Professionalism in the Olympics

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 23, 2008 1:36 AM GMT
    In your guy's opinion do you think if the IOC hadn't turned a blind eye to the Soviets in the 40's, and the original ideology of the Olympics being a purely amateur competition was still in effect today, would America and the other continuous power houses of the Games still be dominating the Games? Do you think that current professionals would choose to stay amateur in order to keep their Olympic eligibility or would the Olympics be a thing of the past?

    Just wondering what you guys think. I think assuming it never changed and continued with amateurism they would be a thing of the past. Thus power houses of today would no longer be power house for obvious reasons.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 23, 2008 3:14 AM GMT
    I think it really depends on the sport. With some of the sports in the Olympics it would be fairly difficult to be a professional in the traditional sense. How many people can actually make a living off of being a marathon runner, triathlete or wrestler? Sure you can cover some costs through sponsorship but there are very few people who make a living at those things. When it comes to other sports like basketball I think it would be far different today if they didn't allow pros in. Personally I would be more inclined to take an interest in the Olympics if professionals were not allowed in as it stands I mostly don't care.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 23, 2008 3:27 AM GMT
    I've never thought of it that way. Then again, I've never known much about the politics behind Olympic Sports and it's athletes. Sure, I do love all of Track and Field, Gymnastics, Ice Skating and Swimming events. The whole ceremony and the sportsmanship, aside from the occasional steriod abuse, is inspirational and something I look foward to every 4 years. I'm going to have to look into this, and I do know how long until I can give an honest thought out response to your post, but it's worth the investigation. Thanks Redneck4life.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 23, 2008 3:39 AM GMT
    i was just curious i'm reading this book - "Winning is the only thing- Sports in america since 1945" and they open talking about the Olympics and it got me thinking
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2008 9:55 AM GMT
    Well, if you look at other countries, they definitely don't put has much emphasis on WINNING as the US does, but hey, we've always been the winners, lol.

    Olympics, like anything, is the culmination of years of training for "amateur" athletes. It's all about the process (a think I hear so many time) yet in the US its all about medals. Well, thats good and all, but theres only 3 medals per event. Most of the athletes go to represent their country in what is supposed to be a peaceful time (yet, did we stop war in 2002? or 2006?) Its sad that the US Mens Basketball team has degraded into, people who think getting paid from commercials and endorsements (which is important, to make the living) is more important than being a world ambassador for your country.

    Well, as an athlete that most likely WONT be going pro in his sport, no, i don't think the US would be on top if pro athletes would be allowed. However, there's a lot of non-US athletes that are the top in the world and get paid for what they do. But, in some cases, its a necessary evil, because people need money to live and i think that because they are paid for what they do, a better product is being produced in terms of athletic achievement.