If nz had another team in the comp would the breakers have to change their name to Auckland ?

It would be awesome to have more teams in the comp. just don't see it happening that soon.

@ anon , any word on who those six teams could be? My guess is west syd, Brisbane, wellington, 2nd melb, Canberra and Newcastle. Will Townsville still be around is another question.

Brisbane will be next season then 2nd Melbourne team. There's a chance that a 2nd NZ team could enter (Saints).

West Sydney? Doubt it. Didn't work well the first time and where would they play? Keep in mind venue accessibility, costs etc.

Newcastle would be great, but just as unlikely as West Sydney.

Canberra, I don't think there's even a sniff of a bid there?

Tassie team would be good and more realistic IMO.

I don't see the point in going back to places that have flat out failed in the past or that don't have the kind of venue to warrant them being there. I would be good with a second NZ team, A second Melbourne team, Brisbane... then after that I would like them to try Tasmania or even Northern Territory.. lets go somewhere where there isnt competition... West Sydneys never been that popular from memory.. Canberra is a long while off... Newcastle probably the same.

Northern Territory would be interesting but there must be a reason why the NRL hasn't expanded out that way?

Hmm Canberra have not even had a president of their state association for the last 4+ months - the only interstate competition team they are interested in is the Capitals - its bankrolled by their local competition at many, many multiples of paltry ( basically nil) the 4's of their contribution to the Gunners SEABL team -

The only chance Canberra has of ever seeing NBL action is if a Western Sydney team was introduced and they decided to play some home games in Canberra, like GWS does for AFL.

Canberra is lacking in professional sport outside of NRL and Union. If the marketing is done correctly, and there is some local identity attached to the team, a Western Sydney team playing in Canberra would do okay in pulling crowds.

If it happens in the next 2 to 3 seasons, the first person I'd be recruiting for them would be Anthony Petrie.

You coaching the Canberra Jagerbombs has it's appeal TR.....

I'm all for expansion. What does the future hold for Townsville and Wollongong? It would be great to see more teams without them dropping out.

"salary cap will come down forcing the big spenders back to the field" I say if you cant spend the current cap tough luck princess. Why should perth and a few others reduce their spending for a team like Townsville? time to get rid of community based teams they are dragging the NBL down!

League couldn't support four teams added in one season. Not enough talent.

If guys like Ben Allen can already get an nbl gig imagine the talent spread over 4 more teams. It could get worse if the likes of DJ and Goulding head overseas

"commonsense"

So in that case you would have a 5 team league?

OK.

To solve the talent spread problem, the nbl could allow teams to have a third non- starting import. It would be hard to establish if the import was starting quality or bench quality but I'm sure they could put in place some sort of criteria.

I see your point natwhereyouat. I don't think the nbl in its current state can expand with teams like Townsville. I admit I have no idea how to fix the nbl, is a semi pro league an option? having a cap of say 700k then adding a marquee player.

I agree with the 3rd import option. But like I've posted here countless times, have it as a "local" import. An import that played in the SEABL, Big V etc.

Talent spread isn't an issue like I once thought it was.

Perth's bench is hardly formidable with Wagstaff the only name that multi teams would fight for if he was a free agent.

Cairns has more names on paper than most and is 2nd bottom

In the past teams used to run 7 deep. You had a back up guard and a back up big with the rest being young kids being developed.

Take top 7 of each from the talent pool still gives you 24 players to base rosters on us imports

Hawks probably have the right example of what the talent would be like on an expanded league roster

The NBL used to have 14+ teams back when basketball was a low participation sport without a depth of talent and we only had a handful of genuinely world class players, yet the league was high-scoring and popular.

All that would happen if we expanded is the imports and better Aussies would stand out more and the games would be higher scoring. It could actually be a good recipe for getting more casual fans.

I agree with paul, if we build it they will come!

The bigger issue is sponsors and $$$, since we are killing off potential money pits by closing down manufacturing and associated businesses in this country, we need some leadership at the top to foster the right structure first...

Less important is the concern over talent spread and where players are going to come from, more concern should be directed towards over how each team can develop and thrive, rather than just survive IMO...

Second NZ Team would certainly work.

Full confidence in their sustainability.

In terms of Wellington, TSB Bank Arena has a capacity of 5,655 people. (Nearby Te Rauparaha Arena has a capacity of 3,000)

Just in the NZNBL, the Saints have 24 sponsors (unsure of $), but some big name sponsors out there including Nestle, Hells Pizza (extremely profitable NZ company), Ibis Hotels, Under Armour etc.

