Isaac
Years ago

Stupid hypothetical two-league NBL concept

I'm putting this up as a bit of an off-the-cuff concept for people to pick apart. It's obviously flawed and quite likely completely ridiculous. It's stupid for most reasons, but what the hell.

Here are my starting assumptions:

- player salaries comprise a significant portion of club costs
- players prefer playing games to training
- majority of fans would not be keen to pay more for more games
- majority of clubs are at the mercy of generous ownership/benefactors
- TV deals prefer big-city teams
- more basketball jobs, the better for our players, coaches, etc
- if the league loses a regional team, the fans and its sponsors do not simply transfer to another team; they're more or less lost until a team returns in their locale
- an ideal, concentrated, TV-oriented NBL might prefer big-market teams, but there are still opportunities in regional areas, including from past teams

(For a moment, assume that the ABL leagues around Australia either do not exist or are adjusted to be part of this idiocy.)

What if the NBL was actually two leagues that did not run concurrently but used the same players, most playing for two different teams? Could it provide income/opportunities for players and also leverage regional markets?

Imagine (for simplicity sake to begin) that NBL players are contracted for the same period that they are now. They play more games in place of training. In one league, they play for big market teams in a televised, blockbuster league.

In the remaining period of their contract, they play for a brother-team in a second league. Either areas that have semi-supported an NBL team in the past, or regional areas near the original teams. e.g., Perth's players might have Freo as their second team. In Sydney, it might be Wollongong or Canberra.

One of the two competitions could be potentially played under experimental tweaks to the rules. TV would be optional for the second league.

A club operating in two locations would have some increased costs (ops, transport, venue, etc) but essentially draw from two pools of fans and sponsors while making use of a single set of players.


Now, trying to drag a silly idea towards reality, some potential issues and tweaks:

- clubs/players would need a local presence rather than just fly-in, fly-out; would work in Wollongong and Freo where they could do regular clinics/appearances, but harder elsewhere
- would the perceived second tier fans buy into it?
- promotion and relegation wouldn't work as you could end up with someone playing against their own brother-team

Perhaps instead a system whereby NBL clubs sub-contract players for part of their term to sides in a second league? And some players play only in one league, many in both. e.g., Kings contract Bob Baller for $120k with a deal that he plays also for Canberra or Wollongong. He makes the same amount for the same period of work. Gets to play more games than usual, but trains less.

Why not the SEABL/ABL as the second tier? They aren't selling tickets for $20-30 to 2-5k crowds.

Topic #31352 | Report this topic


HO  
Years ago

That would be called "representative basketball" I would think Isaac! Perhaps in reverse because of who owns the contract.

Reply #412820 | Report this post


MACDUB  
Years ago

As mad as the idea is, I like it!

Big advantage of having two leagues is supplementary income.

A good scenario would see NBL player salaries drop, and promote them to play in the SEABL/NZNBL competition where they could demand top dollar.

Say $60k from NBL and $30k from second-tier league.

Reply #412824 | Report this post


HO  
Years ago

But can the second tier team support those salaries?

Look at Knox's situation, reported on here as losing 6 figures per year for the last couple of years - and a powerhouse association in melbourne's heartland.

Reply #412825 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

It's starting to look like the BA takeover in 2009 has backfired. I said at the time I wanted the league to continue on as a private league (yes including the big money owners) as a BA takeover would lower the standard too much in a race to the bottom in a supposed attempt at parity.

Gold Coast and now Townsville have gone with other teams sitting on the edge with the big money teams streets ahead of the rest (Perth and NZ). All it has done is lower the standard of the league dramatically making it even less appealling to watch. While NBL TV is a good thing the TV ratings are shithouse.

BA fuck up just about everything they touch and couldn't organise a chook raffle in a pub.

Reply #412829 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

HO, my starting point was that the second tier league was comprised of locations that would support 2-5k $20-30 tickets. e.g. rather than necessarily elevating a SEABL club, you'd be starting with a Wollongong, Cairns or Townsville as they already exist, then potentially supersize powerhouse ABL/SEABL sides or renew previous NBL teams.

I think you'd have more luck saying "You guys are still NBL. You guys are now Super NBL." rather than "You guys stay NBL. You other guys go down a level to the Crap NBL. Hope you like it."

Reply #412832 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

What was that "high stakes hoops" or whatever?

That type of thing seems a great way to capture some public interest in more+different basketball, and give players an extra source of (small) income.

A 3on3 weekend festival on TV? A 5on5 tournament over two weeks?

Reply #412840 | Report this post


Timmy D  
Years ago

I think they should keep the teams that are already in the NBL and give them sister teams and if they are in financial trouble they can drop down to the other league and one can be elevated, the teams can be:

DIV 1
ADELAIDE PORT ADELAIDE
BRISBANE GOLD COAST
CAIRNS TOWNSVILLE
MELBOURNE GEELONG
AUCKLAND WELLINGTON
PERTH FREMANTLE
WOOLONGONG NEWCASTLE

Teams would need to be added but tell me if you have any other cities.

