Hoops

Big V Restructure

@HO yeah, me too ... and the ones I know of are good people, a bit surprised given that list BV is not more proactive around some of these issues.

Nick Honey has only just take over from Wayne Bird in the Big Chair, so will be interesting to see what eventuates over the next little while ...

@HO for your enlightenment ...

http://www.basketballvictoria.com.au/index.php?id=64

ooops make that "with the men's recruits"

@HO disappointed at your lack of resolve to move into politics ... LOL ...

But I agree with you on the lack of vision - no one wants to paint the picture do they.

^^Anon I can assure you that with a WNBL team Bulleen do not have money to splash around on Big V.

Not sure how it's happening the men's recruits, must be some other magic being weaved there.

@HO ... nice work man ... no doubt many people will try and pick holes in your plan, but at least you have come up with a pretty solid basic structure.

My only question/comment would be the move of MMBL to a weekend comp ... I have heard that one of the attractions of MMBL to some players is that it is mid week so does not interfere with their busy weekend party schedule. But that's just a minor point.

What are you running for president of BV ?

Oh and in your spare time, perhaps a tilt at PM ?????

^Anon yes and no ... SEABL still has it's own board as far as I am aware ...

The SEABL Chairman commented in Dec 2012 that a full transition plan would be in place in around 3 - 6 months.

Of course, key elements of SEABL will carry forward to the new competition ... what changes, who knows, happy to just wait and see.

^Anon all associations in Victoria that run the major competitions are "free wheeling" entities run by member clubs - SEABL, Big V, MMBL, VJBL.

There was a lot of discussion earlier in the thread about this along the lines of BV becoming an overall controlling entity rather than a passive peak body.

No SEABL is not yet the UPL - UPL is a generic name for a new competition that will sit under NBL/WNBL. The first step was to break off D-League and merge it back to state competitions, which has happened.

SEABL has already voted to dissolve itself - the next step is the transition to a new competition, but that is still in progress because SEABL, BA and maybe other parties are still working out how this new competition will be structured.

p.s. really enjoying this thread, one of the more constructive threads I have seen on hoops for a while ... good work all ...

@TW well surely it shouldn't be wishful thinking if BV took an active leadership role in the sport.

And it is not that clear yet exactly what SEABL is going to become when it ceases to be SEABL.

It should help if done right ... but as @HO as pointed out, the whole structure of SEABL (UPL) down to Big V and then to CBL/MMBL all has to fit together in a coherent fashion and provide the right levels of competition and cost structure to suit each assoication (hopefully all) that want to field a senior team.

I think the biggest problem is decided if you just let the "free market" work out which clubs play in which competition, or if you create a "framework" with rules that define how it should happen.

Don't have a solution for that - over to you @HO !

HO, I totally agree with all your comments in relation ot this matter and think you have summarised it quite nicely.

It's a pity there is not more open information from all relevant parties on the whole "new SEABL" (UPL) thing ...

A couple of years back BV published some information about the DL/YL merger and promised regular updates, but nothing further was forthcoming. That did eventually happen, but not a lot of public communication around it.

Same for Big V - no publishing of AGM information or similar to know what decisions have been made by member clubs. Unless you are a club delegate at an AGM, good luck finding out what is going on.

Ideally all key bodies involved in the sport should communicate much more openly with the wider basketball community around these strategic issues. IMO ...

Heh @HO sorry, I left the thread for a day ... LOL ...

You said earlier the structure of basketball is a basketball decision, not a Big V decision ... absolutely agree.

But the problem is that BV seem just to operate as a peak body and individual associations emerge over time with member clubs and take a slice of the "market" - VJBL, Big V, MMBL, SEABL ... the overall structure does not seem to be managed by BV, it is just left to evolve.

OK so that was a personal observation - allowed to evolve, not managed.

Do you think that's a fair comment ? Is the underlying issue the role BV plays in overseeing basketball in the state ?

@TW I take it you are not a big fan of the nuffy youtube shows ... LOL ...

It should actually be up to the member clubs to define what Big V is about ... but I suspect another case of the tail wagging the dog ?

@HO okay thanks, good comments ...

I certainly understand that right now MMBL is pretty much a "anyone can play" competition. I don't really know the history of MMBL and where it sits in the political landscape.

The biggest problem is probably that right now the structure of Big V assumes a certain cost base from entered teams ... whereas MMBL is a much simpler user pays model.

You certainly raise an interesting conceptual model ... who knows if the powers that be are actually thinking about this stuff.

@HO what do you mean by "MMBL needs to be rebuilt" ?

Doesn't it serve it's purpose as is ... it is effectively a user pays competition for clubs/teams that want a higher level than senior domestic but don't want the cost of Big V.