Sponsor dollars could go way up considering the increased exposure (and it would be a huge jump in exposure from NZNBL).

And in terms of talent, there is no need to worry about their ability to fill a roster.

Even just in the NZNBL, they have managed to get some stud players. Their pulling power in a new ANBL comp would be impressive.

Have to agree with whoever said there would be a talent dillution... Ben Allen is in the league already!... 4 more teams? Unless you intend to up the rule to 3 imports I don;t see how your gonna do it without making the league really suck.

And I do have to say, if the regional teams are bringing the league down, their futures must be seriously considered. If Townsville is preventing the rest of the league from raising salary caps or is just spounging too much money, with an average of less than 3 thousand attendance a game and the brand clearly straggling.. what is it doing there?

I would bring the bullets in, allow Townsville to drop off if it cant sustain itself. Survival of the fittest is what fuels evolution... when a mother in the animal world has a litter of babies... it will spend its time feeding the strong and will abandon the weaklings. Cruel, but it is a decision made for the survival of the family. Townsville is a weakling... Wollongong is becoming a weakling. We might have to let them die and bring in Melbourne 2 and Bullets. Foundation club or not... and if in a few years one of these teams starts showing they now have a plan to move forward with again, you reconsider them.

Can't rush to add a NZ team. Priority has to be Brisbane and Melbourne because strength for the league will partly come from a TV deal and a NZ team won't help that where Brisbane and a Melbourne alternative to the Tigers might.

"Northern Territory would be interesting but there must be a reason why the NRL hasn't expanded out that way?"

Probably more to do with the fact that everyone south of Townsville starts complaining about the heat once the temperature is over 25 degrees. Not an issue inside an air-conditioned stadium though, but basketball just isn't big in NT, they got pathetic local crowds when they hosted the pre-season tournaments a few years back.

Personally, I think a 2nd Townsville team and a 2nd Wollongong team are no-brainers ;)

Joke all you like about the community teams but their fans are far more genuine and loyal then say Melb or Syd.

"Joke all you like about the community teams but their fans are far more genuine and loyal then say Melb or Syd."

Crowd numbers so far this year may suggest otherwise.

Strong crowd support is vital for regional based teams like Townsville and Wollongong. Given that there is not a lot of corporate opportunities and TV ratings don't count in regional places, the only thing going for them is to have passionate, loyal supporters that turn out in good numbers each game, win or lose (more often lose). Their crowds need to be well above 3,500 on average for each game. In fact, they should be upwards of 5,000 if the league really wants to get back into the game.

So far, crowds have fallen to below 3,000 in Townsville for most of their games, and in Wollongong, they have been struggling to get more than 2,500. And that included just 2,300 against Sydney. Not flash.

Numbers like these, and with limited sponsorship opportunities and with no benefit for TV viewership. they would have a very hard time to convince the NBL that they belong in this league. However as long as there's only 8 teams playing, the NBL will be desperate to ensure Townsville and Wollongong stay on.

If crowds don't pick up considerably for these clubs, and the league expands to include Brisbane and a 2nd Melbourne team, its possible the NBL will simply give up on the Crocs and Hawks and let them die.

Simply put, they need to be visible in their own towns, because if their not, theres no point in them being around, other than to make up the numbers.

**I certainly don't wish that and have always respected the underdog small market teams, so I absolutely want to see the Crocs and Hawks up and about again.**

If say 3 teams are added with an unchanged salary cap, there is 3 salary caps more money to spread around. With the dilution of talent, if NBL clubs are responsible, I'd expect that to translate to allowing some of the big name players getting paid more. I'd like to know what kind of salaries some of our Euro-based talent is earning because adding more NBL teams might have the effect of reversing the drain of talent to Euro leagues, or enticing more of our college talent to play NBL.

It would be like going back to the 80s and early 90s, a big difference between the top and bottom talent.

Would certainly increase the scoring, get some players back from OS and make basketball a more attractive pathway for young athletes. Question is how to make these teams sustainable for the long term?

I still think Mick's point from the other day about the gulf between stars in the NBA and the end of the bench (in terms of salary and probably skill) is worth more thought and discussion. Dilution of the league, but with salary concentrated at the high end might be the way to go.

