Its over..turn the lights off on the way out

The Continental Basketball Association (CBA) forum
tops804
Site Admin
Posts: 1613
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:26 am

Post by tops804 » Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:16 am

[quote=""Pounder""]There were 17 teams in the 1991-92 season.

By 2000...

Connecticut, Fort Wayne, Gary, Grand Rapids, Idaho, La Crosse, Quad City, Rockford, Sioux Falls, Yakima. 10 teams. WAY spread out. No TV, except the occasional local broadcast. Four of those teams didn't survive Thomas... and Idaho spent a year in the ether.

At least most of those cities are close to major airports (from which the cheaper flights are usually found). Flying into Montana or Minot is crazy expensive, and bussing in during winter is no picnic. Not that Pikeville is easy...[/quote]

Seems to me that BET was going to show games (beginning with the 2001
All-Star game) but that obviously never happened. With so many ESPN's
out there, I always thought it was too bad they couldn't go back to their
roots once in a while.

The league still plans it's so-called, Caribbean Summitt, next week. If they
try to pull anything that the owners in the states don't like, I wonder if the
PBL will start getting calls.

This league is still suffering the D-League pickover, and obviously the groups
purchasing multiple teams didn't work. Whatever happened to the return
of the Indiana Alley Cats? Where the CBA is hurting itself, and becoming ABAish.
They are not telling anyone, anything.
Last edited by tops804 on Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
Adios, OSC message boards. (2007-2017)

bectond
Site Admin
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:58 pm

Post by bectond » Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:18 pm

All I know is the CBA was in far worse shape two off-seasons ago. They only had two returning teams (Yakama and Albany), the Alley Cats (who drew flies), Pittsburgh (Still drawing flies) and FOUR Apex owned teams.

Which meant they only had five ownership groups, three of which (you can guess which ones) were not all that hot.

This off-season 4-5 teams will be returning, and RGV seems to be the only weak link. Last year the CBA had five or six dead weight ex-ABA franchises.
Those dead weight ABA escapee franchises are now opting for the PBL (which is a good thing for the long term survival of the CBA!). If the CBA focuses their future expansion on clustering in geographical areas (Say, add teams in Fargo, Brooklyn NY, Wichita Falls, Enid and Wenatchee) instead of wacky caribbean expansion ideas the league could survive if the length of the season were reduced. (48 games is too much).

The CBA has faced and over come far worse off seasons than this one.
Basketball Junkie and Rummikub Champion

DazedAndAmused
Site Admin
Posts: 1066
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 2:36 am

Post by DazedAndAmused » Sat Jun 21, 2008 2:54 pm

[quote=""bectond""]All I know is the CBA was in far worse shape two off-seasons ago. They only had two returning teams (Yakama and Albany), the Alley Cats (who drew flies), Pittsburgh (Still drawing flies) and FOUR Apex owned teams.

Which meant they only had five ownership groups, three of which (you can guess which ones) were not all that hot.

This off-season 4-5 teams will be returning, and RGV seems to be the only weak link. Last year the CBA had five or six dead weight ex-ABA franchises.
Those dead weight ABA escapee franchises are now opting for the PBL (which is a good thing for the long term survival of the CBA!). If the CBA focuses their future expansion on clustering in geographical areas (Say, add teams in Fargo, Brooklyn NY, Wichita Falls, Enid and Wenatchee) instead of wacky caribbean expansion ideas the league could survive if the length of the season were reduced. (48 games is too much).

The CBA has faced and over come far worse off seasons than this one.[/quote]

Internally, the CBA may not be worse off than it was 2 or 3 years ago. But, they can't operate in a vacuum. That's the issue now. 2 or 3 years ago the economic situation was not the same. The affect on attendance is just one symptom. Operating costs will be much higher (in an already bad operating cost structure.) Sponsors will be harder to come by, and most importantly for the CBA, quality ownership groups will be few and far between.

That said, the PBL is not the savior of independent minor league basketball, and they have to weather the same storm. But, they have better positioned themselves with clustering of teams (relatively speaking) and shorter season. That may be good luck or good foresight... I don't know. If their vetting process (or associated controls) are solid, they may be all that we have, except for David Stern-subsidized ball.

Their last batch of added ABA defectors were not that bad (eg, Vt, Manchester) so I don't think that's an issue. (The CBA courted those teams too.)

psbf
Site Admin
Posts: 3884
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:41 pm

Post by psbf » Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:05 pm

Bectond, you can say what you want about our attendence, but we had a couple of games where it improved and I would like to think that is a positive sign for us.
DandA, that's true about our economy. That will make it harder to draw more owners and fans with things being harder to purchase. As I said, I feel the Carribean idea is a mistake as well.

