|
|
Post by spacejammer on Jul 26, 2024 20:08:43 GMT
Hi all
With the announcement of the upcoming ENBL and teams playing in Europe this upcoming season.
It got me thinking about how if the new BBL league what would happen if they were to reintroduce a salary cap and import rule?
After what 777 did to the league I can understand why people are wanting the cap and restrictions back in place.
But for the Eagles, Gladiators and Flyers I'm worried that if the restrictions and cap were brought back in then those teams might struggle to be competitive in Europe.
Unlike the Lions last season who could afford to rotate players and bring in reinenforcements with their ridiculous budget.
I imagine the other teams might not be able to do this as much.
And looking at the recent investors for Sheffield and Cheshire I am now wondering if you bring back a cap would those investors still be happy to be on board.
I understand the want to bring back the cap so it stops teams doing what Lions did and controlling the league.
But let's be honest is it likely we are going to see anyone come along and abuse the league like this any time soon?
At first I didn't mind the league potentially bringing back the Salary cap but now that I think about it mpre I'm now not so sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jul 26, 2024 20:16:48 GMT
I think there's a good plan amongst all of what we've had over the years
Max 3 imports
Top 2 highest paid brits don't count in the salary cap
Max and Min Salary cap, stops london over spending against teams this year and stop teams like Manchester putting a 40k total team out. Both ruin the competitive
|
|
|
|
Post by spacejammer on Jul 26, 2024 21:25:34 GMT
I think there's a good plan amongst all of what we've had over the years Max 3 imports Top 2 highest paid brits don't count in the salary cap Max and Min Salary cap, stops london over spending against teams this year and stop teams like Manchester putting a 40k total team out. Both ruin the competitive I understand that but what about the teams that take on Europe? I know Leicester and London did par take in the BCL when the old rules were in place. And I can see this being no issue for teams that are just competing in the BBL. But from what it took London just to be competitive in EuroCup they had to breakdown these restrictions in order to be competitive at that level. I just think with the cap and restrictions for those clubs it is going to be difficult to be successful in Europe if we can only have 3 imports and are restricted to how much of a salary you can offer your talent? Not to mention if you have injury issues throughout the season too. Unless you were to pay guys to just play ENBL only or have a rotation of part time players you can switch out. But I can't see that being affordable or something the BBL clubs would want to have to mess around with as it would create a headache and potentially deter them from pursuing Europe. |
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jul 27, 2024 5:25:55 GMT
What's more important, a competitive league or teams playing in Europe. It might be 1 or the other for the time being
|
|
|
|
Post by spacejammer on Jul 27, 2024 6:50:06 GMT
What's more important, a competitive league or teams playing in Europe. It might be 1 or the other for the time being I would say both but I think it depends on your team is how people will answer that. With the Eagles playing in Europe again I'm going to be biased and want what is best for my team. Whereas if your team isn't playing in Europe then you'll be less likely to care about them bringing back the cap. I don't know if anyone knows this but how many domestic worldwide leagues have a cap in place and does not having one really impact them? Does the NBL have a salary cap even? |
|
|
|
Post by foxtrot27 on Jul 27, 2024 7:10:06 GMT
What's more important, a competitive league or teams playing in Europe. It might be 1 or the other for the time being I would say both but I think it depends on your team is how people will answer that. With the Eagles playing in Europe again I'm going to be biased and want what is best for my team. Whereas if your team isn't playing in Europe then you'll be less likely to care about them bringing back the cap. I don't know if anyone knows this but how many domestic worldwide leagues have a cap in place and does not having one really impact them? Does the NBL have a salary cap even? Strong national team with depth and a continued focus on pipeline development far outweighs everything. A competitive team in Europe won’t have the financial metrics to do anything notable and counting on washed up yanks won’t go far and won’t build real audience, like a national team can. |
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Jul 27, 2024 9:35:10 GMT
Teams should be allowed to spend what they generate, as long as it's sustainable. I don't see anything wrong with Eagles or Riders spending more than (as an example) Bristol or Surrey because they have a bigger venue and generate more revenue. I also don't see an issue with Glads owner putting his hand in his own pocket. Holding teams with ambition to play in Europe back via financial constraints isn't the way to go.
Personally and I've said it loads before the import rule is turned into a farce by dual nationals, an American with a British passport is still an American. I'd far rather watch good Americans than the mediocre dual nationals that kick around the league just because they had a British grannie or whatever. My solution to this would be to keep 5 imports but the dual nationals count towards that unless they are fully eligible for GB (obtained their passport before 16 I believe).
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jul 27, 2024 9:58:06 GMT
Glads owner spending a fortune is the same as 777 spending a fortune I'm afraid.
