BBL Big Bash League Expansion Thread

[Tassieboy]

Launceston could see a bigger slice of the ever growing Big Bash League, Cricket Tasmania chief executive Nick Cummins says.

Speaking on the Northern leg of his statewide tour on Wednesday, Cummins said Northern Tasmanian fans may see more of the Hobart Hurricanes beyond their maiden match at UTAS Stadium against Sydney Thunder on December 30.

“Cricket Australia have expressed a desire to continue to expand the Big Bash in terms of games, not just clubs,” Cummins said.

“We have an aspiration that it will go to a full home and away season and what that means is seven home games in Tasmania (up from five in 2017-18). Because of the window and market saturation I don’t think we would be wanting to play all of those games in Hobart so that means there is more opportunity for more Big Bash in Launceston and Hobart.”

Source: http://www.examiner.com.au/story/4828797/northern-team-talks-to-get-underway-soon/?cs=96

 

[fantasyunit]

Source: http://www.examiner.com.au/story/4828797/northern-team-talks-to-get-underway-soon/?cs=96

A full home and away season would be glorious. Should be able to fit the extra 16 games required into pretty much the same 48 day window used for this seasons fixture, can certainly keep it under two months. I hope they move on it in the next year or two. Don't think more teams is necessary.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

A full home and away season would be glorious. Should be able to fit the extra 16 games required into pretty much the same 48 day window used for this seasons fixture, can certainly keep it under two months. I hope they move on it in the next year or two. Don't think more teams is necessary.

More likely the season is extended earlier in December or later in February. CA aren't going to cannablise the audience by playing two games at once and Ten (or whoever) won't want games on weekday afternoons AEDT.

 

[JackOutback]

I think it's more important to them to keep it within the school holiday timeframe. That has certainly played a role in its success. Double headers most days wouldn't cannibalise the audience.

 

[nobbyiscool]

A full home and away season would be glorious. Should be able to fit the extra 16 games required into pretty much the same 48 day window used for this seasons fixture, can certainly keep it under two months. I hope they move on it in the next year or two. Don't think more teams is necessary.

I think they're probably cooking the goose that laid the golden egg by expanding from 8 games, to 10 games, to 14 games each in the space of a couple of years.

And if/when they do it, they're going to do it in a strategic way that makes the broadcasters - not CA - pay for the extra games.

 

[fantasyunit]

I think they're probably cooking the goose that laid the golden egg by expanding from 8 games, to 10 games, to 14 games each in the space of a couple of years.

And if/when they do it, they're going to do it in a strategic way that makes the broadcasters - not CA - pay for the extra games.

Of course. I just think a full home and away season is important to make it a more legitimate competition, so looking forward to them continuing to move in that direction.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I think it's more important to them to keep it within the school holiday timeframe. That has certainly played a role in its success. Double headers most days wouldn't cannibalise the audience.

A doubleheader isn't playing games at the same time. There can't be a game in Perth every weeknight to make doubleheaders happen.

And if/when the BBL gets to the point of full home and away seasons it'll be past being a school holiday only thing. It's still novel after 6 years and only 4 on free-to-air. That's not going to be the case a decade from now.

 

[Matchu]

I think they're probably cooking the goose that laid the golden egg by expanding from 8 games, to 10 games, to 14 games each in the space of a couple of years.

And if/when they do it, they're going to do it in a strategic way that makes the broadcasters - not CA - pay for the extra games.

You make a good point. The previous format (8 games) allowed each team to play every other team in the league once and local rivals twice. The two biggest markets in this country are Melbourne and Sydney so it makes sense for them to have local rivalries. It ensures at least four blockbusters each year when the local derbies occur.

So where to from here? 10 rounds really does lend itself to the inclusion of two extra teams. We know South East Queensland is the third largest market in Australia (3.5 million) so wouldn't it make sense to add another two blockbuster derbies each season in the next largest market? To further that point, the Gold Coast is the largest market in Australia that doesn't already have a team so that would be another reason to start a second team in South East Queensland. Then you need to decide if it's worth creating another team in the fourth biggest market (Perth) for more local derby blockbusters or explore the option of Geelong/Canberra. I'd be leaning toward another WA-based team because it would open more scheduling options with the time difference. There's also the added benefit of a new stadium in Perth.

