The NBA season is back! In basketball, a single player can change the trajectory of a season probably more than any other team sport. And there are few things more frustrating than watching your team give away a lead while its best player sits on the bench. It’s an easy decision from the couch, but coaches oftentimes stick to their normal rotations, even when things are going poorly.

Making playing time decisions is hard. And so much has been said in recent years about the impact of too many minutes played in today’s NBA. If you are interested in the topic of injuries, go read my articles on load management and Achilles injuries.

In this article, I explore regular season and playoff minutes across the last ten NBA seasons, from 2016/17 through 2025/26, along with earlier career data of select players. I look at trends in playing time for starters and bench players, how coaches allocate minutes differently, and compare minutes played among prominent NBA players.

Regular Season Minutes

Every team has the same 240 player-minutes to distribute in a game. Five players on the court multiplied by 48 minutes.

Across 82 games, those minutes have several things they need to do. They have to help win the game, give younger players room to develop, cover for injured teammates, and identify which combinations work best. The season is a marathon, but managing a roster is a jigsaw puzzle.

To understand who gets those minutes, I ranked each team’s players by total playing time and calculated the share going to its top five players and top eight players. A smaller percentage of the allocated minutes during the season is being given to the top five and top eight players for each team in recent years compared to years past.

Meanwhile, the number of players who appeared in a regular season game increased from 486 in 2016/17 to 582 in 2025/26. There are a few explanations for a larger number of players getting minutes, the most likely contributors being larger rosters, injuries, and tanking.

Let’s start with the roster itself. In 2016/17, teams could carry up to 15 players on standard NBA contracts. The following season, the league added two two-way spots per team. A third two-way spot was added in 2023/24.

Across 30 teams, that raised the usual combined capacity from 450 to 540 roster spots, a 20% increase. Not surprisingly, the number of players who appeared in our sample jumped from 486 to 541 in the first season with two-way contracts.

Injuries create another kind of opening. A third-party analysis showed that 4,198 regular season games were lost to injury or illness in 2016/17. By 2024/25, that figure had reached 6,779. That’s about a 61% increase, which outpaces the percentage increase in players who received playing time. This can also account for the increase in playing time across more players.

Then there’s tanking. Eight teams in 2025/26 won no more than a third of their games, compared to three in 2016/17. The eight teams that won less than a third of their games last season gave their top eight players an average of 64.4% of their season minutes. The other 22 teams allocated, on average, 73.9% of their minutes to their top eight players.

The number of teams that win less than a third of their games goes up and down over the decade rather than increasing every year. However, the NBA has made a concerted effort to reduce tanking, which gives us more qualitative evidence of it being more of a problem in recent years compared to years past.

In February 2026, the NBA fined the Utah Jazz $500,000 after Lauri Markkanen and Jaren Jackson Jr. were removed before the fourth quarter in two close games despite being able to continue. Indiana received a separate $100,000 fine after holding out three starters who the league determined could have played. Then there’s the change in the lottery rules, which give the teams with the worst three records a lower chance of getting a top pick in the draft.

What likely explains the growing spread of minutes is a combination of all three: larger rosters, an increase in injuries, and more tanking.

Playoff Minutes

Incentives change when determining minute allocations once there is a specific opponent to beat, and elimination is at stake. There is less room to spend minutes on developing potential. The minute distributions show how much more concentrated the work becomes.

Averaged across all ten seasons, the 16 playoff teams each year gave their top eight players 77% of regular season minutes and 90.3% of playoff minutes. The graph below shows those averages season by season. In 2025/26, for example, the share of minutes among a team’s top eight players rose from 75.6% to 89.5%. All 160 playoff team-seasons showed an increase in minutes among its top eight players.

That leaves everyone outside the top eight sharing less than 10% of postseason minutes, on average. Denver took this to an extreme during its 2023 championship run. Its eight most-used players accounted for 98.3% of the team’s playoff minutes.

Interestingly enough, across all ten champions, the average was 90.0%, which is about the same as the other playoff teams. Championship teams weren’t outliers in terms of allocating playing time to their best players. Their top eight players were just outperformed everyone else’s.

This is what makes roster depth an interesting thing to study. A roster can give a team enough options to get through the regular season without every option remaining useful in a playoff series. The goals and incentives change as the season enters the Spring, and the coach better be prepared to make the right decisions.

How Coaches Distribute Minutes

The coach has a lot to do with how opportunities are distributed. I compared minute allocations across coaches over the ten-season sample.

For this comparison, I only included team-seasons when a coach was with a single team the whole year. I averaged each team’s top-five and top-eight shares across that coach’s qualifying seasons. The chart ranks the ten coaches with the highest average top-eight player share of regular season minutes.

Thibodeau has a reputation for leaning on his top players more than anyone else. But by top-eight share of regular season minutes, he’s actually tied for second in this sample, just behind Chris Finch and even with Mike D’Antoni.

However, if you look at the top five, his reputation holds up. Thibodeau leads every coach in the sample at 61.9%.

The postseason comparison is also interesting. Thibodeau’s top eight averaged 92.8% of playoff minutes across five qualifying playoff runs. As a comparison, Steve Kerr’s top eight averaged 85.7% across six seasons.

The Burden of Being Indispensable

Counting how many games a player played in an 82-game season doesn’t tell us how much basketball a player actually played. Just ask Victor Wembanyama. He argued last season that minutes should be looked at to become eligible for season awards instead of a strict games-played threshold. But even after the 82-game regular season is played, the most important minutes to be played are still to come in the playoffs. And those extra minutes can take a toll.

For example, take Jayson Tatum in 2021/22. He played 2,731 regular season minutes. Boston then made the Finals, and he added another 983 in the playoffs. His total for the season reached 3,714 minutes.

The playoffs increased his season’s playing time by 36%. To put that in perspective, 983 minutes is almost 33 additional games for someone averaging 30 minutes a night.

Imagine finishing the regular season knowing you have another third of a season’s worth of minutes ahead of you. Obviously, those are the minutes players want most. Nobody is asking to lose in the first round so they can take an earlier vacation. Still, winning creates a physical burden for players at the top.

LeBron’s 2017/18 season was the highest in the ten-year sample. He played 3,026 regular season minutes and another 922 in the playoffs, finishing at 3,948.

And this isn’t a workload just reserved for the league’s biggest stars. Mikal Bridges played 3,742 combined minutes for the Knicks in 2024/25 and Josh Hart played 3,539 that same season. They can thank Thibodeau for that (lol). Both finished ahead of plenty of players with more individual accolades.

The Accumulation of a Career

Two players can have the same number of seasons on their Basketball Reference page while having played very different amounts of NBA basketball. We often compare players by age. Once a player turns 30, we start wondering how much longer he has left. But two 30-year-olds can have very different wear and tear based on the minutes they have played.

The longevity of the players at the top of the minutes played list is quite extraordinary. To put it into perspective, LeBron had played about 59% more NBA minutes than Dame Dillard at the same age of 30. The gap was 16,093 minutes. Using 30 minutes per game over an 82-game season as a benchmark, that’s roughly six and a half seasons of playing time.

Six and a half seasons. At the same age.

Part of that difference in minute accumulation between the players who have played the most and everyone else comes from entering the NBA earlier, availability and roster makeup, and the playoffs. But it still takes a special type of endurance to be at the top of this list.

Earning the Next Minute

I want my favorite team’s best players on the court when the game is close. That’s part of being a fan. But looking at these numbers changes how I think about the player coming out of the game and the one checking in. One has earned the responsibility of being difficult to replace. The other needs enough opportunity to show he can be trusted. Coaches have to keep deciding how to divide minutes.

The regular season requires a team to keep functioning as its available puzzle pieces change. The playoffs are then where the stars have to show up and perform night in and night out, accumulating one minute at a time.

Every fan loves reliving unforgettable sports moments. I am honoring that nostalgia with a Butterflies series called “Replays.” Each edition will revisit a memorable moment, add historical context, uncover a number or statistic, capture the reactions it inspired, and trace the butterfly effect it set in motion.

Context

Dame Lillard is back in Portland. His first regular-season game in a Blazers uniform is expected to be October 21st. He looks fit and is passing the eye test in preseason. When he signed with Portland in the summer of 2025, I wrote about my feelings and how it just felt right. A little over a year later and it feels like he never left. At the same time, some of his most iconic moments feel like decades ago.

In 2017/18, the sixth-seeded New Orleans Pelicans swept the Blazers in the first round despite being the lower seed. A year later, Portland had another opportunity as a three seed against Oklahoma City.

The Thunder weren’t an easy draw. They won 49 games and had swept the Blazers in the regular season, 4-0. Additionally, 19 of the 20 “experts” at ESPN picked Oklahoma City to win the series. Everyone thought the Blazers would be bounced in the first round for the second year in a row. Shoutout to Nick DePaula for being the lone Portland vote.

The series was heated from the jump. Dame and Russell Westbrook had beef the entire series. Trash talk between the two was at its peak. And that’s saying something considering they always have had a personal rivalry on the court.

Portland won the first two games, Oklahoma City won Game 3, and the Blazers won Game 4. The series returned to Portland with the Blazers up 3–1, one win from advancing.

The night before Game 5, Lillard had friends, along with Chris Haynes, over to his house. Dame was already thinking about the next night. He told the room he planned to finish the series in Portland.

Game 5 swung back and forth. Portland trailed early, led at halftime, and went up nine in the third quarter. Then Oklahoma City took control. With 7:12 remaining, the Thunder led 107–92.

Portland came back and a Dame layup tied the game at 115. Westbrook missed at the other end, the Blazers grabbed the rebound, and the ball found Dame. Portland had one possession to finish it.

The Moment

The Numbers

The shot was officially recorded at 37 feet. That’s more than 13 feet behind the top of the three-point line.

His final stat line:

• 50 points

• 17/33 shooting

• 10/18 from three

• Seven rebounds

• Six assists

The points and made threes were both Portland playoff records at the time. The Blazers won 118–115 and took the series 4–1.

Then there’s how rarely a shot like this happens. Dame’s shot to end the playoff series with no time left on the clock against the Thunder was only the ninth in NBA history. Only Kawhi Leonard has done it since.

Reactions

Paul George shared his thoughts:

Dame’s post-game presser:

A collection of NBA player tweets here.

The comment section:

The Butterfly Effect

Dame’s wave looks different when you know what happened next. George and Westbrook, the Thunder’s best players, never played another game for OKC.

That summer, Oklahoma City traded George to the Clippers for Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Danilo Gallinari, five first-round picks, and two pick swaps. Westbrook went to Houston for Chris Paul and more draft assets.

Dame broke up Oklahoma City with one shot. Had the Thunder gone further in the playoffs, maybe Kawhi’s recruitment of George wouldn’t have been enticing. The George trade brought Oklahoma City its next franchise player in Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. It also supplied the 2022 pick used to draft Jalen Williams.

In 2024/25, Gilgeous-Alexander won the MVP, led the Thunder to a championship, and won Finals MVP. And then won the MVP again in 2025/26. None of that had life when the ball left Dame’s hand. Who would have thought the team on the receiving end of Dame’s wave would find its championship pieces in the aftermath?

Every season, we find ways to convince ourselves that this could be our team’s year. Having something to believe in is part of why we keep coming back. You don’t need to win every year to enjoy being a fan. Most of us would settle for believing that, someday, we could. But what about football club fans who haven’t challenged for a title in decades? Or ever?

That question brings us to Manchester City’s financial doping case. City became the contender its fans had dreamed of, but did so by breaking financial rules. Then there’s the question of whether those rules allow for small clubs to even dream of winning.

We’ll get into both, but first, here’s a quick overview of how football’s financial rules work.

How The Financial Rules Work

European football doesn’t have traditional salary caps. The key idea is that an owner’s wealth and a club’s spending allowance are different things. The rules limit how much owners can fund beyond what the club earns.

Under the old Premier League rules, a club could lose up to £105 million across three years. That number excluded some spending, including qualifying investment in academies, women’s football, community projects, and infrastructure.

Starting in 2026/27, the Premier League introduced a new system. Its basic rule is that clubs can spend 85% of their football income on their team. That team spending includes player and head coach wages, agents’ fees, and transfer costs. Transfer fees are usually spread across a player’s contract. For example, a £50 million transfer fee on a five-year contract would generally count as £10 million a year.

There is some flexibility above 85%. Clubs start with an extra allowance of 30 percentage points, which shrinks as they use it. Spending above 85% can lead to financial penalties and points deductions. Clubs playing in UEFA competitions are also required to meet UEFA’s stricter 70% squad spending limit.

An owner can build a better stadium, improve training facilities, or invest in an academy. Those things can help the club earn more money, which eventually leads to spending more on players. But they can’t just write a check to the club and count it as revenue to offset expenses.

Manchester City’s Financial Breaches

Money has always been the historical answer to improving a squad and moving up the league table. More money in football generally means better players, a better manager, improved facilities, and more winning.

This is what Manchester City experienced in 2008 when the club was bought by Sheikh Mansour, a member of Abu Dhabi’s ruling family and currently the Vice President of the UAE. The new owner had money. Lots of money.

City wasn’t a perennial title contender when he arrived. In fact, City spent much of the 90s being relegated and promoted between the first and second division of English football, even spending a season in the third division.

However, since Sheikh Mansour arrived, City has won 26 trophies, including eight Premier League titles, four FA Cups, seven League Cups, and one Champions League. This is what his money bought the club and its fans.

All of City’s winning was called into question when the Premier League announced that an independent commission had found the club guilty of serious financial breaches spanning the 2009/10 through 2017/18 seasons.

According to the commission, Manchester City made sponsorship agreements appear larger than they were. Some sponsors paid only part of the reported sponsorship fees, with the owner supplying the rest and passing it off as revenue. The result was a club that appeared to meet financial rules when it had significantly exceeded the spending limits. City denied wrongdoing and appealed the findings.

Subscribe now

There’s a detail in City’s history that makes this saga more interesting. Mansour bought the club when modern-day financial rules weren’t in play. I understand why the timing would be frustrating. He bought a club with enormous ambitions, and the rules governing how he could fund those ambitions changed. I’m sure he felt cheated out of his grand plans.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham expressed concern about the potential of losing City’s owners and praised their investment in Manchester. His comments drew criticism and some accused City’s owners of sportswashing.

Fines and points deductions are likely, but relegation, title removals, and straight bans are among the more severe potential outcomes. The consequences could be huge, not only for the club, but also for the surrounding area of Manchester.

But that shouldn’t influence the commission’s final ruling. If you cheat, you should be punished. And in the case of Manchester City, they should be punished harshly to show that rule-breaking isn’t tolerated. I want opposing fans to scream and chant more than they ever have when playing against City. I want each City away match to feel like a prison sentence.

Still, I can’t help but have a somewhat nuanced take on the whole thing. Not whether they should be punished, but whether the rules in place are even effective and accomplishing the right outcomes.

The Purpose of Financial Rules: Parity vs Protection

What are football’s financial rules actually supposed to accomplish?

In most American sports, salary caps ensure parity on the field. The NFL has a hard cap. The NBA’s system allows exceptions and uses a luxury tax, but both leagues have a uniform spending limit across the league. A team’s salary cap doesn’t simply rise because it sells more jerseys, tickets, and sponsorships than everyone else.

