Overview of Why Colin Is PRO Tanking, When Should LeBron Retire? 24 Team CFP? NBA Needs To Make Changes
This episode (The Volume / iHeartPodcasts) is a wide-ranging sports conversation led by Colin (the main host) with Danny Parkins and guests. They debate NBA tanking, the stylistic health of basketball, LeBron James’ future, and the idea of a 24-team college football playoff. The hosts mix philosophical takes about attention economics and sports entertainment with concrete rule-change suggestions for leagues.
Key topics covered
- Why Colin is pro-tanking in the NBA
- The ethics and optics of teams resting/sitting players (Utah example)
- How the three-point revolution has changed the NBA’s style and physicality
- Concrete league-change proposals (NBA experimentation, expansion, season length)
- LeBron James: potential retirement timing, legacy vs. economics
- College football playoff expansion (24 teams): pros, cons, and implications
- Broader trends: NIL, transfer portal, athlete wealth, and attention fragmentation
Main arguments & takeaways
On tanking
- Colin’s thesis:
- We live in a distracted-media age; regular seasons (long, repetitive) draw weaker audiences than marquee events.
- Tanking is a rational strategy to build dynasties quickly—getting top draft picks (e.g., Spurs getting Duncan, OKC picks) can transform franchises.
- Banning trades or removing draft picks feels punitive and may not solve the problem.
- Counterpoints (Danny and others):
- Purposeful resting/sit-outs (e.g., Utah sitting players late in games) undermine the competitive product and fan experience.
- There are moral/entertainment costs: fans paid to see meaningful competition.
- Possible middle ground suggested:
- Modify draft rules (e.g., limits on top-four consecutive picks, tweak protections) to reduce incentives for blatant, season-long tanking.
On style of play and player health
- Claim: Players have become so proficient at three-point shooting that the game’s artistry and physical playoff-style battles are diminished.
- Result: more spacing, more sprinting/covering, higher load management, and certain injury types (e.g., Achilles) rising.
- Proposed stylistic fixes:
- Experiment with rule changes in an in-season tournament (try different court/rule setups).
- Suggested drastic thought-experiments: move the three-point arc inward (to the bench) or remove the corner three to encourage mid-range/inside play and physicality.
- Use in-season or G League settings to trial tweaks before league-wide adoption.
On league structure changes
- NBA proposals discussed:
- Expand to 32 teams (add Seattle, Vegas), cut regular season to ~70 games — more rest, potentially fewer load-management issues, extra franchises increase revenue and fan interest.
- Use the in-season tournament as a lab to try new rules.
- Comparison to MLB:
- Baseball used its minor leagues to trial meaningful rule changes (pitch clock, etc.); NBA could emulate that iterative approach.
On LeBron James’ future
- Consensus: LeBron could physically play multiple more years and remains a box-office draw; money and lifestyle incentives make staying attractive.
- Legacy considerations:
- Some hosts would prefer a clean, cinematic retirement (e.g., going back to Cleveland) rather than a diminished final chapter.
- Likely outcome predicted: LeBron will seek a farewell tour rather than abruptly retiring.
On college football playoff expansion (24 teams)
- Arguments for 24 teams:
- Adds November/December significance and broader interest because transfer portal and NIL have increased roster quality and parity.
- Reduces committee power; more teams have a real shot.
- Concerns:
- Early-round blowouts (mismatch games) and dilution of regular-season “meaning” for certain marquee rivalry games.
- Logistical questions about scheduling, home-game economics, and maintaining rivalry importance.
- Overall leaning: hosts are optimistic—more football equals more engagement, and many fans will tune in if stakes increase.
Notable quotes & soundbites
- “We’re a distracted nation… events do really well. The regular season struggles.” — rationale for preferring marquee events/dynasties.
- “The players have gotten too good. They have broken the game — it’s become a jump-shooting contest.” — on the three-point era’s impact.
- “I’m okay with tanking if the rules disallow sweeping trades… you can’t become OKC overnight anymore.” — acknowledging causes and limits of tanking logic.
- On LeBron: “He’s box office… people would pay to see him — that’s a real value beyond wins and losses.”
Specific recommendations mentioned
- NBA
- Limit the ability to pick top-4 in back-to-back years (or similar rule) to curb repeat high picks.
- Shrink/adjust pick-protection mechanics on traded picks to reduce manipulation.
- Expand to 32 teams and shorten to a ~70-game season.
- Use the in-season tournament as a sandbox to trial rule changes (court, three-point line placement, trapezoidal lane, etc.).
- Hire basketball historians/legends to advise on product evolution (a la hiring former stars/coaches to consult).
- College football
- Consider a 24-team playoff to increase late-season importance and reflect the pro-level talent on many rosters brought by transfer portal/NIL.
Broader context & implications
- Attention economics: with streaming, social media, and many entertainment choices, leagues must create events that cut through noise.
- Athlete economics: NIL and higher pay create older, more professionalized college rosters and generational wealth that changes competitive incentives and athlete engagement.
- Entertainment vs. competition trade-off: maximizing TV/merch/ticket value sometimes conflicts with preserving competitive integrity and local fan trust.
Actionable takeaways (for league execs, media, and fans)
- Leagues should experiment aggressively but transparently — use midseason tournaments or developmental leagues to trial rule changes before full adoption.
- Consider structural changes that align player health, economics, and fan engagement: e.g., season length, expansion, and draft rules.
- For fans: be aware that expanded playoffs (college) or more marquee events (NBA in-season trophies) may increase games that matter—this affects how you value regular-season contests.
- For media/critics: frame debates around outcomes—do changes increase engagement, fairness, and long-term product health?
Bottom line
This episode argues that many issues (tanking, load management, style-of-play) are interconnected and driven by a changing media landscape and athlete development. Solutions require a mix of immediate rule tweaks (draft protections, in-season experiments) and larger structural changes (season length, expansion, playoff formats). The hosts favor pragmatic experimentation: protect competitive integrity while adapting the product to how modern audiences consume sports.