P
PRSURF2
Guest
Puerto Rico will be the host I think.
S
samer_1_22
Guest
I ' d like to share with you why Football still number one in the world !! I was flipping channels yesterday and everywhere I see Football .. not often I see basketball.
I was thinking if adding more teams to the world championship would make such improvement ..I' d say Marketing is the key to increase basketball fan-base.. adding more teams but in a way same number of games should be kept as it was.
Remember adding more teams means adding more games: This will get qualified teams tired (teams who qualify to second round, quarter and semi/final and finals) ..
Adding more spots to every zone... more the event becomes bigger..
Moreover, There shouldn' t be direct qualified teams.. They should qualify normally like other tams
I was thinking if adding more teams to the world championship would make such improvement ..I' d say Marketing is the key to increase basketball fan-base.. adding more teams but in a way same number of games should be kept as it was.
Remember adding more teams means adding more games: This will get qualified teams tired (teams who qualify to second round, quarter and semi/final and finals) ..
Adding more spots to every zone... more the event becomes bigger..
Moreover, There shouldn' t be direct qualified teams.. They should qualify normally like other tams
F
Franz2
Guest
^^^ Host and Olympic champion will always get direct qualification.
And I see you have a French flag in your profile. Well, basketball isn't that popular in France. That's probably why you don't see much coverage.
Elsewhere, it's fairly moderate to slightly above.
And I see you have a French flag in your profile. Well, basketball isn't that popular in France. That's probably why you don't see much coverage.
Elsewhere, it's fairly moderate to slightly above.
A
ArnoldPettybone2
Guest
Horrible decision.
Instead of doing the logical right moves, like canceling the 2013 EC and moving the world championship to that year AND reducing it back to 16 teams to keep the quality and level of play, they will make sure basketball will remain the UEFA cup of sports.
So typical of idiots who cant see how disastrous a European championship every two years is to players and fans alike.
Instead of doing the logical right moves, like canceling the 2013 EC and moving the world championship to that year AND reducing it back to 16 teams to keep the quality and level of play, they will make sure basketball will remain the UEFA cup of sports.
So typical of idiots who cant see how disastrous a European championship every two years is to players and fans alike.
D
Dtown2
Guest
While I agree with some of what you're saying, how would you do qualification? And why have the World Championships just a year after the Olympics?
A
ArnoldPettybone2
Guest
That's really not a big of problem.
The first in every Olympics qualify for the world championship (4 to 8, give or take; might help put some prestige on the fledgling tournament), and the remaining spots will be distributed to division A national teams per continental qualifying tournaments.
As for the date of the qualifying tournaments, I don't think that putting them in the middle of the season is such a big of a problem in NBA players term. The best teams that has the large pool of NBA players will qualify directly anyway, imo.
As for your other question, do you think its better to have the WC on a football WC summer AND between two EC? I don't. The basketball tournament importance over the WC is an anomaly in the world of sports (maybe besides tennis GS tournaments) and should be taken care of, and it has to start somehow and somewhere.
The first in every Olympics qualify for the world championship (4 to 8, give or take; might help put some prestige on the fledgling tournament), and the remaining spots will be distributed to division A national teams per continental qualifying tournaments.
As for the date of the qualifying tournaments, I don't think that putting them in the middle of the season is such a big of a problem in NBA players term. The best teams that has the large pool of NBA players will qualify directly anyway, imo.
As for your other question, do you think its better to have the WC on a football WC summer AND between two EC? I don't. The basketball tournament importance over the WC is an anomaly in the world of sports (maybe besides tennis GS tournaments) and should be taken care of, and it has to start somehow and somewhere.
D
Dtown2
Guest
I'm kind of torn really, as a fan I love the fact that there are tournaments that matter every year in Basketball, but I also know that the quality of the tournaments can be hurt by playing every year. Though really it's only Eurobasket that's deeply effected currently.
I don't really have a problem with the WC of Basketball being the same year as the World Cup. They're not going head to head after all. There's over a month in between the two events, and there's not a huge cross over of fans going to both events.
I'd leave the WC two years after the Olympics, play the regionals between them with the year after the Olympics with the year after the Olympics being a recovery year.
Ex.
