Catching more flies...

[preeths]

With the tumultuous ABA postseason behind us, now is a good time for all of us to take a step backward and look at the league, and the state of minor league basketball, anew. Most of us would agree that things have to change in order for the sport to grow at the minor league level. Many would argue that leadership needs to change in order for it to happen.

Here's what I want to toss out there. The way we state our opinions can affect how they are received, regardless of how right we may be. No matter how accurately you believe you have nailed the problem and solution to what ails the ABA, you will be ignored if all you do is insult those who have the power to change things. In short, you catch more flies with honey. This doesn't mean you shouldn't continue to call for change. You should! But we can probably do without more cracks about Egg McMuffins and basement offices. Let's de-personalize this argument to a degree. Yes, if you believe specific individuals are the problem, then they need to be called on it. Let's just keep our criticism to how they've managed things, and not tear them down as people.

[The Magician]

Roger that ... New season on the horizon.

[cglue]

Let the meetings and changes begin.

cglue

[bectond]

OK, from now on i'll be nice. However, it disturbs me to her owners state that they are leaving the ABA to join existing leagues or form new ones yet they also state they will continue on with the same faulty business model. They attempt to blame one man for all their failures. That to me is insane, in fact the definition of insanity is to continue to do the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. These owners never worried me much until recently because they were all confined to one disfunctional league. But now these folks (see, I can be nice) are branching out into other leagues and starting new ones without making any changes to what they are doing from a business prospective. The ABA is fastly becoming a virus that is about to infect every aspect of indie basketball. Not because of one man, but because none of the parties invovled seem to be able to come together on the simplest issue and bring about a positive outcome. The ABAs motto should be "OUT FOR SELF". Yes, the culture may have started from the top but I don't think these folks understand that they are part (if not most) of the problem. Somebody (If not me then someone else) has to wake these guys up before the damage every North American market with their own brand of senseless negativity.

[bdaly]

But now these folks (see, I can be nice) are branching out into other leagues and starting new ones without making any changes to what they are doing from a business prospective.
I don't know how you can say this when there haven't been any details about the league released. Your proposed business model in the other thread had some flaws, and I wasn't the only one to make that statement. Let's see how things unfold before making blanket statements like this one. I'm comfortable with a new league that is more regional and has the ABA's good, reliable, well financed teams. If that's what unfolds, I think it can work. But we'll have to wait and see; it's as simple as that. There's enough time that the PBL and CBA could come together; the CBA was more than happy to take weaker ABA teams last season (than those that I'm confident are bolting this year). It'll be an interesting several months.

Finally, what you don't seem to understand on the business side of things is if the CEO isn't flexible, then there isn't much the other teams can do. If anyone is let in the league, the strong teams can come together, but it doesn't matter. There will be financial issues, folding teams, schedule problems, and complete chaos. That's why breaking off is a viable option. There are former ABA teams that have done just fine in new leagues. At least the ones that are properly financed. The CBA took in a few questionable teams like So Cal and Florida last year--hopefully they'll rise again.

[cglue]

It was a troubled season and only we can come together and stop singing change but actually change. That is going to be the key this offseason. I dont believe in leaving a troubled ship that I am aboard, thats too easy to me.


cglue

[bectond]

I don't know how you can say this when there haven't been any details about the league released..

I can see what happened last year. Nothing, No rules or regulations were put into place just of few threats "We'll take your team if you don't show". How come the owners don't become proactive with new owners. Help them before a problem arises.


Your proposed business model in the other thread had some flaws, and I wasn't the only one to make that statement...

Dude, your a habitual point misser. I never gave a business proposal WTH are you talking about. I drop somethings off the top of my head that would work better than what the existing owners were proposing. In another post, you stated how owners have bad grammar when they post. You fail to get the basis of ones argument over and over again. My point has been that these folks don't work well with others and the don't have any rules to fall back on when they don't agree. They don't have any safeguards in place to assist the weaker teams.


Let's see how things unfold before making blanket statements like this one.
I'm comfortable with a new league that is more regional and has the ABA's good, reliable, well financed teams. If that's what unfolds, I think it can work.
.

Loose confederations don't work in the pro sports world. Successful leagues hire a strong executive, and give him or her rules and regulations to enforce.
Why are these folks attempting to re-invent the wheel. I'll tell you why, they don't know what they are doing. I don't have to wait and see because if they continue with the blame game and no rules, regulations or support of each other they will surely fail.



