Buftex Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 So, the US shouldn't put their very best athletes into competition, even though they are following the same rules as all other countries? How unpatriotic is that? I agree, it isn't particularly entertaining basketball, but (I guess I am in the minority) I don't find most college basketball all that compelling either...if the IOC changed the rules, where nobody could play professionals in any sport, I am on board with that...but until that happens, there is no reason that NBA players shouldn't represent the USA in Olympic basketball...there are plenty of Olympic sports that are tilted toward one country or another...USA dominates in basketball...simple as that. International players get better all the time, in part, I think, because we have so many NBA players on the Olympic teams...some day, maybe not in our life time, but maybe, some other country will knock the US off the basketball perch...until then, deal with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 So, the US shouldn't put their very best athletes into competition, even though they are following the same rules as all other countries? How unpatriotic is that? I agree, it isn't particularly entertaining basketball, but (I guess I am in the minority) I don't find most college basketball all that compelling either...if the IOC changed the rules, where nobody could play professionals in any sport, I am on board with that...but until that happens, there is no reason that NBA players shouldn't represent the USA in Olympic basketball...there are plenty of Olympic sports that are tilted toward one country or another...USA dominates in basketball...simple as that. International players get better all the time, in part, I think, because we have so many NBA players on the Olympic teams...some day, maybe not in our life time, but maybe, some other country will knock the US off the basketball perch...until then, deal with it! Not changing the rules so much as puting them back to where they started. The olympic ideal was AMATEUR competition. A fine tradition IMO. Not pro's popping in on a lark to say they won a gold medel. Jim Thorpe lost his medals because he got $2.00 a game playing ML baseball. Unfair? Probably. Did the committee enforce the amateurs only in the olympics rule? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) They changed the men's soccer eligibility rules this year to 2 players over age 23'and everyone else under. It gutted the talent and interest in Olympic soccer and that's way more popular than hoops. The IOC could change the rules. This is not new. This age requirement went into effect in 1992. The men's team is U-23 with 3 (not 2) older players allowed. There is no age restriction for the women. FIFA trumps the IOC when it comes to soccer. They pushed this age restriction for the men because they didn't want the Olympic soccer tournament to rival the World Cup, or the other regional (Euro, CONCACAF, CONMEBOL,...) championships. Edited August 1, 2012 by gringo starr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The trap... Right place and right time... Will never happen like that again... The Soviets didn't know what hit them till it was too late. Great for the Americans... Hockey by nature is a very flukey game too... Not being unpatriotric... But take it for what it was... Soviets were ripe for the picking... Brooks saw a kink and exploited it... This is true. Look at how often the #7 and 8 seeds advance in the nhl vs the nba. Upsets can happen in basketball, but there's no lucky bounce of the puck off someone's skate. Our college kids would get wrecked by the Spains of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 This would be a problem if it was another countries "Dream Team" dominating the US, but right now, its a guaranteed gold medal for the US as theres no other country that can compete with them and give them a run. They have talked about removing womens hockey fromt eh winter games because the Canadians and US teams dominate everyone else and its not close, so why isn't there talk of removing mens basketball from the games? Atleast with mens hockey, theres more then 2 dominant teams and theres a chance for upsets One of the issues you could run into with the team sports being allowed to use Pros to make their teams is at what level (or what leagues) will be considered pro? Using hockey as an example, the NHL is obviously pro, so the KHL would need to also be considered the same, but would you classify something like the AHL or ECHL or one fo the other "minor leagues" as pro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 This would be a problem if it was another countries "Dream Team" dominating the US, but right now, its a guaranteed gold medal for the US as theres no other country that can compete with them and give them a run. They have talked about removing womens hockey fromt eh winter games because the Canadians and US teams dominate everyone else and its not close, so why isn't there talk of removing mens basketball from the games? Atleast with mens hockey, theres more then 2 dominant teams and theres a chance for upsets One of the issues you could run into with the team sports being allowed to use Pros to make their teams is at what level (or what leagues) will be considered pro? Using hockey as an example, the NHL is obviously pro, so the KHL would need to also be considered the same, but would you classify something like the AHL or ECHL or one fo the other "minor leagues" as pro? Yes... The AHL and ECHL are very much professional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) This would be a problem if it was another countries "Dream Team" dominating the US, but right now, its a guaranteed gold medal for the US as theres no other country that can compete with them and give them a run. They have talked about removing womens hockey fromt eh winter games because the Canadians and US teams dominate everyone else and its not close, so why isn't there talk of removing mens basketball from the games? Atleast with mens hockey, theres more then 2 dominant teams and theres a chance for upsets One of the issues you could run into with the team sports being allowed to use Pros to make their teams is at what level (or what leagues) will be considered pro? Using hockey as an example, the NHL is obviously pro, so the KHL would need to also be considered the same, but would you classify something like the AHL or ECHL or one fo the other "minor leagues" as pro? They would have to be considered professional leagues. It's not like those players play for free in those leagues. If the IOC ever reverts back to amateur only status, it would be interesting to see how many players decide to postpone their professional careers in order to be eligible to represent their countries in the Olympics. My bet is, not many would. Edited August 1, 2012 by K-9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 This would be a problem if it was another countries "Dream Team" dominating the US, but right now, its a guaranteed gold medal for the US as theres no other country that can compete with them and give them a run. They have talked about removing womens hockey fromt eh winter games because the Canadians and US teams dominate everyone else and its not close, so why isn't there talk of removing mens basketball from the games? Atleast with mens hockey, theres more then 2 dominant teams and theres a chance for upsets Except 2004. The US men's basketball team is capable of losing. They are usually the best team but they are not a gauranteed gold. This isn't 1992. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Except 2004. The US men's basketball team is capable of losing. They are usually the best team but they are not a gauranteed gold. This isn't 1992. And 1972 and 1988. Although we got royally hosed by the refs in 1972. Still, it was that close and clearly demonstrated the world was catching on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 And 1972 and 1988. Although we got royally hosed by the refs in 1972. Still, it was that close and clearly demonstrated the world was catching on. The other years had no NBA players but you're right. Basketball is a US dominated sport but the world is pretty good. Not everyone is Angola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Spain gave them a tough game for the gold in 2008, also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The other years had no NBA players but you're right. Basketball is a US dominated sport but the world is pretty good. Not everyone is Angola. True, there were no NBA players but I think that speaks to the point about those that want to have only our college players in the Olympics. I think against the likes of Spain, Lithuania, Russia, and other European pros, our college guys, while competitive, would be hard-pressed to medal, let alone win a gold. That '88 team had some damn good players on it and they couldn't get it done. The rest of the world has gotten even better in the 24 years since. I just don't think it would be long before those old cries about sending our best players returned. If there's one thing we can't stand more than winning in a rout, it's losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optometric Insight Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) Its about winning the Gold, that's all the people who choose the teams think about. Not about the few that say that collegiate players should play. And could you honestly say that you would rather see the Bills play with collegiate players and go 0-16 rather than play with the best of the best and win a whole bunch of games by multiple points? Many people are hardcore USA basketball fans that have waited 4 years to watch them play and they want to see the USA win just like us hardcore Bills fans want to see the Bills win. Edited August 1, 2012 by Teen Insight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Its about winning the Gold, that's all the people who choose the teams think about. Not about the few that say that collegiate players should play. And could you honestly say that you would rather see the Bills play with collegiate players and go 0-16 rather than play with the best of the best and win a whole bunch of games by multiple points? Many people are hardcore USA basketball fans that have waited 4 years to watch them play and they want to see the USA win just like us hardcore Bills fans want to see the Bills win. Actually, the other posters here are right. It's about making sure the field is level. The US college players wouldn't medal unless the other countries went with amateurs too. If pros can play, the only way to make it fair is to send US pros for the US team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Anybody have Nigeria +82? 'Cause you lost! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Please use spoiler tags if u are gonna talk about outcomes.... some of us enjoy watching even if we know the probable outcome!!! Anybody have Nigeria +82? 'Cause you lost! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Unlike pro sports leagues, the Olympics have nothing to do with parity IMO. If the other teams get crushed, they get crushed. It's our best vs. their best. The Chinese dominate diving, South Koreans dominate speed skating, Kenyans dominate long distance running. I don't see any of those nations evening the playing field by sending their "B" teams. Really good point. It still isn't very entertaining this way. But you are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Please use spoiler tags if u are gonna talk about outcomes.... some of us enjoy watching even if we know the probable outcome!!! Um, the game was shown live by NBC. I figured if NBC didn't want to keep it a secret it was ok to spill the beans. Besides, they aren't replaying this game. I promise not to tell you who won the women's all-around in gymnastics nor will I tell you how Phelps vs. Lochte went down in the 200m IM. Deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 I understand it was shown live...at 5:15 as i am finishing up work and travelling home....i'm not busting on you, solely...just a culmination of things....the other night on facebook, someone posted at 8PM that phelps broke the medal record, despite the broadcast on nbc not showing it until 11:30 PM...still thoroughly enjoyed watching the race...i would just prefer and request that if you, me, others want to talk about results, we wait until the next day...there is no excuse by then to not know...i have purposely avoided a lot of news outlets and some have done a good job of masking results but having headlines that say the results are in but they are within the body of the article.... I seem to be one of the rare ones on this board that enjoy watching the coverage from 8-12, and i know the hoops game wasn't part of that, but in the days of dvr, its not too much to expect some might be tape delaying it on their own accord to watch it when they are able. ok, i'm done with my 'rant'....now off to watch gabby douglass in a loving (but not creepy) manner.... Um, the game was shown live by NBC. I figured if NBC didn't want to keep it a secret it was ok to spill the beans. Besides, they aren't replaying this game. I promise not to tell you who won the women's all-around in gymnastics nor will I tell you how Phelps vs. Lochte went down in the 200m IM. Deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 I understand it was shown live...at 5:15 as i am finishing up work and travelling home....i'm not busting on you, solely...just a culmination of things....the other night on facebook, someone posted at 8PM that phelps broke the medal record, despite the broadcast on nbc not showing it until 11:30 PM...still thoroughly enjoyed watching the race...i would just prefer and request that if you, me, others want to talk about results, we wait until the next day...there is no excuse by then to not know...i have purposely avoided a lot of news outlets and some have done a good job of masking results but having headlines that say the results are in but they are within the body of the article.... I seem to be one of the rare ones on this board that enjoy watching the coverage from 8-12, and i know the hoops game wasn't part of that, but in the days of dvr, its not too much to expect some might be tape delaying it on their own accord to watch it when they are able. ok, i'm done with my 'rant'....now off to watch gabby douglass in a loving (but not creepy) manner.... You avoided news, but not the "USA men's basketball" thread? I feel like there's something to be learned here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts