Giannakopoulos calls for CSKA's return and criticizes Olympiacos over the NBA stance

Panathinaikos owner Dimitris Giannakopoulos has publicly called for CSKA Moscow's return to the EuroLeague and directly criticized Olympiacos and several other clubs for opposing a plan to let the NBA take a deeper role in European basketball. The message was delivered through Instagram Story posts in which Giannakopoulos called CSKA Moscow, Real Madrid and Panathinaikos "great competitors" and argued that there can be no true champion of Europe without them. This is a story about league governance and owner-room politics, not about tactics or on-court performance.

Background: an owner with a direct stake

Giannakopoulos is one of the most powerful and controversial figures in European basketball. He is known for direct intervention, forceful public statements and for using social media as a pressure tool. That raises an important information-quality caveat: every substantive claim in this story comes from a single individual, and that individual holds a direct commercial interest in the outcome he is advocating. In other words, this is an advocacy source, not a neutral one.

The original report also shows no independent corroboration for any information point. There is no internal league document, no confirmation from EuroLeague leadership, and no response from Olympiacos or CSKA Moscow. Every figure and every procedural description — such as the claim that "a couple more teams" are opposed, or that CSKA Moscow's return is on the agenda — is therefore unverified. The reliability of the whole story must be read within that limit.

Two posts, one campaign

The core content of the two posts can be reduced to three messages. First, Giannakopoulos calls for CSKA Moscow's return to the EuroLeague. Second, he criticizes Olympiacos and a few other clubs for opposing NBA involvement in the EuroLeague. Third, he positions Panathinaikos, CSKA Moscow and Real Madrid as the pillars defending European basketball's identity.

The delivery method also matters. Giannakopoulos offers no detailed financial or legal argument. He uses symbolic and emotional language aimed at fans. A photo of him with CSKA Moscow president Andrey Vatutin circulates as a political signal: this is an alliance at leadership level, not merely a personal opinion.

Another notable point is how he refers to Jordi Bertomeu. The phrase "now without Jordi" implies that the EuroLeague is in a power-transition phase after its long-serving chief executive left his post. In that context, owners are competing to shape the new order.

The call to bring CSKA Moscow back

Giannakopoulos's argument about CSKA Moscow is more symbolic than technical. He does not discuss qualification places, licensing mechanisms or financial conditions. He talks about history and prestige: CSKA Moscow, Real Madrid and Panathinaikos are the three names that built European basketball, and without them the title loses legitimacy.

This is a brand-equity argument dressed as a sporting-fairness argument. It implicitly devalues the sporting merit of newer EuroLeague entrants, clubs that may have earned their place through results on the court. At the same time, it converts a political question — CSKA Moscow's exclusion from European competition amid a complex geopolitical context — into a question about the "integrity of basketball".

It must be stressed that CSKA Moscow is a club with a Russian identity, and its absence from European competitions is tied to factors outside purely sporting boundaries. The original report only touches this dimension indirectly, so any conclusion about the practical likelihood of CSKA Moscow's return should be placed at a high level of uncertainty.

The criticism of Olympiacos

The most controversial part of Giannakopoulos's statement is that he names Olympiacos explicitly. He argues that clubs opposing the NBA plan are "well treated currently" and that they fear being excluded from future selection. He also offers a line that has been widely quoted: "Basketball is not a toy for rich children."

The line is a rhetorical reversal. Giannakopoulos, himself a wealthy owner, positions other wealthy owners as the negative archetype, thereby distancing himself from the very class he is describing. It is a memorable media device with strong viral potential.

At a deeper level, his argument is about resource allocation. He implies that some clubs measure success by how much money is lost at the end of the year — that they survive on owner wealth rather than commercial viability. In economics, this is a public-choice style argument: those benefiting from the status quo resist change to protect their advantages.

Naming Olympiacos explicitly may be deliberate escalation. By turning a policy debate into a conflict between owners, Giannakopoulos pressures silent clubs to pick a side. It is a tactic that raises the political cost of visible opposition.