But we'll have to wait and see; it's as simple as that. There's enough time that the PBL and CBA could come together; the CBA was more than happy to take weaker ABA teams last season (than those that I'm confident are bolting this year). It'll be an interesting several months..

If a few ABA teams join the CBA, great. That league has rules in place. If a team decides they don't like a particular hotel while on the road in that league they will have to find another one or pay a huge fine. Just staying home would be unacceptable.



Finally, what you don't seem to understand on the business side of things is if the CEO isn't flexible, then there isn't much the other teams can do. If anyone is let in the league, the strong teams can come together, but it doesn't matter...

No, you don't seem to understand. If they were smart they would have known these things before they invested money and join the league. Are you telling me these owners were unable to do research before they folked over their 10 grand. They either knew what they were getting into or they are.... (i'm being nice now) Most old men are not flexible, I don't get your point. The old man does not prevent teams from talking. Can you prove that Mr. Newman prevents the owners from forming a support group for one another? Mr. Newman seems to be a guy with an idea; however, he does not want to take on any additional expenses nor does he seem organized. All the team owners most likely joined the ABA because they also share his distatse for expenses. That, however does not prevent them from assisting him with his organizational shortcomings. All I have seen is bickering, no new rules or enforcable regulations. Why, because these folks don't want to pay fines that's why.
It has nothing to do with Mr. Newman. What does he care about owners regulating themselves. He has already made his money off the franchise fee

There will be financial issues, folding teams, schedule problems, and complete chaos. That's why breaking off is a viable option. There are former ABA teams that have done just fine in new leagues. At least the ones that are properly financed. The CBA took in a few questionable teams like So Cal and Florida last year--hopefully they'll rise again.

All these issues exist because the owners don't want to spend any money.
They want to increase the franchise fee (which does not cost them anything)
but that will not solve their problems because they are the problem. They want to charge the next guy more money and hope that an increase fee will somehow make that owner a better business person. Teams fold not because some owners lack funding but because the ABA is not organized. Why must teams play 36 games if they don't have enough money to complete an 8 game schedule. Why can't the owners work to prevent the problems before they occur. Mr. Newman has been disorganized all his life (most likly) why don't they let him do what he does best (find new owners) and take over the day to day? Because they are cheap. They don't have the time to do it their selves and they don't want to spend the money to hire someone to do it for them. These folks don't even want to pay their players in most cases, why do you believe they will change their strips once they get out on their own?
Do you really believe they (the so called funded teams) will spend the money it takes to staff a league office? Get real dude, your fooling yourself.

[bdaly]

Yikes, some very questionable business logic here. If you really believe that the CEO of an organization is never at fault and it really comes down to those that are nothing more than puppets (team owners, so called league officers), well, that's certainly contradicts what they teach in business school. It's tough to come up with safeguards when the person at the top is letting in a flood of undercapitalized teams. How do you help out a team that starts a season with $12,000 in the bank? The only way you can is by giving them money which means the top ten teams would end up providing significant "welfare" for most of the league. That's not realistic when there are 20-30 teams without proper funding. Business plans also include the necessary capital, which teams should have included. That is, enough capital to make it through the season if the worst case scenario occurs.

There is so much here to address, but it's not worth the time. I'll agree that some owners should have done more due diligence before joining, but then again, perhaps they believed the false promises. Otherwise, all we can do is wait and see, like it or not. I'll comment as things unfold. Bickering here isn't going to do a thing. I'm interested to see how a new league with the ABA's strongest teams will unfold. You clearly think these teams were a huge part of the problem. Again, we'll just have to wait and see. And with that, I'll let this thread be.

[AConcernedCitizen]

Why can't we talk about what the definition of Minor League or Indie basketball is, for a start?

To me, minor league basketball is defined as teams playing in regional leagues or conferences where attendances are 1,000-3,000 people attending.

How does anyone else define it?

[nksports]

Why can't we talk about what the definition of Minor League or Indie basketball is, for a start?

To me, minor league basketball is defined as teams playing in regional leagues or conferences where attendances are 1,000-3,000 people attending.

How does anyone else define it?

Minor league would be any pro league below the NBA.
Independent would be any league without a formal relationship with the NBA (everything but the D League. The CBA used to have a formal relationship with the NBA, but that ended a few years ago).

[TopSpin]

With the tumultuous ABA postseason behind us, now is a good time for all of us to take a step backward and look at the league, and the state of minor league basketball, anew. Most of us would agree that things have to change in order for the sport to grow at the minor league level. Many would argue that leadership needs to change in order for it to happen.

