Stern Sets Sights on Global Domination

At the 2008 All-Star Extravaganza and Public Relations Weekend, NBA Commissioner David Stern reiterated his interest in establishing franchises in Europe. Since Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Michael Jordan saved the NBA in the eighties, Stern as focused on the game's globalization, and particularly the NBA brand. In late 2007, Stern made his move into China; Europe appears to be the next step.

After Stern's proclamation, CNNSI's Ian Thomsen wrote:

"European basketball needs the NBA. The arcane federations that run basketball in Europe have been unable to find common ground and grow their sport. European basketball is strictly minor league with little hope of becoming profitable, much less of challenging the popularity of soccer. The presence of the NBA would create new interest in basketball and elevate interest in the local leagues and clubs."

Thomsen and Stern miss the point, to a large degree. Thomsen criticizes European basketball because it is not profitable; but, for many in Europe, sporting clubs do not exist for profit. In Europe, to use parallels in the United States, the local YMCA, Parks and Recreation, high school, university and an NBA franchise would be under one entity. The goal in Europe is not to increase the club's value and never would a club move for greater profit, like with the Seattle Supersonics. The European club system and the NBA are incompatible; they exist for different reasons with different purposes.

Europeans enjoy the NBA for entertainment. Basketball fans see games and highlight shows on satellite or cable television. However, basketball people in Europe - at least in my experience - believe the basketball played in European leagues is better than that played in the NBA. The NBA is an entertainment-based league built around superstars, while Europeans appreciate the local clubs with local players battling against neighboring towns and cities. They root passionately for their own club, but watch NBA games like they watch the And1 Mix-Tapes.

FIBA runs basketball worldwide - except in the United States. To move into Europe, the NBA needs a way around FIBA. The NBA could simply place its own franchises in major cities, as has been proposed. However, will locals support NBA franchises instead of their local clubs? In Madrid, will the locals turn their back on Real Madrid and pay hundreds more in ticket prices to watch the NBA's Madrid Matadors? If the NBA insists on moving to Europe, the best locations may be those without competition: while England and Ireland have domestic leagues, neither is very competitive when compared to the leagues in Spain, Greece and Italy, and no teams in England or Ireland have the local support and following of Panathanikos or Maccabi Tel-Aviv. Adding a franchise in London and another in Dublin - where numerous American companies have their European Headquarters - could work. Adding additional teams in the U.K. could create the Far-Atlantic Division (Belfast and Glasgow?) and probably put the BBL (British Basketball League) completely out of business, but this approach fails to create a greater following throughout the continent, which largely defeats the purpose of adding teams on the other side of the Atlantic. However, trying to supplant the local clubs in Madrid, Rome, Berlin, Paris or Athens will not work, in my opinion.

Established clubs would have to change their entire operation to join the NBA, or the NBA would have to change its operations. In Europe, clubs have teams from youth through the professional league. Players progress within the club, and clubs develop their next generation of players. Would Real Madrid cease its underage development program to join the NBA? If it did, would that alienate it from the locals? Those in the underage clubs would find another club in Madrid, and this club would provide new competition for the NBA. Would locals support the local club playing in the ACB - one of Europe's top leagues - against teams from throughout Spain, or the Spanish NBA affiliate playing against the Oklahoma City Supersonics? Games featuring Spanish stars would draw big crowds, but what about in other countries? Would Athenians ignore the rivalry between Panathanikos and Olympiacos to support the Athens Arsenal against their arch-rivals from London, especially since no Greek players currently play in the NBA?

The NBA has no hand in developing the players who eventually play in the league. Instead, United States' youth basketball players play on school, AAU and college teams before being drafted into the NBA. From a business and profit-generating prospective, this model creates the most wealth and the smallest expenditure for the owners because NBA franchises sit back and wait to see who develops and then they pick the top players rather than investing time and money to develop players.

European clubs, on the other hand, provide opportunities for a variety of players. Even with smaller clubs in less competitive countries, the clubs sponsor multiple teams. When I coached in Ireland, our club sponsored a Super League team, Division I, DII, DIII, DIV, u-20, u-18, u-17, u-15, u-14, u-13, u-12 and u-11 teams. With these clubs, the goal is for players to join at 10-years-old and develop until they eventually peak on one of the adult teams, either in the Super League, if they are good enough, or maybe Division I or II. In more competitive countries, like Spain, players in Division I and sometimes even DII are professional, paid players. The best youth players often play for the u-20 team and the Division I or Super League team. In my club, we had 3 players from the u-20 team on my SL team and a 4^th u-20 player played on the DII team, but practiced with the SL team for more experience. In the U.S., this would be like a high school player playing with his high school team, but practicing and occasionally playing for an NBA team.

If an established club eliminated its development program to join the NBA, would locals support the new NBA organization? Or, how would the NBA adjust to a club running its own development program? Would players automatically join that club, or would they enter the draft like all other players, meaning a club like Real Madrid could develop the next star of the Boston Celtics and then have to play against him without getting anything in return.

