a braod supporter base you need to embrace the other teams in that region. IMO having a Brissy based superleague team named the Brisbane whatevers and put up on a pedestal as the elite BRISBANE team and marketted to Brissy people only will alienate a lot of potential fan on the GC (and even Suny coast) who wouuld be interested. Have the team based in Brissy but clearly drawing on the clubs around it and it could really be seen as a united team to take on the other big citys.

Statman, your first point is exactly what I am saying.

The regional teams are perfect for the NBL, but an elite league should have a captial city focus, with the possible exception of a Nth Qld team.

And definitely links between NBL and elite league clubs, even if not hard and fast links, is a good way to move forward and help development of young players.

Paul, I actually think that if its done properly, having regional teams can help the 'superleague' rather than hinder it

say in SE QLD we have teh Blaze and a Brisbane Bullets team in the NBL, they would be rivals for the NBL and then the best players from each team could combine (with added O/S based players if available) to for a united SE Qld team for the Superleague. If marketed correctly this could capture a broad supporter base from both Brisbane and the GC.

Same could be done for Cairns/Townsville, West Syd/Woolongong/Canberra, Melb/Ballarat?, Adelaide/My Gambier?, Perth/Fremantle?. Then throw in NZ based teama and we have a 6 yeam super league taht could play 20 rounds + finals. 2 games a week and we are done in 3 months. Aim for big TV exposure - showcasing the best players we have and maybe it could work.

With regards to the NBL teams having to reduce their cost bases and therefore prices they charge, this has to have help from the league. Whether it be from distributing cash from any TV rights deals done for the superleague or other means, something needs to be done. Marketting is the obvious area where a centralised body can take on the lion share of costs and responsibilities and allow the teams to run their own local promotion at a greatly reduced cost. Could there be something also done on a national level with things like caterring? Say the league signs up Fosters to a league wide deal to provide game night requirements. This could allow for cost reductions by giving the league greater buying poer and ability to get a better deal, in turn saving all the clubs some money? Surey there are lots of oher areas where the league could look after things as a centraised body - freeing up the clubs individual resources.

Some good points Statman. NBL clubs charge too much as it is now, so if it were a 1 1/2 tier league they would have to reduce them.

As for the top tier, the capital city focus will significantly increase sponsorship and broadcasting opportunities.

Having regional teams greatly reduces the potential of the top tier competition to become a highly successful league.

Interesting ideas being thrown about and a couple of my thoughts as I see it.

Isaac - you have said that places like Cairns probably wouldnt lose sponsorship/support. Id agree with taht provided the prices are substantially dropped. I almost grabbed a box this year with the Blaze (settled on Gold Season tickets @ $50 per game)but if the Blaze were not in the Elite comp there is no way known I would consider coughing up anywhere near what they are asking for their tickets. I know for a fact that ther ae a lot of other supporters this year who would say the same thing. So they may not lose supprter/sponsor numbers but IMO the revenue from these people would be dramatically reduced

Also you mentioned one of the issues we have is the vast gap between the rich teams (Tigers, Breakers, Dragons) and the others. Is this because these clubs are so well run and massively profitable? Or is it more that their rich owners are happy to burn significant ammounts of money to try and win. Im sure its more the later and there is no way this is sustainable long term. Eddy Groves is the perfect example of how it can all go wrong - and fast if we are reliant on 'rich benefactors'. We need to make the league profitable and ALL teams sustainable before we even think of upping our cost base.

Important to remember it is not a regional teams comp. It is still the NBL, with mostly current NBL clubs ie a mix of regional and captial city teams.

This comp would receive tv coverage as it is not competing with the elite competition. It is on for four months and satifies the basketball audience in Australia with good quality competition.

That audience is enough to make clubs that are spending $300-400K on players sustainable.

