Soccer is Not Basketball: 3 Reasons Why a Midseason NBA Tournament is a Bad Idea

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver has flirted with the idea of adding a midseason tournament to the NBA season. *Cue Michael Scott*

He said, “Why does such a long basketball season offer one true prize?” This is a horrible idea. I know I’m not even a spec on Commissioner Silver’s radar, but I pray this post makes it to him.

Dear Commissioner Adam Silver,

First let me say, I admire your desire to push the league forward and make the NBA as exciting as possible. But please, do not add a midseason tournament to the NBA schedule. You may point to the success of midseason tournaments in soccer. But this is a very nearsighted argument failing to understand the major differences between the structure of soccer leagues and the NBA.

While countries across the world have their own professional soccer league, let’s compare the NBA with the English Premier League (EPL) and the entire English Football League System to fully understand why midseason tournaments are successful (yes, that’s tournaments, plural).

The English Football League System includes a whopping 5,300 clubs spanning 10 different divisions (the NBA and the G League have 59 combined). Of those 10 divisions, the top 4 receive the most media attention with the top league (the EPL) widely considered as the best league in the world. What makes these leagues so great is their promotion and relegation system. Teams in the 6th league could do well enough to move up to the 5th, and a team in the 5th league could do badly enough to go down to the 6th. While basically impossible, Manchester City (the winner of the EPL last season) could be relegated the following year to the 2nd division, then the 3rd, then the 4th, and so on to the 10th. Similarly, a team in the 10th could move up to the 9th, then the 8th, and eventually all the way to the 1st.

On top of winning their own division, 2 different midseason tournaments take place: The English Football League Cup and the Football Association Challenge Cup. The English Football League (EFL) Cup consists of every team in the top 4 leagues competing for this trophy. The winner gets a berth in the UEFA Europa League tournament, a European soccer club tournament designed for the above average to good teams in each top league to compete and win a continental trophy. This gives fans of average and bad teams something to fight for considering getting a place in the Europa League equals more money and exposure on a continental stage.

The Football Association Challenge Cup, known as the FA Cup, is the most popular of the two considering its tradition as the oldest national football club competition in the world. It consists of teams across all 10 leagues in England. 736 teams competed in the FA Cup last year. Like the EFL Cup, the winner receives an automatic bid to the UEFA Europa League tournament.

Both competitions are fairly popular with fans, and teams take them seriously, which is why one would think a similar model would work with the NBA. But these tournaments would not work in the NBA for three reasons.

1. There is no coveted prize for lesser teams to strive for.

Winners of both the EFL Cup and the FA cup get valuable automatic bids to the UEFA Europa League tournament. For average to bad teams in the premier league, this is a very valuable prize getting a chance to play Europe’s best on a continental stage. But what would the winner of this midseason NBA cup receive? There is no North American basketball tournament for the winner of this cup to receive a bid to. The prize could be a playoff spot. But trust me, I will explain a more efficient way of determining this later.

5th League Lincoln City did the unthinkable beating Premier League team Burnley 1-0 in 2017.

Further, what makes these soccer tournaments so special are the upsets. Teams across multiple leagues compete. This means a little-known soccer team in the 5th league could play a premier league team and win, which happened in 2017 when Lincoln City defeated Burnley. Just look at what this victory meant to those fans. While almost impossible, a 10th league team could advance far enough to play a premier league team and do the unthinkable. But even if the upset doesn’t happen, some premier league teams travel to lower league teams every season. This gives fans from a small town in England a chance to see the likes of Liverpool or Manchester City in their own city. As stated in the article The Value of the FA Cup, this highly boosts the town and the small club’s revenue and gives an opportunity for those players to prove their talent against the best in the country.

2. Teams across multiple leagues participate and can face off against the best teams in England, which wouldn't happen in the NBA.

Basically the level of soccer at the lower divisions

Absolutely none of that would exist in the NBA. Compared to the 763 possible teams in the FA Cup, the NBA would have 30. All 30 of those teams are in major cities in America and run by wealthy owners. Whatever financial boost those teams or cities incur because of basketball games is nothing compared to the financial boost to small teams. Including the G League and/or other professional leagues in North America is the only way a similar economic boost would occur. Further, this economic boost is the main reason these soccer tournaments stay relevant at all considering its decline in importance for big clubs. The only clubs who truly care about the tournaments are the small ones. But at least they actually care.

But what separates the small clubs in England from the worst in the NBA? There is no salary cap in soccer. The worst teams in the NBA can improve under the same uniform financial standard. This can’t be said for soccer clubs. Money drives soccer more than any other sport because of its lack of salary cap. Teams backed by billionaire or trillionaire owners rule the sport. They also don’t invest in small clubs meaning they don’t have the financial ability to improve and climb the league ladder. This make these tournaments so important to those teams and fans. They provide the only opportunity to compete against the best. Whereas no similar sentiment is shared in the NBA where every team plays each other multiple times in the year. This is why I struggle to find a reason for fans and teams to care about these tournaments. Teams will face the same teams they do in the regular season, and adding a meaningless trophy won't make a difference when everyone knows the ultimate prize is an NBA Title.

3. NBA teams don't have the same depth as soccer teams to compete in other midseason competitions along with trying to win an NBA title.

Though small clubs keep these tournaments afloat, big clubs still take them seriously especially when they are close to winning it all. But the biggest difference between soccer clubs and NBA teams are their depth. Chelsea FC has 32 players on their team. An NBA team can have 15 players at most. Of course I know a soccer game consists of 2 teams of 11 and basketball has 2 teams of 5 explaining the difference in total players on a team. But soccer clubs use their depth when playing the smaller clubs by starting their youth or bench players because the opposition gap is so large. To emphasize, when I say “smaller clubs,” I’m talking about a team 1 or more divisions below the top league. Imagine a major league baseball team playing a single or double A team or worse. When the talent gap is that large, top teams can afford to play their B team and still win easily. In the NBA, that wouldn’t happen. NBA teams would still face NBA teams, like they do in the regular season. The talent gap wouldn’t be as big. Last season, the Phoenix Suns beat the Milwaukee Bucks, twice.

Imagine if a midseason tournament were implemented last season, and the Warriors faced the Knicks. There’s a good chance the Warriors would rest one or two of those superstars following the soccer model for a tournament that doesn’t matter to them. They know they’ll likely still win. If they lose, it doesn’t change anything considering the ultimate prize of an NBA Title is still a possibility.

The Solution

Commissioner Silver, a midseason tournament is not the best way to push the league forward. If you want to add more excitement, look at what another American professional league has done. In 2012, Major League Baseball added an additional wildcard spot to their playoffs in each league. Right before the playoffs, the two wildcard teams faceoff in a winner-takes-all single elimination game to decide who gets the last spots in the playoffs. Bleacher Report writer Andrew Mease praised this in his article MLB Adds Second Wild Card: 12 Ways This Is an Exciting Change.

A similar concept could be adapted and expanded on by the NBA. There are 15 teams in each conference. The teams who finished 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th would enter a mini tournament. Each game is single elimination. In relation to last season’s eastern conference, this would include the Charlotte Hornets, Miami Heat, Washington Wizards, and Atlanta Hawks in that seeing order. The 9th seed would play the 12th seed, and the 10th would play the 11th giving the winner of the tournament a chance to play one game against the 8th seed for the last spot in the playoffs. This end of the season play-in tournament would give excitement to the average team and to those loyal fans who would love to see their team in the playoffs.

I’m all for making the NBA the best league it can be, and I believe a play-in tournament with a playoff berth as a prize is a great idea. But a midseason tournament is not.