European football’s financial rules don’t ensure parity on the field. Instead, rules protect the club, its employees, and its creditors. The idea is that it ensures a billionaire’s willingness to spend today doesn’t leave the club in debt long after they are gone. Still, it is different from the NFL and NBA in that it actually prevents parity.

In American sports, an owner doesn’t have to overspend when they aren’t title contenders. The only consequence is a bad season and a high draft pick.

But for European football, lower-end teams are in a catch-22. They have to win enough to not get relegated. But they also can’t spend so much that they break financial rules. This dilemma for lower-half teams creates a disadvantage. And it’s a vicious cycle.

In the case of Manchester City, this is what happened. They were a mid-table team with an okay brand, but nothing that drew the popularity of a team like Manchester United. They were in the vicious cycle. So to get out of it, they cheated.

Football’s Elite Benefit The Most

That brings us to the “Red Cartel.”

It’s a derogatory label associated with Manchester United, Liverpool, and Arsenal. The argument is that these clubs built commercial reach with worldwide brand equity before the current rules existed, then benefited from a system that ties player spending to that reach.

As an Arsenal fan, I can understand why supporters of other clubs find that maddening. The established giants start with a substantial advantage, which showcases itself on the field. Just look at who won titles across Europe’s five biggest leagues over the last 10 seasons.

In Germany, Bayern Munich won nine of the last ten. In France, PSG won eight of the last ten. Italy had four different champions, but Juventus and Inter Milan combined to win seven of the last ten titles. In Spain, Barcelona won five, Real Madrid won four, and Atlético Madrid won one. Even in England, Manchester City won six of ten (though they were only able to because they cheated).

If you support a club outside that small group, how realistic is your hope of winning the league?

Contrast that with the NFL and NBA. Across those same ten years, the NFL has had six different champions and the NBA has had eight different champions. That’s a huge difference.

Now, financial rules alone don’t mean only a few clubs can win a title. Just look at Leicester City as a counterexample. However, the rules do make it that much harder for new clubs to break through and become perennial title challengers. Leicester was a one hit wonder and now down in the third tier of English football.

The Premier League says its rules aim to protect competitive balance as well as financial sustainability. But the current system hasn’t improved competitive balance. It only reinforces the Premier League hierarchy that has always been there. I’m not saying we should allow unlimited spending. But I am saying rules that tie squad building to existing revenue are too limiting and punishes clubs on the field that otherwise could be title contenders because of smart squad building.

Belief Is What Makes Fandom Fun

Manchester City fans didn’t cook the books. Local business owners didn’t lie about the sponsorship arrangements. Yet they both will feel the consequences of decisions made above them.

I’m not going to pretend I feel sorry for City’s leadership. But I do feel for the supporters and the city. And as a sports fan, I want competition. If we are upset about Manchester City’s cheating because it’s unfair, we also need to talk about the rules themselves being unfair.

I want Arsenal to win. I also want clubs outside the established giants to have a believable path toward winning. Financial rules should enable that belief for fans, not take it away.

You know that feeling when sports content just hits different? Every month, I round up the best articles, charts, video, and audio I’ve consumed. “Seven Wonders” is a Butterflies series where I share my favorites.

It’s been a while since I’ve written my Seven Wonders series. I’m glad to be back at it and share some of my favorite pieces of content I’ve come across. In the past, I’ve just shared articles, but I think I’m going to branch out now and share any type of content, whether that’s interesting graphs, charts, videos, etc.

But first, seven of my recent posts:

1. The Best Sports Summer. I take a look back at this summer with Arsenal, the Knicks, and the World Cup and share why sports can make our lives better, using research to back it up.

2. Which Premier League Teams Get Their Money’s Worth? Five seasons of spending and performance data show which Premier League clubs are the most efficient teams. Tap in to see who is at the top and bottom of the table.

3. How Seattle Lost Its Basketball Team. The Sonics didn’t disappear overnight. Their move to Oklahoma City was the result of years of arena disputes, ownership changes, and political failures that offer an uncomfortable warning for other NBA cities facing similar battles.

4. The Football War. El Salvador and Honduras famously went to war around the same time they were playing each other in World Cup qualifying. Look back on the interesting history of how sports and geopolitics got intertwined.

5. The Top 10 Games of the 2026 World Cup. The ten most memorable games from a World Cup filled with comebacks, controversy, and underdog stories. Do you agree with my ranking?

6. What’s Next for the USMNT? The golden generation captured the country’s attention but still exited in the Round of 16. The next step is getting more Americans playing meaningful minutes at the highest levels in Europe.

7. Any Ball That Rolls. America has built leagues, academies, and infrastructure for soccer. Still, the next step is building a real soccer culture where kids grow up playing the game everywhere simply because they love it.

And now, here are the seven best pieces of sports content I’ve recently consumed:

If you enjoyed my recent article on Premier League spending, you’ll love these three articles:

1. The Quants Who Bought Football by . Matthew Benham and Tony Bloom made their money using math and data to beat the football betting market. They then took the same approach into club ownership with Brentford and Brighton. The result is basically the blueprint for modern football ownership.

2. Inside Como 1907’s rise from Italian afterthought to the envy of Europe by . Como went from bankruptcy and Italy’s fourth division to the Champions League in just a few years. Take a dive into the interesting combination of money, analytics, and lofty goals that has turned Como into one of the poster children of modern football.

3. When Chelsea’s money stopped being special by . Chelsea have spent like crazy and implemented a unique strategy in recent years focused on a youth movement and long contracts. This piece dives into the interesting history of how money transformed a club and its culture, with an open question of how Clearlake Capital will continue to operate now that they have full control of the club.

The fall is a great sports season:

4. The Week That Was (September 7-11, 2026) by . This graphic shows the total sports volume and month-over-month change we see throughout the year. Get ready for weeks of intense sports viewing.

Are you looking forward to the new NBA season? If so, these next three will be right up your alley:

5. 30 Teams in 30 Days in 30 Charts by . This is a fun visual preview of the 2026/27 NBA season. There is one chart for each team focused on a question or insight that could define the team's year. Below is an example of one of Chris' charts. This covers half the league, so be on the lookout for Part 2.

6. NBA News and Rumor Roundup 9/30/2026 by . If you need to get caught up on the latest happenings around the Association, look no further. This article offers a quick snapshot of where the NBA stands after Media Day, plus everything else you need to know (and probably don’t 😜) as the start of the season is less than a month away.

7. Swamp Dragons Night. FINALLY! by , , and . If you want to learn a bit of branding and logo history about the Brooklyn Nets, this is a great one. The Nets almost completely reinvented themselves in 1995 as the New Jersey Swamp Dragons, and this is the inside look into that rebranding process. Brooklyn is finally celebrating the Swamp Dragons identity this season.

   ---

You know those lulls and ruts you enter into throughout your life? Maybe you are in one of them now. Or in one more often than you would like. You know, that’s ok. It’s just part of life. One of my favorite quotes is from Jenkin Lloyd Jones, which he wrote in a newspaper column and was later popularized by Gordon B. Hinckley:

“Life is like an old-time rail journey—delays, sidetracks, smoke, dust, cinders, and jolts, interspersed only occasionally by beautiful vistas and thrilling bursts of speed. The trick is to thank the Lord for letting you have the ride.”

The point of the quote is to enjoy the journey and be grateful for both the ups and the downs. I think this is good advice. As Andy Bernard from The Office said, “I wish there was a way to know you’re in the good old days before you’ve actually left them.”

It takes perspective to recognize when we are in the “ups” of life. But what if I told you that one sure way to have an “up” is to experience sports?

I think the summer of 2026 was the greatest in sports history. We were bombarded by sporting event after sporting event. But even better than that, we were reminded why sports are so great. Sports pull people together.

Think about what we witnessed.

Arsenal won the Premier League for the first time in 22 years in May. Knicks fans poured into Manhattan after their first championship in 53 years, singing New York City classics that stand the test of time.

Americans sang “Country Roads” after World Cup matches and broke viewership records along the way. Fans from around the world filled cities, big and small, across the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, chanting, singing, and gathering across cultural and ethnic boundaries.

Then in September, right as the weather was changing to fall, the 25th anniversary of 9/11 reminded us of how sports helped a nation heal.

Sports Builds Communities

Arsenal and the Knicks won the Premier League and NBA championship at the beginning of the summer. A sports team can give people who have nothing in common a shared identity. You can’t help but root for people’s happiness. Just look at them in these videos.

Then the World Cup took it to another level.

My pastime this summer was watching World Cup visitors experience America for the first time. We watched them bring their chants and traditions to Times Square. They brought the beautiful game to our NFL stadiums. And the European and South American atmospheres were transmitted to our television sets for the rest of America to experience.

I embraced this World Cup more than I ever have. I had the privilege of going to two games myself. I was there during the introduction of the USMNT’s unofficial anthem versus Australia. The pop and party in the stands after Malik Tillman’s free kick against Bosnia was unlike anything I’ve ever felt in a stadium.

Coming home from the U.S. vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina game, my friend and I wore our USA jerseys through the airport. An older couple talked our ears off the entire time about how they’d watched the game the night before. They just kept going. And this was at 6:30am.

We then had a bit of a drive from the airport after landing. We stopped at a gas station in a podunk town in the middle of nowhere. As we were getting back in the car after grabbing some snacks for the road, a guy started telling us he’d watched the game the night before too. He said he’d never really watched soccer before.

He asked us about Folarin Balogun’s red card, and whether that meant the U.S. would have to play the next game with ten men. My friend explained the rule to him and confirmed we’d still have eleven men, but Balogun would be suspended (well, so we thought). The conversation ended with the guy saying he’d be tuning in for the Belgium game. We never would have talked to him if it wasn’t for sports.

And then there was the 25th anniversary of 9/11. Sports brought a country together during tragedy and heartbreak. Sports were a symbol of overcoming evil. And we were reminded of that again this year, a quarter century later.

Maybe This Feeling Is Measurable

Maybe that feeling of belonging isn’t just something sports fans convince ourselves is real.

A 2024 study used three different methods to test whether watching sports improves well-being. One analysis used data from roughly 20,000 Japanese adults, another was an experiment where people watched sports videos, and a third used MRI brain imaging. Across all three, watching sports was positively associated with well-being.

Additionally, in 2023, researchers looked at more than 7,000 adults in the UK and found that people who attended live sporting events reported higher life satisfaction, a greater sense that their lives were worthwhile, and less loneliness.

The study can’t show that attending games caused happiness or connection. But even after researchers accounted for things like age, health, employment, and economic circumstances, the relationship was still there.

People who went to sporting events seemed to feel a little better about their lives and a little less alone. It’s hard to deny that after watching millions of North Londoners, New Yorkers, and fans across the world pour into the streets together.

While writing this, I was reminded of a book called Soccernomics, which I read a few years ago. One of the authors, Stefan Szymanski along with Georgios Kavetsos, looked at self-reported life satisfaction across 12 European countries over three decades. They compared that data with major sporting events, including the World Cup and European Championship.

The findings showed that a country hosting a major football tournament was associated with increased life satisfaction. And once the tournament was over, the boost in life satisfaction then seemed to disappear.

The researchers also found only limited evidence that a country’s success on the field had a positive impact on how satisfied people were with their lives. In other words, the thing making people happier wasn’t winning, but experiencing the football tournament itself.

What’s even cooler is that researchers later analyzed data in France after the World Cup was hosted there in 1998. They looked at suicide data from 1979 through 2006 to see if the tournament had any measurable effect. During the month of the World Cup, there were 95 fewer suicides than researchers statistically expected, which was a 10.3% decline.

On days immediately following games played by the French national team, suicides were 19.9 percent lower than expected. The decline was especially pronounced among men between the ages of 30 and 44.

The researchers pointed to hypotheses around belonging and social integration. When an entire country becomes wrapped up in the same event, people may feel a little less isolated from everyone around them.

The study can’t tell us that 95 specific people were saved because France hosted the World Cup. It also can’t prove that football itself caused the decline. But 95 is a remarkable number. That’s 95 people who are still around as a brother, sister, father, mother, daughter, and/or son. And football may have played a part in it.

Which brings me back to this summer. Maybe the important part wasn’t whether the U.S. beat Belgium. Yes, we’d all love it if our team had won, but that’s not what the lasting message was about. The memory that will last was the millions of people having somewhere to go, something to talk about, and someone to experience it with.

Sports are entertaining. And most of the time that’s enough. But every once in a while, they seem to give us something a little more important, maybe like life itself.

We’re Running Out of Places to Belong

So much of modern life has become individualized. We stream shows alone. We work without leaving the house. We order food to our door. But these studies all point to the fact that belonging matters. Sports are really good at helping us realize that.

Sports are one of the few things left where millions of people care about the exact same thing. And then willingly wear the same colors, sing the same songs, and experience the same emotions together.

I called this summer of 2026 the greatest summer in sports history. I’m sure someone could point me to a summer with better games, better athletes, or more dramatic finishes. But I know what I felt, and I’m sticking to my proclamation.

Every fan loves reliving unforgettable sports moments. I am honoring that nostalgia with a Butterflies series called “Replays.” Each edition will revisit a memorable moment, add historical context, uncover a number or statistic, capture the reactions it inspired, and trace the butterfly effect it set in motion.

Context

College football just kicked off, and it only took the first weekend to produce some real controversy. Michigan defeated Western Michigan in a game that saw the clock hit zero with Western Michigan leading. And then one second was added back on the clock. Michigan threw a game-winning Hail Mary in what will be a game talked about for a long time.

54 years ago this month, the 1972 USA vs. Soviet Union basketball game for the Olympic gold in Munich had a similar fate.

1972 was the peak of the Cold War. The Americans and Soviets were world powers and competing in ideology, space, weapons, and yes, even sports.

But basketball belonged to the United States. It was an American sport, and the rest of the world was just catching on. The USSR was a good team that practiced and played together frequently.

At the time, America sent college kids to compete who only had a few practices together before the Olympics. But again, this was basketball. And Americans owned basketball. The US men’s basketball team had won 63 consecutive Olympic games and had won every gold medal since basketball became an Olympic sport in 1936.

During the gold medal game, the Soviets came out firing. The US kept it close, but the USSR led the entire game. That was until the final three seconds, with Doug Collins at the free-throw line.

The Moment

There isn’t great footage of the game on the internet without commentary and voiceover. This is the best video I found. You’ll need to watch it in two instances to fully see what happened.

First, watch this clip from 1:13:20 to 1:16:12. When the commentary starts, come back here for the second clip.

Watch this second clip from 1:22:16 to 1:24:14.

Below is the written description if you need extra context:

With three seconds remaining in the game, Doug Collins was fouled hard while driving to the basket and took a while to get up. When he finally came to, he knocked down two free throws, giving USA a 50-49 lead, their first of the night. While taking his second free throw, you can hear the horn go off, but it was ignored, and the game continued. The horn going off will be a constant during the last three seconds of gameplay, which adds to the chaos.

The Soviets immediately inbounded the ball. As they made their way to midcourt, the officials stopped the play with about one second remaining because the Soviet coach was screaming for a timeout.

Apparently, he had requested a timeout to occur after the made free throw, but it wasn’t acknowledged. Even the FIBA Secretary General walked onto the floor from the stands, signaling that three seconds should be put back onto the clock. The referees decided to reward the USSR with the timeout and replay the inbound with three seconds left after the made free throw.