Therefore, if I was deciding what to do over the next few years, I'd introduce two new teams in Fremantle and the Gold Coast.

 

[The_Reaper]

You make a good point. The previous format (8 games) allowed each team to play every other team in the league once and local rivals twice. The two biggest markets in this country are Melbourne and Sydney so it makes sense for them to have local rivalries. It ensures at least four blockbusters each year when the local derbies occur.

So where to from here? 10 rounds really does lend itself to the inclusion of two extra teams. We know South East Queensland is the third largest market in Australia (3.5 million) so wouldn't it make sense to add another two blockbuster derbies each season in the next largest market? To further that point, the Gold Coast is the largest market in Australia that doesn't already have a team so that would be another reason to start a second team in South East Queensland. Then you need to decide if it's worth creating another team in the fourth biggest market (Perth) for more local derby blockbusters or explore the option of Geelong/Canberra. I'd be leaning toward another WA-based team because it would open more scheduling options with the time difference. There's also the added benefit of a new stadium in Perth.

Therefore, if I was deciding what to do over the next few years, I'd introduce two new teams in Fremantle and the Gold Coast.

It will be Canberra over Fremantle.

 

[Matchu]

It will be Canberra over Fremantle.

What makes you say that? What does Canberra have to offer?

 

[Bomberboyokay]

What makes you say that? What does Canberra have to offer?

It's a city not a suburb of Perth for one thing.

 

[JackOutback]

A doubleheader isn't playing games at the same time. There can't be a game in Perth every weeknight to make doubleheaders happen.

20 games (for the finalists) in 48 days is too many. And if/when the BBL gets to the point of full home and away seasons it'll be past being a school holiday only thing. It's still novel after 6 years and only 4 on free-to-air. That's not going to be the case a decade from now.

I don't accept that it's too many games. They are three hour games, half of which you are sitting on your hands. Could easily play every second day.

 

[nobbyiscool]

You make a good point. The previous format (8 games) allowed each team to play every other team in the league once and local rivals twice. The two biggest markets in this country are Melbourne and Sydney so it makes sense for them to have local rivalries. It ensures at least four blockbusters each year when the local derbies occur.

So where to from here? 10 rounds really does lend itself to the inclusion of two extra teams. We know South East Queensland is the third largest market in Australia (3.5 million) so wouldn't it make sense to add another two blockbuster derbies each season in the next largest market? To further that point, the Gold Coast is the largest market in Australia that doesn't already have a team so that would be another reason to start a second team in South East Queensland. Then you need to decide if it's worth creating another team in the fourth biggest market (Perth) for more local derby blockbusters or explore the option of Geelong/Canberra. I'd be leaning toward another WA-based team because it would open more scheduling options with the time difference. There's also the added benefit of a new stadium in Perth.

Therefore, if I was deciding what to do over the next few years, I'd introduce two new teams in Fremantle and the Gold Coast.

I never want to see any sporting code ever go to the Gold Coast again. It has always been, and likely will always be a graveyard for sporting team. The Suns & TItans would've both gone **** up if it weren't for the respective codes propping them up.

I think Perth is an interesting one. The Scorchers have been the competitions biggest success story, both on and off the field. And the creation of the new Perth Stadium, along with the ongoing use of the WACA, lends itself to another 2nd team. On the other hand though, the Scorchers seem pretty well established. There's a strong likelihood that a 2nd team with only the ground as the major point of difference isn't supported. (If it weren't for the size of Melbourne, I don't think the Stars and Renegades would be sustainable given the lack of differentiation between the teams.)

So with that said, I don't know who the next 2 cabs off the rank are likely to be. And in the absence of any really obvious contenders, I would say that expansion isn't and shouldn't be a priority. I'd like a Canberra team, but I don't see it as essential, and their isn't an obvious "partner" to join them to maintain an even number of teams - especially when a Canberra team would draw players from Sydney, which means you can't then add somewhere like Newcastle as the other team.

