# adriatic league



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

Adriatic league is developing into third strongest league in europe (after Italian and spanish). next year it will consist of three clubs from Slovenia(Krka,Olimpija...), 4 from Croatia (Cibona,Zadar, Split...), Yugoslavia (Crvena zvijezda, Partizan, Zeleznik, Boducnost) and 2 clubs from Bosnia.
Tis league most certanly is the biggest talent factory in europe...
so pay attention to it!:yes:


----------



## Carl English (May 29, 2003)

Has Zadar qualified for the Euroleague by winning the Adriatic League this past season? Also, does anyone know if they will re-sign Michael Meeks?


----------



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

Zadar should be in euroleague, but Cibona signed 3 years contract with Euroleague, so zadar will play in second euroleague.
It is very difficult to explain, and I don't believe I can make it with my crappy english...
I do not believe they will resing michael Meeks, although he made the winning shot against Crvena zvijezda( game looked like a battelfield) i've heard they expected a little bit more from him, and they have some talented home raised centers...


----------



## Carl English (May 29, 2003)

Another question... I don't understand why the Euroleague was reduced from 32 to 24 teams? 

I'm sorry to hear about Mike Meeks. I am a long time friend of his.


----------



## Zalgirinis (Feb 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Carl English</b>!
> Another question... I don't understand why the Euroleague was reduced from 32 to 24 teams?


I think it was the only clever decision by ULEB, cause such teams as London Towers or Ostende just sucked. 24 teams are allright, but format dividing teams to 3 groups wasnt great, they should think some better format for this year's Euroleague, though I dont think they are going to do anything about it. Final4 sucks totally also.


----------



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

while euroleague consisted of 32 teams. everybody could get in- most of them came into league because of marketing, media coverage the league would gain with them... n stuff- which is just fine with me but games were BBBBBBOOOOOORRRRRIIIIIIINNNNNNGGGG!!! Especialy London Towers... sorry - but Englishman just don't know how to play basketball!
They should stay playing cricket.


----------



## Carl English (May 29, 2003)

I understand London was a disaster. I still think there were teams not in the Euroleague this year that should have been. Pamesa Valencia, Ural Great, Zadar, Split immediately come to mind. Now this season we'll have a situation where Real Madrid won't even be in the Euroleague. The three groups of 8 is a messy format!


----------



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

Real didn't deserve it to play in euroleague- Spain league is hot- hottest in europe and this year real was like 7th or something like that- but Real will return.
Pamesa plays as good as Barcelona, Ural is gettn better and better, ... Zadar:rbanana: Split- wait for few years- I can easily say their team under 18 would be american high school champs.


Euroleague is led by some f_____ m*d*f*k*z they made some strange rules... like in NBA when tha ball hits the basket it means new24 seconds! in europe if you hear the ring (this sound I don't know how to say) referee sometimes stops the game even if defending team is already running on the half of the court- :upset:  :devil: 

jp! they're f_____ stupid


----------



## SEOK (Apr 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Carl English</b>!
> I understand London was a disaster. I still think there were teams not in the Euroleague this year that should have been. Pamesa Valencia, Ural Great, Zadar, Split immediately come to mind. Now this season we'll have a situation where Real Madrid won't even be in the Euroleague. The three groups of 8 is a messy format!


London Towers were absolutly a joke, look they couldn't even manage to win the English league (last year Chester Jets won it). But we had the honour to see Ovarense too in the first edition of the ULEB Euroleague...

I don't like the three groups, I don't like the Top-16, I don't like the F4: this formula is a copy of the football Champions' League model (listen the anthem too, and compare the logos!), but basketball is not soccer. Basketball needs playoff time, when you live or you die. Siena this year joined the F4, but... they were 2-0 with Ulker, 1-1 with Panathinaikos, 1-1 with Skipper. Their true opponents were the Greens and Bologna-2. And they finished 1-1 with these teams, joining the F4 with the fantastic record of... 10-10. How is it possible that a team finishes its Euroleague at the third place, with the 50% of victories (11-11)? 

I'm sorry for nations like Poland or Portugal or Belgium that have the right to play against the best teams, but the could join the EL with a preliminary round (like in the 2001-02 edition). 4 teams for Italy and Spain, 3 for Hellas, 2 for Turkey, France and Russia, 1 for Israel, Lithuania, Serbia-Montenegro, Croatia, Slovenia, Germany and the remaining place coming from a tournament between the champions of Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc... (8 teams: quarters, semis, final). 

The problem is that this formula has been voted by the clubs, and not by the organization: why that? to have guaranteed three home games in the Top-16 (read: money). 

Another thing: I don't like the fact the some teams have the right to play in the Euroleague without having reached on court the possibility to play in the highest European competition: Virtus Bologna was 16th in the Italian league, they can't play the Euroleague 2003-04. Ural Great Perm won the Russian Superleague 2002, but CSKA (5th in Russia) was in the EL (and Perm in ULEB Cup). The same happened with Zalgiris one or two years ago, Partizan won the YUBA league but joined the EL simply because a Greek team (Iraklis, and then Panionios, Peristeri and Marousi) couldn't play due to financial problem. 
Is it the European Best Championship? I want to see there the best European teams, the teams the fought and deserved the EL.

Ah, Matiz: the 24 seconds rules has been decided by FIBA: do you want to laugh? Go in the site www.fiba.com, and read the new rules about the jump-balls... it's so ridicoulous...


----------



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

> Ah, Matiz: the 24 seconds rules has been decided by FIBA: do you want to laugh? Go in the site www.fiba.com, and read the new rules about the jump-balls... it's so ridicoulous...


 why are they doing this to me???


----------



## SEOK (Apr 3, 2003)

You know, the "heads" of basketball aren't working so well. 
Example, the three points line. 
We had it in 1984, after the OG of Los Angeles: 6m25. Now, after 19 years, the 3pts line is always at the same distance, and what happened? 
That a team like Skipper can manage to win the first final against Benetton, shooting 29 times from beyond the arc (50%). They play a sort of handball. 20 seconds of passes, then who's free 7 meters far from the basket shoots. What a show! 

Not only: these 6m25 are 6m25 for someone who's playing the Olympiac final, for a 10 years old girl who's playing her first year of basketball, for a player on wheelchair. Is this _normal_? I don't think so.


----------



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

I completely agree with you.
Like when someone dunks and gets technical foul cousehangin on a basket... WAY TO GO!!!!! :dead:


----------

