Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Perfect Euroleague format?
#1
What would your perfect Euroleague format be? A league based on sports principles with every team having a chance to qualify? A closed NBA-like league? Should every European country have a team in Euroleague?
Reply
#2
I think some of the clubs need a permanent franchise. I mean take a club like Aris or Dynamo. It's killing these clubs by not being able to have a guaranteed spot.
Reply
#3
Guaranteed spots might a good idea for countries that have 1 or 2 good teams and the rest are unable to compete. In that way other clubs from that country wouldn't be hurt anyway. Take Lithuania as an example. Rytas and Žalgiris are above others and even if all teams could qualify it is very unlikely to see a lower team reaching the final. But in such leagues like Spain where there are more than 4 EL level teams, it is really unfair. So what's the point to fight for the ACB title then if you will still have to play in Eurocup or Eurochallenge?



Of course basketball is different from football and I agree that clubs need some guarantees so that they could attract investors. But it shouldn't be done at the expense of the teams that could potentially reach the same level.
Reply
#4
Bertomeu gave an interview to Russian press some days ago. He said there will be 12-13 guaranteed contracts, qualifiers in the last week of September or first week of October, more spots for Lithuania, Russia, Ukraine and Latvia. Less spots for France and no spots for Portugal until they develop basketball more.
Respect and thanks for everything:

Alvertis, Bodiroga, Jasikevicius, Radja, Wilkins, Vrankovic, Fotsis, Rebraca, Kattash, Gentile, Koch, Middleton, Kutluay, Rogers, Papadopoulos, Becirovic, Tomasevic, Siskauskas, Pekovic, Lakovic, Vujanic, Chatzivrettas, Maljkovic, Spanoulis and many more to follow in the near future.
[Image: vspa.jpg]

Reply
#5
I would prefer a system much like it NBA, regular season each team faces the other at home and outside and than a best of five playoffs till the final.
Reply
#6
[quote name='GuyOFK' post='13895' date='Jan 20 2009, 05:42 PM']I would prefer a system much like it NBA, regular season each team faces the other at home and outside and than a best of five playoffs till the final.[/quote]

If we speak about the format of the season then I like the way it is. Each game is important and Euroleague games have that special feeling compared to the domestic league. If each team meets the other so often and so many times Euroleague would lose its attraction. Champions League in football wouldn't be so interesting and wouldn't attract so people if we could see Manchester United face the likes of Real Madrid every few days. I wouldn't want it to be a routine.



And besides when would the teams play games in the domestic league? Euroleague season would be very long and boring as NBA is.



Just my thoughts <img src='http://www.talkbasket.net/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />



But the primary question was more about the way the Euroleague should work. How the teams should qualify and how many spots each country should have etc.
Reply
#7
I think every team should get a chance to play in the Euroleague. I hate the fact that no Israeli team but Maccabi can make it, for example. Holon won the title last year and they deserve recognition for doing so. I think it should be like the Champions League in football...the great teams will still be there every year, but some refreshment is always good.



As for how many spots each country should have, I don't have exact numbers. However, I believe that Greece, Italy and Spain should have the most spots; Russia, Lithuania, Israel, Turkey and France are a tier below; then Serbia, Croatia, Germany, Slovenia, Poland; then the rest. I hope I didn't forget anyone.
Reply
#8
some of croatian and serbian clubs not named cibona and partizan are better then best clubs from france for sample. and that guaranted spot destroys clubs from ex-yu. for sample in my croatia split won chapionship once, and zadar twice in last 5 years and could not paricipate in euroleague because cibona had guranted spot. that was maybe last chance for 3 time europian champion split to get out of financial problems because playing in euroleague means more intrest for sponsors. nobady can tell me that zadar, zvezda (red star) or hemofarm are not better than le mans or nancy, not mention what kind fans zadar and red star have or basketball tradition that ex-yu clubs have and just how many great players came from this area . Unfortunaly or fortunaly bartomeou, stern and others are doing everything to promote basketball in mony interesting countries and that culd destroy basketball in small but basketball rich countries like serbia, croatia and lithuania to
Reply
#9
What do you think of the current format of the Euroleague and how do you think it should be?



IMO the current format is pretty good but I just think that playoff serieses would be better then final four, it'll make the season longer, fans can enjoy more games and teams can make more money. plus, the final four might be fun and keeps everything open but it's a bit unfair. and why can't more fans enjoy the late rounds? I think that playoff serieses would give more fans, which not all can afford going to game abroad a chance to be part of the semis and finals and even with the biggest arena there'll always be more fans that can't get there when all 4 teams' crowds are there together.



share your opinions
Reply
#10
I think that in Euroleague must play best teams so I think that licenses stuff are stupid.
Bench-Warmer.net - my new web blog! ||| lt.bench-warmer.net - lietuviška blog'o versija! ||| I'm on twitter
Reply
#11
[quote name='Panathinaikos' date='03 January 2009 - 09:31 PM' timestamp='1231007466' post='13407']

I think some of the clubs need a permanent franchise. I mean take a club like Aris or Dynamo. It's killing these clubs by not being able to have a guaranteed spot.

