Yao Ming Resigned and His CBA Reform: Destiny or Inadequacy?

IHistorical Synopsis

In the early years of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, a simple and efficient system was needed to develop the national sports team. It was at that time that the “three-tier athletic development system” was adopted as the national principle, and of course, basketball was a part of the plan. The three tiers, consisting of Sports Traditional Schools (primary and secondary sports schools), Sports Schools (high school level sports schools), and finally, National Training Teams or Provincial Professional Teams, were the designated places for all athletes.¹ The National Basketball League was completely made up of provincial professional teams, and college basketball at that time had no relationship with professional athletes. We can almost say for certain that during that period, the college sports in China were purely “amateur.” Imagine this: being born in Akron, Ohio, Lebron James grew up in a “sports school,” and could only play for the “Cleveland State Team” (no Cavaliers yet!) in his whole career.

The system did contribute to the rapid development of the national professional sports teams in the beginning. But over time, the system started to hold athletes back. Professional sports and school sports stayed completely separate, which made it harder for talent to develop in a well-rounded way.² Athletes had limited chances to grow individually, explore opportunities abroad, or blend sports training with academic education due to the provincial team’s full control over them.³ For example, Yao Ming’s journey to the NBA in 2002 was actually very difficult. According to Martin Fackler, Yao was initially forced to hand over half of his income to China’s government and sports authorities if he joined the NBA, and after tough negotiations, he finally received permission on the day of the draft.⁴

Having lived through the system himself, Yao Ming—one of China’s biggest basketball stars—saw both its strengths and its serious flaws. After retiring from the NBA, he took on the challenge of reforming Chinese basketball. In 2017, he was appointed as the President of the CBA (Chinese Basketball Association), and under his leadership, the CBA officially separated from direct government control and set up the CBA Company. Yao’s reforms focused on a few big things: making the league more competitive and commercialized (introducing the CBA Draft and promoting player trades), fixing youth training systems (“Little Basketball” programs for kids and developing CUBA (Chinese University Basketball Association)), professionalizing the referee industry, and trying to bring Chinese basketball closer to international standards.⁵ His goal was to modify the rigid system while still keeping some of the government support that had helped Chinese sports succeed in the past. However, due to the men’s national basketball team’s continued decline in performance (for example, failing to qualify for the Tokyo Olympics), Yao Ming has to quit his position in 2024.⁶

IIEthical Analysis

From the virtue ethics perspective, Yao Ming showed a lot of courage and good judgment in the reform. Growing up under the three-tier system, he knew what needed to be changed and stepped up for real change. He was going against a lot of powerful people and traditions since the players who came from provincial teams were long considered “property” of the team, which was ridiculous in a commercialized league. His clear long-term vision was also important during his career as the president. Yao knew that if we wanted the Chinese basketball industry to truly grow, we needed a more supportive environment. That’s the reason why he put great effort into developing school basketball programs, pushing for referee professionalization, etc. Lots of people only focus on the current failure of the Chinese men’s basketball team and blame it on Yao, but they ignore the fact that reform needs time to see its effect, especially when facing a huge and rigid system that China used to have. “Actions are as important as intentions,” and both Yao’s actions and intentions are virtuous.⁷

From the deontology point of view, Yao’s reforms were the right thing to do because they respected the players’ basic rights and did not treat them as tools. Before his changes, a lot of athletes had almost no say over their own careers. Yao fought to fix that by making the CBA more commercialized and giving players clearer chances to move and grow. You can see the impact too: after his reforms, more Chinese players like Zhou Qi and Cui Yongxi got the chance to play in the NBA or in Australia. Players from the women’s league, like Li Meng and Han Xu, have been able to join the WNBA and other international leagues and even become star players.⁸ We can also see more and more young athletes attending American schools for elite training, and all those things are hard to imagine before his reform.

IIIAnalytic Conclusion

Let’s go back to the topic. What led to the resignation of Yao Ming? I think the “inadequacy” is the lack of time, and the “destiny” is the deep-rooted system. Yao’s reforms were ambitious, but structural changes cannot happen in just a few years, especially when he chose the bottom-up approach. But his seven years of effort were far from useless. More and more players start to get benefits from competing and training abroad, and more players are pursuing opportunities in the NBA Draft, such as Zeng FanBo and Cui Yongxi. Athletes’ performances from CUBA are becoming more and more competitive, and the first pick of 2023, Chen Guohao, exploded for 20 points, 10 rebounds, and 5 blocks in his CBA debut. The national female basketball team has already risen to second place in the world, and people are paying more attention and money to the WCBA (Women’s Chinese Basketball Association).⁹ Young athletes are entering D1 NCAA schools, such as Dan Houran and Wang Junjie.¹⁰ The seeds have already been planted, and all they need is time to blossom.

On the other hand, Yao’s reforms harmed the interests of many traditional strong teams that held onto their star players using the regulations. The clash between CBA star Zhou Qi and the Xinjiang Guanghui Basketball Club is an example. In 2022, Zhou Qi and the Xinjiang Guanghui Basketball Club had a major dispute over the contract. Zhou Qi wanted more flexibility to pursue opportunities overseas, but the club refused to let Zhou Qi go. The disagreement escalated when Xinjiang refused to release Zhou Qi or offer a fair contract, leading to his decision to sit out the CBA season. In 2023, with tensions still running high over salary cap rules and Yao Ming’s push for player rights reforms, the Xinjiang team suddenly pulled out of the CBA, claiming “CBA’s unfair behavior.”¹¹ Many people, particularly local fans from Xinjiang, viewed this incident as another piece of proof of the difficulties—and, in their eyes, the failure—of Yao Ming’s reform efforts.

The main idea of Yao Ming’s reforms was a simple but important idea: athletes deserve the right to control their own careers. The traditional system has treated players like property, tying them to teams and limiting their choices for too long. Yao tried to make the CBA a place where athletes could have real agency—the right to move, to compete, and to grow without being trapped within certain teams. This matters because rights are the foundation of any healthy sports system, and without them, real development is impossible. Players’ hard work should lead them to better opportunities, not just for the benefit of a few teams. Yao’s resignation shows how hard it is to change a system that resists giving up control, but the changes he made—more chances abroad and more respect for athletes—are not going away. His work matters because it opened a door that cannot easily be closed again. We can see more and more athletes seeking opportunities both through transfers and playing abroad. After all, fighting for athletes’ rights is about fairness, dignity, and the future of Chinese basketball.

End of essay · NOUS Review