I don't know how the New Zealanders go about a domestic T20 competition, but I'm probably one of few people that thinks NZ - and more specifically NZ players who would only miss games to play for NZ - could add a lot to the competition.

 

[nobbyiscool]

I don't accept that it's too many games. They are three hour games, half of which you are sitting on your hands. Could easily play every second day.

It doesn't give much time for recovery, coaching, traveling, and the "family time" that many people use to argue against Christmas Eve/Day games (I'm not one of those people.)

I guess the thing about cramming that many games in - aside from the "cooking the goose" that I alluded to earlier - is that you're starting to stretch the depth a lot more. If you're playing that many games, you probably need to add at least another 2 players to each squad.

 

[Marklar_33]

A doubleheader isn't playing games at the same time. There can't be a game in Perth every weeknight to make doubleheaders happen.

20 games (for the finalists) in 48 days is too many. And if/when the BBL gets to the point of full home and away seasons it'll be past being a school holiday only thing. It's still novel after 6 years and only 4 on free-to-air. That's not going to be the case a decade from now.

Where did you get 20 games from? 16 for the finalists

 

[The_Reaper]

What makes you say that? What does Canberra have to offer?

As Bomberboyokay points out its a city of 400,000 people in a market where people have to travel a few hours to attend a match (whereas once the Perth Stadium comes in pretty much everyone in Perth will be able to attend matches). Canberra's obviously going to grow over the decades as well.

And most importantly over the last four or five years, CA has really increased the amount of cricket being played in Canberra. They now get an ODI match every year and will probably get test matches sooner rather than later (possibly at the expense of Hobart). CA obviously sees Canberra as a place they want to play more games so its actually probably the next in line (Gold Coast after that).

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Fremantle team = Perth 2. People seem to think it's a separate place because of the AFL team's name.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I never want to see any sporting code ever go to the Gold Coast again. It has always been, and likely will always be a graveyard for sporting team. The Suns & TItans would've both gone **** up if it weren't for the respective codes propping them up.

Clive Palmer manages to destroy mining companies up in wingnut Queensland so I don't think Gold Coast can be blamed for his soccer team being a **** up. Moreover, as the sixth largest city in Australia organisations will keep putting teams there. A bunch of rugby league teams failing 20 years ago or what goes in the flipping NBL isn't important.

I think Perth is an interesting one. The Scorchers have been the competitions biggest success story, both on and off the field. And the creation of the new Perth Stadium, along with the ongoing use of the WACA, lends itself to another 2nd team. On the other hand though, the Scorchers seem pretty well established. There's a strong likelihood that a 2nd team with only the ground as the major point of difference isn't supported. (If it weren't for the size of Melbourne, I don't think the Stars and Renegades would be sustainable given the lack of differentiation between the teams.)

The WACA is a shithole. International cricket and the BBL will never play there again. If a second Perth team comes in they'll use Perth Stadium.

So with that said, I don't know who the next 2 cabs off the rank are likely to be. And in the absence of any really obvious contenders, I would say that expansion isn't and shouldn't be a priority. I'd like a Canberra team, but I don't see it as essential, and their isn't an obvious "partner" to join them to maintain an even number of teams - especially when a Canberra team would draw players from Sydney, which means you can't then add somewhere like Newcastle as the other team.

Gold Coast and Canberra will be next.

 

[ioppolo]

Fremantle would be no different to having a team based in Rockingham. In fact the city of Rockingham may actually be bigger than Freo council.

 

[Matchu]

It's a city not a suburb of Perth for one thing.

Fremantle team = Perth 2. People seem to think it's a separate place because of the AFL team's name.

You seem to have contradicted yourself a bit here. I clearly pointed out a Fremantle franchise would be playing at the new Perth Stadium so I'm not sure where the confusion originated. It's just a naming convention to differentiate themselves from the Scorchers and it makes sense because the Perth public are conditioned to the name due to the AFL.

I never want to see any sporting code ever go to the Gold Coast again. It has always been, and likely will always be a graveyard for sporting team. The Suns & TItans would've both gone **** up if it weren't for the respective codes propping them up.

