Naps and I got in a drunken argument about this the other night (I know, weird). Anyways, my feeling is that the only sports that should be played in the olympics are the ones where winning a gold medal is the pinnacle of your sport. So, that means, basketball, baseball, tennis, soccer, (golf) should NOT be olympic sports. Just my opinion, and Naps, I already know yours.
What does everyone else think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Normally, I agree with you RedDog. But that's phucking retarded. Why the hell would that be? The Olympics are a frickin spectacle of sport. They celebrate sport and nationalism. The only reason any sport is excluded is because it's a bunk sport and nobody plays it. I would like to hear this argument for why only "pinnacle of the sport is the Olympics" sports should be in the Olympics. The only reason it's the pinnacle of those sports are because there's no money to be made in some sort of professional league. That doesn't mean you shouldn't get the chance to rep your country. Look at Kobe and Lebron, those guys are richer than hell but they're busting their balls cause it's about the country not their egos. I can't believe I'm the first person to rip this post. Cripes.
Haha...'nuf said
sorry squints, i was busy, but like red dawg said, we already had this conversation. i'm sure you know how i feel.
haha, nice squints. My only argument for sports like basketball, golf, tennis etc...is that not ALL (yes Lebron and Kobe are there) of the best players in the world choose to play. This is because, as you said squints, there is to be no money made from the olympics. Andy Rodick did not choose to represent his country? Why? Kevin Garnett? Tim Duncan? Tracy McGrady? etc etc etc. Tiger Woods hates playing in the Rider Cup and the Presidents Cup, and I'd be very surprised if he CHOSE to play for his country in the Olympics. When all of the best players in the world in the sports I have mentioned change their thinking and feel that representing their country is more important than money, I will change my thinking as well.
Lets talk about the argument for golf in the olympics. My previous argument stands, but more than that, golf is a game where the best player does not always win, in fact, the best player loses more often than he wins (Tiger Woods might be an exception). I can't think of any other Olympic sport where this is the case (possibly baseball, but not on the same level). Golf involves so much luck and chance that almost anyone with world class skill can win on any given day. This only adds to my previous argument. Why now, would the best players in the world go to the olympics if not only are they not going to make any money, but they will also probably not win a medal?
Post a Comment