I never was a fan of allowing professional athletes to take part in the Olympics. Duane Wade ain't helping me turn that opinion around.
Mostly because, well, stuff like this:
And this.
Paid professional Oympians are an oxymoron anyway.
Leave the Olympics to the amateurs.
I've always though that change was the downfall of the Olympics.
ReplyDeleteI could not agree more with you Gentlemen.
ReplyDeleteI always thought it opulent watching USA obliterate nations like Angola. The way they ran over them was pitiful no matter how in awe the Angolans were.
ReplyDeleteI don't blame the players for showing no mercy. They're professionals. But it's yet another reason why to keep the pros at home. USA basketball made its point: USA rules the sport despite strong nations out there.
Hockey is different. At least the six or seven countries that compete are roughly on the same level. Still, I wouldn't allow it. We got the point.
Soccer uses a mix of players - some pros - but very little of them are top tier players. Pro soccer players play way too many games at the pro level anyway. Between the World Cup, Copa America, Euro and a host of club tournaments, it's a miracle they don't get injured more often. The calls for pros in soccer have thankfully been silent.
I know little about these things, but I always thought soccer is played only at the pro level.
ReplyDeleteIt is. Only hockey and basketball make a point of sending pros. Tennis too. I don't see the point except for money.
ReplyDeleteSoccer is more complicated. The weaker confederations (Africa, North/Central America, Asia) are allowed to field their strongest professional sides. Europe and South America are not. FIFA did this because they do not want to see the Olympics rival the World Cup even though they allowed pros to increase the popularity of the game at the Olympics.
What most European sides do is send their young prospects. It's sort of a training camp.
Hence, why African teams do so well.