Coach Itoudis and the Euroleague revolution: From 20 to 30 teams, conferences, playoffs and the Russian question

Dimitris Itoudis, a name associated with Euroleague titles and a coaching career full of personality, has made a statement that cannot be ignored. He is not talking about any specific team or analyzing tactical schemes; he is painting the vision of a Euroleague expanded to 30 teams, with groups, conferences and playoffs at the end of the season. In Itoudis' logic, a continental competition needs to be big enough for the final games of the season to become a real measure of excellence. The Euroleague currently has only 20 teams, a number he believes does not exploit the league's potential. What he wants is not just more teams, but a new architecture: from a long regular season to a knockout playoff bracket, from meaningless early games to life-or-death battles in the final phase. For those who have followed European basketball for many seasons, Itoudis' statement is not new but is becoming more urgent. The Euroleague has grown exponentially in commercial terms, media coverage and player quality over the past two decades. Yet the current calendar is too dense, and matches between lower-ranked teams and the top sides are often unappealing. Itoudis suggests that dividing the league into groups would create more decisive matchups while helping teams manage their physical condition better. At a deeper level, his message is about financial stability. A 30-team league with more players, coaches and referees would generate more revenue from broadcasting rights, sponsorship and ticket sales. Clubs struggling to balance their budgets could breathe more easily if the commercial pie grows. That is why Itoudis calls this direction sustainable, rather than chasing short-term success for a group of wealthy clubs. The market context and governance power are creating both opportunities and challenges. On the positive side, FIBA has given the green light to players, individual athletes and referees, setting a precedent for national teams to join a unified competition system. On the negative side, expansion remains a controversial topic among the 20 existing clubs. Some big teams fear sharing revenue with weaker opponents. Others argue that the Euroleague should move toward South Europe, the Middle East and emerging markets instead of focusing only on Spain, Turkey, Greece, Russia and the Baltic region. The key point lies in the current governance model. The Euroleague is not an open league like football, where a national champion can be promoted. It is a closed league featuring shareholder clubs that have a decisive voice in every reform. Itoudis, no matter how successful a coach he is, cannot unilaterally change the bylaws; but he can shape public opinion and push the discussion in the right direction. When it comes to Russian teams, the story becomes even more sensitive. In the past, clubs such as CSKA Moscow were pillars of the Euroleague, delivering fiery derbies against Real Madrid, Barcelona or Panathinaikos. After geopolitical conflict erupted, Russian teams were excluded from European competitions, and their return remains uncertain. Itoudis wants to see Russian teams come back for professional reasons, but he understands that the decision lies beyond the court. This is a geopolitical risk that any expansion plan must account for, because the Euroleague cannot place commercial goals above the political and social context of the continent. From a practical standpoint, the 30-team playoff vision is still a long-term goal. Itoudis says he wants to see the Euroleague keep developing for at least ten more years, showing that he is aware of the multi-stage nature of the process. In the short term, the Euroleague will likely expand to 24 or 26 teams before reaching 30, as a testing path. That would reduce risk and give new clubs time to adapt to the density of games, travel conditions and operational budgets. From my perspective as someone who regularly follows transfer activity and the backstage corridors of European basketball, the biggest impact of Itoudis' statement is not about the format details. It is about pulling the issue out of the closed meeting rooms of club owners. When a respected coach says the Euroleague needs to reach 30 teams and finish with playoffs, he is telling fans: do not settle for a closed league with pointless matches. Demand more. I also want to emphasize something rarely discussed. The Euroleague is currently competing with the NBA in terms of league appeal. The NBA has 82 regular-season games, seven-game playoff series and a highly polished entertainment industry. The Euroleague cannot copy the NBA model, but creating groups based on region and standings would make the competition easier to follow. If only a handful of games really matter each week, fans will gradually lose interest. A season with playoffs will keep them engaged from October to May, instead of building to a climax only in the final rounds. However, the story also has a downside. Lengthening the season will place an extra burden