I agree, Isaac, that's why I don't think such a dilution, if it occurs, is a bad thing. I'd argue any dilution won't be very noticeable to the casual viewer since it should also be masked by a return of talent from Euro and college. A dilution that allows some of the stars to stand out more will actually increase the 'watchability' of the league, especially to casual viewers. The question is how to make the teams sustainable and ensure salary cap spending is responsibly allocated to allow the return of talent to counter the dilution effect, not just effectively an x% pay rise for all existing players.

If the talent was diluted wouldnt that then mean that the star power of the elite would increase

if each team becomes less talented the gap between the elite and bench player would widen giving the elite talent more potential to show off and therefore potentially become bigger household names for being so dominant

If you look around the continents the leagues with the most talent are the lowest scoring. It's no coincidence the NBL's lowest scoring years have been when there have been fewer teams.

Increase the teams, increase the spectacle for the casual viewer.

Stop suggesting a West Sydney team. The Razorbacks were a joke. There would have to be a lot of guarantees in place before the League would even consider a WS team, I think.

Brisbane first and foremost. Then a 2nd Melbourne team. Then NZ MkII. After that, who knows?

I'd love to see Hobart, Canberra and Newcastle back in the League, but in all honesty, I can't see it happening.

I think a 10 team, sustainable League is what we should be looking at for at least then next half decade.

Then, if the NBL is going well after 5 years, and others are keen to join in, THEN we consider them. No more small market teams for now though.

Tassie won't be able to fund a team or attract players. Canberra is a waste of space and should be bulldozed. Outside of politicians it has no value....hang on a second. Newcastle? Now there's a shithole. You would need to pay visiting clubs danger money. I think we should bring a team out of Murray Bridge or Goondiwindi before we head back to Canberra.

Anonymous just said NBA teams have "talent dillution"... I think your taking it all out of context. The NBA's "talent dillution" is the fact that you have Lebron James/Kobe Bryant types on teams and then in 12th spot you have a guy who would be a star in Euroleague. It is hardly any kind of true talent dillution when the overall standard of the league is as high as it is. We don't have the luxury in Australia of further dilluting the talent, We lack the top 20 or so Aussie players.. and now we are going to start picking up SEABL scrubs to fill in positions 9 and 10 whilst remembering we have a crop of guys ready to retire and dudes like Ben Allen who shouldnt even be in the league anyways?... People are saying they only want to go 7 deep? this isn't social basketball! ... Somewhere you have to protect the standard of the league. this is where marquee player/3rd import rule makes sense. I personally would go for a 2 import 1 marquee player rule.. meaning we have a shot at luring back some Aussies. If you want Graeme Dann, Daniel Joyce, Ben Allen in the league than I am worried for your mental well being. I also don't think the NBL suffered the kind of talent dillution in the 80s/90s that people are saying.. We had ALL of our top talent except for Longley in the league... most of our late bench guys would be off in college playing solid minutes these days. watching the old games, teams look deep enough to me... I doubt if we expanded to 2 more teams without import changes we could come close to the depth we use to have.

I think the dilution comment relating to the NBA refers to the effect of the NBA having 30 teams instead many fewer teams. Imagine what would happen if the NBA had just 10 teams? Those 12th man spots would be seriously talented. The difference between star player and towel waver would be much, much less than present. The point of the NBA comparison, I suspect, is that talent dilution -- with a greater variance of talent in the league -- does have some benefits.

GWB, completely disagree.

If you had 4 teams, you're adding four more $200k jobs, four more $130k jobs, etc. The chance of bringing some guys in Europe home or getting stronger imports increases.And while some weaker players might make teams, that will only help the stars stand out. Four teams in one season would be irresponsible, but with time and wealth/power distribution it could happen.

I agree Isaac, expansion is doable and desirable as long as it's done right over a few years. The league can also consider giving expansion teams an extra import or two for their first year so they can space out their local recruiting over two years.

In terms of talking about clubs' sustainability, I wonder if it's more about the making the overall league stronger so it can support clubs.

Every league in Australia has multiple teams that arent sustainable at certain points but is supported by HQ, so basketball needs to find a way to head down that path, and more teams in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane (as well as Wellington if it brings additional TV) is probably the best way to do that.

If population estimates show Canberra, Hobart and Newcastle growing significantly Id be looking into them for the next wave a few years down the track.

^^

That's a good example of why you shouldnt post drunk, kids.