The Soviets inbounded the ball again, and the horn went off almost immediately. The Americans celebrated on the court as if they had just won the gold medal. But they hadn’t. The clock hadn’t been properly reset to three seconds. The officials had to remove the USA players, staff, and media from the court to replay the final three seconds, yet again.

This time, the clock was set properly back to three seconds. Soviet guard Ivan Edeshko was the inbounder and threw a length-of-the-court pass. Aleksandr Belov out-battled both Jim Forbes and Kevin Joyce and laid the ball up right before the final buzzer. The final score: USSR 51. USA 50.

The Numbers

For nearly the entire game, the United States’ estimated win probability remained below 50%. Even after a made basket closed the Soviet lead to 49–48 with 40 seconds left, the US still only had a 24% chance of winning.

Then came the swing. Doug Collins’s free throws put the United States ahead 50–49 with three seconds remaining, sending its estimated win probability to 97%. One full-court pass and an Alexander Belov basket later, it swung back in favor of the Soviets.

Reactions

Team USA

The Americans immediately tried to appeal the game to a five-person FIBA jury. The last-ditch effort was rejected 3-2. It was a moment where the context of the Cold War found its way into sports since the three countries that declined the appeal were all Eastern Bloc countries.

In protest, the Americans didn’t attend the medal ceremony and still haven’t collected their medals. The US captain, Kenny Davis, even put instructions in his will that his wife and children were to never accept his medal.

YouTube Comment Section

The Butterfly Effect

Before the Munich Olympics, US Olympic basketball had a repeatable pattern: Send college kids, win the gold, celebrate, repeat. This gold medal game showed the weakness in that system.

The Soviets had continuity, experience, and players accustomed to international basketball. The Americans assembled a new group of college stars every four years and expected talent to win out. The rest of the world was catching up.

For another two Olympic games, the U.S. continued using amateurs. The US won gold in 1976, boycotted the 1980 games, and won gold in 1984. Then they lost again to the Soviet Union in 1988, this time in the semifinals.

One year later, FIBA changed eligibility rules, allowing professional players to play in the Olympics. That’s what set up the Dream Team in the 1992 Olympics. The US wanted to show it was still superior in basketball, a sport it invented. But 1972 is what put the US on notice that the rest of the world was finally catching up.

Football transfer news is one of the wildest things to witness in sports. Reporting can never be 100% trusted. I find myself having to check Transfermarkt just to make sure I’m not being deceived by a tweet saying a deal is all but done. Just look at how long it took to finalize Yan Diomandé’s transfer to Real Madrid. Or the chaos and ripples that ensued after the Folarin Balogun deal to Everton fell apart. This summer’s transfer window definitely gave me flashbacks to NBA free agency when DeAndre Jordan was held hostage in his own home by his Clippers teammates.

But now that the transfer window has closed, we can all breathe again. Fans and Premier League teams can now focus on winning games. After months of rumors, Fabrizio Romano updates (and online quarrels), the squads are finally set. Well, at least until January.

With Premier League spending seemingly hitting new records every transfer window, it begs the question: Which Premier League teams actually make the best use of their money?

Measuring Spending Efficiency

I collected five seasons of Premier League data1 from 2021/22 through 2025/26. I collected data on transfer fees, player wages, amortization schedules, and Premier League tables. The goal was to compare each club’s spending with the number of points it earned.

To get rid of data that might be misleading, I removed point deductions for club violations to ensure findings were based solely on team spending and play on the field.

I also created a metric called Total Squad Cost, which is basically the added wage bill and amortized player transfer costs per year for each club. Adding these two numbers gives us a more accurate view of what the cost of a team actually is for a given year.

I then created a regression estimating how many points a club should earn based on its Total Squad Cost. A team with an expensive squad is expected to earn more points than a team working with a smaller budget. The difference between the model’s estimate and the club’s actual points became its Points Above Expected (PAE).

For example, if a club’s spending suggests it should earn 55 points, but it actually earned 60 points, it has a PAE of +5. If the same club earns 50 points, it has a PAE of -5.

I also had a multi-season ranking that compared the average PAE across the five seasons being observed. To reduce noise, a club had to play at least three of the five seasons analyzed in the Premier League to be considered in the multi-season ranking. There were 21 eligible teams for this ranking across the five seasons.

With that said, let’s get to the rankings.

The Most Efficient Spenders

When it comes to efficiency, it’s natural to think less spending is better. However, with the PAE metric, spending is ok as long as the team produces results on the field. Over the last five seasons, nobody has done that better in the Premier League than Liverpool.

Liverpool averaged a PAE of 14.38. Across the five seasons, Liverpool earned 385 points and had the two most efficient individual seasons. It finished 26.13 points above expected in 2021-22 and 26.2 points above expected in 2024-25.

Funnily enough, Liverpool actually underperformed its PAE last season by 4.7 points, but still finished on top over the five years because they performed so well the other four. And if you think about the context, it makes sense. They brought in Florian Wirtz and Alexander Isak for a combined £225 million plus add-ons during a season when the team finished far below expectations.

Arsenal finished second with an average of 13.51 PAE over the last five years. Remember when Arsenal’s transfer strategy was regularly mocked? The team was criticized for overpaying for players like Martin Ødegaard and Kai Havertz, but those signings have paid off handsomely.

Like Liverpool, Arsenal have been big spenders over the past five years. But again, smart signings have helped the team outperform its points expectations.

Efficient With Less

Brighton and Brentford are as efficient as advertised. They both beat their Total Squad Cost expectation by 11.08 points and 10.59 points per season, respectively. Brentford produced 6.69 points for every £10 million of Total Squad Cost, the best rate among all 21 qualifying clubs. Both clubs are world-class at finding players before their prices exploded. They have also been willing to sell at the right time and put the profits back into squad building.

Subscribe now

The Bottom of the Efficiency Table

Now for the other end of the table. Close your eyes and cover your ears, United fans.

Manchester United averaged 115.09 points below expected per season over the last five years. Only Southampton performed worse among clubs with at least three seasons in the Premier League since the 2021/22 season.

According to our data, United accumulated the highest Total Squad Costs in the Premier League during the time period observed. The Red Devils earned 306 points. For comparison, Aston Villa earned 305 points, and Newcastle earned 295 points, both while spending approximately £1 billion less in Total Squad Costs. United pays like an elite squad and receives results that look much closer to a mid-table team.

Interestingly, transfers aren’t Manchester United’s biggest issue. When looking at just the money spent in the transfer market, United actually outperformed its expected points by 3.3.

However, looking at wage spending alone tells a much different story. United earned nearly 16 fewer points per season than its payroll suggested it should, which heavily impacts its Total Squad Cost metric. One bad transfer window can be overcome, but the issue with United has been the accumulation of expensive decisions.

Years of large contracts make life difficult when it comes to efficient spending. And once bad contracts start accumulating year after year, it is hard to break the cycle. As a result, United claimed three of the six worst seasons when it came to points below its expected totals.

Another big club underperforming is Chelsea. Chelsea is a club that has spent big over the past five years in the hopes its youth movement will pay off. It hasn’t, at least not yet.

Chelsea finished 12.87 points below expected, placing it 19th in the table out of the 21 teams that qualified. The difficulty with evaluating Chelsea is that much of its spending was designed around young players and unusually long contracts. This summer’s transfers for Chelsea may be a turning point. Time will tell.

The Challenge For Promoted Clubs

Newly promoted clubs only averaged 31.2 points per season over the five years analyzed and finished over eight points below their PAE. Contrast that with established Premier League clubs, who averaged 56.2 points and finished 1.48 points above expected.

So, why does this happen?

Newly promoted clubs often have to rebuild large portions of their squad in one summer. They are buying several players at once and integrating them quickly. They often have a lot of spending to do, yet they are often still recruiting players on the fringes. In other words, they are spending a lot, but the quality of the players may not be there since the best are choosing to go to established Premier League teams.

Just look at the recently promoted teams’ spending this summer. According to Transfermarkt, Ipswich spent £189.56m (8th highest in the Premier League), Hull spent £150.9m (10th highest), and Coventry spent £127.6m (12th highest) to try and bolster their squad to stay up this year.

Even despite these efforts, most recently promoted teams eventually drop back down to the Championship. It’s no wonder none of the top 10 individual PAE seasons over the last five years include recently promoted clubs, but two promoted clubs are included in the bottom 10 PAE seasons.

Transfer Spending Tells Us Less Than We Think

One of the most interesting findings came from comparing transfer spending, wages, and Total Squad Cost. In 2022/23 and 2024/25, transfer spending explained less than one percent of the variation in club points. We spend all summer tracking and commentating on transfer fees, yet the amount spent in a single window tells us very little about what will happen during the season.

Wages, on the other hand, were much more closely related to results. Transfer spending captures the players purchased during a specific period. However, wages capture the perceived quality of the squad.

What the Data Tell Us

Transfer windows are easy to sell to fans and the powers that be. Give a manager new talent and every weakness from last season is seemingly answered. The record signing will propel the team up the table. The cheap prospect is the next great scouting find. Then the matches begin, and everyone has to prove that the moves made during the transfer windows were the correct ones.

Subscribe now

Liverpool spent plenty, but the spending kept producing points. Arsenal received criticism during its rebuild, particularly when some of its signings seemed questionable, but stuck with it year after year and won the title. Manchester City faced the highest expectations in the league and still found a way to exceed them.

Teams like Brighton and Brentford are forced to take a different path. They can’t compete with the biggest clubs financially, so they have to find advantages elsewhere. They have to reach players before the wealthier clubs do. Some develop into first-team contributors. Some outgrow the club and are sold, funding the next group of prospects. The cycle has to continue because clubs like Brighton and Brentford can’t afford many mistakes before relegation breathes down their necks.

Clubs near the bottom of the PAE ranking tell another story. Manchester United didn’t arrive there because of one bad signing. United’s position reflects several years of expensive decisions. The manager responsible for a signing may be gone within a season, but the transfer cost and salary remain. Bad signings can be sold, but often for a loss. And this is what makes squad building so difficult. The next transfer window begins with less flexibility because of decisions made several years earlier.

The consequences of poor spending for teams with lots of money like Manchester United and Chelsea usually are a season without European football. However, consequences aren’t so kind to smaller clubs like Brighton and Brentford. Four of the bottom 10 PAE seasons in the dataset resulted in teams being relegated, and they all happened to teams with limited money to spend.

Every August, we rush to declare winners and losers before most of the new signings have even played for their new team. It is part of what makes the transfer window fun. But now the transfer window is closed, at least for a few months. And we’re left with what matters: turning money into points.

Having grown up in Portland and being a Trail Blazers fan, I have not enjoyed watching this saga with the new ownership team. It’s a little heartbreaking that the Blazers moving out of state is actually a possibility. I’ve seen other sports franchises move during my lifetime, but now I am getting a taste of what it actually feels like. It almost feels wrong.

A sports team is the fabric of a city, especially the Blazers, since they’re the one big-league team in Portland. I feel for all the fans. I feel for Dame Lillard, who I’m sure came back because of the city and his family more than anything else. I feel for myself.

I’m also not naive to the business side of this. Oregon is a high-tax state and is difficult to do business in compared to plenty of other places. From a fiscal perspective, it probably does make sense to move. But when a sports team is removed from its home, it rips away the personality and heart of a city.

A lot has been said about Tom Dundon in the media, most of it negative. It started with some of his shenanigans during the Blazers’ first-round playoff series against the Spurs. From the fan T-shirt debacle, to not taking the two-way players on the first road trip of the playoffs, to not having late checkout for some of the staff, it was clear he manages by a different rulebook.

That rulebook is still in full use this offseason, with multiple firings and layoffs happening across the Blazers organization. All of this cost-cutting has led Bill Simmons to start calling Dundon “El Cheapo,” a nickname that has caught on among NBA fans.

Jason Quick of The Athletic has been doing a great job reporting the current negotiations between the city of Portland and the Trail Blazers. I’m not going to rehash everything that’s already been reported. If you want the details, go read his articles or search Twitter for the important anecdotes. Still, there are a few important things to note…

Quick reported that Dewayne Hankins, the Blazers’ President of Business Operations, said:

“The arena is only a small piece of [the] bigger picture. Portland’s current stagnant business climate, high income taxes, and divisive political environment make this a tough city to invest in. It makes it harder to sell tickets, secure corporate partnerships, and recruit players.”

Some of the points he made are debatable, but that doesn’t change how the new ownership group perceives the situation.

The state, city, and county have now approved $586 million for arena renovations, so it comes down to negotiating a new arena contract between now and December 17th, when the Portland city council will hold its next vote. That vote could lock the Blazers into Portland until 2050, assuming the city and the team can reach an agreement.

However, if they don’t reach an agreement by December 31st, over half the cash committed by the Oregon state legislature will expire, putting the whole “Portland” in Portland Trail Blazers in real jeopardy.

Subscribe now

I’ve seen tweets over the last couple of weeks saying this feels exactly like 2008 with the Sonics. I took the time to research the timeline1 for how Seattle lost its basketball team. After reviewing the details, it isn’t exactly the same, but the motivation of the two ownership groups does feel similar.

Let’s take a painful look (for Sonics fans) down memory lane.

January 2001

Howard Schultz, the Starbucks founder, and a group of investors bought the Seattle SuperSonics for $200 million. While owning the team, he famously feuded with Gary Payton, Desmond Mason, and Rashard Lewis.

2005–2006

Hurricane Katrina forced the New Orleans Hornets to relocate temporarily to Oklahoma City for two seasons. The experiment created strong local enthusiasm to bring the NBA to Oklahoma City permanently. The city already had the Ford Center, an arena suited for hosting an NBA team.

Feb 2006

Schultz had been demanding public funding to renovate KeyArena. Schultz pushed for a funding package of over $200 million to upgrade the venue. David Stern even urged the city of Seattle to move forward with the project, calling KeyArena the “least competitive lease in the league.”

Shultz said that he would have to either move or sell the team if he didn’t get the funding.

Having already recently invested in upgrades, the city wasn’t excited about sinking new money into the arena. From the City of Seattle’s government website, it says:

“In 1993, the City and the Seattle Supersonics negotiated a revenue-sharing lease agreement designed to fund the reconstruction of the 30-year-old [arena] from building revenues, without dedicated public tax sources. The impetus for the 1993 renovations was to modernize the arena and…retain the NBA Sonics franchise as the anchor sports tenant. The total project cost was $104 million, with the Sonics contributing $21 million for the buildout…

In 1994, the City Council approved a 15-year agreement with the Sonics and authorized $73.4 million in 20-year bonds for [KeyArena] construction. In return for the City’s investment, Seattle received some revenue from club seat sales, admissions, and the naming sponsorship. A renovation fund contained within the lease agreement accumulated $4.3 million between 1995 and 2003 to ensure that the venue remained state-of-the-art.”

July 2006

With no funding for an arena renovation in sight, Schultz agreed to sell the Seattle SuperSonics to Clay Bennett, the leader of an Oklahoma City-based group, for $350 million. Schultz said he and his 58 investors lost over $60 million since purchasing the team five and a half years earlier.

October 2006

The NBA approves the sale of the Sonics. As part of the contractual obligations, Bennett must spend a year of “good faith best efforts“ to find a viable home for the Sonics in Seattle.

