from INSIGHT BUSINESS published by USC's Center for Management Communication
www.marshallinsight.com © copyright 2006 by USC Marshall School of Business. All Rights Reserved.
by Kris Fredrickson
Less than 20 years ago, the only time the American public heard names such as
Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Wang Zhi Zhi, and Predrag Stojakovic was when their home
countries were refusing to cooperate with the United Nations. Nowadays, any
American who’s opened a newspaper to the sports page or watched the daily
highlights on television can likely identify these men as players in the most
competitive basketball league there is, the NBA. The recent influx of international
players has impacted the game on many levels. As Luke Peterson observes in an
article entitled The Globalized Association, “as the NBA acquires more
international talent, global citizens from regions that nurtured this new talent
become ardent fans.” (Peterson) This increased international interest
is evidenced by the fact that league games are now shown in 212 countries. Additionally,
the Los Angeles Lakers have commentators who broadcast in Farsi and scores of
fans from Chihuahua, Mexico routinely bus 17 hours into Texas to witness Eduardo
Najera, a Chihuahua native, play for the Dallas Mavericks (Peterson).
There is no doubt that the NBA is becoming an increasingly international league
among players and fans alike. With this, comes the worldwide extension of American
culture. Chinese teenagers are purchasing Nikes in record numbers, American
music is quickly becoming a favorite among young Argentines, and children in
Yugoslavia are growing up on a diet which includes McDonald’s and Coca-Cola.
As Peterson notes, international fans are buying “merchandise, tickets,
and a piece of American culture all at the same time” (Peterson).
Intuitively, as the market for the game grows and American culture broadens
its reach, American businesses find themselves with many lucrative opportunities.
In 1991, sales of Nike products abroad represented 33% of their total revenue.
By 2001, however, that number had increased to 53% (Locke). Given the immense
potential for profit that exists, many feel that the internationalization of
the NBA is just another way for developed Western countries to expand their
corporate empires. In fact, it is difficult to argue that the globalization
and internationalization of the NBA and other professional sports organizations
does not have a profoundly positive impact on the league and the country in
which the league is based. However, the international extension of professional
sports leagues has also worked to the advantage of the countries which export
players as well as human kind in general, fighting stereotypes, bridging cultural
gaps, and promoting international understanding.
INTERNATIONALIZATION: ENSURING THE SUPERIORITY OF THE NBA
Some have argued that globalization is bad for the NBA, citing that it strips the game of its heritage and sense of “Americanism.” Foreign players, they insist, are making the game a less personal experience for the Americans who gave birth to and popularized the sport. Supporters of this idea propose that the NBA follow the lead of the Chinese Basketball Association, which limits the number of foreign-born players per team to two. The purpose of this rule, they say, is to promote national pride and patriotism. Not only would this policy be unfair, but in the long-run, it would most likely prove severely detrimental to the league. As a result of this limit, qualified Spaniards, Russians, and Canadians would be turned away in favor of less capable Americans. For the patriots who support this belief, it should be noted that basketball was invented by James Naismith, a Canadian who migrated to Massachusetts prior to conceiving of the game. Clearly, basketball is not inherently American.
Not only does the idea of ignoring ability to favor a certain nationality contradict the ideals upon which America was founded, but by implementing such a regulation, the NBA would be shooting itself in the foot. The National Basketball Association did not become the supreme basketball league solely by virtue of the fact that it is located in the United States. Rather, the NBA has grown to a position of prominence because it employs the most talent, and is consequently more exciting than any other league. If the league were to start judging players using arbitrary criteria (such as nationality), some exceptional talent will end up playing abroad. In time, the NBA may lose its reputation for having the best players in the world. Those who advocate regulating the participation of foreigners dismiss this argument, maintaining that spectators will be more interested in a game to which they can relate. Leagues with high rates of internationalization, they insist, are inherently less engaging due to the fact that fans will have difficulty identifying with the players and their various backgrounds. They seem to believe that this effect more than compensates for the lack of truly exceptional talent. But is this really true?
Since the mid-1980s, when NBA scouts started actively recruiting foreign talent, the popularity of the game among Americans increased dramatically. In 1981, the NBA commanded an average of $19 million per year for their U.S. television deals. In 2001, this number exceeded $660 million, an increase of over 3400% (Dukcevich). Clearly, Americans are tuning in to the internationalized game in record numbers.
