PDA

View Full Version : Olympic Pros?



Mr. P
08-19-2008, 12:34 AM
Should pro athletes be allowed to compete in the Olympics?
By "pro" I mean someone who is on a pro team and employed as a player.
I can argue both yes and no but really lean to NO.

How do you feel about this issue?

diuretic
08-19-2008, 06:27 AM
I think it's okay to have professional athletes compete. My reasoning for that is that during the days of the Soviet bloc (the old USSR and its satellites) so many athletes were in the military. In effect they were in training the whole time. Other nations which didn't do that fielded athletes who gave up their jobs to train for years. That improved when governments started to offer their athletes some help in joining national sports programmes. I think the distinction blurred then and I don't think it's relevant today.

KitchenKitten99
08-19-2008, 09:07 AM
I really don't care as long as they are good enough to take the golds home. If pro players give us the advantage, then so be it. They are athletes who are employed full time to play the sport itself. There might be some players out there who just don't want to be in the professional sports teams, but are just as good. Maybe do trials and tests for anyone wanting to be on the olympic teams? That would give anyone wanting to test their skills, a fair shot at it without being on a pro team.

theHawk
08-19-2008, 09:27 AM
Should pro athletes be allowed to compete in the Olympics?
By "pro" I mean someone who is on a pro team and employed as a player.
I can argue both yes and no but really lean to NO.

How do you feel about this issue?

I would say no. I think that professional athletes have ruined the Olympics.

dan
08-19-2008, 10:04 AM
No. Certain countries have many, many advantages available to their professional athletes, certain countries have methods that rub right up against the illegal line in order to get their athletes in supreme shape. It just offers too many variables for people to get a medal for something that they get paid a ton of money to do, anyway. Save it for someone who will really appreciate it, i.e. the kid who works his/her ass off but never went pro for whatever reason. They're the ones who deserve it.

jackass
08-19-2008, 10:13 AM
I would say no as long as all countries follow suit. If other countries are going to use professionals ie: USSR, then all countries should be able to use them.

Hobbit
08-19-2008, 12:14 PM
I think they should be allowed. The Olympics always advertises itself as the way to determine who is the best in the world, but how can you say that when you deliberately exclude the people who probably are the best in the world? In effect, I think excluding pro athletes is punishing them for being good at a sport people are willing to pay to see. If swimming was as big a spectator sport as basketball, do you really think Michael Phelps wouldn't be rolling around in huge piles of cash?

I also don't buy the argument about 'not appreciating it.' Even if you're a pro, you almost never compete internationally except maybe one bordering country (like us competing with Canadian teams in baseball and hockey). The chance to compete for the gold medal in the Olympics is so much bigger.

Abbey
08-19-2008, 12:16 PM
I think they should be allowed. The Olympics always advertises itself as the way to determine who is the best in the world, but how can you say that when you deliberately exclude the people who probably are the best in the world? In effect, I think excluding pro athletes is punishing them for being good at a sport people are willing to pay to see. If swimming was as big a spectator sport as basketball, do you really think Michael Phelps wouldn't be rolling around in huge piles of cash?

I also don't buy the argument about 'not appreciating it.' Even if you're a pro, you almost never compete internationally except maybe one bordering country (like us competing with Canadian teams in baseball and hockey). The chance to compete for the gold medal in the Olympics is so much bigger.

Good points, H. You've convinced me.

manu1959
08-19-2008, 12:17 PM
what about all the swimmers that get full ride scholarships at american universities not to mention millions in endorsement cash.....

amateurs.......hardly.....

dan
08-19-2008, 12:35 PM
I think Michael Phelps probably has a pretty nice pile of cash to roll around on.

Pro athletes in the US, China, etc. train year-round, take all kinds of performance enhancers, have entire teams of specialists making sure that they are working to their full potential, I just don't think it's fair at all for athletes like that, who by the way already recieve mountains of accolades and cash, to be able to compete with people from small countries who don't have the financial stability to support their professional athletes like that.

manu1959
08-19-2008, 01:26 PM
I think Michael Phelps probably has a pretty nice pile of cash to roll around on.

Pro athletes in the US, China, etc. train year-round, take all kinds of performance enhancers, have entire teams of specialists making sure that they are working to their full potential, I just don't think it's fair at all for athletes like that, who by the way already recieve mountains of accolades and cash, to be able to compete with people from small countries who don't have the financial stability to support their professional athletes like that.

maybe you missed the part where most of the poor smaller countries athletes (swimming and track) go to american universities on full ride scholarships .....

dan
08-19-2008, 02:07 PM
maybe you missed the part where most of the poor smaller countries athletes (swimming and track) go to american universities on full ride scholarships .....