January 2007

Just three months after buying the Sonics, Bennett is already making plans around the possibility of a move to Oklahoma City.

Behind the scenes, Bennett’s ownership group was already in contact with Oklahoma City officials. An email from a consultant to Oklahoma City mayor Mick Cornett discussed briefing the mayor on questions about the Sonics moving to Oklahoma City and coordinating his public talking points.

Subscribe now

Feb 2007

Bennett says he wants to build a $530 million basketball arena in Renton, Washington, just south of Seattle. He asked for $300 million in taxpayer money for the construction, but the city isn’t willing to entertain the idea.

Spring–Summer 2007

While Bennett was publicly pursuing an arena solution in the Seattle area, his ownership group continued to lay the groundwork with Oklahoma City.

Emails from a Bennett consultant discussed negotiations over potential relocation costs, including the arena and a practice facility.

August 2007

With no solution to the Sonics arena in sight, Aubrey McClendon, co-owner of the Sonics, told an Oklahoma newspaper, “We didn’t buy the team to keep it in Seattle. We hoped to come here.” The NBA fined McClendon $250,000 for the comments.

September 2007

Seeing potential for issues down the line, the Seattle City Council unanimously passes a new ordinance saying the Sonics are bound to its KeyArena lease through 2010. Two weeks later, Bennett filed papers to begin the process of getting out of the final two years of his lease with KeyArena. The Seattle city attorney immediately filed a lawsuit to block any attempt by the Sonics to get out of its lease.

Meanwhile, a local Native American tribe in Auburn, just south of Seattle, says it is willing to donate over 26 acres of land to any group that wants to build an NBA arena there.

November 2007

One year and one month after the NBA approved the sale of the Sonics, and having completed the 12 months of a “good faith best efforts“ to make it work in Seattle, Bennett informs Stern that he intends to move the Sonics to Oklahoma City. His only obstacle was now to get out of his lease with KeyArena.

A week later, Stern tells reporters in Oklahoma City that, “If the Sonics do move, that would be too bad because the NBA would be very unlikely to have a team in Seattle again.”

February 2008

Bennett offers the city of Seattle over $26 million for the right to get out of the final two years of its lease. The city rejects the offer.

March 2008

Oklahoma City started preparing for the Sonics’ arrival. Voters approved a one-cent sales-tax extension that would generate approximately $121 million to renovate the Ford Center.

Bennett’s ownership group reached a preliminary agreement with Oklahoma City for a 15-year lease of the Ford Center and the development of a new practice facility. The agreement was contingent on NBA approval of the relocation and Bennett getting out of his Seattle lease.

At the same time, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer offered to contribute $150 million toward a renovation of KeyArena in an effort to keep the Sonics in Seattle. The proposal had an April 10 deadline.

Early April 2008

Mayor Greg Nickels acknowledged that Seattle couldn’t meet the deadline to secure the remaining money needed for the proposed KeyArena renovation. This was a major blow to the city’s effort to keep the Sonics. Seattle had one option remaining: Take legal action against the Sonics to keep Bennett in his KeyArena lease.

Around this time, emails from 2007 became public, showing that Bennett and his ownership group had discussed moving the team to Oklahoma City much earlier than they had acknowledged publicly.

Subscribe now

One email reply from Bennett, after being asked if there would be a way to move the team before the next season, said, “I am a man possessed! We do everything we can. Thanks for hanging with me boys, the game is getting started!”

The emails made the ownership group’s claims that they were making a “good faith best effort” to keep the team in Seattle a lot more complicated.

April 13th, 2008

The Sonics played their final game in Seattle. Fans chanted, “Save our Sonics!” in a 99-95 win against a 50-win Dallas team. The Sonics finished the season with 19 wins in Kevin Durant’s first year with the team.

Mid April 2008

Stern said he felt Bennett made a good-faith effort to keep the team in Seattle. The NBA owners moved forward with a vote to approve the Sonics’ relocation to Oklahoma City. Only Dallas (Mark Cuban) and Portland (Paul Allen) voted against the move. Bennett was officially approved to move the team. He just needed to figure out how to get out of the KeyArena lease.

Late April 2008

Howard Schultz filed a lawsuit seeking to reverse his 2006 sale of the Sonics to Bennett’s ownership group. Schultz argued that Bennett had misrepresented his intentions and had not actually intended to make a good-faith effort to keep the team in Seattle.

Seattle produced additional evidence suggesting that NBA officials themselves had concerns dating back to 2007 about whether Bennett’s group was genuinely trying to keep the team in Seattle. It gave both the city and Schultz more evidence that moving the team may have been the plan all along.

Early June 2008

Bennett’s attorneys asked the court to dismiss Howard Schultz’s lawsuit seeking to undo his sale of the team. They argued that it was impossible to reverse a sale that had already been completed. Schultz later dropped the suit after the NBA said he’d signed a binding no-sue agreement as part of the sale.

Mid June 2008

A six-day trial began over the team’s KeyArena lease. About 3,000 Sonics fans gathered outside the courthouse in Seattle for a “Save Our Sonics” rally. Former Sonics players Gary Payton and Xavier McDaniel attended.

Bennett took the witness stand under oath. He was questioned about his 2007 email saying he was “a man possessed.” Bennett insisted that he had meant he was determined to find a solution that would keep the Sonics in Seattle.

Bennett testified that forcing the Sonics to remain in Seattle for the final two years of their KeyArena lease would cost the team approximately $60 million. His attorneys also presented an economics professor who argued that professional sports teams have essentially no economic impact on a region. According to Seattle’s economic analysis, the Sonics’ annual impact for the region was about $187 million.

July 2nd, 2008

Hours before the trial verdict was supposed to be announced, Bennett and Nickels called a news conference announcing a $45-million settlement to be paid to the city of Seattle. An additional $30 million would be paid if Seattle received no replacement NBA team within five years of the Sonics’ departure.

The new Oklahoma City team wasn’t permitted to use the SuperSonics name, logo, or the green and gold colors in case Seattle ever got a team again. The franchise history and 1979 championship are part of the Thunder’s franchise history, but the physical championship banner, trophy, and retired jerseys remained in Seattle.

Bennett said the new Oklahoma City team would create duplicate championship banners and trophies for undetermined purposes in Oklahoma City; however, no replica 1979 championship banner has been hung in Oklahoma City.

Once in Oklahoma City, Bennett said in a news conference, “We made it.”

Aftermath

Seattle’s $30 million payout eventually came due since no replacement team arrived within five years.

In 2019, Schultz called selling the team “one of the biggest regrets of my professional life.” He continued by saying he should have been willing to lose money until a local buyer emerged.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

It feels like the World Cup just ended, but the new European season is upon us. Teams are hopeful and making a final push in the transfer window to bolster their sides.

In preparation for the new season, I asked football writers on Substack for their best storylines and predictions. I know this is a bit of a change from my usual writing, so let me know what you think. Shoutout to for starting this tradition and letting me carry it on!

For our Substackers, some of the most anticipated storylines of the season revolve around the coaching carousel and the impact of big-name transfers. We also have a pretty good range of predictions for Europe’s top five leagues + Champions League winners, including some surprises.

Dive into the season’s most anticipated storylines and predictions below.

Butterflies by

Arsenal’s chase for more trophies or the new Manchester City era under Enzo Maresca will probably get the headlines. But I’m most interested in the sneaky storylines that will come out of Old Trafford.

From the time Michael Carrick took over Manchester United in January 2026, the Red Devils have secured the most points in the Premier League, even ahead of the champions, Arsenal. Life at Manchester United feels much different now compared to after its loss to Grimsby Town last August.

Manchester United will have a full season under Carrick now while also bringing in Youri Tielemans and Marcus Rashford into the squad. The only player they are losing who played big minutes is an aging Casemiro. Can Carrick finally bring United back to the days of being feared? I believe he can and will transform the red side of Manchester into title contenders once again.

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Arsenal

• LaLiga: Real Madrid

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich

• Serie A: Inter Milan

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: Arsenal

Thrill Shot by

I’m curious how Liverpool will function after moving on from Arne Slot. Jurgen Klopp brought stability and magic to Anfield in 2015, then sang Slot in on his way out in 2024. Slot won with Klopp’s roster plus Federico Chiesa as a lone addition, but his sophomore squad soured despite a preseason spending spree.

Slot’s out, and Andoni Iraola takes over. Beyond how tactics or results change, I’m curious how the club will run from 2025 onward. How much time does Iraola, or any post-Klopp manager have? Add in the infusion of Jeff Bezos’s investment. Will they keep splashing big money? Will Liverpool keep the soul that ran like a thread through club history from Bill Shankly to Klopp?

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Arsenal

• LaLiga: Barcelona

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich

• Serie A: Napoli

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: Bayern Munich

Gunner Forever by

For the first six years of his managerial career at Arsenal, Arteta was still, in many ways, a rookie manager. He walked into a job many felt was too big for him and had to grow into it under an enormous amount of scrutiny. He had to persevere through the doubts, the three consecutive second-place finishes, and the growing narrative that perhaps this Arsenal side and its manager were destined to be nearly men rather than victors.

Winning the Premier League changes that context completely. For the first time, Arteta goes into a season without that weight of needing to prove that he can get Arsenal over the line. He is no longer the inexperienced coach trying to establish himself. He is a Premier League winning manager and, remarkably, the only one in the division heading into this season who can say that.

Going into this new season, we will get to see what kind of manager Mikel Arteta becomes after becoming a winner.

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Arsenal

• LaLiga: Barcelona

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich

• Serie A: Inter

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: Arsenal

Football Wrapped by

For as long as football transfer windows have existed, big teams have signed talent from smaller teams. This has allowed elite clubs to sign marquee players, while smaller teams use large cash reserves to develop. Transfers like Enzo Fernandez, Joao Felix, and Declan Rice are all examples of this.

However, in recent windows (especially this summer), teams approaching elite status (not just small teams) have seen their prospects poached. Take Aston Villa: last season they won the Europa League, and this summer lost both Morgan Rogers and Youri Tielmans. Newcastle also saw their squad scavenged this summer, with Gordon, Tonali, and Guimarães all off to bigger teams. Both teams have signed replacements, but can’t adequately replace their departures.

Ultimately, this effect leads to a concentration of talent at the top teams and minimizes their overall competition. In the Premier League, I think this means teams outside the “Big Six” will struggle for European qualification and larger points gaps will exist throughout the table. Beyond that, I expect an all-or-nothing season for Real Madrid: they’ll either win the double or endure another trophy-less season.

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Chelsea

• LaLiga: Barcelona

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich

• Serie A: Inter Milan

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: Bayern Munich

97 Insider by

The storyline I am most excited about going into the 2026/27 season is the beginning of the post-Guardiola era. Since 2016, Pep has been in the Premier League with Manchester City, and since 2017, it’s been utter dominance from the Cityzens. Six titles in nine years is no easy feat, and four consecutive titles had never been achieved before.

However, every so often, a window opens where the torch is handed to the next set of teams set to dominate the league. We saw this in the transition from the City-Pool era of 2018–2022 to the City-Arsenal era from 2022–2026, and with Pep out of the picture, that window has once again reopened.

There is an opportunity for another team to join Arsenal at the top and kickstart a new era.

None of the other Big Six sides look particularly settled at the moment. Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester City all have new managers, Tottenham are coming off a relegation scrap, while Manchester United’s situation is still being monitored, despite the massive improvement they showed under Carrick last season.

Even with the Gunners, who knows whether they are burnt out from going toe-to-toe with City for so many years and whether they will be able to cope with the pressure of maintaining their crown?

The question is: what new era is set to kick off in the Premier League?

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Manchester United

• LaLiga: Real Madrid

• Bundesliga: Stuttgart

• Serie A: AC Milan.

• Ligue 1: PSG.

• Champions League: PSG

Game Over, Ball Burst by

To keep this close to my heart, I’m extremely interested in seeing how Andoni Iraola fares at Liverpool. Everything that could go wrong for Arne Slot, did go wrong, but ultimately I felt the decision to replace him was justified as the style of play was suffering and the mood around him had soured too much.

Now, Liverpool have a coach who will play a more swashbuckling style, but how the squad, which remains light and according to Iraola himself not fit enough to play this style, responds to this will be fascinating. My instinct is it will be a mixed bag results wise, but the fans will back him if the football is entertaining. Either way, sign me up.

League Winner Predictions:

PL: Arsenal

Champions League: Bayern Munich

Planet Soccer by

The biggest storyline will be how Jose Mourinho will do at Real Madrid and if he can deliver trophies, both in La Liga and the Champions League this season.

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Arsenal

• LaLiga: Real Madrid

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich
  Serie A: Napoli

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: Bayern Munich should win the Champions League given their talent, but PSG are favorites once again. Can anyone stop them?

Sports Square by

Pep Guardiola’s 10-year run at Manchester City is over. Enzo Maresca, who used to be his assistant, is coming in to replace him. That’s the storyline. City’s grip already loosened last season, with Arsenal taking the title after 22 years. Now the man who built the team is gone too. Does the machine still run without Pep’s fingerprints on it? We might find that out very quickly, as City face Arsenal in the Community Shield, Maresca’s first game in charge. It’s the first time the Premier League hasn’t had Pep since 2016. That makes this season unmissable.

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Arsenal

• LaLiga: Barcelona

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich

• Serie A: Inter Milan

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: PSG

Pattern of Play by

I’m curious to see how Pep’s apprentices will set up their teams and battle against each other this season.

League Winner Predictions:

• Premier League: Chelsea

• LaLiga: Barcelona

• Bundesliga: Bayern Munich

• Serie A: Inter Milan

• Ligue 1: PSG

• Champions League: PSG

I’ve always been fascinated with the intersection of geopolitics and football. The Argentina vs England game in the World Cup re-energized me to do more research in the space. As I was thinking about it, I was reminded of another rivalry I had come across previously between El Salvador and Honduras. Maybe I’m in the minority, but up until I came across it, I had never heard of the history between the two countries.

So I went down the rabbit hole and found out why the story often told isn’t exactly what happened.

The Background

El Salvador and Honduras had lots of similarities when it came to football. In the 1960s, they were two young football nations still finding their footing. El Salvador’s top flight didn’t take its modern shape until 1969, while Honduras’ Liga Nacional had only turned professional four years earlier, in 1965.

Outside of football, the countries also have many similarities. They share the same language, religion, and have similar cultures. In the 1960s, both Honduras and El Salvador even had similar authoritarian military governments. But that’s where many of their commonalities stop.

El Salvador was dominated by a small landholding elite. Most of the best arable land was owned by a few families. As land became more and more scarce, many Salvadorans crossed into non-settled neighboring Honduras, where they created their own communities and farmed the land. By the 1960s, it was estimated that 100,000-300,000 Salvadorans had migrated into Honduras.

In contrast, Honduras was a large and sparsely populated country ravaged by poverty and political instability. As Salvadorans moved to Honduras, a land reform initiative in 1967 led to a growing nationalist sentiment in Honduras.

The reform law essentially asked all Salvadorans to go back home. When they did not go, the Honduran president, who gained power six years earlier by military coup, forced thousands out. Handbills appeared throughout Honduras:

Guanaco: If you believe yourself decent, then have the decency to get out of Honduras. If you are, as the majority are, a thief, a drunkard, a lecher, crook, or ruffian, don’t stay in Honduras. Get out or expect punishment.