I think Perth is an interesting one. The Scorchers have been the competitions biggest success story, both on and off the field. And the creation of the new Perth Stadium, along with the ongoing use of the WACA, lends itself to another 2nd team. On the other hand though, the Scorchers seem pretty well established. There's a strong likelihood that a 2nd team with only the ground as the major point of difference isn't supported. (If it weren't for the size of Melbourne, I don't think the Stars and Renegades would be sustainable given the lack of differentiation between the teams.)

So with that said, I don't know who the next 2 cabs off the rank are likely to be. And in the absence of any really obvious contenders, I would say that expansion isn't and shouldn't be a priority. I'd like a Canberra team, but I don't see it as essential, and their isn't an obvious "partner" to join them to maintain an even number of teams - especially when a Canberra team would draw players from Sydney, which means you can't then add somewhere like Newcastle as the other team.

I don't know how the New Zealanders go about a domestic T20 competition, but I'm probably one of few people that thinks NZ - and more specifically NZ players who would only miss games to play for NZ - could add a lot to the competition.

Well be prepared to be disappointed because I'm fairly sure the BBL will be expanding into the Gold Coast in the next five years.

As Bomberboyokay points out its a city of 400,000 people in a market where people have to travel a few hours to attend a match (whereas once the Perth Stadium comes in pretty much everyone in Perth will be able to attend matches). Canberra's obviously going to grow over the decades as well.

And most importantly over the last four or five years, CA has really increased the amount of cricket being played in Canberra. They now get an ODI match every year and will probably get test matches sooner rather than later (possibly at the expense of Hobart). CA obviously sees Canberra as a place they want to play more games so its actually probably the next in line (Gold Coast after that).

Didn't CA recently state they were looking to expand into markets that didn't already have international cricket regularly being played?

 

[The_Reaper]

Fremantle would be no different to having a team based in Rockingham. In fact the city of Rockingham may actually be bigger than Freo council.

Actually Rockingham has more of a distinct identity, is further away and has a much larger population (especially if you make it Peel).

Still not enough for an actual team though but at least there is a difference.

 

[The_Reaper]

You seem to have contradicted yourself a bit here. I clearly pointed out a Fremantle franchise would be playing at the new Perth Stadium so I'm not sure where the confusion originated. It's just a naming convention to differentiate themselves from the Scorchers and it makes sense because the Perth public are conditioned to the name due to the AFL.


Well be prepared to be disappointed because I'm fairly sure the BBL will be expanding into the Gold Coast in the next five years.


Didn't CA recently state they were looking to expand into markets that didn't already have international cricket regularly being played?

And then proceeded to give the Sixes, Stars and Perth an extra home game each.

 

[Matchu]

And then proceeded to give the Sixes, Stars and Perth an extra home game each.

It seems like they are just dipping their toes in the water this season with these being the only regional games:

The Hurricanes are going to Launceston, the Renegades should be going to Geelong, the Strikers will mostly play Perth in the NT and the Thunder will probably play in Canberra. If it weren't for the Commonwealth Games, you would have seen Brisbane playing on the Gold Coast as well.

 

[Greenstar5]

I think the Gold Coast will be next cab off the rank for a team.
600k people and growing.
Located in the SEQ urban area of 3.5 million, creating a second team with a rivial up the M1.
Gold Coast full of holiday makers over the Christmas break.
The big bash style, handfull of games, cheap tickets, good night of entertainment, music. People arnt as attached to their BBL as their footy teams, I think people go to see a bit of exciting cricket fun night out.

I would think any games in the GC would fill the 25k at Carrara.

 

[Matchu]

I think the Gold Coast will be next cab off the rank for a team.
600k people and growing.
Located in the SEQ urban area of 3.5 million, creating a second team with a rivial up the M1.
Gold Coast full of holiday makers over the Christmas break.
The big bash style, handfull of games, cheap tickets, good night of entertainment, music. People arnt as attached to their BBL as their footy teams, I think people go to see a bit of exciting cricket fun night out.

I would think any games in the GC would fill the 25k at Carrara.

The split between rugby league and Aussie rules fans on the Gold Coast is about 60/40 but one thing they do agree on is cricket so you would see sports fans from both codes attending cricket matches. The shorter season probably suits the Gold Coast's sporting climate as well.