Whether it's his fortune or not is still unsustainable spending, he mustve spend at least 5 mill since he took over, it's only accepted by him because he's not winning
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jul 27, 2024 9:58:52 GMT
Teams should be allowed to spend what they generate, as long as it's sustainable. I don't see anything wrong with Eagles or Riders spending more than (as an example) Bristol or Surrey because they have a bigger venue and generate more revenue. I also don't see an issue with Glads owner putting his hand in his own pocket. Holding teams with ambition to play in Europe back via financial constraints isn't the way to go. Personally and I've said it loads before the import rule is turned into a farce by dual nationals, an American with a British passport is still an American. I'd far rather watch good Americans than the mediocre dual nationals that kick around the league just because they had a British grannie or whatever. My solution to this would be to keep 5 imports but the dual nationals count towards that unless they are fully eligible for GB (obtained their passport before 16 I believe). Would you exclude British players that play for their other national teams too? Players like Dusha, genuine question |
|
|
|
Post by mac on Jul 27, 2024 10:01:13 GMT
I want to have my cake and eat it. That means a competitive league that is sustainable. I have no problem with a salary cap but that doesn't stop decent British players going abroad for higher wages. That's been an issue since I first started watching in the 1990s. Sadly, there is no easy fix.
|
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Jul 27, 2024 10:05:03 GMT
Glads owner spending a fortune is the same as 777 spending a fortune I'm afraid. Whether it's his fortune or not is still unsustainable spending, he mustve spend at least 5 mill since he took over, it's only accepted by him because he's not winning But he's writing his own checks and gifting the money to the club. It's not debt, it's not other people money. I don't think trying to maintain parity by preventing clubs recieving money would work. What motivation would there by for any new owner if they can't spend their own money? |
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jul 27, 2024 10:10:50 GMT
Glads owner spending a fortune is the same as 777 spending a fortune I'm afraid. Whether it's his fortune or not is still unsustainable spending, he mustve spend at least 5 mill since he took over, it's only accepted by him because he's not winning But he's writing his own checks and gifting the money to the club. It's not debt, it's not other people money. I don't think trying to maintain parity by preventing clubs recieving money would work. What motivation would there by for any new owner if they can't spend their own money? Which is what London did, they found investors that invested, doesn't matter who's money it's invested still. It glads put a playing squad out that matched London from last year with his own money you wouldn't have any qualms??? |
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Jul 27, 2024 10:22:09 GMT
But he's writing his own checks and gifting the money to the club. It's not debt, it's not other people money. I don't think trying to maintain parity by preventing clubs recieving money would work. What motivation would there by for any new owner if they can't spend their own money? Which is what London did, they found investors that invested, doesn't matter who's money it's invested still. It glads put a playing squad out that matched London from last year with his own money you wouldn't have any qualms??? If Glads owner wants to spend his money on his basketball club instead of buying a yacht or a gold played Bugatti that's fine by me. The reason Lions and the league became insolvent is because 777 were spending money they didn't have and were putting the organisations into debt. Glads do not have any debt, the owner is signing the cheques. It's not the same. |
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jul 27, 2024 10:26:43 GMT
So if glads sign 16 players on the same wage and dominate like London did you're fine with it as it's his own money?
|
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Jul 27, 2024 10:31:10 GMT
So if glads sign 16 players on the same wage and dominate like London did you're fine with it as it's his own money? Yeah I'm not petty and don't get butthurt that my team won't win because another team has better players. |
|
|
|
Post by foxtrot27 on Jul 27, 2024 12:40:11 GMT
So if glads sign 16 players on the same wage and dominate like London did you're fine with it as it's his own money? Glads owner has money, but he’s not Euroleague rich. BCL and no one really cares about that and he’s just burning money as budgets there are £1M-3m. He won’t come close to making that back in East Kilbride! |
|
|
|
Post by spacejammer on Jul 27, 2024 17:03:09 GMT
The thing with what London and 777 did is they removed the cap and import rule for their benefit and not for the benefit of the league.
If 777 had of not had any skin in the game and just took on the league and been legimate I probably wouldn't have minded either.
As for the import rules and GB players why not instead try and give teams more initiative to sign GB players like a league bonus maybe.
Going back to my initial question what other leagues across Europe have a salary cap in place?
Because now that 777 have gone whilst I see teams and the league attracting investors I cannot see it ever being as wild as what London did anytime soon.
I would maybe say the league should consider seeing how next season goes without a cap being in place before considering whether to bring this back in or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Abootman on Jul 28, 2024 17:03:58 GMT
The extra import slot didn't benefit Lions one bit. They only used five last season. Four prior to the mid-season addition of Nwaba. If anything that rule change probably helped level the playing field a little bit. Didn't do homegrown players any favours though. Six imports is at least one too many in my view.
I'd be very, very surprised if a new league decided to implement a salary cap so restrictive that it prevented teams from being competitive in the ENBL. That would be setting the bar awfully low. If a salary cap was reintroduced the only team I could potentially see it being a hindrance to in the near future would be Caledonia.
Given that teams are clearly well underway with their recruitment now, one would assume these rules have already been decided upon.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverbirch on Jul 29, 2024 8:38:31 GMT
I think its probably less about the salary cap anymore and more about the sustainability of teams (hopefully something we might have learnt from this whole 777 debacle) and purpose of the league.
Sustainability:
1. Introduce a cap, and even a collar to keep it competitive so we dont get a Leeds Force or Birmingham Knights situation
2. Less about a salary cap definitive number but based on revenues, much like the FFP in football so teams who make bigger revenues can spend bigger
3. Dispensation for teams when a new owner takes over - they usually want to invest some of their own cash to bring the team up to speed so for a season or 2 perhaps this should be allowed
Purpose of League:
1. More heavily governed by BBF so quotas on GB players and U23 GB players in order to raise standards of GB teams or at least provide more opportunities for GB players
2. If Europe is still a focus of the league then the ability for teams to have a "stretch" budget (no idea how this would work)
Whatever happens i feel it might need to evolve over these next few years of what i suggest will be recovery years post BBL collapse, depending on what the level of growth is and the impact of the new (and potential future) investors bring to the league
|
|