[/quote]



What exactly Aris did to deserve that? Or Dinamo? The way these teams usually play in Eurocup doesn't give a credit for them.



I don't like the final 4 system. I know Euroleague has to adjust to other leagues, but one game deciding the champs is a joke. Not to mention that 1 month brake after the quarter finals...
Reply
#12
The winning formula is UEFA. Finish well in your domestic league and you are in, if you have a bad season try again next year. If a powerhouse historic team fails to qualify for the Euroleague the responsibility is on them to try and recover. If they lose sponsors because of this, so be it. If they cannot recover, then go bust. I cannot justify rewarding inept team management and as a fan, I do not want the Euroleague to give handouts to teams that did not prove themselves in their domestic competition. This is the only way to ensure that every game matters both in the Euroleague and in the domestic league.



With that said, I am extremely grateful with the changes made to Euroleague last season whereby smaller league champions had a chance to qualify through a preliminary tournament. This needs to stay. Euroleague is slowly figuring things out but I firmly oppose guaranteed Euroleague spots as it runs counterintuitive to encouraging competitive basketball. The only exception to this that I can possibly justify is a guaranteed spot to the defending Euroleague champions and a guaranteed spot to the Eurocup champions because it is not guaranteed to a specific team year-on-year.
Reply
#13
In the other side of the format question, I would like to see series in the SF and the Final.



No more of F4, which fit to the organizers and not to the teams.

If we want that the Sport wins, let decided games on the court, with the best of 5 series.
Reply
#14
Better is Final four because is World Event.And with the best of 5 series is boring.



Perhaps it is best to extend Euroleague to 30 teams.And expand to more countries from West and North.Like Holland,Germany,Portugal,Great Britain,Dennmark,Austria,Sweden,Norway....Of course in qualification.



Euroleague with this countries will earn more money from sponsors and TV rights.Also with more money will increase prize money for victory in regular,top 16,play-off and final four.Then each clubs will increase their budget.And we will see best players from NBA in Euroleague.
[Image: 26637_navijanjeee409_blic_markodjurica_f.jpg]
Reply
#15
I like F4 system, cause every team has the same chances then. If one team is playing bad that F4, f*ck it, come next year and train harder. F4 system gives smaller clubs some chance against "the big ones", and that way every finish is different...
(Mar 4, 2012, 7:59 pm)KAPALI Wrote: "...I can show U what I am everytime everywhere your web artist..."
Reply
#16
[quote name='straight forward' date='30 May 2010 - 12:21 AM' timestamp='1275171685' post='21440']

What exactly Aris did to deserve that? Or Dinamo? The way these teams usually play in Eurocup doesn't give a credit for them.



I don't like the final 4 system. I know Euroleague has to adjust to other leagues, but one game deciding the champs is a joke. Not to mention that 1 month brake after the quarter finals...

[/quote]



What I mean is clubs that have potential to be very big and important clubs. Khimki is another one. But if they are not allowed in the Euroleague they do not have the motivation to be what they could. Aris for example would triple its budget if it had a contract.



Another club is ALBA. Clubs like this should be in the Euroleague and the system basically prevents them from being there most years. The Euroleague on the other hand has teams like Olympija, some crappy French teams, etc. in there every year. It's a bit illogical to say the least.
Reply
#17
[quote name='skangles' date='30 May 2010 - 12:48 AM' timestamp='1275173305' post='21441']

The winning formula is UEFA. Finish well in your domestic league and you are in, if you have a bad season try again next year. If a powerhouse historic team fails to qualify for the Euroleague the responsibility is on them to try and recover. If they lose sponsors because of this, so be it. If they cannot recover, then go bust. I cannot justify rewarding inept team management and as a fan, I do not want the Euroleague to give handouts to teams that did not prove themselves in their domestic competition. This is the only way to ensure that every game matters both in the Euroleague and in the domestic league.



With that said, I am extremely grateful with the changes made to Euroleague last season whereby smaller league champions had a chance to qualify through a preliminary tournament. This needs to stay. Euroleague is slowly figuring things out but I firmly oppose guaranteed Euroleague spots as it runs counterintuitive to encouraging competitive basketball. The only exception to this that I can possibly justify is a guaranteed spot to the defending Euroleague champions and a guaranteed spot to the Eurocup champions because it is not guaranteed to a specific team year-on-year.

[/quote]



The problem is that the Euroleague does not have as many established clubs financially. So it does not work that way. You have to first establish the clubs and then you can make it closer to UEFA. As it stands now the Euroleague is just stupid that they don't include clubs like Aris and ALBA when they would bring in much bigger revenues for the league and increase the fan base.



I think what the Euroleague is trying to do with the qualifiying round is a nice attempt. Next year they will have 16 qualifying teams so we will see how that works out. But even that is a bit unfair. For example you want them to base it on merit, yet a team like Maroussi has qualified for the Euroleague 5 times in the 2000s decade and was only allowed to play once, after qualifying through two rounds even though they earned a direct qualification before that.



They qualified last year directly and then Euroleague told them could not play yet again but allowed them in the qualifying round because it was new. Now here they are in the Euroleague qualified again and their owner was told that next year Euroleague might not grant them one of the qualifying spots among 16 teams. This after they made the top 16 this year.



