Should the NBA expand to 32 teams (Seattle, Louisville), shorten the season to 75 games, and seed teams 1-16 in the playoffs? ?
75 games means fewer injuries, fewer back-to-back games, less need to rest your star players. It will shorten the season by 2 weeks, but the quality of games will be improved. People in Seattle miss the Sonics. Basketball is huge in Kentucky. I would have said Las Vegas but I don't see the Clippers relocating there. Seeding teams 1-16 regardless of conferences and going back to best of 5 in the first round and maybe even the second. What do you think? 🤔
- Anonymous1 month ago
No. Expanding to 30 teams already diluted the league's talent pool, and is contributing to unbalanced playoff seeding and conferences
- STEVELv 71 month ago
The NBA expanding to 32 games is a possibility, but the season will remain 82 games, and the current playoff format will remain the same
Clippers are relocating to Inglewood. They'll be getting a brand new building next to the new NFL stadium
- 1 month ago
1) Louisville is the 48th largest TV market in the US. 48th. It would then be the smallest NBA TV market.
2) Among median household income, Kentucky is only ahead of Alabama, New Mexico, Arkansas, Mississippi, West Virginia and Louisiana.
So that's low population and low median income. NBA teams make just over half of their income from ticket sales.
75 games means an uneven number of home and away games. It also means that teams will lose 3-4 home games per year, or around 10% of their home games. You'll also have networks wanting a TV rights reduction since they're getting fewer hours of programming.
Where is this mythical NBA team going to play? They can't use college facilities because of alcohol and gambling. So who is going to buy this expansion team in Kentucky and build an arena? I mean, Kentucky taxpayers are stupid enough to keep electing Mitch McConnell so maybe they're dumb enough to give away $500mm to some billionaire to build a new arena (which will lose money like every other one of these moronic stadium/arena deals that taxpayers have to foot the bill for).
- BobLv 71 month ago
They won't shorten the season because there will be less overall revenue and the players contracts will go down as a result. They might seed the teams 1-16, I don't think they need to or should expand to 32 teams, and I see no reason that the Clippers should move and I can't see the league trying to force them to move.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- conley39Lv 71 month ago
Shortening the season would be okay but they won t do that because of the loss of revenue.
- A Yahoo UserLv 71 month ago
I don't know why these professional sports associations don't accept the inevitable
and grow to the point
and add games to the point
where they have year-round, or nearly year-round, games.
Let's take basketball.
There are lots of fans that would love to watch new games every week of the year.
Why not give it to them?
So what if it interferes with baseball or football season?
They'll still make money
and people will still want to see those games.