Nathaniel S. Butler/Getty Images
I know Outside The NBA is a basketball site (tell your friends!), but I’m going to start off here talking about something different. Is that okay, are other leagues’ economic and competitive models fair game? I say yes. So, prepare to read the first and only basketball post inspired by the United Soccer League. I know, none of you have heard of it; that’s okay. Let me explain and try and follow along.
Most sports fans in North America have at least heard the name “Major League Soccer”. They assume that because of its name, its marketing, and the reporting it gets in major sports news outlets, it is the biggest and best soccer league in the continent. This is/was a lie. It may be biggest, especially in dollar terms, but it’s not the best. But how can that be? It’s simpler than you’d think. MLS has a (restrictively low) salary cap, as well as an economic model that would make Josef Stalin proud. The USL, on the other hand, is a traditional soccer league. The clubs’ budgets and stadiums are constrained only by supply and demand. While most USL teams never had the funds to really go after players; some did. Montreal, Vancouver, Portland and Seattle were all at the top tier of the USL economic pyramid of late. Vancouver being part owned by a local millionaire and part owned by sometimes comedian Steve Nash; Seattle being owned partly by Microsoft, partly by wannabe bowler Drew Carey. And Montreal getting its support from a successful local businessman and a… very friendly government in both municipal and provincial levels. USL teams had a tendency to do VERY well when pitted against MLS competition.
In fact, in last year’s inaugural CONCACAF Champions League, out of the final 8 clubs who made the “Championship round”, there were two USL clubs to one MLS club. The one MLS club lost in the quarter finals, while one USL team made it to the semi-finals and the other gave up 5 goals in the 2nd half of the 2nd game to lose 5-4 in one of the single greatest collapses I have ever seen. However without that collapse 2 of the 4 best clubs in North America would have been USL clubs, the other 2 being Mexican. Nary an MLS club to be seen. Then, we see a USL club make the “jump” to MLS. How did Seattle do? Well they missed winning the Supporters Shield (regular season title) by 2 points, and finished tied for 2nd in the Western Conference. This was both a great moment for the USL, and also its death knell.
You see of the 4 clubs I mentioned as standouts from the USL: Seattle is already now in the MLS. Portland joins the league for the 2010 season, Vancouver joins in 2011 and Montreal is widely assumed to be the next franchise admitted. When a league loses four of its best (off the field anyways) clubs, it’s generally not good for the health of the overall league. Imagine the NBA if the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks and Bulls decided to join the Euroleague. Could the NBA survive? Maybe. Is it even close to the most marquee league in the world? Clearly the answer is no. So given that this situation happened to the USL, even a casual observer could see there was trouble brewing. Recently however something very interesting happened. Vancouver, Montreal and 6 or 7 other clubs have broken away from the USL to form their own league (assuming they get the blessing of US soccer, who oversee everything soccer related). Why is this interesting? Well for starters, the league would be called the NASL. If you know your North American sports history, that name should ring a bell. But more importantly they have stated their desire to be a 2nd-tier league below the MLS. Not in the MLB/AAA minor league relationship but in the Premier League and Coca-Cola League style relationship. That’s right. We could be looking at a second tier of soccer in North America where teams can get promoted from and relegated to. Maybe not in the short term (there are tons and tons of red-tape, as well as monetary and social issues to overcome first). But it is an actual real possibility. Why is this interesting to any of you, dear NBA fan? Simple.
Soccer and basketball share a number of similarities. Both are free-flowing reactionary games that when played properly are beautiful to watch. Both put a premium (in general) on athleticism and skill verses size and strength (obviously not always: see DeSagana Diop and Peter Crouch). Most importantly: both games are played around the world in a completely different way than they are played here in the northern half of the Americas. Basketball in Europe has promotion and relegation, too. And if there was ever a league that could be helped by such a setup, it’s the NBA. The NBA traditionally has the haves and the have-nots. The haves are generally the same few clubs, give or take a dominant draft pick or two. The have-nots are almost always the same clubs, unless one of the good teams decides to take a vacation for a few years (like the Knicks). So why not take a page from their North American Soccer brethren and embrace success and failure. So here’s my proposal: that the NBA split into Champions League and Continental League. Champions League would involve the top 14 clubs, and the NBA Continental League would have the bottom 16.