TEN
Site Admin
Posts: 754
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:34 pm

Post by TEN » Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:06 pm

Talked to someone very high up in CBA...he told me that the PBL is putting out a "offer you can't refuse" to new franchises....To be honest...I don't know how they would do it...They take care of all of your travel, uniforms, etc....all you have to do is pay the players and staff basically....and from what i understand no entry fee.....could that be right?

Boy they must have some pretty solid sponsors! I have a hard time believing that info!

JAKMAN
Site Admin
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 1:25 am

Post by JAKMAN » Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:55 pm

TEN, I don't doubt your information. I just don't understand why anybody would believe the PBL would pay all these costs in the middle on an economic meltdown.

If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.

Crystal Ball
Site Admin
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:04 pm

Post by Crystal Ball » Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:45 pm

Look for an announcement in the very near future of a completed merger between the CBA and PBL,a few details need to be worked out about front office titles and some issues with two person verus three person officiating and things of this nature.

The merger is going to happen,bottom line

psbf
Site Admin
Posts: 3884
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:41 pm

Post by psbf » Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:06 pm

Very interesting! That would explain all the lack of official news lately. But I agree that this 'it's on me' deal from the PBL does seem unreal. Especially with gas prices so being so high.
So, I guess the merger will soon be official. I'm still cautious about it, though.

bectond
Site Admin
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:58 pm

Post by bectond » Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:18 pm

[quote=""DazedAndAmused""]Internally, the CBA may not be worse off than it was 2 or 3 years ago. But, they can't operate in a vacuum.

That said, the PBL is not the savior of independent minor league basketball, and they have to weather the same storm. But, they have better positioned themselves with clustering of teams (relatively speaking) and shorter season. That may be good luck or good foresight... I don't know. If their vetting process (or associated controls) are solid, they may be all that we have, except for David Stern-subsidized ball.

Their last batch of added ABA defectors were not that bad (eg, Vt, Manchester) so I don't think that's an issue. (The CBA courted those teams too.)[/quote]

IMO the CBA should not have attempted to recruit any of the teams the PBL cherry picked from the ABA this off-season. I’m not knocking the PBL, I just don’t believe the CBA should actively pursue existing teams that have not functioned under the umbrella of a structured stable basketball league. Those team owners may not understand the importance of collecting league dues, having a strong league executive or following international professional basketball rules. It would be akin to attempting to sell value to a consumer obsessed with price. A meal at Ruth Chris cost more than one Ruby Tuesday’s, which is more expensive than Wendy’s. Ruby Tuesday’s would be in a world of trouble if they failed to understand their place in the market and foolishly hired a Dairy Queen executive to improve their menu because Dairy Queen’s stock performed well last quarter (The cadet should have never been hired). Ruth Chris would not attempt to emulate Wendy’s approach to selling meat products or poach Wendy’s franchisees.

I’m attempting to illustrate that the D-League, CBA and PBL should all have different missions and each league should understand it’s place in the market. The CBA has to focus on strengthening the league brand. That is done by finding the right cities (has a professional arena with open weekend dates), where the entertainment options limited and strong ownership groups can be found. (By strong ownership groups, I’m referring to groups with 10-20 members that can share the cost of operating a franchise for years to come).

The PBL could become a fine alternative for many former ABA club owners because the PBL adds structure while retaining the confederate approach the ABA uses at a fraction of the cost of centralized basketball leagues (D-League and CBA).

The CBA missed the boat when they failed recruit the former USBL clubs. Those teams were familiar how a structured leagues operate, they could have been sold on value as opposed to price. As it stands now, the CBA should focus more on branding, if ex-ABA teams feel that the PBL is the right choice for them- cool. All that means is a lot of current franchise owners are beginning to understand their place in the market (Pittsburgh should be in the PBL because they can’t draw flies in a mid-major market), the CBA simply has to find new ownership groups that fit their mission or fold up the tent.
Basketball Junkie and Rummikub Champion

TEN
Site Admin
Posts: 754
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:34 pm

Post by TEN » Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:48 pm

The solid USBL teams (Dodge, Kansas, Oklahoma) didn't have much interest in playing in the CBA. Those teams realized the niche they were in playing during the summer worked best for them. Kept expenses down, kept the talent level up....not competing for dates and fan support with local colleges and high schools (would have lost that battle).

I still think a good viable spring/summer league where the players make around $500 a week plus room and board can be successful if run correctly.

Prime example of the player quality issue....DeAnthony Bowden wasn't good enough to make our Oklahoma squad last spring in free agent camp....ends up with a CBA Championship...

In the USBL, you could at least get some pretty dang good players to return your calls, even if you couldn't actually get them to Kansas or Oklahoma.

Post Reply

Return to “CBA”