on players already competing in domestic leagues and national teams. Concerns about injuries, playing quality and fairness between clubs with different budgets cannot be dismissed. European basketball has always been defined by tactics, discipline and team spirit. If expansion happens too quickly without a mechanism to balance power, the Euroleague could become a place where big spenders dominate and smaller teams only serve as background. Itoudis does not offer detailed solutions to those problems. That may not be a coach's job. What he does is reopen a debate that many executives would rather avoid. The question is no longer whether to expand, but how to expand without destroying the league's DNA. That is a smart shift, because it focuses on quality rather than quantity. For Vietnamese basketball fans, the Euroleague is often more distant than the NBA. But the story Itoudis tells has common points with how Vietnamese basketball has developed in recent years: we need larger playgrounds, clear formats and the ambition to go beyond national borders. Southeast Asian basketball, including Vietnam, is also looking for regional league models to raise its level. The Euroleague can serve as a mirror to learn from, not to copy but to understand governance lessons. One of the things I have learned from following transfers and contract negotiations is that changing a competition format always brings a shift in power. When the Euroleague expands, the balance of power between big and small clubs will be reset. Teams that once held veto rights may lose their position if outnumbered by new members. This explains why some traditional clubs are cautious about the 30-team plan. They are not afraid of on-court competition; they are afraid of losing control off the court. The Greek strategist seems to understand this better than anyone. He chooses to talk about a vision rather than criticize the status quo. His way of reasoning resembles what good negotiators do in transfers: do not talk about what you want, talk about what everyone will gain. When Itoudis emphasizes financial stability, he is telling small clubs they will benefit. When he talks about bringing Russian teams back, he is telling people who care about the sport that the competition will improve. But he does not clearly state who will have to sacrifice what. There is a fine line between optimistic vision and illusion. A 30-team Euroleague would need more than a snap of the fingers because each club has its own interests. Domestic leagues like Spain's ACB or the VTB United League will react if the Euroleague swallows too much of the calendar. Although FIBA has sent positive signals, full cooperation is not guaranteed. In that context, Itoudis cannot create a revolution alone; he can only fuel a debate that was already simmering. Looking at the details of what Itoudis says, he is not contradicting those who oppose him. He says he fully agrees with the direction the Euroleague is taking and hopes, God willing, the league will reach 30 teams. The phrase 'God willing' shows he is not imposing a specific timeline. He wants future generations to witness a competition where the final game is not the end of a meaningless season, but the peak of a tense playoff run. That makes me think of the difference between a manager and a craftsman. A manager looks at the number of teams, broadcasting contracts and revenue. A craftsman looks at the rhythm of the season, the feeling of entering a playoff game and knowing that every small mistake can cost you elimination. Itoudis belongs to the second group. He has sat on the bench in life-or-death games, so he understands the value of a playoff system better than any executive. When he calls playoffs the pinnacle of basketball, he is speaking from real experience. So what happens next? The Euroleague is unlikely to move to 30 teams immediately. A more realistic step is to gradually expand to 24 or 26 teams, test a conference format for one or two seasons, and then consider adding a play-in round or increasing the number of playoff games. Such changes need the consent of the clubs because the Euroleague is not a single entity. But the story Itoudis just told laid an important brick: nobody can deny that the Euroleague needs to become bigger and more attractive if it wants to compete in an era of basketball globalization. In a world where Saudi Arabia is pouring money into sports, where the NBA is opening academies in many countries and where European players are increasingly outstanding, the Euroleague cannot stand still. The vision Itoudis presented may not be complete, but its direction is right. European basketball executives need to look beyond one season, beyond immediate interest conflicts. One thing is certain: we are living through a transition of power in European basketball. A 20-team Euroleague without playoffs and without Russian teams is not the end point. Itoudis is just one of those standing before a new door, but he is brave enough to push it. Ten years from now, people may remember his speech as one of the moments that sparked change.