Here's what I want to toss out there. The way we state our opinions can affect how they are received, regardless of how right we may be. No matter how accurately you believe you have nailed the problem and solution to what ails the ABA, you will be ignored if all you do is insult those who have the power to change things. In short, you catch more flies with honey. This doesn't mean you shouldn't continue to call for change. You should! But we can probably do without more cracks about Egg McMuffins and basement offices. Let's de-personalize this argument to a degree. Yes, if you believe specific individuals are the problem, then they need to be called on it. Let's just keep our criticism to how they've managed things, and not tear them down as people.What amazes me is how come nobody has figured this out yet. How come there's not a legitmate 2nd tier league to the NBA in just about every city. True, the ABA has some issues but at least you can say they are making a effort to do something about it, and at an affordable price. In my opinion, what hurts the ABA is these teams that don't hold up there end of the deal. I mean Joe makes it afforable, but I don't know if it's fair to blame Joe because somebody else doesn't do what they have entered into an agreement to do. No doubt, there business plans needs some work. How about all the other leagues. Could it be that the field is too diluted. I know that the CBA is struggling and I also know that the CBA and the D-League price tag is too high for most.

[psbf]

where Joe reneges on his promises of payment? To me, that's the part that stands out above all else. I admit that I only know of this from reading other posts. But I don't see how you can ignore that.

[Pounder]

I think most people in America define "minor league" as "not major, not college, but players are paid." Trying to mix in "independent" as if it were a noteworthy designation is, to me, irrelevant to the people to whom you're trying to sell tickets.

What's "off" about the ABA that might support bectond's argument? Most leagues are pretty much run by the owners, and the commissioner they hire is given the policies, rules, et cetera to enforce. The commissioner operates at the behest of the owners. Of course, that opens up the possibility of abuse (seems like UHL and some of the arena and indoor football leagues constantly wrestle with "over-salary-cap" rumors and similar issues). HOWEVER, that also involves owners semi-regularly getting together, sharing ideas (if the league works) on marketing and cost containment and what have you. The ABA is run in the opposite manner; the commissioner is very much in charge of the show, even to the point of going public and surviving an ouster. League communications seem to be REQUIRED to go through the front office in situations where, at times, teams could be talking to each other to resolve problems.

Frankly, you would have an awfully hard time convincing me that this is not a ponzi scheme. Joe needs to sell mostly to people who don't have a brain in order to keep regenerating rights fees. The website hardly seems concerned with action on the court. Somehow, some way, I have to wonder if Joe sells some of the equipment required for the "game system." The one argument I hear that might change my mind- and I think it was published in Rochester- is that Joe is simply so nice, yet naive, that he truly expects his system to succeed despite every ounce of scrutiny offered in opposition. Maybe he's passive-aggressive to a fault. The math doesn't add up that way to me; it adds up to a profit-making operation.

With that evidence, and with the APPARENT lack of two-way accountability in the organization, there is a point where I DO blame owners for getting into this. You should not be spending money on a venture when you obviously haven't done sufficient research.

That being said, where bectond's argument falls down- we don't know what's going to happen yet. I do believe it is possible that some owners "grew a brain." Naturally, to me, growing a brain involves either a hostile takeover of Joe's stock or leaving the league, and I'm pretty confident which one will happen. As it is, I'm starting to think that the ABA prefers garnering the attention to gaining integrity. Avert ye eyes.

Meanwhile, for the PBL... it doesn't matter as much what you start with as where you evolve. I think the PBL has less than a 50% chance of surviving 3 years if it gets going, simply because we are talking about owners who have gotten used to a certain rhythm... and may overreact to getting taken by Joe in the first place. Flexibility- fixing what's not working- is the key to survival. Good luck.

[bectond]

Yikes, some very questionable business logic here. If you really believe that the CEO of an organization is never at fault and it really comes down to those that are nothing more than puppets (team owners, so called league officers),.well, that's certainly contradicts what they teach in business school.

First off if you have taken a business class or know anything about business you would know that the CEO is normally a salesmen and a figure head. The board of Directors control the corporation not the CEO. The owners have to take responsibility for their losses because they are the only ones doomed to lose capital not Mr. Newman. Capital loss is defined as the amount by which the purchase price of an asset exceeds the selling price. ABA owners don't seem to sell their assets, their franchises just seem to disappear or vanish. I have even heard that Mr. Newman gives away franchises that were purchased (The Hammond Rollers being one). These owners continue to just abandon their franchises within a year. How can a so called successful owner sell their teams for a profit if Mr. Newman is selling teams for 10,000 (and giving some franchises away for free) and fellow owners are abandoning teams. Mr. Newman does not stand to lose any money therefore, the owners are simply enabling him to undermind their profits (which sports owners see when they sell their franchises. The Enablers are the problem without the owners Mr. Newman would be nothing. These folks normally always lose at least 10,000 (because some never even field a team). The fact that they can't remove him is proof that they and not myself are not wise or well schooled in business. I would have never invested in an ABA franchise.


