|
|
Post by erj14 on Feb 23, 2023 9:58:59 GMT
I fundamentally disagreed with the removal of the salary cap when it was announced last summer, but was willing to see how it would play out. I just disagree that it's going to 'grow the game in the UK' and I'm yet to see a powerful argument for that to be the case. I think there are very few people who know who Sam Dekker is in this country and definitely don't think people have been flocking to arenas in numbers to see him play. However I will say, I was excited to see him play up here in Newcastle.
My main problem with it, is that I think the money spent (£3-£7 million depending on who you listen to) could be far better spent actually 'growing the game' in this country. Youth leagues could be set up, community clubs could be set up and facilities built (which does actually give a return on your investment) with this sort of money. Not just chucking it at players and then letting a load of people in free to watch it.
I do think 777 have made other positive steps with the league, but the removal of the salary cap is not one of them in my opinion. It was done for one club, so they could chase EuroLeague and that's it. If it was 'for the good of the sport' it could have been done incrementally as the league grew.
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter on Feb 23, 2023 11:36:04 GMT
I’m not sure joining EuroCup would have been in 777 Partners initial plans. But the exclusion of Russia created a window of opportunity to join the second tier Euroleague competition. Decker and Koufos were needed for that competition, and so the salary cap had to go. The alternative would be for those players to only play in EuroCup but that would not be a very good arrangement for anyone.
I think we were all shocked when we heard London Lions would be playing in EuroCup. I know I was, even though I had never watched EuroCup and didn’t really know what it was for.
|
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Feb 23, 2023 11:52:48 GMT
I fundamentally disagreed with the removal of the salary cap when it was announced last summer, but was willing to see how it would play out. I just disagree that it's going to 'grow the game in the UK' and I'm yet to see a powerful argument for that to be the case. I think there are very few people who know who Sam Dekker is in this country and definitely don't think people have been flocking to arenas in numbers to see him play. However I will say, I was excited to see him play up here in Newcastle. My main problem with it, is that I think the money spent (£3-£7 million depending on who you listen to) could be far better spent actually 'growing the game' in this country. Youth leagues could be set up, community clubs could be set up and facilities built (which does actually give a return on your investment) with this sort of money. Not just chucking it at players and then letting a load of people in free to watch it. I do think 777 have made other positive steps with the league, but the removal of the salary cap is not one of them in my opinion. It was done for one club, so they could chase EuroLeague and that's it. If it was 'for the good of the sport' it could have been done incrementally as the league grew. They never said grow the game right? It was grow the professional game. Why would an American investment company spend their money building youth and community facilities? They aren't a charity. |
|
|
|
Post by eagles18000 on Feb 23, 2023 12:35:03 GMT
because building the economy of the sport (venues/participants etc) is essential to the ultimate success and visibility of the professional game. The greater the audience the greater the prospects.
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter on Feb 23, 2023 12:35:38 GMT
I wonder why they even bothered to do anything with the women’s game. How does that help to turn the BBL into a major professional league?
|
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Feb 23, 2023 12:40:16 GMT
I wonder why they even bothered to do anything with the women’s game. How does that help to turn the BBL into a major professional league? To avoid criticism for not doing so. |
|
|
|
Post by dexter on Feb 23, 2023 12:45:51 GMT
I wonder why they even bothered to do anything with the women’s game. How does that help to turn the BBL into a major professional league? To avoid criticism for not doing so. Well that backfired then. But hopefully in the long run it will be beneficial. I guess another way of saying that is because it’s the right thing to do. GB women are actually better than GB men. For its relatively low cost it would be wrong to leave the women’s game behind. |
|
|
|
Post by erj14 on Feb 23, 2023 13:25:31 GMT
I fundamentally disagreed with the removal of the salary cap when it was announced last summer, but was willing to see how it would play out. I just disagree that it's going to 'grow the game in the UK' and I'm yet to see a powerful argument for that to be the case. I think there are very few people who know who Sam Dekker is in this country and definitely don't think people have been flocking to arenas in numbers to see him play. However I will say, I was excited to see him play up here in Newcastle. My main problem with it, is that I think the money spent (£3-£7 million depending on who you listen to) could be far better spent actually 'growing the game' in this country. Youth leagues could be set up, community clubs could be set up and facilities built (which does actually give a return on your investment) with this sort of money. Not just chucking it at players and then letting a load of people in free to watch it. I do think 777 have made other positive steps with the league, but the removal of the salary cap is not one of them in my opinion. It was done for one club, so they could chase EuroLeague and that's it. If it was 'for the good of the sport' it could have been done incrementally as the league grew. They never said grow the game right? It was grow the professional game. Why would an American investment company spend their money building youth and community facilities? They aren't a charity. To build a fanbase and economy for the sport. I absolutely don't see 777 as a charity for basketball, but I believe the only way to create a robust fanbase is to have what we have in Newcastle. Otherwise the average punter doesn't give a toss what EuroCup or Europe Cup is. I live amongst what's been built in Newcastle and have seen it with my own eyes with my son. What they do WORKS. There is no way you get return on investment by signing and paying Dekker etc. |