This tension was escalated by a history of land and maritime boundary disputes between El Salvador and Honduras. Salvadoran media also spread reports of the persecution of migrants in Honduras.

The triple combination of these social, economic, and territorial tensions created the perfect storm for what was to come as the 1970 World Cup qualifiers were well underway.

The Football

On June 8th, 1969, El Salvador and Honduras were set to play the first of two scheduled World Cup qualifying matches in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Six days earlier, on June 2nd, the first wave of Salvadoran families was forced from their homes and sent over the border to El Salvador.

Within hours, Red Cross refugee centers said the intake of Salvadoran refugees was overwhelming. Local Salvadoran newspapers and radio stations claimed Hondurans were murdering and committing mass rape during the expulsion; however, the Red Cross said they saw no evidence of such vile behavior. In a 1981 book, Thomas P. Anderson said human rights abuses “were isolated cases and not so widespread as generally believed in El Salvador.”

However, the damage was done. Tensions were high during the match in Honduras, which included fighting in the streets throughout the entire match. Honduras won 1-0.

On June 15th, just seven days after the first match, Honduras traveled to El Salvador for the second qualifying match. Honduran players traveled to the field in armored cars. More outbreaks of violence occurred between the two fanbases. El Salvador won decisively, 3-0.

Following the second game, Honduran media picked up where the Salvadoran media started, claiming the same vile acts were committed against Hondurans. Anderson said the Honduran media claimed hungry and thirsty Hondurans were served urine and manure and women were stripped and violated in the streets. However, he said, “Those of us who were there saw nothing of the kind, but it was impossible to intrude any rational statements into the Honduran press.”

Later, a human rights subcommittee would say, “the press and radio bear an enormous responsibility” for the war that later occurred.

As fate would have it, El Salvador and Honduras would meet a third time, just 12 days later on June 27th. The two met in a playoff at the Azteca in Mexico City to determine a spot for a place in the last playoff game vs Haiti to decide who would play in the following summer’s World Cup.

By this time, it had been three and a half weeks since the conflict at the border started. The situation continued to deteriorate so much that on the day of the match, the Salvadoran government cut off all diplomatic relations with Honduras, accusing them of “crimes which constitute genocide.”

Said the El Salvador captain of the situation, “We were focused on qualifying, but we knew the conflict was there.”

The stage was set for the all-important game between El Salvador and Honduras. The game was played at night in heavy rain. Despite all the tension surrounding the game, the El Salvador captain said, “On the field, we respected each other. Even today [30 years later], the ones still alive [from the Honduras team], we have a strong friendship.” Interestingly enough, there were no cards produced the entire game.

Eight minutes in, El Salvador’s striker, Mon Martínez, got space at the edge of the box and ripped a left-footed shot past Honduras’ keeper. Honduras quickly answered with a goal from José Enrique Cardona, a 30-year-old talent playing for Atlético Madrid.

Martínez restored the lead before half to help El Salvador take a 2-1 lead into the break. Honduras leveled again early in the second, and it stayed that way through a downpour.

In extra time, El Salvador’s Pipo Rodríguez restored a lead that wouldn’t be relinquished again. El Salvador beat Honduras, giving them a chance to play for a spot in the World Cup. The game ended with handshakes all around between the two teams.

Said Mauricio “Pipo” Rodríguez after scoring the winning goal, “That goal will always be a source of sporting pride…The authorities and politicians made use of our sports victory to glorify El Salvador’s image.”

However, he continued by saying, “Neither from the Honduras players nor from our side were the games between enemies, but between sports rivals.”

Rodríguez was right that the players weren’t enemies. Their governments, however, had already decided otherwise.

The War

In the days after the match, more and more skirmishes broke out on the border. Seventeen days after the game in Mexico, on July 14, 1969, the Salvadoran Air Force struck Honduras. A Salvadoran ground invasion quickly followed. A war between the two countries officially began.

El Salvador quickly advanced across the border, capturing several towns and threatening the capital. Civilian casualties occurred in large numbers. The Honduran army eventually regrouped and slowed the Salvadoran progress.

On July 18th, approximately 100 hours after the start of the war, a ceasefire was agreed upon. In that time, about 3,000 people died, the majority being Honduran civilians. Under international pressure, El Salvador finally withdrew its forces in August 1969.

Trade between the two countries was cut off for decades, and the borders were closed. El Salvador also had to figure out what to do with hundreds of thousands of refugees who were removed from Honduras and were back in the country. Due in part to the socioeconomic challenges this war caused El Salvador, a civil war broke out from 1979 to 1992, where more than 70,000 people died.

While the war had more dire consequences, the football outcome was minimal. El Salvador went on to beat Haiti to qualify for the World Cup. However, they lost all three games the next summer and didn’t score a goal.

The Football War

The “Football War“ nickname traces back to a headline that ran in American papers the morning after the decisive qualifying match. In 2001, a retired U.S. diplomat said, “It was a difficult job trying to get anybody in Washington…to take [that conflict] at all seriously. Everyone had the same reaction: Oh, it’s crazy in Central America, banana republics having a war over a soccer game or something.”

The truth is, the conflict was already escalating towards a war whether the two countries played football or not.

Cristian Villalta, editor of a Salvadoran paper, said, “This was two military dictatorships using the games to exacerbate nationalism.” Calling it the Football War, he adds, is “like saying World War II broke out because of the artistic failure of Adolf Hitler in Vienna. It’s nonsense.”

The football was real, the rivalry was real, but the war was never actually about either. Argentina vs England reminded me why these histories are fascinating. Football rarely starts the fire, but it’s almost always nearby when one breaks out. El Salvador and Honduras didn’t go to war over a football game. They just happened to be watching one when the real war began.

I know the tournament’s over, but in case you missed it, check out the blurb I wrote for Sports Square about Spain vs. Argentina and what I felt were the keys to the game. Thanks, for the opportunity!

Ah, the 2026 World Cup. There’s nothing like it. Entire countries get behind “the boys.” And they really are boys, maybe except for Tim Ream, Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, and Vozinha. No other sporting event on earth carries this much pride for a nation. It transcends the game itself. Politics, past wars, and decades-old rivalries all get relitigated on a field by 22 guys kicking a ball around for 90 minutes.

Now that the dust has settled, I want to take a minute to reflect on the last 39 days.

I embraced this World Cup more than I ever have. Having it on U.S. soil, with games kicking off during the day and evening instead of the middle of the night, definitely helped. I still remember waking up as a kid to catch USA vs. Mexico and USA vs. Germany back in 2002, and somehow I was more locked in this time around than I was back then. I guess it’s safe to say I felt like a kid again.

I wrote a bit about my experience going to a couple of World Cup games in a previous article. Coming home from the USA vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina game, my friend and I wore our USA jerseys through the airport. An older couple talked our ears off the entire time about how they’d watched the game the night before. They just kept going.

We then had a bit of a drive from the airport. We stopped at a gas station in a podunk town in the middle of nowhere. As we were getting back in the car after grabbing some snacks for the road, a guy started telling us he’d watched the game the night before too. He said he’d never really watched soccer before.

He asked us about Balogun’s red card, and whether that meant the U.S. would have to play the next game with ten men. My friend educated him on the rules and confirmed we’d still have eleven men, but Balogun would be suspended (I guess we were proven wrong there). The conversation ended with the guy saying he’d be tuning in for the Belgium game.

Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention before, but I don’t remember this kind of interest in the game from Americans during any other World Cup. Again, having it on home soil during waking hours probably helps. But I still think it’s pretty cool watching Americans embrace the game the way they have. Just look at some of these tweets from some of the biggest sports commentators in the country.

Even hysterical takes like this one are good. It gives the sport more exposure and keeps people talking:

Perhaps my favorite thing to do these last 39 days was jump on social media and watch people experience the U.S. for the first time. People embraced America with all its fun, quirkiness, and overly in-your-face traditions. Overall, I think the World Cup brought us all together. I was a critic of expanding to 48 teams, but doing so let fans who never used to show up for this tournament experience it for the first time. It showed we’re all human, with the same wants and desires as everyone else. The World Cup showed us the power of sports.

With all the good that comes with a World Cup, let’s not forget why we actually watch. The drama on the field is what pulls in over half the world’s population every four years. So, here are my ten best games this tournament gave us.

10. USA vs Paraguay (4-1)

Not every great game needs a nail-biting finish. Folarin Balogun had a first-half brace to become the first American to score twice in a World Cup match since 1930. Gio Reyna iced it late with a gorgeous outside-of-the-foot finish.

I’ll admit, I was giddy after this one. I came into the tournament with pretty low expectations for the U.S., and this was the game that convinced me, and the rest of the country, that this team deserved to be taken seriously. Without it, I don’t think the U.S. audience tunes in at the numbers it did the rest of the tournament. That guy at the gas station probably never watches a match at all if this game doesn’t happen in the manner it did.

9. Austria vs Algeria (3-3)

This one had every reason to be a nothing game. Heading into matchday 3 of the group stage, both Austria and Algeria only needed a draw to advance, but it still provided us with six goals, two of them coming in stoppage time.

8. England vs France (6-4)

The third-place game is football’s version of the NBA All-Star Game, a glorified exhibition nobody really wants to be playing in (hence the no defense). I would rank this one higher if the game wasn’t meaningless. England went up 4-0 in the first half, only for France to come storming back in the second half, before England put it away late. Perhaps the most interesting part of this match was that this playing style is how all English fans have been begging for over the last 5+ years. Plus, Bukayo Saka had a hat-trick for England after not even seeing the field in the semifinal. It’s almost as if this caused more frustration towards Thomas Tuchel compared to if they had lost.

7. Croatia vs Portugal (2-1)

This one will be remembered for the ball, not the football. Gonçalo Ramos put Portugal up 2-1 in the fourth minute of stoppage time. Croatia thought they’d answered right back when Josko Gvardiol slid home an equalizer nine minutes later, until VAR disallowed it. The Adidas Trionda’s built-in sensor, which detected a hair’s-width touch off Igor Matanovic in the buildup, put Mario Pasalic in an offside position no human eye caught live.

The same “connected ball” technology was used days later in England’s quarterfinal against Norway. It cleared Jude Bellingham’s equalizer by ruling that the ball never touched an overhead camera cable. The new ball sensor had two big controversies in its tournament debut.

6. England vs DR Congo (2-1)

This game has been a bit underrated in my opinion, but at the time, I called it the game of the tournament. My brother went to this game, and he agreed. DR Congo, playing in its first World Cup knockout match ever, came out and punched England in the mouth. The pace was fast and furious and didn’t slow down. After DR Congo scored an early goal, England spent the rest of the match fighting back until Harry Kane finally broke through with a header in the 75th minute and then a rifled finish in the 86th to complete the comeback. The intensity of the game made it one of the best of the tournament.

5. Belgium vs Senegal (3-2, AET)

This game was on while I was enjoying the pre-game festivities at the USA vs Bosnia and Herzegovina game. We all knew Senegal was up 2-0 with only a few minutes left in the match. Then the murmur among the crowd of people around me started to bubble. Belgium scored twice in less than three minutes to send the game to extra time.

Deep into extra time, a VAR review awarded Belgium a controversial penalty for a foul on Senegal. The penalty was buried in the 125th minute, the latest winning goal in World Cup history. It’s one of the greatest comebacks the tournament has ever seen. Selfishly, as a U.S. fan, I can’t help but think about the version of this game where Senegal holds on. This comeback might have cost the U.S. another game in the knockout stages.

4. Argentina vs Egypt (3-2)

Egypt led 1-0 in the Round of 16 when Mostafa Ziko put what looked to be a second goal in the back of the net. However, it was disallowed after review for a foul in the buildup, a call Egypt argued should never have gone to VAR in the first place. The conspiracy theories about Argentina being favored were louder than ever. Ziko did eventually get his goal to make it 2-0, and Egypt looked to be through.

Argentina then scored three unanswered goals in the final thirteen minutes to complete one of the craziest comebacks in World Cup history. The win had Messi in tears. Even he thought all hope was lost.

3. Argentina vs England (2-1)

Forget football for a second. Before the game started, Argentina fans chanted through the entire English national anthem. It was barely audible on the TV. English fans responded by booing and jeering during the Argentine national anthem. After the game, Argentina players ran onto the field waving a banner reading, “Las Malvinas son Argentinas,” a not-so-subtle reference to the Falklands. Both events, which didn’t even include the game itself, tell you everything you need to know about the temperature of this semifinal.

The game was chippy and physical from the opening whistle. After Anthony Gordon gave England the lead in the 55th minute, Tuchel got all his tactics wrong. Instead of keeping the ball and pushing for a second, England sat back and defended in its own third for the last 25+ minutes. The breakthrough finally came from Enzo Fernandez in the 85th minute, and the winner came from Lautaro Martinez, both assisted by Messi. The tactical mistakes, late game drama, and history on and off the pitch between these two sides made this game must-see TV.

2. England vs Mexico (3-2)

The Azteca is the pinnacle of sports. Full stop. This match had everything. A delayed kickoff due to lightning. Rain. Night game. A hostile, deafening crowd that was throwing beer all night. Five goals. One red card.

Mexico dominated possession much of the night, but Jude Bellingham’s brilliance and the team’s stout defending ushered England through to the quarterfinals. The English media called it one of the best backs-against-the-wall performances England has ever played. They became just the third team ever to beat Mexico at the Azteca in a competitive match.

1. Argentina vs Cabo Verde (3-2, AET)

Cabo Verde was the lowest-ranked team ever to reach a World Cup knockout round. A nation of half a million people pushed the defending World Cup winners to the absolute brink.

Messi opened the scoring in the first half with one of the best first touches of the tournament. Side note: a beautiful first touch is probably one of the most underrated skills in all of sports. Plucking a ball out of the air from 40 yards away without losing it out of bounds or to your opponent is pretty remarkable, and footballers make it look easy. Pull a guy off the street to try to do what Messi did for his goal, and the ball would probably end up in the stands.

To the surprise of everyone, Cabo Verde equalized in the second half and pushed the game to extra time. Argentina led again early after a Lisandro Martinez goal.

Then came the goal and moment of the tournament. Sidny Lopes Cabral, who three years ago was playing in the fifth tier in Germany, curled in an absolute worldie from the edge of the box in the 103rd minute. He couldn’t even believe it himself. He then ran into the stands to hug his girlfriend.

In the second half of extra time, Cristian Romero headed in the winning goal. Cabo Verde created chances until the end of the match, but weren’t able to send it to penalties. We didn’t get the fairytale ending, but for 120 minutes, this tiny island nation had the entire world watching in disbelief.

That’s a wrap

That’s the list. This World Cup was filled with memorable games, moments, and controversy. But if this World Cup proved anything, it’s that this tournament still has a way of making the whole world feel small for a full month. Whether you’re watching from the stands or connecting with a stranger at the airport, I don’t think we will get anything quite like it in the near future. Until 2030, everyone.

Every fan loves to relive unforgettable sports moments. I am honoring that nostalgia with a Butterflies series called “Replays.” Each edition will revisit a special sports memory, add context, and share reactions and commentary surrounding it.

Context

In honor of the World Cup this week, let’s revisit one of the most infamous semifinal games in the history of the tournament.