It’s also important to note that the CBA’s policy of limiting foreign-born players has had only questionable success. More Chinese are watching NBA basketball than ever before. The fact that the number of television contracts in China increased from five in 2001 to 14 in 2002 may point to a relevant trend (Narducci). Furthermore, a policy intended to promote Americanism in the NBA might indirectly accomplish the opposite. With the growth of the YUBA League in Yugoslavia and the TNA in Argentina, it is not unreasonable to envision a time in which the best Americans go abroad to play in one of these leagues. After all, as Luke Peterson points out, “athletes, as they have done for years, will go where the money is.” Considering this universal truth, by attracting and employing the most qualified basketball players from all over the world, the NBA is protecting its superiority, not threatening it.
NEW GENERATIONS, NEW PERSPECTIVE
While the expansion of the NBA has inarguably been good for those closely affiliated with the game, this expansion has also helped to advance human relations in general. The argument can be made that sports superstars such as Jackie Robinson and Michael Jordan have done as much as anybody to combat racism and further civil rights, both in the U.S. and abroad. During the pre-civil rights era in the United States, it was extraordinarily difficult for minorities to prove their abilities. At the time, segregation was present at every level of society and few people were willing to take a risk on a minority. It took something as pure as athletics to break through this barrier. As opposed to the other aspects of mainstream society (such as education, business, and politics), competitors in sports can quickly prove their qualifications and ability to contribute to a team. As Jackie Robinson once said, the great thing about athletics is that "you learn to act democracy [sic], not just talk it” (Almanac).
By 1947, neither society nor Major League Baseball could continue to ignore the exceptional level of competition in the Negro Leagues and Robinson was signed to the Brooklyn Dodgers, becoming the first African-American to play Major League Baseball. Fearing change, the white American public initially dismissed Robinson’s success as trivial and irrelevant. However, as Robinson helped the Dodgers to six National League Pennants in a span of ten years and was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame, it became clear that his success was indicative of a much larger trend at work.
The impact Robinson had on the game of baseball is minimal compared to the impact that his life—and the fact that he changed the face of professional sports—has had on society. As Hank Aaron wrote in an article for Time magazine, breaking baseball’s color barrier was an incredible act that that “brought the races closer together than ever before and shaped the dreams of an entire generation” (Aaron). Aaron’s statement has proven quite prophetic. Today, white children grow up idolizing basketball phenoms such as Tracy McGrady (African-American) and Yao Ming (Asian) and young Arabs—who would have never heard of the game had they been born 20 years earlier—are marveling at the athletic abilities of Jason Williams (Caucasian, American) and Vlade Divac (Yugoslavian). With increasingly internationalized professional sports leagues as the messenger, generations of kids are learning that judgments based on race or nationality hold no weight.
GLOBALIZATION: A WIN-WIN
Many opponents of globalization pose the argument that advanced nations are benefiting at the expense of countries which are underdeveloped. While there is some truth to this belief, in the case of professional sports, the less developed nation is better off for having engaged with the advanced nation. Put simply, globalization in this context is a win-win. An example of such a scenario can be found in the case of Yao Ming, the 22-year-old 7-foot-5 Chinese center. In an article entitled Unfree Agents: Globalization and the Future of Chinese Basketball, Daniel Greenstone summed up the dilemma facing the Chinese government: “Should a nation like China relinquish its resources—in this case, talented athletes—to a global power such as the United States, in exchange for a more prestigious place on the world stage? Or should China hold onto (or demand an extraordinarily high price for) its resources—even though such isolationism means losing out on the expertise and training that only developed nations can provide” (Greenstone).
CHINA CASHES IN
After weighing the pros and cons of the situation, China released Yao to the United States and he was selected as the first player overall in the 2002 NBA draft. However, they did not let him go without first striking a lucrative deal for their country. The agreement was so complex that in exchange for rights to Yao, the Houston Rockets had to obtain a total of nine signatures on his contract. These include Yao himself, his parents, his Chinese team, his Chinese agent, his home city of Shanghai, Chinese organizations called The National General Management and The National Basketball Management, his U.S. agent, and finally, his new U.S. team. As per his contract, the Chinese government is to receive half of all Yao’s earnings. Furthermore, before Yao sees any money, his Chinese team takes a percentage. Then, he must pay both Chinese and U.S. taxes. While most expect Yao to make well over $100 million during his time in the NBA, the percentage that the People’s Republic will receive means very little to them.