|
|
|
Post by dexter on Feb 23, 2023 13:47:30 GMT
I don’t think what works in Newcastle necessarily works in London and vice versa. London Lions are building a fan base across London and across the country. No new fans are attracted to watching Newcastle Eagles at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Feb 23, 2023 14:00:59 GMT
I don’t think what works in Newcastle necessarily works in London and vice versa. London Lions are building a fan base across London and across the country. No new fans are attracted to watching Newcastle Eagles at the moment. Agree. Plenty of interest in basketball in the capital. Lots of well established youth/amateur clubs etc. Look at the proportion of the current GB players who were born in and around London/SE. It's just that interest in supporting the professional game was either non existent or on the NBA and not Lions. A lot of what the Eagles do is increasing participation, what the Lions are doing is building the brand and professional club. Plus Lions are aiming far higher than the hand to mouth 'bums on seats' approach of most bbl clubs. |
|
|
|
Post by erj14 on Feb 23, 2023 14:20:02 GMT
I don’t think what works in Newcastle necessarily works in London and vice versa. London Lions are building a fan base across London and across the country. No new fans are attracted to watching Newcastle Eagles at the moment. Lol, Eagles have had more sell outs this year already than any previous season. They're doing just fine with attracting 'new fans'. That's not to say they're perfect (socials are abysmal etc.), but they're growing a fanbase in a sustainable way. In my opinion, what London are doing is built on sand and I don't see any path to a return on their investment in player salaries. I still hope they succeed in what they're trying to do, but it makes me worry for the future of our sport if this goes pop. |
|
|
|
Post by D44 on Feb 23, 2023 15:16:57 GMT
I don’t think what works in Newcastle necessarily works in London and vice versa. London Lions are building a fan base across London and across the country. No new fans are attracted to watching Newcastle Eagles at the moment. Lol, Eagles have had more sell outs this year already than any previous season. They're doing just fine with attracting 'new fans'. That's not to say they're perfect (socials are abysmal etc.), but they're growing a fanbase in a sustainable way. In my opinion, what London are doing is built on sand and I don't see any path to a return on their investment in player salaries. I still hope they succeed in what they're trying to do, but it makes me worry for the future of our sport if this goes pop. You think Lions care about gate receipts though? The American investors are trying to grow a brand that increases in value exponentially. That is their return on investment, not the gate receipts are X and the operating costs are Y so they've made a few quid week to week like the rest of the BBL. Is the value of a football team (Chelsea sold for billions recently) the value of the gate receipt and TV money, or the value of the brand as a whole? It's how American investors operate generally. What else are they going to do to launder the money? If they wanted a fast return they'd just stick the money in an index or hedge fund and get 5% a year or whatever. |
|
|
|
Post by erj14 on Feb 23, 2023 15:36:48 GMT
TV companies aren't going to be paying top dollar to show games in a half empty Copper Box though. The reason football gets huge tv money is because games are played in front of large, passionate crowds which make for a good spectacle on tv.
Those crowds were already there when the tv deals took off in the 90s. That took decades (maybe a century) of building fanbases within our national game. It might be hard for some to hear, but we're MILES AND MILES away from achieving that with basketball in this country. Joe Public don't give a shit about seeing ex NBA players unless it's a LeBron, Steph, KD type scenario. That's never going to happen.
What can be built is a basketball savvy generation of kids who have played the game, know the rules and then appreciate the level of players we already have. This could've been done, they've spent more than what would've been required on the team they have this season. Then we look at tv deals which generate more income.
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter on Feb 23, 2023 16:36:31 GMT
TV companies aren't going to be paying top dollar to show games in a half empty Copper Box though. The reason football gets huge tv money is because games are played in front of large, passionate crowds which make for a good spectacle on tv. Those crowds were already there when the tv deals took off in the 90s. That took decades (maybe a century) of building fanbases within our national game. It might be hard for some to hear, but we're MILES AND MILES away from achieving that with basketball in this country. Joe Public don't give a shit about seeing ex NBA players unless it's a LeBron, Steph, KD type scenario. That's never going to happen. What can be built is a basketball savvy generation of kids who have played the game, know the rules and then appreciate the level of players we already have. This could've been done, they've spent more than what would've been required on the team they have this season. Then we look at tv deals which generate more income. I would be interested in seeing a survey on this, but from speaking to people and listening to what people say I think a lot of sports fans don’t watch BBL because they think it isn’t a good level of basketball. No one will have watched the BBL Cup final and come away thinking that was a lower standard than they were expecting, but plenty of people will have been impressed. I had never heard of Sam Dekker or Kosta Koufos before last year. I don’t care if they used to play in the NBA except that it’s indicative of how good they are. People will be persuaded to watch British basketball if you get them to look at it, and it’s good. Having a decent crowd and a nice venue obviously adds to that as a viewer but you will never get even 1% of sports fans interested in the BBL without really good players. |
|
|
|
Post by eagles18000 on Feb 23, 2023 17:09:05 GMT
Let’s be blunt.
There is an at best 10% shot that what 777 are aiming at will work sufficiently for them to get a return.
