Last month, the NBA's competition committee reportedly approved a motion to move the Finals back to a 2-2-1-1-1 format (2 games at home for the higher seed, 2 games at home for the lower seed, one away higher, one away lower, Game 7 at home for the higher seed). It still had to be approved.
At the owner's meetings on Wednesday, the league voted to approve the change.
NBA owners unanimously approved Finals format change to 2-2-1-1-1. Had been 2-3-2 since 1985.— Brian Windhorst (@WindhorstESPN) October 23, 2013
Stern says it was unfair for team with better record to be away three games & spend eight days on road. "Easy sell," Stern said.— Marc J. Spears (@SpearsNBAYahoo) October 23, 2013
Stern has a point here. Protecting the "advantage of the higher seed is important for the integrity of the game. You play the game, supposedly, for a reason, and your success should provide you with an advantage, if there is to be one.
I for one am still in favor of moving Games 3 and 4 to neutral court somewhere fancy, like Vegas or New Orleans, to make it more of a spectacle. The Finals already stretch on forever, might as well make it more fun.
You wonder what teams could have been effected by this change in the past. Do the Heat take Game 5 back in their home building and avoid having to go seven and their brush with elimination?
Hard not to wonder what a 2-2-1-1-1 format would've done to the 2012 Finals for the Thunder. Having that Game 5 in OKC would've been huge.— Royce Young (@royceyoung) October 23, 2013
Either way, this is the new law, and it means more travel if a series goes long, but a more fair set up for the better team up front.