There would be some players in the SEABL who would probably be getting $30-40k a year at the moment.
I thinbk if they are looking at a feeder league that they should perhaps look at a second team from each NBL club that is made up of the best players in their designated region. Similar to what the Buffaloes were a while back.
Adelaide 36ers would have the Adelaide 09ers who consisted of the elite of the SBL who would play before the 36ers, Melbourne Tigers would have the Melbourne Cubs consisting of O'Hea, Sturt, etc and if there were two teams in one state then the NBL would need to divide the local teams up between say East coast and West coast for example. Players can there come out to NBL games to watch both the feeder team and their NBL team.
The main factor again would be sponsorship and costs involved.
I don't know how you would go signing an American or decent Australian (dual citizen) for a whole 12 months stopping them from playing in other leagues in the off season. You would need to be paying them BIG dollars to do that and I don't know how many clubs abroad would want to pay to get them released for 2 or 3 months unless they were very VERY good.

Well, if Adelaide played in the elite league and had an affiliate in the NBL, Coops could get $50K for the elite season, and $40K for the NBL season.

Something similar to Soccer players. Sounds good for the top-tier players, could increase the size of contract they get and if the team worked hard to sell them, some profit could be had. Might not work for lower players, why would Fitz bust his hump to sell Coops when he could get more money selling 'Tez.

Nutwork, my vision would be that Ballinger, for example, would get $200k in the elite league and $50K in the NBL.

Having teams playing in competitions that suit their budgets means that the players get an opportunity to increase their income, while clubs get the chance to achieve sustainability.

In your scenario Isaac isn't he then playing all year round for $200k instead of $200k for the sixers & $40k in NZ or Asia or Sth America with a total of $240k?

Basically, the plan is for an 8 team elite league, with 6 or 7 Aus teams from major centres, that also has obligation in its licence for young player devt.

The NBL would be a 12-14 team league with Australia’s best players with the exception of Boomers squad members/players good enough to pick up overseas deals after the elite league season etc.

Each league would run for just over 4 months at separate times of year, with the NBL proposed to run Autumn-Winter, and the Elite league Spring-Summer.

This would mean opportunities for approx 140-150 Australian players to play at a good or very good standard. NBL (second tier) salary cap is proposed at approx $400K (it could be $300K to start with if more viable initially), with all wages between $30-$50K for the 4 month season.

Elite league could have a minimum wage of $40K, meaning a player coming out of the AIS could secure NBL and elite league contracts to the value of $70K straight off the bat. They also get the chance to play minutes in a decent standard comp (NBL) and learn from training each day with Australia/NZ’s best players at their elite club.

A player like Nathan Herbert can pick up $60K in the elite league (as he prob does now in NBL) and $40K in the NBL and make a good living.

While the top tier league has regional centre teams, it will not reach the heights that are possible for the sport in terms of publicity and media. And with only one genuine professional league, players out of the AIS and college will mostly not be able to secure places and will be lost before they have reached anywhere near their peak.

Playing in the ABA is not seen as a career path by many. And convincing a broadcaster to pick up an ABA second tier league would be much more difficult than a broadcaster continuing their coverage of an NBL that now has an elite comp on top of it, played at a separate time of year.

Like the idea of an Oceania League if it could be setup

So, in a nutshell:

"Superleague": Nationally run, say 10 or so teams.
"National League" Like the B's, but runs in the Superleague off season. Teams may be linked to a Superleague team (eg Adelaide 36ers play SL, Adelaide Pirates plays National league and feed to Sixers)
"State League": As it the current case with the current 10 teams.

Can't really see it working too well with a staggered comp. The aim seems to be to deepen the number of players, so I would be tempted to run the second tier in line with the main league timing. The problem with a national second tier comp. would be with travel and thus attracting sponsorship. You only need to look at Port Power/Port Magpies to see how hard it is to manage.

Good idea, but I would say strengthen the state leagues to close the gap between the ABL and the NBL rather than add a layer between them.

Interesting. Given the NBL's well documented history of failing to secure long term free to air rights / adequate pay TV coverage, do you believe the second tier in the above system would prove financially sustainable? I'd assume the level of sponsorship would also be diminished.

I like the idea, but I'm just not sure the basketball pie is big enough to make it work. I understand we're looking down the track and all, but still.

Then again, I suppose the likely reduced media coverage would be offset by lower second tier salary caps etc. to some extent.