The comparison with football is nice at a distance but utterly fails close up. Football has gigantic tv revenues, 120 years of history and in the form of the premier league, the no1 product in the world.
Uk basketball has none of them and won’t have any of them whilst 777 are involved (the last 2 will never happen, the first is a long long time away).
That means to get to a point where they can sell for a profit they are going to have to pile in millions, (which tbf they are doing), but also crucially show a path to profitability. And whilst it may not be sexy, that involves selling lots of tickets and merchandise (something which at this point they really don’t seem bothered by).
And euroleague teams don’t run at a profit, in fact the opposite is true. It’s not the nba where the cba and revenue sharing means profit is basically built in.
So i hope they succeed, but i am not a fan of trickle down economics, be it Truss or 777 as i don’t think there is any evidence that it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by SamH on Feb 24, 2023 0:11:47 GMT
TV companies aren't going to be paying top dollar to show games in a half empty Copper Box though. The reason football gets huge tv money is because games are played in front of large, passionate crowds which make for a good spectacle on tv. Those crowds were already there when the tv deals took off in the 90s. That took decades (maybe a century) of building fanbases within our national game. It might be hard for some to hear, but we're MILES AND MILES away from achieving that with basketball in this country. Joe Public don't give a shit about seeing ex NBA players unless it's a LeBron, Steph, KD type scenario. That's never going to happen. What can be built is a basketball savvy generation of kids who have played the game, know the rules and then appreciate the level of players we already have. This could've been done, they've spent more than what would've been required on the team they have this season. Then we look at tv deals which generate more income. But I do often see various sports, including some football, on TV where the crowd is pretty minimal or even non existent. It doesn't look great but it doesn't seem to stop TV wanting to show it. Sometimes a sport may not attract big crowds in the venue but do get good ratings on TV. People aren't going to not watch a sport they like just because the live crowd is poor. Good example, I watch snooker and on a weekday afternoon it's often a poor crowd in the venue, but it's on all week nearly every week on one network or another because it gets good ratings. It just isn't something people will take a day off work to go and see. When they had an event in Hong Kong recently there were 10,000 people in attendance but the ratings wouldn't have increased as a result as it wasn't even a ranking event just an exhibition really. But it did look amazing seeing a crowd that big. |
|
|
|
Post by erj14 on Feb 24, 2023 9:31:26 GMT
TV companies aren't going to be paying top dollar to show games in a half empty Copper Box though. The reason football gets huge tv money is because games are played in front of large, passionate crowds which make for a good spectacle on tv. Those crowds were already there when the tv deals took off in the 90s. That took decades (maybe a century) of building fanbases within our national game. It might be hard for some to hear, but we're MILES AND MILES away from achieving that with basketball in this country. Joe Public don't give a shit about seeing ex NBA players unless it's a LeBron, Steph, KD type scenario. That's never going to happen. What can be built is a basketball savvy generation of kids who have played the game, know the rules and then appreciate the level of players we already have. This could've been done, they've spent more than what would've been required on the team they have this season. Then we look at tv deals which generate more income. But I do often see various sports, including some football, on TV where the crowd is pretty minimal or even non existent. It doesn't look great but it doesn't seem to stop TV wanting to show it. Sometimes a sport may not attract big crowds in the venue but do get good ratings on TV. People aren't going to not watch a sport they like just because the live crowd is poor. Good example, I watch snooker and on a weekday afternoon it's often a poor crowd in the venue, but it's on all week nearly every week on one network or another because it gets good ratings. It just isn't something people will take a day off work to go and see. When they had an event in Hong Kong recently there were 10,000 people in attendance but the ratings wouldn't have increased as a result as it wasn't even a ranking event just an exhibition really. But it did look amazing seeing a crowd that big. Yeah, but basketball isn't snooker. Snooker has a long history of being on television in this country. Joe Public understand it and it doesn't have to be 'accepted'. You just need to look at the (in my opinion) moronic comments on BBC posts about basketball to understand where the British public stand on it. It's seen as an American only sport, which obviously isn't the case at all. The way you change this is by getting kids playing the sport from an early age. I've seen it with my own eyes, kids play the sport then want to go to an Eagles game. They naturally bring their family who enjoy the night. The kid then starts to get hooked on the sport and the parents/grandparents/wider family start to see the sport for what it is. The child playing can explain what the rules mean and all of a sudden the game starts to make more sense. They like to see their kid 'fitting in' and being part of something wider than their school. Adults won't give the sport a chance if they see it on tv, but if you get that emotional attachment, you've got a much bigger possibility of someone giving the sport a chance. That kid then grows up with basketball as 'their sport'and becomes an adult who will then hopefully spend money on consuming the product. It's a long play, but for me the only way forward. We need the sport to look the best it can be when it's on television. Why does a TV company pay for sports rights? So they can sell advertising. They can only sell advertising if the thing they are broadcasting is popular. At the moment basketball isn't. That's why I think we should be building from the ground up. Not supercharging ONE CLUB to chase some imaginary tv deal pot of money. The culture in this country has to be changed before we can do that. |
|
