Euroleague Expansion to 30 Teams: Itoudis's Dream and the Dilemma of Scale

At a press conference following a November 2026 match, when reporters asked about the future of European basketball, Dimitris Itoudis — a coach who has lifted the Euroleague trophy twice with CSKA Moscow and Olympiacos — could not hide his excitement. "I want to see the league grow to 24 teams, then 26, and finally 30 teams," he said, his voice calm but firm. "If God wills, I want to witness this for at least ten more years." That answer was not merely a wish — it was a roadmap that many in the industry are now trying to read backward, searching for what is practical and what remains a vision.

After thirty-two years following European basketball, I have witnessed too many occasions when a renowned coach spoke about "the future of the league" — and most of those declarations sank into the oblivion of history. But with Itoudis, the story is different. He is not just a great coach; he has lived in both systems — the closed Euroleague model and the open FIBA-standard system — to understand that the shortage is not good players, but a stage large enough for them to shine.

Context: When 20 Teams Are No Longer Enough

The Euroleague currently operates with 20 teams, playing single or double round-robin depending on schedule adjustments. This is a model that has been significantly reformed since the 2026-2026 period, when the league faced a roster crisis. But even with 20 teams, competitive pressure remains unevenly distributed: a group of about 8-10 teams consistently competes for playoff spots, while the rest plays with a "just stay in the league" mentality — a reality that even the most optimistic cannot deny.

In the 2026-2026 season, the win differential between the top and bottom of the standings frequently ranged from 8-12 wins. This is not a sign of a truly competitive league, but rather a manifestation of a structure lacking tiers. Itoudis understands this better than anyone, having watched CSKA Moscow under his guidance frequently enter the Final Four with 15-20 point margins against weaker opponents in the regular season — games he once admitted "lacked real competitive value."

The model Itoudis proposes — conferences and playoffs — is not a new invention. The NBA has operated this system since the 1970s, and even European basketball has experimented with group structures at national championship levels. The difference lies in the fact that the Euroleague is a cross-national competition, with teams from 8-10 different countries, each carrying its own history, fanbase, and revenue streams. Placing them into two or three conferences is not simply a matter of rescheduling — it requires a delicate political negotiation among major clubs, national federations, and the Euroleague itself as the organizing body.

Analysis: Three Pillars of the 30-Team Dream

Itoudis is not merely talking about the number 30. He builds his dream on three pillars that I call the "stability triangle": finances, personnel, and competition.

On finances, each new team added brings not only broadcast contracts, sponsorships, and gate revenue — it also creates jobs for hundreds of people: coaches, medical staff, marketing personnel, and logistics partners. In a context where many Euroleague clubs are still struggling with their balance sheets post-COVID-19, adding 10 teams means additional revenue distributed across the ecosystem. This is basic economic logic that even the most skeptical cannot easily refute.

On personnel, Itoudis emphasizes that expansion means opportunities for more players, coaches, and referees. This is an argument I have heard from many tournament administrators, but it has never been entirely convincing. Because the real question is not "are there enough talents to fill 30 teams" — but "will the average quality of those 30 teams be higher than the current 20." A league with 30 teams where 10 bottom-dwellers can only win 5-10 games per season is no different from a 20-team league with 10 such teams — it merely prolongs the suffering instead of solving the root problem.

On competition, this is the pillar Itoudis warms to most. He dreams of a season ending in playoff rounds rather than a single championship game. "Playoffs are the pinnacle of basketball," he says — and from the perspective of someone who led Olympiacos to the Euroleague title in 2026, I understand why. Under the current system, a team can lose 12 games in the regular season and then win three straight at the Final Four to claim the title — dramatic, but it means the season lacks accumulation. Round-robin playoffs, conversely, would create a series of meaningful games where each win carries real weight.

The Blind Spot: What Itoudis Has Not Said

But amid the prevailing optimism, I notice a tactical blind spot that Itoudis himself — one of the most insightful coaches in Europe — may have inadvertently overlooked. That is the question of talent supply.

The Euroleague currently brings together most of Europe's best players along with some foreign talents from the NBA and development leagues. If expanded to 30 teams, each team would need at least 12-15 registered players, meaning 120-150 additional Euroleague-level players are needed. This is not a small number. Even if the league lowers its recruitment standards, the average quality of the league would be affected — and this is a double-edged sword that even the most enthusiastic expansion advocates often dodge.

Another less noticed blind spot lies in the scheduling issue. The current Euroleague season runs from October to May — nearly 8 months with 34 regular season games. If expanded to 30 teams with a conference system, the schedule could balloon to 40-45 regular season games, plus playoff rounds. This means national teams would have less time for FIFA window training camps, and players would have to play more games under depleted physical conditions. In a context where injuries are already a constant concern for every European club, this is a variable no one wants to put on the same scale as revenue.

There is also a subtler question, which I call the "power equation." Expanding to 30 teams means diluting the power of the founding Euroleague clubs — teams like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Olympiacos, Maccabi Tel Aviv — that have held seats on the board for two decades. When 10 new teams are added, the voting structure will change, and this is a political game Itoudis may not have mentioned because he is a coach, not an executive.

Notable Signals: FIBA and the Russian Shadow

One detail in Itoudis's statement that many overlooked: he mentioned Russian clubs returning to the Euroleague as "a desire." This is not an ordinary statement. Since the Russia-Ukraine conflict and FIBA sanctions, CSKA Moscow and Zenit St. Petersburg have been excluded from European competitions — a decision that has distorted the Euroleague's competitive landscape and caused some teams to lose familiar opponents.

FIBA recently gave "the green light" for Russian players, coaches, and referees to participate in international competitions as individuals. But this decision does not yet include restoring the competitive status of Russian club teams. The gap between "green light for individuals" and "green light for teams" remains a gray area — and Itoudis knows this well when placing it in the same sentence as the 30-team dream.

As someone who witnessed CSKA Moscow dominate the Euroleague under Itoudis during 2026-2026, I understand why he wants Russian teams back. Not just because of history — but because Russian basketball brings a distinctive playing style, different from Mediterranean and Western European basketball, creating a tactical diversity that few leagues can match. But this is also why their return becomes the most sensitive political variable in the entire expansion equation.

Risk Assessment: Three Layers of Defense for the Dream

Based on my analysis, Itoudis's 30-team dream faces three layers of risk to monitor.

The first layer is acceptance risk — whether the current 20 teams are willing to surrender seats to 10 new teams. This is a medium risk, as Euroleague history shows major clubs always protect their interests before any structural change. The second layer is geopolitical risk — the return of Russian teams depends not only on Euroleague decisions but also on the broader context of international relations, where basketball is merely a small pawn. The third layer is quality risk — if the 10 new teams are filled with cash-strapped clubs and mid-tier players, the Euroleague could become a replica of a second-tier league with more teams but less competition.

One thing I have learned after more than three decades of sports reporting: the dream of a great coach does not necessarily become reality, but it shapes the debate. And the debate, sometimes, matters more than the outcome.

The Next Question: Who Will Pay for the Dream?

If the Euroleague truly expands to 30 teams within the next 5-7 years — a scenario many experts rate as feasible if political consensus is achieved — the question is no longer "should we expand" but "who will suffer." Smaller clubs from limited markets such as the Baltic, Balkans, or Middle East could lose their standing if placed in a weaker conference. Young players could face a more congested schedule. And national federations could see their control over players shrink as the Euroleague increases its number of official games.

Itoudis says he wants to live to see the 30-team dream come true. But the real question is not how long he will live — but whether the European basketball industry has enough courage to transform a beautiful vision into a viable structure, or if it will leave it floating as a slogan on t-shirts in the locker room.