Part two of our series, NBA Europe: The Grant Experiment, digs into the structural conflict at the heart of the NBA’s ambitions in Europe — namely, the decision to go around EuroLeague rather than partner with it. Emmet Ryan explores who really controls European basketball, what the NBA wants to change, and whether NBA Europe has the power to reshape the sport on the continent.
Read part 1 here: The High Cost of NBA Europe.
The option was there for the NBA and FIBA to make peace with Euroleague — I even suggested it as the smartest option. Instead, they chose war. With a new 16-team league set to launch in 2026/27, this isn’t just a fresh competition; it’s a direct challenge to the system that has dominated elite European basketball for two decades. Doing so requires understanding the complexity of the governance battle, the political split, and the risks of building a basketball empire without the clubs that already run one.
Why the NBA Went Solo
The NBA and FIBA have not invited EuroLeague as a partner in the NBA Europe project. Judging by the words of Andreas Zagklis, intentionally so as they want Euroleague to recognise it is not an equal in this relationship.
Given FIBA’s desire for meritocracy, that makes some sense. Euroleague is a closed-shop, run by its top clubs and it also controls the routes of access to its competitions. FIBA, with its interests obviously more aligned with national federations, favours more open competition systems.
A partnership could have meant ceding control, which would have also put the NBA in a bind. It likely wouldn’t have wanted its voice even slightly diluted. Similarly, it risked irking FIBA if it sought the sport’s governing body to treat Euroleague as an equal. Politically, it was awkward.
The Structure Showdown
NBA Europe plans to have 12 permanent teams and 4 qualifiers. This semi-closed model is enough to placate FIBA. There are still routes for clubs to qualify for the competition but three quarters of all sides are permanent fixtures.
Euroleague mirrors the real NBA more than NBA Europe. It’s got 13 permanent members (including the suspended CSKA Moscow). The other spots each season are designated for wild cards or the winner of Eurocup, the secondary competition that Euroleague also owns.
The Euroleague model however still has teams play in their national or regional leagues, along with their domestic cups. The proposed new franchises of NBA Europe, especially in London, would likely be far too strong for national level competition. That means some separation from national structures, at least for the permanent members, seems likely.
While this won’t be of concern to new fans, the strong core of those who already spend money watching basketball in Europe will be disrupted. These fans, who are also paying consumers, expect certain local elements to go hand in hand with their teams. This disruption will not be an easy sell.
BallinEurope is ramping up its YouTube game this season. Subscribe to our channel now for player exclusives, analysis videos, and much more.
Who Actually Runs European Basketball?
That really is the question that matters most. When understanding what is happening and trying to gauge what happens next, it’s important to see who holds what levers and how strong their grasp on them is.
There was a thawing in the cold war between Euroleague and FIBA. Now, relations could be frostier than ever. Euroleague operates independently with its own calendar albeit with some respect for FIBA’s calendars. National leagues, cups, and one international window a year have room to breathe.
FIBA has long had the backing of the national federations across the continent. Now it has the NBA as a megaphone to push its case. A lot of it comes down to the clubs involved. Real Madrid, the Greek rivals, and Fenerbahce amongst others are must-haves for NBA Europe to get legitimacy. These clubs will expect guaranteed money from the league, not to pay the high franchise fees that have been touted.
The NBA is betting it can win over markets, not just the legacy clubs, but it needs to succeed with both to avoid a total failure.
BallinEurope has a book, a real life actual book called I Like it Loud, and you can buy it on Amazon now. It’s here as a book and here in Kindle form.
Built to Scale?
Considering Euroleague only has 18 clubs, the idea that a 16 team competition may have concerning limitations may seem odd. Yet, even with large markets on its opening day, There are limits to the reach and scalability of a 16 team competition.
How and when NBA Europe plans to add expansion franchises remains shrouded in mystery. Any league without a plan for them however is certain to run into problems.
A static 16 team league risks fan fatigue. UEFA has already experienced this with the group phase of the Champions League, a core reason for the shake-up this past season. Furthermore, any top city not included at the start will raise questions. Kaunas and Belgrade are hardly the most affluent or enormous media markets. Yet a pan-European basketball competition without a presence in either would lack authenticity.
Whatever approach is taken towards qualification will also prove telling. Any side not guaranteed a spot in the league is faced with a major budgetary decision if qualifying is decided in-season or in the early season. Bet big on getting a spot and risk financial hardship if you fail. Alternatively, plan for failure and risk not qualifying or actually make it through and be woefully out of place competitively. Of course, all of that comes down to who will actually want to take part. That is the focus of part 3, which drops on Wednesday.
The NBA and FIBA plan on launching a European league in 2026 — but can it really work? In this five-part series, we dive into the financial gamble, the structural chaos, the club politics, the media game, and the cultural fight for basketball’s soul. From billion-dollar ambitions to legal landmines and fan resistance, NBA Europe: The Grand Experiment breaks down the biggest shake-up in European hoops in decades.
Leave a Reply