It's tough to come up with safeguards when the person at the top is letting in a flood of undercapitalized teams. How do you help out a team that starts a season with $12,000 in the bank? The only way you can is by giving them money which means the top ten teams would end up providing significant "welfare" for most of the league. .

Where have up been the lost 20 years? Have you ever heard of the KC Royals, the Montreal Expos or the LA Clippers. Sports leagues have been providing welfare to their weaker clubs for years. Thats why they allow the weak teams to draft first in the draft. As for your question; "how do you help out a team that starts a season with $12,000 in the bank"? You make rules and regulations governing the operating of franchises. If a team only has $12,000 in the bank, then don't schedule that club to play a 36 game schedule. NCAA D-IA football teams play non-money making D-1AA teams all the time. The smaller schools travel to the bigger schools for payday games.
Many black college basketball teams travel for the first 2 months of the season playing for big pay days. Why do these folks (I'm being nice) schedule the so-called strong teams to play the same amount of home games as the weaker teams. If team A averages 3,000 per game and Team B averages 50 a game why does'nt Team B give up home dates and travel to Team A for a share of the gate. This is not rocket science the owners are just not that smart. The real question should be this- Why do the owners weaker teams agree to play a full schedule if they know they only have $12,000. Your asking the wrong questions. Why don't they ask for their schedule to be reduced so that they can finish a season.



That's not realistic when there are 20-30 teams without proper funding. Business plans also include the necessary capital, which teams should have included. That is, enough capital to make it through the season if the worst case scenario occurs..

If you were an owner of a team and you knew Mr. Newman sold teams to every Tom, Dick and Harry why would'nt you put in a provision that states that teams create their own schedule. Once again this is not rocket science, these owners just are not that wise. This is what indie colleges do Notre Dame football has been doing it for years.



There is so much here to address, but it's not worth the time. I'll agree that some owners should have done more due diligence before joining, but then again, perhaps they believed the false promises. Otherwise, all we can do is wait and see, like it or not. I'll comment as things unfold. Bickering here isn't going to do a thing. I'm interested to see how a new league with the ABA's strongest teams will unfold. You clearly think these teams were a huge part of the problem. Again, we'll just have to wait and see. And with that, I'll let this thread be.

These isssues are minor. The problem is the owners, they can't seem to resolve the simplest issues. Leaving the ABA is not going to remedy the lack of intelligence and prudence that these folks have shown. It is truely unreal, all these guys do is b@t@h and complain. Instead of making two or three changes to their system they revolt and now they are attempting to spread their brand of insanity into a new league which will only further upset fans and sponsors. It does not matter how much money a new owner has that arguement is lame. If they don't have a solid track record don't put them on your schedule or pay them to make the trip and pick up an easy W.

[Shootmaster_44]

Why can't we talk about what the definition of Minor League or Indie basketball is, for a start?

To me, minor league basketball is defined as teams playing in regional leagues or conferences where attendances are 1,000-3,000 people attending.

How does anyone else define it?

To me minor league basketball or for that matter minor league sports in general is any league which is not considered the top league in its sport. So for basketball anything that is not the NBA is minor league (for North America). However, a few of the leagues covered here I don't consider minor league, but I will keep this tied to basketball.

As for indy basketball, that to me doesn't exist. The only sport where you can call a league an indy league is baseball and that's only because of the umbrella organization of Minor League Baseball. Since minor league basketball doesn't have that sort of formal structure, it is impossible to call any league an indy league.

[bectond]

That being said, where bectond's argument falls down- we don't know what's going to happen yet. I do believe it is possible that some owners "grew a brain." .

I respectfully disagree, these guys can't agree on anything. They don't work well together. How will these guys change their tune now? It is extremely hard to form a league when the parties are all on one page. It is nearly impossible to do it with folks that refuse to show up for games because they don't like the hotel they are staying in. These owners don't really like each other very much and their actions speak volumes. They never attempted to make any changes last year after they were named league officers. All they did was threaten each other with the death penalty. No solutions to the real problems were addressed just the same old blame game. This mess is as much the teams that are leaving fault as it is Mr. Newmans and the teams that are staying.