The catch: while the two leagues play games against each other, the top 8 clubs from each league get into their own playoffs. The top 8 from the Champions League would be competing for the Larry O’Brien trophy, and basically be the same playoff system we have now, just smaller. The top 8 from the Continental league would play for the right to enter into the Champions League the following season. The top 4 teams from the Continental League Playoffs would get promoted to the Champions League for the next year. Which begs the question, if the top 4 advance, why keep playing after the quarter finals in the Continental League playoffs? Simple. They are playing for draft slots in the lottery. The number 1 pick overall in the draft goes to the winner of the Continental League, to help them compete in the Champions League. The 2nd pick goes to 2nd place in the Continental, 3rd goes to 3rd place (there would need to be a 3 vs 4 game to decide who is the 3rd seed here), 4th to 4th, then the lottery opens to every team regardless of record; be they from either Champions or Continental Leagues, with a single exception to be used as a bonus carrot.
So how would we decide which of the bottom 6 Champions League teams will not be relegated to the Continental League? Another playoff, where the bottom 4 teams are relegated. Well, you say it’s a 6 team tourney, and 2 teams “win” by staying in Champions League, so how do we keep the finals game of this tourney interesting since they already won the right to stay up? Simple: the club that “wins” the relegation playoffs are awarded the 5th overall pick in the draft as a reward. So the draft order would go:
1) Winner of the Promotion Playoffs (insert sponsor name here)
2) 2nd place in the Promotion Playoffs
3) 3rd place in the Promotion Playoffs
4) 4th place in the Promotion Playoffs
5) 1st place in the Relegation Playoffs
6) (and every pick afterward) straight lottery, regardless of which league the team is based in or their record. Totally random.
Why do the winners of the relegation tourney get the 5th pick, while the 4th team from the Continental League gets 4th? Well, the winner of the relegation round was still in the relegation round. They beat out 5 clubs. A semi final team in the Continental League beat out 12 other teams; and had a harder and longer route to the Champions League. Presumably also, the Continental League team would require more help to compete in the Champions League. The winner of the relegation round is already there, and clearly at least close to competitive.
What would this setup mean for basketball? Well, the top 8 teams out of the 30 would be competing for the NBA title. The next 6 would be competing fiercely to not be relegated. The next 8 teams would be competing for both promotion and draft standing. Basically, instead of between 4 and 8 teams playing meaningful basketball games all year and competing for something big, 22 teams would be. And they would be competing hard. The carrots (promotion, draft standing, NBA title) are big. The sticks (relegation, lost revenue, lost fans, lost TV dollars, worse access to talent in the draft) are bigger. No longer could teams be rewarded for tanking. And additionally, there are now 3 series of playoffs with various rewards coming out of them that would ALL make for dramatic and exciting games. Whether the 3 playoff brackets are settled in a Euroleague style round robin, a March Madness style bracket, or an NBA style 7 game series, every game would be meaningful. Every game would have intensity and would make for riveting TV. Suddenly, instead of there being between 16 and 20 “irrelevant” teams every year, there are only a maximum of 8. And finally, teams are not rewarded for incompetency. If this all seems complicated, well it is. But this is basically what it would look like if David Stern had implemented this system for this season (based on last season’s results).
The NBA Champions League would feature:
Cleveland
LA Lakers
Boston
Denver
Orlando
San Antonio
Portland
Atlanta
Houston
Miami
Dallas
Philadelphia
New Orleans
Chicago
NBA Championship Playoffs
Cleveland vs. Atlanta, Lakers vs. Portland, Boston vs. San Antonio, Orlando vs. Denver
The relegation round would have:
Houston vs. Chicago, Miami vs. New Orleans, Dallas vs. Philadelphia
*Before you criticize that the above teams won’t get to compete for the NBA Championship, remember they would have had all year to play against the other clubs in the Champions League. If they couldn’t hang over 64 games, why do they deserve a title shot? The Champions League is for winners and it’s sink or swim.