Brazil hosted Germany in the 2014 semifinal. Playing on home soil and with plenty of talent, Brazil had all the ingredients to win their sixth World Cup. Both teams walked into the Mineirão without a loss.

Brazil was shorthanded. Neymar was injured in the quarterfinal game against Colombia and Thiago Silva was suspended from accumulating yellow cards. Still, fans were hopeful. This was Brazil, after all.

However, this wasn’t just a bad night for Brazil; it rearranged its history.

It’s the largest margin of defeat ever recorded in a World Cup semifinal. Miroslav Klose of Germany scored his 16th career World Cup goal in the match, moving past Brazil’s own Ronaldo to become the tournament’s all-time leading scorer (at the time). The loss also snapped a 62-match unbeaten streak at home in competitive play for Brazil, which stretched back to 1975.

Brazil lost pieces of its own record book that night.

The Moment

Apologies, FIFA blocks its video from being watched here, so you have to go to YouTube. Click here to watch.

You can also watch the video below, but it’s not as good.

Reactions

Brazilian soccer culture already had a word for this kind of night before it happened. In 1950, Brazil lost to Uruguay in the World Cup. It would become known as, “Maracanaço,” a shameful day in Brazilian history. “Mineiraço,” named after the stadium where this loss happened, is what this forgettable game became known as.

Comment Section

And the saddest comment ever…

This World Cup has been amazing. Genuinely, it’s had everything you could ask for on U.S. soil. My new pastime is watching World Cup visitors experience America for the first time. Watching them bring their chants and traditions to Times Square. Bringing the beautiful game to our NFL stadiums. And the European and South American atmospheres are being transmitted to our television sets for the rest of America to experience.

The country got behind the boys. The stars have been as bright as ever. The games have been fantastic. Argentina vs Cape Verde. Mexico vs England at the Azteca. Argentina vs Egypt. Portugal vs Croatia. England vs DR Congo. We’ve had some real bangers, and I’m sure there’s more to come before this thing is done.

I had the privilege of going to two of them myself.

The first was USA vs Australia in Seattle. The crowd was already buzzing after the U.S. had just put a 4-1 thrashing on Paraguay, and that energy walked straight into the stadium with everyone. Honestly, I’m not sure how the players managed to focus on the game after hearing the entire crowd belt out the national anthem before kickoff. I’m sure everyone in the stands felt something. I felt patriotic. It was also the introduction to “Country Roads” as the USMNT’s unofficial anthem. It was emotional in a way I didn’t expect a soccer game to be.

The second game I attended was USA vs Bosnia and Herzegovina, the first game of the knockout stage. I bought those tickets the day after I got home from Seattle. It was midnight. I was sitting in my closet, refreshing the janky FIFA ticketing site, looking for a deal. I finally just took a breath and bought the most expensive tickets I’ve ever purchased in my life. I had a little buyer’s remorse the next morning. Then I remembered this was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and got over it quickly.

Both games were electric. I’ve never experienced anything like it at a sporting event. The whole crowd was locked into every touch. The pop and party in the stands after Malik Tillman’s free kick against Bosnia was unlike anything I’ve ever felt in a stadium.

Said Folarin Balogun of his World Cup experience, “Is this real life?” Needless to say, the vibes were good.

Then Reality Hit

And then came USA vs Belgium. To put it kindly, the U.S. sucked. They looked timid. They looked scared. The moment was too big for them.

That’s honestly what stings the most. Watching teams like Cabo Verde and Egypt refuse to back down to Argentina, throwing every last ounce of energy into those games. Then, watching a U.S. team, with more talent one through eleven than either of Cabo Verde or Egypt, looked completely star-struck.

Said The Athletic:

How, after so much glee over the past month, had it suddenly turned so sour? How, after so much dynamic soccer, could each thought seem so slow and each touch look so sloppy?

U.S. players entered Monday’s round-of-16 match with confidence, so much confidence that the prospect of a World Cup exit on the banks of the Elliott Bay barely registered.

“We all had in our minds that we were definitely gonna be heading back to L.A. tomorrow (for a quarterfinal),” midfielder Gio Reyna said.

Instead, they rode a bus back to their team hotel, and over the 24 hours that followed, they said emotional goodbyes. They shared a last night of drinks and debriefing at the team hotel; sent farewell messages in their WhatsApp group; then trudged through Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and went their separate ways.

Belgium didn’t even let us get into our high press. They played long balls over the top and won every second ball. They attacked our weakest link, Tim Ream, by overloading his side of the field. Pochettino tried to adjust, but there were too many mistakes to overcome. Once Belgium got its third goal, they were content to sit in a low block and see the game out. We never found a way through it.

Subscribe now

The USMNT has taken plenty of criticism since the Belgium loss, Christian Pulisic especially. And honestly? That’s a good thing. It means people are starting to care. The media is starting to take notice. Expectations have been raised.

According to insights from Fox, 50 million people tuned into the U.S. vs Belgium game in the United States. The reported numbers keep going up, but that’s the highest-watched sporting event in the States outside of NFL games since the 1994 Olympics. That’s more than double this year’s NBA Finals, a series that featured the Knicks, arguably the league’s most popular team not named the Lakers. So, all this criticism, all this noise, I welcome it. It’s a sign of life for soccer in America.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Before the postmortem starts, let’s reflect on what went right. This team won the group with a game to play. USMNT players became household names. For about three weeks, this team gave the entire country a reason to care. People believed. Some even thought we could make a run and win the whole thing.

This was our golden generation. Back in 2022, we had the second-youngest squad at the entire tournament. Now those same guys are in their prime. However, and here comes the tough part, we didn’t make it any further than we did four years ago.

By the next World Cup, most of the core of this team will be past their prime. This tournament was it for a lot of them.

• Chris Richards will be 30

• Antonee Robinson will be 32

• Sergino Dest will be 29

• Alex Freeman will be 25

• Tyler Adams will be 31

• Weston McKennie will be 31

• Malik Tillman will be 28

• Christian Pulisic will be 31

• Folarin Balogun will be 29

If you don’t weigh this against how far past U.S. teams have gone, this is still the most talented group we’ve ever fielded. The U.S. World Cup squad carries a higher transfer market value than Switzerland, Ecuador, Uruguay, Colombia, Japan, Mexico, and Egypt. In fact, only 16 other countries in the entire World Cup have a more valuable squad than ours.

Of course, the record book doesn’t care about transfer valuations. We lost in the Round of 16 with the 17th-best roster in the tournament by transfer value. On paper, we performed about as well as we were supposed to.

The next step for the USMNT isn’t just getting more players onto rosters at big European clubs. It’s getting them real, meaningful minutes against the toughest competition week in and week out. We need these guys starting Champions League matches, not just sitting on the bench. If you look at total minutes played by World Cup squads in Europe’s top five leagues, the U.S. ranks 18th. Right now, there are 30 Americans playing in the top five leagues. Spain has 523.

Folarin Balogun is a good example of what that gap means. He’s been embraced as one of the best players we’ve had this World Cup. He plays for an okay AS Monaco team that finished 7th in the French top flight, which will have to qualify for the Conference League next season.

Even though he was the leading scorer on his team with 13 goals, he’d probably have a difficult time making the England World Cup squad had he committed to the Three Lions back when he was deciding which country to play for. With that said, he may be on the move this summer to a more prestigious club. I just hope he goes somewhere he can get meaningful minutes.

The thin depth of the U.S. becomes a problem when it’s time to pick a squad. We only have a handful of guys playing at the top level, and even the ones who get there often aren’t playing much once they arrive.

Alex Freeman is a good example of this. He arrived at Villarreal mid-season in January 2026, a team that finished 3rd in LaLiga. He got a total of three starts and nine appearances in his first four months with the team. Now, it’s definitely difficult to break into a team mid-season, and I would hope he can win a regular spot in the starting XI this coming season, but sporadic playing time like this isn’t uncommon for Americans in Europe.

World Cup 2030

A lot can change in a World Cup cycle. Half the starting lineup turned over between the Round of 16 in 2022 and the Round of 16 in 2026. There’s no reason to think 2030 will be any different.

It’s going to be up to the next generation to pick up the slack. Alex Freeman should hopefully be one of the veterans come the next World Cup. There are other good prospects coming, but we still don’t have a true top-tier player in the world wearing the U.S. badge.

Everything about American soccer is trending up. Attendance, ratings, buzz. Records were set all tournament long, even in defeat. But how we perform when the lights are brightest is still an open question.

I keep coming back to Seattle vs Australia, a country falling in love with the sport in real time. It was evident by the way the team, fans, and internet embraced the new unofficial anthem of the USMNT. I think The Athletic reported it best:

It struck a chord with players.

“Part of being American is knowing ‘Country Roads,” defender Chris Richards said that afternoon. “We’re all singing it together.”

Fans latched on too, humming the tune, playing the video — of players and supporters soaking up the scene — on repeat ever since.

Immediately after the match, Spotify saw a 74% increase in streams of the song, a company spokesman told The Athletic.

Google searches for “Country Roads” also spiked on Friday afternoon, and have remained higher than usual levels.

A few days later, Fox’s Jenny Taft reported that the song was rolling from the office of U.S. coach Mauricio Pochettino.

The golden generation’s window is closing. The next group of players, hopefully better than the last, is going to inherit a country that knows how to show up. Whether that team lives up to the hype is the only thing left to find out.

Fair warning, I use “football” and “soccer” interchangeably in this one. Soccer is what we say here in America, and it’ll show up when the American context calls for it. If that’s bothersome, I’d argue that tension is actually kind of the whole point.

The World Cup is being played in the United States this summer. I’m not going to lie, I was pretty hyped after the convincing 4-1 win over Paraguay on Friday. I’ve never seen the U.S. Men’s National Team play so well.

Balogun is in the early lead to win the Golden Boot, Pulisic was splitting defenders and causing chaos, McKinnie was constantly running in behind the defense, Tillman and Freeman were quietly all over the field, and Adams and Richards provided the stability we needed. Sure, it was against a Paraguay team that doesn’t have expectations to do much in this tournament, but the dominant performance has gotten my hopes up as a fan.

In anticipation of the World Cup, Nike and Adidas released their newest commercials to get us riled up. The commercials were star-studded, both in pop culture and legends of the game.

Nike’s commercial is titled “Rip the Script,” a nod to the fluidity of the beautiful game. It celebrated the flair and unscripted nature of football. Adidas’s title, “Backyard Legends,” highlighted the street culture and improvisation of pickup games.

Nike and Adidas continued the Joga Bonito and Impossible is Nothing themes from years past, not in name, but in expressing the spiritual home of the game. They represent what football means. A coming together of cultures, people, and communities. A celebration of creativity and talent.

Some of my favorite football commercials growing up represented this as well. From the cage match and Brazil’s locker room, to Jose +10, and Ronaldinho’s ping pong game with himself, they all sold us the dream of the beautiful game. It can be played anywhere with anyone at any given moment.

But watch those commercials long enough and a question creeps in. When did an American kid last actually do any of that to a point where it is celebrated? There certainly isn’t a male American player prominently featured in any of the commercials.

You Can’t Teach Culture

The U.S. is still a country that considers American football, basketball, baseball, and maybe even hockey more important to the cultural fabric of society.

The easy narrative is that America’s best athletes don’t play football, as I’ve attempted to debunk in the past. A more refined argument is that the pay-to-play model locks out talent. The more nuanced perspective is that even if we solve for cost (which MLS academies are starting to address, if you are in the right geography, talented enough to make it, and can find a way to support yourself until academy age), we still have a soccer culture deficit.

American kids don’t grow up playing pickup soccer on the streets the same way kids do in the Brazilian favelas or the boroughs of London. That pickup culture is what makes countries like Brazil great at the sport.

At the epicenter of football in Brazil is futsal. With futsal courts about the same size as a basketball court, futsal can be played in crowded cities surrounded by apartment buildings. Futsal courts are bound to have cracks and potholes after years of wear and tear. With the uneven playing surface and small area, young Brazilian players learn how to dribble and play in tight spaces.

Pelé popularized the Portuguese phrase “Jogo Bonito,” meaning “the beautiful game.” Futsal is where much of the flair of the Brazilian game originated, with stars such as Pelé, Zico, Ronaldinho, and Neymar starting their careers playing futsal.

Carlos Alberto, the captain of the Brazilian team that won the World Cup in 1970, told the BBC:

“Football in Brazil is like a religion. This is the difference between Europe and Brazil. After the World Cup, people in Europe start to think about life, business. Here in Brazil, we breathe football 24 hours a day.”

Antony, a Brazilian playing for the storied Manchester United, said it best in The Players’ Tribune:

“The ball was my savior. My love from the cradle. We don’t care about toys for Christmas. Any ball that rolls is perfect to us...With a ball at my feet, I had no fear.”

In like manner, Adriano, a former Brazilian national team player, said:

“A ball was always at my foot. It was put there by God.”

In Brazil, everyone plays football — the kids, construction workers, drug dealers, and bus drivers. Dribbling a ball, everyone is equal, barefoot and all.

Soccer is not built into the culture of America like so much of the rest of the world. The aesthetics of the Nike and Adidas commercials have never been the reality for Americans. However, maybe this World Cup can slowly start to turn the tide. I mean, look at some of these Tweets and reactions after the Paraguay game:

Building Soccer in America

Look back at the 1994 World Cup on U.S. soil and what it did for soccer in America can give us a glimpse of what it can do for us in 2026.

When the U.S. bid to host the 1994 World Cup, FIFA made its position clear: you want the tournament, you build a league.

The U.S. had lacked a real professional soccer league since the North American Soccer League’s (NASL) demise in 1984. Major League Soccer was born out of that ultimatum, officially forming and beginning play in 1996. No World Cup, no MLS.

Soccer started to grow in popularity after the 1994 World Cup. In 1994, soccer ranked as America’s 67th favorite sport, right behind tractor pulling. However, soccer started to be televised more and more in America. Now, you can catch different leagues from all around the world on most of the major streaming platforms.

According to US Youth Soccer, there were more than 3 million registered youth soccer players in 2014, representing an almost 90% increase from 1990. In raw terms, that’s an additional 1.4 million kids playing over two and a half decades. Additionally, high school soccer participation increased fourfold among boys and 35-fold among girls from 1973 to 2014.

What drove this growth wasn’t just infrastructure. It was faces. American kids had players to look up to after the 1994 World Cup. Guys like Alexi Lalas, Cobi Jones, and Tony Meola became the heroes for a new generation of soccer fans. The U.S. women winning the World Cup in 1999, also hosted in the States, further introduced new faces to look up to.

Landon Donovan, widely considered one of the best American players ever, traced his obsession directly back to attending a ‘94 World Cup match as a kid.

The Ultimate Goal

Antony said the ball was his savior. Adriano said God put it at his feet. You don’t manufacture that relationship with a registration fee and Saturday morning orange slices.

America has spent thirty years building soccer from the top down. Leagues, youth clubs, television deals. It has produced real progress and real players. But the beautiful game was never built from the top. It was built in backyards, in favelas, and on cracked futsal courts.

The 1994 World Cup put soccer on screens that had never shown it before, in front of audiences that had never sought it out. Some of them stayed curious. Their kids grew up curious. And gradually, that curiosity compounded into something that has culminated in what we saw on Friday.