Reply #412857 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

High Stakes Hoops was run off the back of what seemed like a miracle TV deal and sponsorship combo. I don't know if it could be repeated too easily. Crowds were pretty miserable, IIRC.

Reply #412860 | Report this post


Libertine  
Years ago

Isaac, what the NBL needs to do is get the NBA involved. There is no 'NBA Australia' office or similar. Branch out and get some funding injection into the league.

Bit like how the MLS is completely underwriting the Australian Baseball League and owns stakes or majority shares in a number of European baseball leagues.

Reply #412861 | Report this post


KET  
Years ago

Living in two locations might be an issue though. You could have players playing a minimum of 44 games in a year over two teams. We would need to compact it.

Tier 1: National Basketball League (1 Oct - 30Feb)

1. Adelaide
2. Brisbane
3. Melbourne
4. Sydney
5. Perth
6. Victoria
7. New Zealand
8. Wellington

28 games, play each team 4 times. Top 4 make finals. 6 games per week:
1 - Thurs (SKY)
2 - Fri (FOX, NBLTV)
2 - Sat (SBS, NBLTV)
1 - Sun Twilight (FOX)

Tier 2: Trans-Tasman Championship (April 15 - June 15)

Aus
1. Cairns (Brisbane brother)
2. Townsville (Brisbane brother)
3. Wollongong (Sydney brother)
4. Canberra (Sydney brother)
5. Newcastle (Sydney brother)
6. Geelong (Melbourne/Vic brother)
7. Hobart (Melbourne/Vic brother)
8. West Coast (Perth brother)
9. South Australia (Adelaide brother)

NZ
1. Supercity Rangers
2. Waikato Pistons
3. Mountain Airs
4. Bay Hawks
5. Jets
6. Saints
7. Giants
8. Nuggets
9. Sharks

16 games, play each conference team once, top 4 of each conference make it, conference champions face off in the championship game. SKY covers a few NZ conference games per week. In Aus conference, local networks like WINTV/Channel 7 etc. cover their local home team games or NBLTV cover a select amount. Finals on FOX/SBS.

Reply #412879 | Report this post


KET  
Years ago

To add, ABA/SEABL would need to be during the NBL season. The Tier 2 teams would have about half local ABA/SEABL type players and half NBL players. That would hopefully make the tier 2 teams financially sustainable with 2.5k crowds

Reply #412882 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

There's a number of issues that have lead to today's issues.
The glamour of basketball has faded because the quality and style of the basketball has changed in some ways, it's pretty ugly to watch at times tbh. In the golden era basketball exploded with the imports it was a spectacle which has since faded. if you want bums on seats you need to provide entertainment.
The structure of basketball AUS leaves a lot to be desired, it does Jack all to tap into its largest markets "The people who play and love basketball" and gives little to that market as well, maybe it's just the 36's that operate that way??
I just struggle to see how kids can see a clear pathway from aussie hoops to 36's as a senior

BA is overseer of nought, administrative wankery it appears everything is left to the states and well financially there's black holes imo.

A good restructure would be beneficial.

Reply #412895 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

'895:

I just struggle to see how kids can see a clear pathway from aussie hoops to 36's as a senior
As in from playing district basketball with a club?

Seems pretty obvious to me. Play through juniors. Make your ABL team or AIS if you're good enough. College if that's an option. Otherwise, show promise at ABL level and make it clear you're available as 36ers training bait or extended squad or development player roles. That plain last route has seen court time for Illman, Gower, Hambour, Molitor, Daly, Warbout, etc. Plus many others given a chance to show their stuff - Mapunda, Gerlach, Doyle and more.

Reply #412950 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Some good ideas on here imo, im intrigued by Isaac and KETs suggestions.

Mine is simialr in some ways.

What do SEABL and NZ NBL clubs spend on their rosters?

Could the NBL, SEABL and NZ NBL work together?

Set a roseter budget/salary cap appropriate for all teams.

Maybe have 2 conferences with Aus and NZ, each conference plays say 20-30 games, have there own finals, have a champion, then the top say 4-6 teams of each conference have a Oceania club championship tournament over say 4ish weeks, knockout single elimination, with a final 4 weekend, cities share/bid for the hosting of, a bit like the NCAA tournament/final 4 weekend.

Is that a way to get the best of both worlds?

Not sure how it helps the player payment situation, could have a maximum spend/salary cap of what the average NZ/SEABL league team, (could it be 300-500k?) can afford and then its up to the club, then the revenue from the finals tournament is spread around the clubs that qualify and gets distributed in part down to the players, so for example player might make 50k from the conference league, then maybe another 20k from the finals tournament? Not sure how that would work though.

Reply #412996 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Serio: Tourism photography and videography
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 7:18 am, Fri 29 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754