CHINA PUTS GLOBALIZATION TO WORK
For the Chinese government, the sweet part of the deal involves the other stipulations of Yao’s contract. According to the agreement, Yao’s new NBA team, the Houston Rockets, must take his former CBA team, the Shanghai Sharks, under their wing. Rockets coaches will train those from the Sharks and the U.S. team will allow the Sharks’ players to train alongside their own during the off-season. The Chinese government has also benefited in less direct ways. Seeing one of their own excel in the NBA has motivated many of the 1 billion Chinese citizens to take an interest in basketball and their own CBA. This is particularly conducive to the strategy that China implemented in the early 1990s which builds nationalism through sports, the ultimate goal of which is to bind the country together and foster a sense of pride and patriotism (Greenstone).
Daniel Greenstone observes that the situation of China and Yao Ming is a “classic globalization story. A developing nation that is rich in resources and poor in technical expertise must choose whether to remain isolated and lag behind in competitiveness” or “engage the larger world but risk losing control of those resources.” (Greenstone) Many feel that where there is a winner, there must also be a loser. However, as has been demonstrated by the acquisition of Yao Ming by the Houston Rockets, globalization can work to the benefit of all parties involved. Not only will the CBA’s coaches and athletes receive the superior training that only an advanced organization such as the NBA can provide, but add to this the fact that prior to Yao, most Americans didn’t even know that basketball existed in Asian countries. Now that China has produced a 2003 All-Star and Rookie of the Year candidate, their program is taking center stage among international fans and recruiters alike.
REMAINING ISOLATED: THE CASE OF CUBA
Not everybody sees fit to follow China’s example. Cuba, another authoritarian state, has decided to remain in isolation. Castro is not without his reasons. As David Hunter observes in an article entitled U.S. Could Bury Cuba in Capitalism but Sticks with Relics of Past, if Castro were to open his country’s doors to American business, “McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, and movie rental stores will be on every corner of every city.” Hunter’s article continues to point out that if Cuba were to permit America to do business within its borders “it wouldn’t take long to bury what’s left of communism in this hemisphere” (Hunter). Castro electing not to export professional athletes to the U.S. is a strategic decision that surprises no one. Given Castro’s philosophy of government, it’s an easy decision for him to make. After all, it allows him to remain in power. However, it’s unlikely that this is the best decision for his people. Aside from denying his country a place on the world sports stage—which reaches a very high number of international citizens—Castro is depriving his athletes of the superior training and technical expertise offered by the U.S.
WESTERN COMMERCIALISM: IMPROVING CONDITIONS WORLDWIDE
It is no secret that globalization is often fueled by Western commercialism. Because of this, it gets a bad name among citizens of underdeveloped nations. People are naturally inclined to resent the more advanced nation, citing things such as huge disparities in the standard of living and large corporate profits as evidence of the lack of a symbiotic relationship. However, in many cases (professional sports included), the less developed country finds itself much better off for embracing the processes of globalization. The fact remains that many good things are motivated by Western commercialism. It’s hard to deny that when a foreign athlete comes to the U.S. he is making America richer and more powerful. However, he is also a walking advertisement for his home country. In time, the globalization of sports is likely to improve the quality of competition and financial stability of leagues around the world, not just those with premier status.
Works Cited
Aaron, Henry. “The Trailblazer: Jackie Robinson.” Time.com. 20 Apr. 2003. <http://www.time.com/time/time100/heroes/profile/robinson01.html.
Dukcevich, Davide. “The NBA Is Blowing It.” Forbes.com 18 Dec. 2001. 20 Apr. 2003. <http://www.forbes.com/2001/12/18/1218nba.html>.
Greenstone, Daniel. “Unfree Agents: Globalization and the Future of Chinese Basketball.” PopPolitics.com 27 June 2002. 20 Apr. 2003. <http://www.poppolitics.com/articles/printerfriendly/2002-06-27-globalization.shtml>.
Hunter, David. “U.S. could bury Cuba in capitalism but sticks with relics of the past” KnoxNews.com 27 May 2002. 20 Apr. 2003. <http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/opinion_columnists/ article/0,1406,KNS_364_1170779,00.html>.
Locke, Richard M. “The Promise and Perils of Globalization: The Case of Nike” MIT’s Sloan School of Business Website. 20 Apr. 2003. <http://mitsloan.mit.edu/50th/nikepaper.pdf>.
Morning Almanac. 23 Oct. 2003. <http://www.newmorningtv.tv/dailyalmanac_102302.jsp>.
Narducci, Marc. “So far, Yao stands tallest in world or marketing.” The Philadelphia Inquirer 4 Apr. 2003. 20 Apr. 2003. <http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/5553679.htm>.
Peterson, Luke. “The Globalized Assoociation.” PopMatters.com 28 Jan. 2003. 20 Apr. 2003. http://www.popmatters.com/sports/features/030128-globalnba.shtml.
________________________________________