The NBA question and the European order

The biggest variable in this story is whether the NBA will take a deeper role in the EuroLeague. This is a macro trend reshaping European basketball as a whole. If NBA influence expands, the EuroLeague's revenue structure, media rights and brand value could shift substantially.

In that context, clubs with strong brands and global orientation — Panathinaikos, Real Madrid, CSKA Moscow — could benefit more. That creates a notable overlap between the "defending European identity" argument and the commercial self-interest of the biggest clubs themselves. It must be stressed that this is an inference, not a fact confirmed by the source.

On the opposing side, the most reasonable argument is that those clubs fear dilution of value or replacement within a new structure. If NBA involvement is seen as an existential threat, opposing it is rational behaviour in interest terms.

The power vacuum and the decision process

The real rule question here is not financial mechanics but shareholder governance. The EuroLeague does not operate under an NBA-style salary cap, luxury tax or apron architecture. Its clubs operate under Financial Fair Play-style rules, with spending caps as a share of revenue and break-even requirements.

The core question, then, is who has the authority to approve an NBA integration deal, and what the voting threshold is. If a super-majority is required, the "couple more teams" Giannakopoulos mentions could constitute a blocking minority. At that point the fight stops being about persuasion and becomes about arithmetic.

The phrase "now without Jordi" points to an authority gap. When the body that would normally adjudicate has not been clearly established, the very question of "who may approve" becomes contestable. That is a procedural loophole, and it is the largest structural risk in the whole story.

Two blocs are forming

The overall picture shows polarization forming inside the EuroLeague. On one side is the pro-NBA-integration bloc, with Panathinaikos as its spokesperson, CSKA Moscow as an aspirant and Real Madrid invoked as an ally. On the other side is the resistance bloc, with Olympiacos named explicitly and several clubs whose identities remain unknown.

Note that Real Madrid being invoked as an ally is only Giannakopoulos's phrasing. There is no evidence that Real Madrid has committed to a position. If Real Madrid does not confirm, this could become a reputational risk for Giannakopoulos.

Likewise, the number and identity of opposing clubs remains unverified. The real figure could be larger or smaller than portrayed. This is a point to watch, because it determines whether the opposition can muster a blocking minority.

The gap between statement and reality

A clear distinction is needed between a statement and its enforceability. Giannakopoulos presents CSKA Moscow's return as a priority that should be resolved, and presents NBA involvement as an inevitable trend. But the political feasibility of both is unproven. Club consent, not the will of the NBA or of a single owner, is the true binding constraint.

Rhetorical intensity in the statements is high, while the level of verifiable evidence is low. That is the classic signature of an overheated signal within a governance debate. Readers should discount the drama of the story to match the underlying evidentiary base.

Risks and ripple effects

The biggest risk is that the EuroLeague fractures into hostile blocs during a leadership transition. When decisions are made in an unsettled authority environment, they tend to lack legitimacy in the eyes of the losing side.

The second risk is the entanglement of CSKA Moscow's return with the NBA integration question. If both issues must be solved simultaneously, the political cost rises sharply and the chance of a deal falls.

The third risk concerns owner-to-owner relations. Naming Olympiacos explicitly turns a structural dispute into a direct conflict between two individuals, raising the chance of a durable rift.

At the macro level, this story sits at the intersection of two trends: the NBA's global expansion into Europe, and the reordering of European club basketball governance after the Jordi Bertomeu era. The outcome of this debate could reshape the commercial and competitive map of European basketball.

In information-value terms, the story has high industry value and high timeliness, but only low-to-moderate reference value. Every substantive claim comes from a party with a direct stake, and should be independently verified before use.

Conclusion

This is an advocacy-driven governance story, not a verified fact set. Its value lies in exposing an open fracture among EuroLeague owners at a moment of leadership transition. Its reliability, judged by source structure, is low.

What to watch going forward: whether Real Madrid publicly confirms or denies the implied alliance; the real number and identity of opposing clubs; whether CSKA Moscow's return becomes formally bundled with the NBA integration package; and who becomes the EuroLeague's next leadership figure after the Jordi Bertomeu era.