I would prefer to see a percentage on the number of Olympic athletes who actually get full scholarships to US universities before I comment fully, but there is a world of difference between a college-level athlete and a professional athlete.

Gaffer
08-19-2008, 03:29 PM
How about they take all the pro-sport stuff out of the competition. No baseball, soccer, hockey or basketball. That's where the pro's come into play anyway. You can watch those kind of games for months on end, why do they need to be in the olympics? Go back to the original games, track and field, gymnastics and swimming.

manu1959
08-19-2008, 03:33 PM
How about they take all the pro-sport stuff out of the competition. No baseball, soccer, hockey or basketball. That's where the pro's come into play anyway. You can watch those kind of games for months on end, why do they need to be in the olympics? Go back to the original games, track and field, gymnastics and swimming.

there is a professional track and field league in europe....

manu1959
08-19-2008, 03:35 PM
How about they take all the pro-sport stuff out of the competition. No baseball, soccer, hockey or basketball. That's where the pro's come into play anyway. You can watch those kind of games for months on end, why do they need to be in the olympics? Go back to the original games, track and field, gymnastics and swimming.

there is a professional track and field league in europe....and gymnastcis and swiming...according to google anyway....

Hobbit
08-19-2008, 04:24 PM
I would prefer to see a percentage on the number of Olympic athletes who actually get full scholarships to US universities before I comment fully, but there is a world of difference between a college-level athlete and a professional athlete.

I can't speak for other sports, but I know that a large number of swimmers come to the U.S. or Australia to train. I know that really fast girl from Zimbabwe trained in Georgia, and given a little time, I could probably name others.

In the end, though, there's a place you have to stop. If you kick out everybody who gets a lot of money put into their training, who's left? Sure, the guys who swim for places like Lithuania and Swaziland are still in place, but the guys who go to the Olympics for the U.S. probably wouldn't even be able to place at nationals.

The idea of excluding people based on the resources available for their training is just another enactment of wealth envy and presents athletes with a very difficult and stupid choice. Do they a) accept scholarships and grants allowing them access to really good coaches and facilities, thus fully live up to their potential or do they b) go with whatever they can get on their own income and maintain the ability to enter the Olympics? As long as the only thing a person brings into the competition is their body and whatever equipment is required (no drugs, mechanical enhancement, etc.), I don't see the problem with inviting whoever's good.

No1tovote4
08-19-2008, 04:47 PM
Previous to when the US began to allow "pros" to participate the US often found themselves on the wrong end of that rule. While the USSR and other nations would segregate and perfect their athletes ours were often sub-par because they could not afford the time it took to gain that level of perfection.

Mr. P
08-19-2008, 05:38 PM
How about they take all the pro-sport stuff out of the competition. No baseball, soccer, hockey or basketball. That's where the pro's come into play anyway. You can watch those kind of games for months on end, why do they need to be in the olympics? Go back to the original games, track and field, gymnastics and swimming.

That's pretty much how I feel about it, Gaffer.

I always looked at the Olympics as the ultimate test of the best amateur athletes. The tide turned several years ago and I'm afraid there's no going back.

I'm just a fossil I guess.

Dilloduck
08-19-2008, 06:53 PM
That's pretty much how I feel about it, Gaffer.

I always looked at the Olympics as the ultimate test of the best amateur athletes. The tide turned several years ago and I'm afraid there's no going back.

I'm just a fossil I guess.

It was just becoming IMPOSSIBLE to enforce.

Yurt
08-20-2008, 12:09 AM
professional amateurs.....

Immanuel
08-20-2008, 02:16 PM
As far as I am concerned, the day they allowed pros into the Olympics was the day the drove the death nail into its heart. I don't care whether or not America is more competitive now than before, but the Spirit of the Olympics to me was always amateur athletes competing against each other without pros to be the best.

If Russia or other Communist countries cheated before then that was their loss. The American amateurs were good enough to compete with so-called Russian amateurs.

I don't like the NBA as it bores me to tears. Why would I want to watch "The Dream Team" win every game by 30 points or more? {Yawn}

And NBC is another problem. This year has been better but in prior Olympics they generally showed 2 hours of actual competition per day and 18 hours of "Up Close and Personal" with the athletes.

The Pros and NBC need to go.

Immie