But the most exciting part is what happens next for U.S. soccer. The 2026 World Cup will be loud and bright and maybe, if things break right, genuinely historic for this country.

But what will it do for the next generation? Will the Nike and Adidas commercials actually play out here in the States? Will kids go out to their backyard to kick a soccer ball instead of throwing a football around? Will schools and parks start to build futsal courts instead of basketball courts? Will kids kick around anything that rolls?

This is the next phase of building a soccer culture in America. It needs to be ingrained into the DNA of our country. Build the culture. The rest will follow.

The Nile is generally considered a slow-moving river. It has a gradual slope over 4,000 miles. Wide channels slow the current. If you were to float it for hours, you’d pass kids playing on the bank, fishermen casting lines, and the quiet hum of everyday life moving alongside the water.

Near Murchison Falls in Uganda, the river is still broad. Boats cruise upstream without much effort. But as the falls approach, something shifts. The river narrows. The current quickens. The surface ripples and churns. Water is being pulled into a funnel until there’s just a 23-foot gap where the river has no choice but to fall. The result is one of the most powerful and visually dramatic waterfalls in all of Africa.

The NBA regular season is the Nile. 82 games between October and April. Teams rest stars on back-to-backs. Front offices purposefully lose as the Spring peaks through the cold winter months. Talk shows are filled with complaining about what the NBA used to be. And then April comes.

The playoffs are Murchison Falls.

It’s cliché to say, but the NBA playoffs are a fundamentally different sport than the regular season. Statistically and visually different. The stars come out to play. The intensity increases. The pace decreases. Referees swallow their whistles. And soon, basketball is back to how it’s supposed to be played. The NBA playoffs is all the pent-up energy from the regular season finally being released.

The numbers say it clearly. Last year I wrote and showed some interesting statistics that set the playoffs apart.

In all but two seasons since the 70s, there have been fewer possessions per game in the playoffs than in the regular season. Field goal percentages drop. Points per game drop. The game gets slower, harder, and uglier. And that’s just how we like it.

What the numbers are saying is that defenses are working harder. A few less possessions, points, and misses a game might not sound like much until you realize what it represents.

Energy and effort are the biggest differences on the defensive side of the ball. Players are giving maximum effort and expending more energy on a per-possession basis. Every play is being contested harder, guarded more carefully, and scouted more thoroughly. Everything is magnified.

Defense is the part of playoff basketball that doesn’t get enough credit. We know about the closers and shot-makers. But the history of the NBA playoffs is written just as much on the other end of the floor. We just saw the Detroit Pistons hold the Orlando Magic to 19 points in the second half to save their season. That’s what defense can do for teams in the playoffs.

It’s the small things that make all the difference in the playoffs. Take the example below of Rudy Gobert against the Denver Nuggets in the first round. He was masterful in the post against Nikola Jokic. But what I was really impressed by was the pressure he extended to other places on the court. Gobert could have been sitting back at the three-point line, but his defense at half court forced the turnover and led to transition points. The extended pressure is a sign of the sustained intensity needed on the defensive side of the ball in the playoffs.

Devin Vassell showed his defensive fight by getting back in transition in this play below. Instead of standing out and guarding Scoot Henderson out on the three-point line, he made sure he had a foot in the paint. You can see from the clip that he took a peek over his right shoulder and spotted Jrue Holiday sprinting towards the basket. He then anticipated the pass and jumped in front for the steal. Again, it’s small things like Vassell’s court awareness that can turn the tide in a playoff game.

Lastly, take a look at this sequence from the 76ers and Celtics. First, Paul George gets beat off the dribble. However, he sticks with the play and is able to poke the ball away from Jayson Tatum from behind. As the 76ers start their fast break, keep an eye on Derrick White in the upper left corner. He sprints the entire length of the court to get the chase-down block. Pure hustle from both George and White resulted in saved points. Sometimes it’s as simple as exerting a little more energy to keep your team’s season alive.

These plays don’t go viral. But they set up the ones that do. A bunch of small defensive plays throughout a series is what propels a team forward as a series reaches its climax.

After all the hard work throughout a series, sometimes we are blessed with a defensive play that lives on forever. These are the plays that are included in the pre-game montages for years to come. Here are a few worth remembering.

Michael Jordan’s steal on Karl Malone, 1998 Finals

Tayshaun Prince’s chase-down block on Reggie Miller, 2004 ECF

LeBron James’ block on Andre Iguodala, 2016 Finals

Jrue Holiday’s steal on Devin Booker, 2021 Finals

Draymond didn’t say there are 82-game players and 16-game players because of who scores. He said it because of who competes. Who can bring the physicality and focus necessary to make plays when it matters most? The playoffs reveal a player’s willingness to make the game hard for someone else. To do the little things that may or may not show up in the boxscore.

The regular season is a river. Long, wide, full of bends and calm currents. The playoffs are a waterfall. Everything that was moving slowly suddenly drops at once. Energy, effort, and defense are what make the playoffs so exhilarating.

You know that feeling when sports writing just hits different? Every so often, I round up the best content I’ve consumed. “Seven Wonders” is a Butterflies series where I share my favorites.

Happy March Madness! Though we have a lack of upsets, we have at least had competitive games played at very high levels. Tight finishes remind us we don’t need a Cinderella run to tune in. If you’re looking at your bracket in tears, here are seven pieces of sports writing that will take your mind off your poor judgment.

But first, some of my recent posts and a few relevant oldies from the archive:

North London Forever. Arsenal lost in the Carabao Cup final, but they still have a shot at the treble. More importantly, they are in a commanding lead in the Premier League and have a favorable path to go deep in the Champions League.

I Think We Can Fix College Basketball. This is from last year, but it is still relevant today. I break down a few small changes that can make the college basketball product more enjoyable to watch.

The 100-Point Game. It seems like many weren’t impressed with Bam Adebayo’s 83-point game a few weeks ago. This piece breaks down how Wilt Chamberlain scored his 100 back in the day. Spoiler alert: it was probably more gimmicky than Bam’s 83.

Victor Wembanyama: The dominance of international players in the NBA. I reflect on the rise and dominance of the international player in the NBA. Though this is older, it’s a fun read, given Victor Wembanyama is closing in on being one of the best players in the world.

The Fouling While Up Three Problem. I break down what the statistics say about fouling while up three. Plus, I share my thoughts on the excitement (lol) of watching the best athletes in the world line up at the free-throw line.

Soccer In Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. You don’t know pressure until you have played for Iraq during Saddam Hussein’s reign.

The Evolution of Unethical Hoops. A video breakdown of how players have adapted over the years to draw fouls, deceive referees, and optimize their game in the era of analytics.

And now, here are the seven (ok, I cheated) nine best things I’ve read in sports recently:

Cinderella Isn’t Dead Yet, But She’s On Life Support by . A case that the transfer portal, not NIL, is the real villain killing mid-major Cinderella runs, and what it would take to save the best underdog tradition in American sports.

Sweet 16 Possibilities by . KenPom breaks down the Sweet 16 and makes a compelling case that the upset dam is about to break, whether you want it to or not.

March Madness (Live from Somewhere Else) by . A look at what we’re giving up when March Madness trades packed campus gyms for massive neutral-site arenas.

MAGIC MOMENTS by . A love letter to the magic of football’s most improbable moments told through a 16-year-old named Max Dowman.

Fly Midway by . A raw breakdown of Arsenal’s Carabao Cup final collapse against Manchester City.

As Big as Chile by . The beautiful story of a tiny Serbian village football club that accidentally went viral in Chile and what it meant to a dying community.

VAR’s Crisis of Coherence by . An argument for why VAR making soccer more accurate has somehow made it less enjoyable, and what we’ve quietly lost by obligating the game to be correct.

The Colonial Logic of Brazilian Football by & . Brazil’s football decline isn’t a talent problem; it’s a structural one. Its best players are shipped abroad, leaving the domestic game hollow.

Game Management by @ . A data-driven breakdown of how NBA teams deploy timeouts, challenges, and fouls.

As of today, Arsenal sit seven points clear at the top of the Premier League with eight games remaining. They have a Carabao Cup final at Wembley in a few weeks. They’re through to the FA Cup quarterfinals. To top it off, they just completed a flawless eight wins in eight matches in the Champions League league phase, beating Bayern Munich, Atlético Madrid, and Inter Milan along the way. Plus, they have a clear path to the semifinals after a favorable draw.

The quadruple is within reach. You have to knock on wood after saying it, but it’s time to whisper it out loud.

No English club has ever done it. However, there is still a real possibility that the season ends with zero trophies. There is still everything to play for.

The Invincibles

In May 2004, Facebook was called thefacebook.com and was a small website only available to students at Harvard. The Boston Red Sox were still in the midst of their 86-year World Series drought. Everyone wanted a Motorola Razr, and American Idol was a TV hit.

Thierry Henry was sprinting around Highbury, turning fullbacks into statues. Patrick Vieira was patrolling the midfield like a nightclub bouncer. And Arsène Wenger was pacing the touchline in his puffer jacket and red tie.

Arsenal went the entire Premier League season unbeaten. They were nicknamed the Invincibles. They were the benchmark; the gold standard. If I were to tell an Arsenal supporter back then that they would still be waiting for another title, they wouldn’t have believed me. But they’ve been waiting ever since.

I recently read a comment on social media from an Arsenal supporter who made a deal with himself that he wouldn’t wear his 2003/04 Henry shirt until they won the Prem again. He thinks this is the year he’ll finally be able to wear his Invincibles shirt once more. Hopefully, it still fits him.

The dark days

After 2004, Arsenal spent the next 22 years winning the occasional FA Cup while watching Chelsea, Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool, and even Leicester trade the league title among themselves. The Gunners moved from Highbury to the Emirates in 2006, which forced the club to enter a self-imposed financial austerity that meant they couldn’t compete in the transfer market for top talent.

During the title drought, Wenger left. Then Unai Emery came and went. Finally, there was a brief Freddie Ljungberg appearance as an interim manager before Mikel Arteta was brought in.

During Arsenal’s time from winning a title until Arteta, they were still very good. They averaged over 71 points per campaign and usually finished in the top four. However, this is Arsenal. It’s not Brighton or even Tottenham. Supporters expect trophies and Premier League titles.

Arteta’s rejuvenation

Arteta took over Arsenal as a first-time manager on Boxing Day 2019. Arsenal were 10th in the table and looked nothing like a club with serious ambitions.

He inherited a dressing room with poor culture, an aging squad, and a fanbase that had lost trust in the institution. Over the next four years, he systematically rebuilt everything. He brought in the right players and adjusted his formation and tactics to fit the personnel he had.

Arteta slowly built a team that could defend from the front, create from deep, and stay compact and disciplined defensively. Arteta’s teams are a complete reversal of the technically gifted, but easily bullied Arsenal sides of the 2010s.

The transformation Arteta has created at Arsenal doesn’t look that much different if you look at the final points tally and position in the final table. In fact, during his time, Arsenal has finished slightly worse in the table than before he arrived. However, it’s the manner in which he has been building towards this season. Progress is visible. The team continued to push and work its way up the table.

Subscribe now

In 2022/23, Arsenal sat eight points clear at the top of the table with nine games remaining. It really did look like the wait was finally over. Then they blew two-goal leads against Liverpool and West Ham in back-to-back games, the first time Arsenal had ever done that in the Premier League era. They also drew at home to bottom-of-the-league Southampton, and got humbled 4-1 by City at the Etihad.

In 2023/24, the Gunners pushed City all the way to the final day, finishing just two points behind despite picking up 89 points, their highest-ever Premier League total. That year, they scored 91 league goals and held the best defensive record in the Premier League. They did almost everything right, but it still wasn’t enough.

In 2024/25, injuries and a red card epidemic derailed their campaign. Bukayo Saka, Martin Ødegaard, Riccardo Calafiori, and Gabriel Magalhães had injuries that tested Arsenal’s depth. They dropped plenty of points from winning positions and couldn’t sustain a long run throughout the entire season, finishing 10 points behind Liverpool.

Three consecutive title challenges. Three consecutive failures. The mental weight of that was and still is real. Everyone is just waiting for a late-season collapse this season. But it hasn’t come yet. Arsenal are the clear favorites to win the League. Winning isn’t a distant hope anymore. It’s actually something that is starting to feel like a reality.

This year’s Arsenal is different. For one, they have true depth. They have added players throughout the squad who have been able to step up without a drop-off. Additions such as Martín Zubimendi, Eberechi Eze, Piero Hincapié, and Viktor Gyökeres have given the Gunners much-needed options when players go down with injuries.

Arsenal’s set pieces have also become a key aspect of their game. Though they are mocked in the media, they have put away the most set pieces in the Premier League this season. A goal is a goal, no matter how it comes. This article does a great job of breaking down Arsenal’s set-piece strategy.

Arsenal’s defense continues to be one of the best in the world. William Saliba and Gabriel have become one of the best center back pairings in Europe, and Timber is arguably one of the best right backs right now. David Raya is also good for at least one big save per game.

Arsenal certainly aren’t perfect, but they know how to win. And that’s what makes them one of, if not the best, team in Europe at the moment.

On the cusp of history

The quadruple has always felt like an impossible achievement in English football. Manchester United won the Treble in 1999. City matched it in 2019. Liverpool came agonizingly close in 2021/22, winning the League Cup and FA Cup before losing the Premier League on the final day and the Champions League in the final. Arsenal are closer to it right now than any English club in history, yet zero trophies is still a dark possibility.

The big one, though, is the Premier League. Just get that, and the 22-year drought hanging over the club will be over. Just win the Premier League, and nothing else will matter.

The NBA is under fire. And that’s a good thing. When people complain, it’s a sign they care.

My last post explored how offensive player movement has been manipulated to draw fouls, partly due to the growing influence of analytics. There has been a healthy debate as to whether analytics makes the sports viewing experience better or worse. Depending on who you ask, you will get different answers.

Either way, I think most fans can agree that we watch sports to be entertained. We watch to feel something. We want to live out our past glory days. Remember the game-winner we hit in our driveway, or if we’re lucky, our high school gymnasium.

Pause for a second and think about your favorite NBA games. It may be a player’s performance over the course of 48 minutes, or it may be some outstanding athletic feat. Most likely, it’s a memory as the time is running down.

We feel something when the games are tense, there is drama to be viewed, and the clock is about to hit zero. Everyone loves a last-second buzzer-beater. It’s what gets the fans jumping up and down wildly at the bar, in a living room, or in the arena.

One analytics movement has started to slowly remove buzzer beaters from the game—fouling while up three. It feels like more and more games are now ending at the free-throw line instead of with a well-executed and defended ATO. Those nail-bitters are now turning into snoozers, and it’s bad for the NBA product.

There have been several studies on the effectiveness of fouling while up three, a few of which I will review. The results of the studies haven’t always been the same, but I’ll explain why as we go along.

Math & Probabilities

An analysis was conducted 20 years ago by a math professor named Adrian Lawhorn. He used math and probability based on NBA shooting and offensive rebounding percentages.

Lawhorn played out the two scenarios of fouling while up three or defending straight up. He concluded that fouling while up three would result in teams being 4x more likely to win vs having the game go to overtime.

Still, for 20 years, most coaches didn’t view fouling while up three as a viable option. Data wasn’t as accessible and it wasn’t something teams seriously considered.

Not Segmenting the Data by Time Remaining

There is another group of studies that analyzed fouling while up three vs defending straight up based on historical winning percentage data for each scenario.

In 2008, another professor named Wayne Winston shared that one of his students observed the data of all NBA games between 2005 and 2008 in which a team was down three with under 10 seconds left.

Subscribe now

The leading team played defense 260 times and won 91.9% of the games. Of the 27 times the leading team fouled, they won 88.9% of the games. The analysis concluded that no definitive strategy was better or worse than the other, a drastically different outcome than the study two years prior.

Then, in 2013, Ken Pomeroy, a college basketball analytics guru, conducted his own study at the college level. He looked at all possessions when the team trailing by three had the ball with between five and 12 seconds left at the end of the second half or overtime.

The 676 teams that decided to defend won 93.5% of the time compared to 92.5% of the 138 teams that decided to foul. Again, a similar result to the 2008 study, with playing defense appearing like the slightly better strategy.

In 2020, Pomeroy wrote another article on the subject of fouling up three, but instead of looking at the data, he identified a loophole in the rule:

“One creative solution to the end-game conundrum is to foul up three and commit lane violations on the last free throw until the shooting team makes it. If you’re a rules wonk, you know that if the defense violates the lane, it’s only penalized if the shooting team misses. This is a feature and not a bug: The shooting team gets the result that benefits it — either a point or a do-over. But in the foul-up-three situation, it is a bug. The fouled team wants to miss, but it isn’t allowed to do so as long as there are violations.”

Intentionally committing lane violations hasn’t ever been a strategy I’ve seen used. However, if it does become a problem, changing the rule to call a technical foul for intentionally gaming the rules would quickly fix the loophole.

Lastly, additional analysis was conducted on NBA data in 2024. Researchers looked at games when a team was leading by three with 24 or fewer seconds remaining. Teams that elected to play defense won the game 93% of the time. Teams that fouled won 92% of the time.

It is clear that there isn’t much difference between fouling and playing defense when the data isn’t segmented by time remaining. Still, all three studies suggest playing defense might have a better winning percentage.

As you will see, though, analyzing the data using a different methodology yields a different result.

Evaluating Probabilities Based on Remaining Time

Another group of studies considers the exact time remaining in the game when deciding whether fouling or defending is the better strategy.

In 2018, Patrick McFarlane, an analyst of the Philadelphia Phillies, looked at NBA games and found that with about 36 seconds remaining, playing defense gives the team up three a 3.5% better chance of winning than fouling would.

However, at around nine seconds, intentionally fouling becomes the optimal strategy. With one second remaining, fouling gives the team up three a 9.2% better chance compared to defending regularly.

Obviously, fouling with only one second remaining can be trickier said than done because you are more likely to foul a shooter. However, the principle remains the same—stick with traditional defense until around nine seconds remain in the game.

A similar analysis was conducted in 2022 with college basketball data. The study observed three-point games with 16 seconds or fewer remaining when the losing team had the ball. It sorted the data based on teams that chose to defend and allow a three-point attempt vs teams that fouled, leading to foul shots. Similar to McFarlane’s analysis, it cut the data based on the time remaining in the game.

For games between 0-12 seconds, fouling while up three doubled the chances of winning in regulation vs having the game go to overtime. Fouling between 12-16 seconds remaining actually flipped the script, with a higher percentage of games going to overtime.

The Optimal Strategy

Each of these studies has slightly different timeframes and datapoints. But as you can see, cutting the data by time remaining in the game sheds new light on the fouling while up three vs defending strategy.

It is reasonable to believe that a well-trained analytics department can analyze the data and instruct a coaching staff when to foul vs not, depending on how much time is left on the clock. Based on the mounting evidence, determining a team’s strategy based on the time remaining seems to be the correct decision.

It’s only a matter of time before we see almost every team perfect the fouling while up three strategy. With the mountains of data now available to the public and as coaches come under more scrutiny for their decisions (or lack thereof), coaches will almost always do what the probabilities suggest.

The Best Outcome for Fans

Still, as mentioned at the beginning of this post, I wondered out loud if this strategy is good for basketball. Nail-biters are turning into snoozers as the final minute of the 4th quarter is turning into 20-minute ordeals.

So, what are we to do?

The NBA changed rules after the Hack-a-Shaq trend in the early 2000s, penalizing teams for intentionally fouling a player off the ball in the final two minutes. Doing so would result in one free throw and the ball back for the offensive team.

The NBA clearly wants the game to be more entertaining. Just look at how defenses are hamstrung nowadays.

There are possible avenues to make a rule change to eliminate fouling while up three. It’s just not as straightforward as the Hack-a-Shaq rule change.

The NBA might learn a thing or two by observing FIBA, which has what they call an unsportsmanlike foul. Its rulebook states:

“An unsportsmanlike foul is a player contact which, in the judgment of a referee, is contact with an opponent and not legitimately attempting to directly play the ball within the spirit and intent of the rules.”

The NBA could implement something similar, which would result in free throw(s) and the ball. It would incentivize more aggressive defense, which I view as a positive. But should this rule be applied to both teams or just the team winning at the end of the game? Or should it be applied throughout the whole game?

The challenge is that it becomes more of a judgment call for referees. Introducing more judgment will lead to mistakes. It could also lead to more intentional fouls disguised as normal fouls.

I’m not here with all the answers. You can scour the internet and see many different suggestions—using Elam scoring in the 4th quarter, allowing offensive teams to decline free throws similar to teams declining penalties in football, etc.

All have some sort of flaw that doesn’t quite sit right with me. Surely, there are people smarter than me whom the NBA can employ to figure it out. I hope so. I’d like to get back to more exciting late-game drama.

For a better reading experience (especially for watching videos and reading charts), read on the Butterflies website or download the Substack app.

Modern NBA foul baiting isn’t a player problem. It’s a rule-incentive problem.

Last Spring, I wrote about how we can fix college basketball. I argued the game was too choppy with too many stoppages compared to the NBA. While the NBA is much more entertaining and watchable, foul baiting is starting to destroy the sanctity of the game.

Over time, the NBA has shifted from a league where fouls punished excessive defensive contact to one where fouls increasingly reward offensive manipulation.

Fouls used to stop defenders from clobbering scorers. Now they reward offenses for creating contact defenders can’t avoid.

Foul manipulation has evolved in three phases:

1. Defensive deception (flopping)

2. Offensive exploitation of defensive mistakes

3. Illegal contact initiated by the offensive player

Defensive deception (flopping)

Back in the 70s and 80s, the NBA allowed much more contact. But slowly things started to change and players found ways to manipulate the game on the defensive side of the ball. Enter the art of the flop. The point of the flop is to sell the contact that is being made—to make the refs believe that the contact being made is illegal.

Players such as Valde Divac, Bill Laimbeer, and Dennis Rodman were the poster children for flopping. And it worked.

It’s difficult to say where the flop originated from; however, Divac is often cited by players as the one who took flopping to the next level.1 Once one player had success with it, it spread like wildfire.

In more recent times, offensive players have used flopping to sell foul calls. Manu Ginobili was one of the best floppers in modern times, often whipping his head back with minimal contact.2

In 2012, the NBA attempted to ban flopping with new rules and fines. The rule has gone through its iterations, but it hasn’t been very effective other than targeting a few culprits. The new rule had been so underutilized that in the first 10 years of the rule’s existence, only 31 total players had been fined.

In the 2023-24 season, the NBA implemented a non-unsportsmanlike technical foul for flopping, which has been called more frequently. Still, it hasn’t been utilized enough to eliminate flopping from the game. I get it. Calling a flopping technical foul every three minutes would get really old and bog down the flow of the game. Still, rewarding flops less often would slowly start to eliminate it from the bag of tricks players use.

Offensive exploitation of defensive mistakes

In 2004, the NBA banned defensive hand-checking, paving the way for more physical play from defenders to be punished. Officiating became more and more favorable for offenses. Defenders were now required to give offensive players space and freedom of movement was prioritized.

The rule change allowed offensive players to more easily exploit defensive mistakes. Offensive players could use moves to create situations were illegal contact was made by the defender. With this, defenders are the ones committing the foul, but the offensive player initiates moves to get defenders in a position where a foul is inevitable.

Players like Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, and Dwyane Wade utilized the pump fake to get defenders in the air and off balance. They would then use that to their advantage and go up into a shooting motion while defenders were on their way down or out of position, creating illegal contact and drawing fouls. Yes, the pump fake has been in the game since the 60s, but modern players have perfected it to get to the foul line.

Chris Paul is another one of the pioneers for making defenders initiate illegal contact with his masterful body control. He often used his speed to blow by defenders, cut them off, and then slow down to draw contact once the defender was on his hip. This caused illegal body contact created by the defender being out of position.

Although the herky-jerky, start-stop strategy of Chris Paul is starting to be removed from the game, I believe that exploiting defensive mistakes is still ethical because it utilizes smart offensive moves to make the defender initiate the contact first.

Illegal contact initiated by the offensive player

The early 2010s marked the real turning point. Analytics reframed offense around efficiency. Teams became smarter about seeking efficient shots and started to eliminate mid-range shots from the game. Pretty soon, layups, three pointers, and free throws became the focal point of offenses. And nothing was more efficient than free throws. has previously written about this and shared efficiency data on it.

Once teams realized this, the goal shifted from solely creating good shots to also creating fouls. This shift changed everything. It was only a matter of time before players figured out new ways to get to the foul line.

The difference now is that offensive players don’t just exploit defensive mistakes to draw fouls. They also initiate the illegal contact first, even when defenders are in legal guarding positions. This is what has given so many fans fits. It’s almost as if the defender can’t do anything about it. Their existence in the vicinity of the offensive player is the sin that compels the referee to blow the whistle.

Players have now added to their arsenal of offensive manipulation to initiate contact and get foul calls. Here are the ways they are doing it:

Shooting-based manipulation

Jumping into the defender while shooting: Players will unnaturally contort their body to make contact with a defender while shooting. This tactic is utilized most often after a successful pump fake, but it has been taken to the next level. However, it's clearly unnatural and not how players usually shoot a jump shot. The Association has cut back on this a bit, but it’s still rampant in the game today.3

Rip through: The rip through was perfected by Chris Paul when in a triple threat position.4 When a defender is guarding and has their hands out in front, the offensive player rips their arms from one side of their body to the other, making contact with the defender on the way through. Offensive players then pull up into a shot and easily get to the free-throw line. This tactic became too common and a cheat to get an easy shooting foul, so the NBA changed the rules for this to be a non-shooting foul.

Unnatural shooting motion: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander has iterated on the rip-through move Chris Paul perfected. The unnatural shooting motion can start from any body position instead of in a triple threat position. SGA is great at using his off-hand to raise up and create contact as if he is going into a shooting motion.5 The move is completely unnatural to how anyone raises up to shoot, but that's obviously the point. He isn't actually trying to score in these situations. He's just trying to create contact to get a shooting foul call.

Spatial manipulation

Leg kick on jump shots: Shooters will extend their legs in unnatural ways to try to draw contact with the defender and get the foul call.6 Reggie Miller had some of this offensive initiated contact in his game when he would kick out his leg on jump shots, but the physical play in the game at the time kept the foul baiting in check. The Association is doing a better job of catching this trick and calling offensive fouls, but pretty much everyone does it and it happens regularly.

Extending landing space: According to the rules, defenders need to allow space for shooters to land. Thank Zaza Pachulia for that. However, some jump shooters will jump forward and land unnaturally, seeking contact with the defender in hopes of drawing a foul.7

Driving-based manipulation

Driving into arm contact: When an offensive player comes hard off a pick and roll, it creates mismatches with the smaller ball handler attacking a big. The point is to crossover and attack the front foot of the defender as they are in their defensive stance. After crossing over and attacking the front foot, offensive players will pick up the ball low and sweep their arms up to make contact with the defender's arm.8 Defenders will oftentimes reach in, but sometimes the offensive player just sweeps their arms up to make contact when the defender is in a legal guarding position. James Harden perfected this move, and now many are doing it, including rising players such as Deni Avdija.

Arm hook: Ah, the old arm hook. James Harden perfected hooking the arm of defenders, usually on drives. He would then raise up, causing contact that made it appear the defender was reaching in.9 Referees have figured it out and clamped down on this offensive player initiated contact, but it still happens regularly.

Hip/shoulder bump: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander may not have invented the subtle hip/shoulder bump, but he certainly has perfected it. He initiates contact while driving and then exaggerates the contact to get the call.10 Defenders are left helpless without any room to avoid the contact.

Let’s fix the game

Flopping and offensive players initiating contact…

Some of these techniques have been dealt with after the 2021 rule change on non-basketball moves. But players adapt and will always find new techniques to draw fouls. As long as the incentives of foul baiting remain, new unnatural contact will be drawn by offensive players.

If the NBA truly wants to eliminate foul baiting from the game, it will have to adopt rules similar to FIBA. The NBA prioritizes offensive freedom. FIBA prioritizes the flow of the game. The NBA rewards trickery and offensive aggression. FIBA punishes players who make initial contact.

The NBA didn’t just overcorrect when it eliminated hand-checking; it rewarded deception. In trying to free offenses, it created a system where initiating contact is just as valuable as creating open shots. Until the league realigns incentives toward ethical basketball, players will continue to exploit every gray area available to them.

The NBA needs to get back to a game where defenses have a chance. Physicality should be a part of the game. It makes for a better flowing and more entertaining game. Fans didn’t fall in love with basketball because of whistles. The post–2024 All-Star break officiating showed that when the game is allowed to breathe, it’s still as beautiful as ever.

Every fan loves to relive unforgettable sports moments. I am honoring that nostalgia with a Butterflies series called “Replays.” Each edition will revisit a special sports memory, add context, and share reactions and commentary surrounding it.

Context

Ok, maybe this wasn’t one of the best sports moments. Quite the opposite. I don’t necessarily feel nostalgic for this Replays edition, but it was such a defining moment in the NBA that I feel compelled to take a look back. It’s one of those YouTube videos you visit every few years and think, “Wow, that actually happened.”

Just over 21 years ago, the Detroit Pistons and Indiana Pacers were among the elite teams in the NBA. They met for an early-season matchup on November 19, 2004.

The season prior (2003-04), Detroit won their first championship since the “Bad Boy” Pistons won back-to-back titles in 1989 and 1990. The Pistons beat the Pacers in the Eastern Conference Finals in six games on their way to lifting the Larry O’Brien trophy.

The Pacers proved they measured up and reignited the rivalry that had been building steam for years. With under a minute left in the 4th quarter, they had a 15-point lead and were ready to leave Detroit with a statement win.

What happened next has been immortalized in infamy.

The Moment

Reactions

Following the brawl, multiple Pacers players were suspended, which effectively erased Indiana’s chances of contending for a title. Ron Artest never returned to his previous form and was eventually traded during the 2005-26 season. The Malice and the Palace was a turning point for the Pacers, which led to a semi-rebuild until a player by the name of Paul George was drafted in 2010.

The incident also influenced rule and policy changes, including stricter arena security, limits on alcohol sales, and a greater emphasis on player conduct and image.

SportsCenter, the premier sports show at the time, reacts

Grantland’s oral history

Ron Artest shares behind-the-scenes details

Ron Artest on his biggest regret

Mike Breen on calling the Malice at the Palace

Comment Section