Could it be an experiment in expansion?
There were nine pioneer franchises in the PBA when Asia’s first play-for-pay league opened shop in 1975. The membership increased to 10 in 1980 but fell to eight two years later. In 1985, only six active teams participated although the national squad joined in as a guest entry. From 1990 to 1998, the league maintained eight clubs. In 1999, Tanduay increased the fold to nine and after a year, Red Bull made it 10.
The league hasn’t hosted more than 10 active franchises in a season.
With more than 80 rookie hopefuls in Sunday’s draft, the speculation is a lot of veterans will be losing their jobs because the league isn’t expanding. The talent pool in the draft appears to be so rich that potential starters may still be available on the third round. Competition for jobs will be fierce and in the end, only the best of the best will survive.
In the First Conference, the displacement shouldn’t be too severe because the candidates’ teams will open up jobs in the 10 clubs even as imports are expected to fill in key slots. But the relief will only be temporary, if not artificial. When the national players return to their mother clubs, expect the marginals to join the ranks of the unemployed.
It’s understandable why there is resistance to expansion. A team spends much more than it earns from its share of TV and other sources of revenue. Breaking even, in cash terms, is a pipe dream although the PBA Board of Governors hopes to someday make it a reality. Adding more teams will mean a lesser share of the revenue pie – assuming it doesn’t enlarge – and a dilution of media coverage.
A business enterprise buys into the PBA mainly for goodwill, image, and a gold mine in media exposure which has a peso value but doesn’t translate into direct cash. The justification is in the advertising mileage that playing in the PBA generates. If the revenue outlook is bleak, expansion will only splash the bottom line of each team deeper in red ink.
Expansion, however, is a sure antidote to stagnancy – for as long as the expansion teams are competitive. The danger of playing the same teams year in, year out is the fans might get tired of it. To address the problem, the league resorts to innovations in tournament formats. That’s why, through the years, the PBA has introduced varying height limits for imports and features such as the twice-to-beat quarterfinals and rules that make for more fast-paced action. Still, there’s a limit to what the league can do in tinkering with rules and formats.
If players are the league’s lifeblood, then sooner or later, expansion must be considered as the key to longevity. Why? Because as it is, PBA players are subjected to a rigorous schedule which conceivably lead to short careers. It’s no joke coping with the wear and tear of playing 10 months in a year. And in the offseason, players are working out to keep in shape. With expansion games will be spaced out for each team. There will be more rest days in between games. Theoretically, it should also create more demand for teams because they won‘t see as much action so soon.
More teams will mean more jobs. Of course, the PBA isn’t a charitable organization. But if it can lend a helping hand to find jobs for more players, why not?
There are franchise applicants waiting in line but the PBA isn’t thinking of expansion at the moment. Is the PBA missing the boat? The timing would’ve been perfect for an expansion this year, with so many Fil-Ams and stars from the Metropolitan Basketball Association and Philippine Basketball League jumping to the PBA. Expansion would’ve also alleviated the plight of second-tier players who could end up losing their jobs before the season starts.