2010 WC
2011 Regions
2012 Olympics
I'd keep numbers as is 12 (possibly 16) for the Olympics, it's the elite tourney. 24 for WC it's the tourney where FIBA can build on their name and expand to new regions.
I don't really have a problem with the WC of Basketball being the same year as the World Cup. They're not going head to head after all. There's over a month in between the two events, and there's not a huge cross over of fans going to both events.
I'd leave the WC two years after the Olympics, play the regionals between them with the year after the Olympics with the year after the Olympics being a recovery year.
Ex.
2010 WC
2011 Regions
2012 Olympics
I'd keep numbers as is 12 (possibly 16) for the Olympics, it's the elite tourney. 24 for WC it's the tourney where FIBA can build on their name and expand to new regions.
A
ArnoldPettybone2
Guest
What made you think that holding these tournaments every year or so makes them matter more!?
Its exactly the other way around.
You don't, the real world does...
Just a little example-the last European championship in volleyball was won by Poland just before Eurobasket, drawing much attention and coverage from fans and media... oh, of course the tournament wasn't even held in Poland...
The same can be said after the Euro 2004 and Olympic football tournament held in Greece, winner of that European championship.
And this is the most important sport tournament in the world were talking about in contrast of the bball WC; Of course it has some of an affect on each other.
Reminds me of the ULEB "expansion" program crap...same motto, same logic and same positive affect (hence, none.)
A
ArnoldPettybone2
Guest
That's typical.
A user makes his own private opinion, like it has any relevance- an argument, an opinion which is not true by some accounts, I giggle on that and explain why and this happens.
Give it a rest.
A user makes his own private opinion, like it has any relevance- an argument, an opinion which is not true by some accounts, I giggle on that and explain why and this happens.
Give it a rest.
L
Lewis3
Guest
You don't, the real world does...
So "EUROPE" is the real world for you
what an Egocentric snob your ARE
I'm really getting sick of some of you Europeans with all your Superiority complex
EUROPE IS NOT THE CENTER OF THE WORLD, you know
P
PRSURF2
Guest
Men, I hate your ignorance...and Lewis, he isn't European, so I think he is a little confused about were he is come from...you play in Europe by default, but you know that if you do a 4 vs 4 between America vs Europe, America could win the Championship with first and second place?, you know that?
USA
Argentina
Brasil
Puerto Rico
vs
Spain
Lithuania
Greece
Serbia
1)USA
2)Argentina
3)Spain
4)Greece
5)Puerto Rico
6)Brasil
7)Lituania
8)Serbia
Thats the real world hahahaha!!
J-Mart2
Dear Leader
So "EUROPE" is the real world for you
what an Egocentric snob your ARE
I'm really getting sick of some of you Europeans with all your Superiority complex
EUROPE IS NOT THE CENTER OF THE WORLD, you know
welcome to the board lewis
S
SunOverHStreet
Guest
Nah, but America is...
Is there any national championship winning team in America that is not world champion automatically...? I'm really wondering?
32 teams is too much. I prefer quality over quantity. And it should stay in 4 year span, regardless of other sport manifestations, such as Olympics or football WC.
D
Dtown2
Guest
What made you think that holding these tournaments every year or so makes them matter more!?
Its exactly the other way around.
You don't, the real world does...
When did I say it would matter more? I said I like more basketball and that's why I'm torn. Unlike soccer, or Rugby there are little to no friendlies in Basketball so the only time we have international play is tournaments. By getting rid of a tournament, we have (no prizes for guessing) LESS BASKETBALL. It's not rocket science. But I recognize the fact that having a tournament that requires a full roster every year can be damaging to players, and they either have to take time off or risk nagging injuries.
The problem when you eliminate tournaments, you also eliminate on court qualification and subject yourself to more Wild Card nonsense which is one the biggest faults of the World Championships. See just about any other thread on World Championships for that mess.
Yes cause the tournament will be devastated having Russia, Lithuania or Germany in it. The only thing expansion did was open up more spots for European teams (see 2002's 5 vs. 2006's 9 and the potential 10 next year), and since we all know European teams are the greatest, logic says the tournament should only benefit.
Unless you meant a 16 team tournament that would grant 8-10 spots to Europe anyway, cause that's what any world championship needs. Half the teams from one continent.