So the qualifying round is a nice attempt, but let's face it, they are using it to pick and choose what teams they want. The same with how they skipped over Hemofarm last year. I mean they practically do whatever they can to ban Maroussi out of the league. Maroussi is clearly the third best team in the 2nd best domestic league and is definitely a top 16 level club in Europe.



So let's be realistic, Euroleague is picking and choosing teams that they think will bring in fans and money. But they don't let them in the league automatically and make it easier for teams like Orleans to get in there. Why? It's only logical to put teams like ALBA and Aris in the league. It was the same way with Khimki and they kept refusing to allow them in the league unless they won the Eurocup. They finally let them in the league and they made the playoffs in their first year.



I agree that results are important, but they should revamp how they rate the leagues and how they give places. Spain should have 5 and not 4. Greece should have 4 and not 2. Italy should have 2 only and yet they have 4 every year and can even have up to 5 under the current format.



It should be 1 for France and they usually get 3 teams, etc. Germany should have ALBA in there, plus the German champ. Adriatic League should be given places itself, rather than places given to the countries themselves like Serbia, Slovenia, etc. That's the problem. They give too many places where they should not be because they look at Italy and France as the leagues making more money. Instead they should look at it as individual teams. And great clubs like ALBA and Aris that have everything you want a Euroleague club to have should be there.



Just like Rytas, they finally got smart and let them in. Those clubs should be also.
Reply
#18
[quote name='Roy M' date='31 May 2010 - 02:58 PM' timestamp='1275310712' post='21477']

In the other side of the format question, I would like to see series in the SF and the Final.



No more of F4, which fit to the organizers and not to the teams.

If we want that the Sport wins, let decided games on the court, with the best of 5 series.

[/quote]



The Euroleague Final Four is what brings in more money though. IMO the revenues would drop if they made it a drawn out series, rather than a single big sporting event.
Reply
#19
[quote name='stefans' date='31 May 2010 - 07:31 PM' timestamp='1275327099' post='21482']

Better is Final four because is World Event.And with the best of 5 series is boring.



Perhaps it is best to extend Euroleague to 30 teams.And expand to more countries from West and North.Like Holland,Germany,Portugal,Great Britain,Dennmark,Austria,Sweden,Norway....Of course in qualification.



Euroleague with this countries will earn more money from sponsors and TV rights.Also with more money will increase prize money for victory in regular,top 16,play-off and final four.Then each clubs will increase their budget.And we will see best players from NBA in Euroleague.

[/quote]



I agree. The Euroleague Final Four is a big event and is getting bigger rapidly every year. If they make it a boring 5 game series the interest will rapidly drop. The series need to be in the domestic leagues. If people want to see exciting playoffs they can watch Real Madrid-Barca and Olympiacos-PAO.



There is no reason to copy everything the NBA does. The Euroleague Final Four format is setup in a way that can make much more money and interest than the NBA Finals with a 7 game series. The NBA really has an outdated format to be honest about it.



Of course from a strict sporting perspective the 7 game series means the better teams will win. Even most of the time in a 5 game series. People wanting a series need to remember that if you do that, then in the last decade CSKA and PAO would have been automatic.



If you had three 5 game series in a row deciding things, you can just hand the trophy to such clubs every year. Besides, the Final Four format just generates a lot more interest and buzz. If people want to compare to American sports then compare it NCAA Final Four or NFL Superbowl. Much MUCH MUCH bigger events and MUCH more money and interest than the NBA Finals get in the US.



And the Olympics Final Four generates more interest than the NBA Finals also. So since Olympics Final Four and NCAA Final Four are bigger than the NBA Finals, then the Final Four method is the one to emulate and not the drawn out 7 game series, which can end really boring when you get the 4-0 and 4-1 series like often happens in the NBA.



The main thing I don't like personally and I think needs to change is that I think there is too much emphasis on the Top 16 stage. The way it is now the Top 16 is really intense and exciting, but to me it is too important. 6 games of the year determines the outcome for the league because of seeding and such. And because of that injuries are allowed to play a huge role in the outcome of the season. Also, it places far too much emphasis on how a team plays in the middle of the season on the outcome at the end of the year. That's wrong. The end of the year is more important. So to me they need to increase the amount of games in the top 16 or they just need to combine it with the regular season and go from there to the playoffs.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  EuroLeague Arenas TalkBasket 1 177 Nov 23, 2023, 1:54 pm
Last Post: TalkBasket
  2023-24 EuroLeague signings and rumors TalkBasket 0 118 Nov 22, 2023, 3:10 pm
Last Post: TalkBasket
  EuroLeague Fantasy Challenge tips: Something for everyone EuroLeague News 0 449 Nov 14, 2021, 7:39 am
Last Post: EuroLeague News
  EuroLeague on Social Media EuroLeague News 0 373 Nov 12, 2021, 8:55 pm
Last Post: EuroLeague News
  EuroLeague Fantasy Challenge Round 8 winner EuroLeague News 0 382 Nov 12, 2021, 6:58 am
Last Post: EuroLeague News

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)