The Continental League would feature:
Utah
Detroit
Phoenix
Indiana
Charlotte
Golden State
New Jersey
Minnesota
Milwaukee
Memphis
Toronto
Oklahoma City
New York
LA Clippers
Washington
Sacramento
Promotion/Lottery Playoffs
Utah vs. Minnesota, Detroit vs. New Jersey, Phoenix vs. Golden State, Indiana vs. Charlotte
Imagine: Phoenix or Utah not only would probably wind up with the number 1 pick, but would be going back into the Champions league. Imagine John Wall joining the Suns. Seriously, think about that for a second. That type of scenario could happen EVERY YEAR. Hell, you don’t think the first round of those playoffs won’t be some of the most intensely competitive basketball in the whole NBA, top to bottom? Then the fight for John Wall after?! Wow. The only teams who would literally have nothing to play for would be the teams at the VERY bottom of the Continental League. The worst 3 teams in the NBA. Every single other team is in play to either be promoted, be relegated, win the NBA title, or get one of the top 5 picks in the draft. And even those teams who realistically aren’t going to get promoted still need to TRY to, because if they want a pick in the top 8 or 9, they have to fight for it. If they don’t make the top 4 spots in the promotion playoffs after all, they are in a lottery with 25 other teams. Not great chances. There are 8 teams promoted and relegated, 1 team wins the title and there’s that 5th overall pick available too. So 6 teams can ‘win’ something every year, not just 1 or 2 (currently you CAN win the draft lottery, which I don’t count since you don’t “win” the lottery, you lose it), and 4 teams can actually lose (where none can now). The stakes are higher, the games are more balanced (since bad teams are playing more games against bad teams, and good teams more games against good teams), more entertaining and more rewarding.
Speaking of teams playing like teams, the schedule would have to be altered as well to make this system work. Teams would not play a home and home against every team in the league. Instead, teams would only play half of the teams in the other league, rotating annually. So 16 games would be “out of conference” so to speak. In addition to the non-conference games, I’d schedule 64 games within the conference. 2 home and home series with every team from within the conference for the Continental League. For Champions League that would be 2 home and home series with every team from within the Champions League, plus 8 extra ‘rivalry’ games that the NBA could allocate as they see fit (e.g. an extra home and home series for Boston/LA, an extra home and home between the Knicks and Nets. Gotta build rivalries somehow!)
With this system, no matter what almost every team in the league is in contention for something, but there is still only 1 trophy to win. And it would become MUCH harder to win that trophy without bottom-feeders to pick on. Think of those dog years when the Pistons were the only team in the Eastern Conference and got a free pass to at least the conference finals. Nuh-uh. Never again. Those Pistons would be playing the best of the best all year. No nights off. If a good team blows a game against a bad team, it’s a punishing loss. A bad team beats a good club and it’s a major victory. The biggest hook for me in all this though: Would anyone NOT be interested in the post season if it was set up like this? Even the regular season means SO much more (since making the Champions League playoffs ensures that you aren’t relegated, and missing the Continental League playoffs ensures you aren’t promoted. This hurts even more when you remember bad teams aren’t rewarded with a top 5 draft pick).
So what does the NBA stand to gain from this setup? Instead of seeing empty seats at a midseason Memphis vs. Minnesota game, it would actually be an important game that would sell tickets. Since those teams play each other 8 times, those games go a long way towards getting in to the Promotion Playoffs. Also while the season would be shortened by 2 games, there would be far more playoff revenue coming in to the league. A lot more big TV games, a lot more advertising opportunities. Plus the home playoff dates which would obviously be premium games, not to mention the merchandise sales that go with having a successful team.
Beyond that there’s the inherent drama and extra excitement for fans league wide since almost every team is in contention for something. Plus since we’d generally have like teams playing likes, every game would theoretically be closer. Every playoff series would be THAT much tighter. Good teams would get rewarded, bad teams get punished. Plus the extra intensity and added rivalry games could really create some competitive games. That should be the NBA’s goal after all. The more competitive games, the more chances teams have to win, the more people watch and buy tickets and buy jerseys and watch T.V. Sure, this is all probably a pipe dream, restructuring a league once it’s started is all but impossible. But a guy can dream, right?