Now if I misunderstood you and you're actually arguing to boot Croatia, and eliminate Lithuania, Germany, and Russia from any chance at the tournament then that's different. But I fail to see how having any of those teams in hurts the game, or how having those teams absent helps in any way.
Last edited by a moderator:
S
SunOverHStreet
Guest
How the hell on earth, you put Argentina in front of Spain?
USA is miles away from Spain and Spain is kilometers away from the rest of the world at this moment. The rest are, well, with very little differences or we could even say equal... in sucking!
And where is Slovenia? They have maybe the best players in Europe, after Spain of course. Don't be such a hater...
A
ArnoldPettybone2
Guest
Once again, like a broken record, last Olympic qualifying tournament: Europe 13- rest of world 1. Last Olympics-tie. Last WC-something like 30-9. Having said that, thus this mean I think Europe is the "real world" and will thrash all other competition? No. That remark was written in a totally different context and I guess you inferiority complex just needed a little stroll to get some fresh air.
Give it a rest.
BTW, did you even notice what you quoted, responded to and the link between the two? there aren't any.
As for why and how Israel plays in Europe, once again-give it a rest, you have no idea.
The last time a European team finished below 12th was in 1986 (and with 16 teams, not below 10th). Obviously the teams that need the extra spots are not European.
Which part of "4 to 8" and "division A national teams per continental qualifying tournaments" you didn't understand? The distribution of spots per continent is up to the teams results in the international tournaments, obviously.
Yeah. That was truly hilarious.
F
Franz2
Guest
haha.....yeah Argentina can't beat Spain. They have good starters but no bench. Spain, of course, does.
D
Dtown2
Guest
Sorry about that misread your previous post.
Still I think this...
...Would hurt several teams. Teams like Brazil, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic,China, Germany etc. which rely on NBA players but are not guaranteed to automatically qualify by any stretch. It would also make the club/country debate worse, as you noted the NBA would likely not allow any players to play mid season. There's no guarantee that Euroleague/Domestic leagues would kowtow to FIBA on this either. FIBA unlike FIFA has little power to exert on these leagues.
It would be easier, and perhaps more marketable in smaller nations, to have home and away dates between countries that haven't qualified spread over a period of July to September. Would allow Eurobasket and other tournaments to be once every four years, and qualifying over three months eases the possibility of injury and fatigue. The biggest problem of course would be funding the amount of travel required.
H
horsecow2
Guest
Found a link for the wire story where Patrick Baumann made the comment about moving to 32 teams: http://chicagopressrelease.com/sports/fiba-says-drug-testing-program-its-largest-ever-ap
Just to add my two cents, my question is how a 32-team tournament would be organized. Currently it's four groups of six teams, but that would have to change. They could stay with four groups, but the prelims would take several days longer. Or they could split the group into eight groups of four, and then make up for the reduced number of group games by adding an extra round to the elimination phase. The second option seems more likely, as it's a) shorter and b) how the FIFA World Cup does things (isn't FIBA thinking of changing the World Championships name to the FIBA World Cup?).
I agree the quality isn't there on the international level to justify 32 teams, but making more of the tournament elimination games would definitely increase the excitement level. Now it seems like the group games are kind of meaningless -- as long as you know you're going to qualify for the elimination phase, it doesn't matter where you rank in your group. It can even help to lose for strategic purposes (e.g. Spain losing to France probably means they'll meet the U.S. in the finals instead of the semis -- which is not to say they meant to lose, just that the potential for gamesmanship is there).
Just to add my two cents, my question is how a 32-team tournament would be organized. Currently it's four groups of six teams, but that would have to change. They could stay with four groups, but the prelims would take several days longer. Or they could split the group into eight groups of four, and then make up for the reduced number of group games by adding an extra round to the elimination phase. The second option seems more likely, as it's a) shorter and b) how the FIFA World Cup does things (isn't FIBA thinking of changing the World Championships name to the FIBA World Cup?).
I agree the quality isn't there on the international level to justify 32 teams, but making more of the tournament elimination games would definitely increase the excitement level. Now it seems like the group games are kind of meaningless -- as long as you know you're going to qualify for the elimination phase, it doesn't matter where you rank in your group. It can even help to lose for strategic purposes (e.g. Spain losing to France probably means they'll meet the U.S. in the finals instead of the semis -- which is not to say they meant to lose, just that the potential for gamesmanship is there).