What’s going on with the Euroleague? (Part 3)

In the neverending story of the new Euroleague system to be approved, the two parties that are discussing the issue (or sending out press releases on it) came up with some news this week. Well, to call it “news” may be a bit much, as both parties told the press that they are still behind their own models. However, a first step was made to come to a consensus.

The first meeting was on Monday in Vitoria, where the Euroleague held a working meeting with 14 teams and three league representatives. Euroleague Basketball clarified the organizational structure and explained that the decisions remain among the participating clubs. What was new in the Euroleague propositions was the fact that the discussion of a qualification round has been opened. This was not the case in the initial model of the Euroleague which had a three-license model. (License A: long-term spot with no fixed year limits; License B: qualification based on ranking system; License C: Eurocup winner.) What also comes out of the Euroleague press release is that the 10,000 minimum capacity only counts for the License A teams.

Yesterday, the ULEB General Assembly had a meeting in Barcelona where it approved the competition model based only on sportive qualification criteria as proposed during their last assembly in Paris. The new project guarantees the participation of 30 teams from 25 countries in the Euroleague taking as reference the Champions League. The main principles of this model are a qualification based on annual sportive results, the fulfillment of minimal structural criteria (arena capacity, budget, and so on) and a dynamic ranking that determines the number of teams and leagues represented.

What is the situation now for the next years?

For the moment, no model has been approved yet. Both the Euroleague and the ULEB have made a proposition but it will be the Euroleague General Assembly and its 33 allowed voters (24 EL teams, 9 participating leagues) that must approve it by a 80% vote. The next general assembly is scheduled for January 2009 so there is still plenty of time for debate.

What are the main differences of both models?

The Euroleague model is based on the fact that a restricted number of teams will get “lifetime” participation in the Euroleague, similar to the NBA. This is of course supported by those teams that would be in the position to get such a license, also called License A.

The ULEB model puts the sportive criteria up front and does not want “lifetime” memberships in the Euroleague but a qualification modus where every league can send their best teams in the race. This model is of course backed by the different national leagues as it gives more opportunities to other clubs to qualify for the major European basketball competition.

What are the next steps?

The Euroleague has already made a first step by starting the debate on a qualification phase. This would give more opportunities to “smaller” teams to find their way to the top competition, something quite impossible with the current proposal of A-B-C Licenses. The goal is now to find a compromise that is acceptable by the leagues and by the clubs.

What’s going on with the Euroleague? (Part 2)

After we spoke about the discussions that came up last week when the ACB proposed an alternative format for the Euroleague, we had the opportunity to speak with Kirsten Haack of Euroleague Basketball in order to clarify the situation and get to know what is really going on with the Euroleague.

First of all, Kirsten told us about the discrepancy between the official voting results of the Euroleague and the figures published by El Mundo Deportivo. The Euroleague General Assembly has 34 members; these 34 members are the 24 teams playing in the Euroleague, the nine leagues that they represent, and the president of the Euroleague. However, the president has no voting rights, so only 33 votes are possible. So the result published by the Euroleague with 25 votes in favor, 5 blanks and 3 nays is correct. The problem that arose occurred when one of the 25 pro-voters took his decision back after one week. However, this was considered by the Euroleague as too late, and his vote was thus taken into account as a positive one.

What was voted on in Berlin was only an objective, a plan; it was not at that time a decision to change the format of the Euroleague for 2009/2010. This is also a very important point.

Last week, the ACB proposed an alternative competition format to the ULEB assembly, a different committee than the Euroleague assembly. However, this proposal has not been officially introduced to the Euroleague so far. And only the Euroleague General Assembly may decide on the format of Euroleague competition. This proposal is, in contrast, not backed by all ULEB members as of today, as you can see in the official Euroleague press release, where lots of international decision-makers are still backing the proposed new Euroleague format.

This sounds all super complicated, so here is the summary. In 2008/2009, the Euroleague will be played in the decided format of four groups with six teams. The plan of the Euroleague to create these different A, B and C licenses is set to become reality for the 2009/2010 edition. However, it still needs to be voted for in following Euroleague General Assemblies. Beforehand, both the Euroleague and the ULEB will discuss this format as well as the ACB proposal to try to reach consensus.

The next Euroleague general assembly is only in January 2009, so both parties have enough time to discuss and compromise.

What’s going on with the Euroleague?

We’ve already spoken several times about the the Euroleague’s new formula. Now today, Euroleague.net published a report that was somewhat misleading: After the decision to make a semi-closed league was taken in Berlin before the summer, it now seems that we’re facing new changes for the major competition of European basketball.

Read more