There are other logistical issues as well. The top European teams currently play in three competitions: (1) its domestic league (Spanish teams play the other Spanish teams); (2) its domestic cup (like a tournament that runs through the season, but is separate from the league standings); and (3) the Euro League. The Euro League is a mini, round robin league featuring pools of the top teams from various countries. In the Euro League, Efes Pilsen from Istanbul plays Lottomattica from Rome one week and Partizan Belgrade the next. These games are played mid-week and the league culminates with a Final Four in May. Domestic games are played on weekends, usually Saturdays. FIBA mandates that leagues take off certain weekends so players can train with their respective national teams or play in scheduled international games or competitions with their national team. Would the NBA adopt this scheduling practice to accommodate the national teams? Would European fans support a four-game home stand in six days? Would fans that typically support teams for about 30 home games pay higher ticket prices per game for 40+ home games? Would the NBA finally shorten its season?

Thomsen argues that European nationalism is subsiding. However, in England there is a movement to restrict the number of non-English footballers on English Premiere League teams. Some argue that the English National Team's lack of recent success is due to the number of non-English footballers in the Premiere League, while others argue that limiting the number of non-Englanders in the EPL would dilute the talent pool and the league's competitiveness, which would further harm the NT's competitiveness. Regardless, the argument discredits Thomsen's belief that the NBA, even without any local players, would succeed because of the receding nationalism. Would people in Berlin support an NBA team without a German player or would the NBA mandate a Nowitski to the Berlin Bears trade?

When NBA teams play local teams in exhibition games, the games do very well. However, these are well-marketed exhibitions. These are once a year opportunities for a local team to beat the Americans and win respect for their nation and their league. People go to the games like they attend a Hollywood premiere; however, will the same enthusiasm exist when the games are commonplace? It is one thing to pay a hundred Euros more for one special game per year to see a local hero return home to play his former club; it is another to do it 40+ times a year to watch teams with unknown players; is anyone looking forward to an upcoming Sonics vs. Grizzlies match-up now that each jettisoned many of their better players? Just like in small markets in the U.S. where games featuring LeBron, Kobe and a couple others do well, if the Madrid Matadors are 10 games under .500 in January, will locals show up for the Matadors vs. the woeful Knicks? If the NBA struggles in New Orleans, Seattle, Charlotte and elsewhere with billion dollar owners, how does Stern expect to succeed in an environment where sports clubs are traditionally viewed and operated as non-profit organizations?

While Thomsen dismisses the European federations, the European schedule stimulates more interest. What do the Knicks, Sonics, Heat or Grizzlies have left to play for this season? Why should their fans continue to attend meaningless games? In the European system, these teams could be alive in a domestic cup competition, giving their fans hope of winning something to salvage an otherwise miserable season. In the European domestic leagues, they would be fighting for their NBA lives with relegation to the NBDL imminent for the three worst teams. Imagine the interest in the NBDL if three NBDL teams were fighting for promotion to the NBA. Instead, Seattle can trade away contracts and reduce payroll knowing it will still be an NBA franchise next season, regardless of record, and the more it loses, the greater its opportunity to win the lottery and grab its point guard of the future (Derrick Rose) to play alongside Kevin Durant. In Europe, they punish poorly managed teams; the NBA rewards ineptitude to maintain competitive balance. Many teams measure success by the bottom line or the franchise value, rather the product on the floor or the won-loss record.

In Europe, where sports fans are used to rich clubs buying soccer players for astronomical figures, how will fans adjust to the NBA salary cap, draft and restricted free agency?

There are so many differences between the NBA and FIBA - and I have not even mentioned the on-court rule differences like 40-minute games, shorter three-point line, five fouls per player and the trapezoid lane - that any type of European invasion would create significant logistical issues.

So, why is Stern eyeballing European expansion? I think Stern wants to pit the NBA against FIBA. If Stern can successfully expand into Europe and develop a following, why can't the NBA exert its influence to fight FIBA on its turf? Could the NBA change the way players develop, creating divisions between amateur clubs/schools and professional franchises, like in the United States? Can the NBA conquer the basketball world and force its brand of basketball on countries worldwide? Or, can the NBA fracture FIBA and its federations just enough to create a compromise of sorts with some sort of World Wide Super League for the top NBA and top European teams that would replace the Euro League? Can you imagine a re-constituted Super League featuring the top 8 European clubs and the top 8 NBA clubs? Of course, this would create even more logistical headaches, but some sort of Super League could be better for European teams and could give the NBA entry into the European market; however, the NBA would have to change its scheduling to accommodate, which actually could be a positive development for the NBA with a shorter league schedule enabling teams to compete in the NBA/FIBA Super League.

Unlike Thomsen, I do not believe that Europe needs the NBA to save it. With or without the NBA, basketball will never surpass soccer throughout Europe unless soccer suffers from some referee fixing scandal that rocks the game's foundation and calls the entire sport into question, like baseball's Steroid Era. European basketball is different than the NBA and that is a good thing. Just as many prefer college basketball to the NBA, many prefer European basketball to the NBA, especially Europeans. Whether European basketball is better is not the question. However, most people dislike change and the NBA in Europe would require colossal change in the way clubs operate.

If Stern really wants a European franchise, I see London and Dublin as possibilities because of the lack of true professional leagues in the U.K. and Ireland right now, as well as the English language and the financial backing. But, to create an entire European division encompassing several teams in several different countries is illogical for at least the next decade, unless the NBA wants to make major concessions.