2004 Summer Olympics

minnemooseus,I am curious about your attitude on this issue. Why shouldn't the Olympic games include the very best athletes from each country? What difference does what they do for a living make?Most countries have been sending their professional athletes to the games for decades and it is a more recent thing for the U.S. In the past, we were sending our kids to play against their men. The U.S.'s joining in the fray simply leveled the playing field.To insist on totally amateur Olympic participants in the games would be unenforceable on a gigantic scale.I like the idea of a level playing field though.verzem

I agree that the Miracle on Ice was something very special. Our kids defeating the Russian professionals was a stunning victory.Our basketball pros versus all the other basketball pros is a level field. And at least they don't play each other regularly so it is fresh. And U. S. success is far from a given in basketball this Olympics. There are some very good teams competing. I agree that Olympic tennis is about the same as the pro circuits and so, is not special.I could get behind a totally amateur Olympic Games if it was somehow enforceable.Verzem

I saw it coming. The U.S. team has too many players at the three position and not enough twos. For international competition, you have to be able to shoot the three because of the zone defenses.The days of throwing a bunch of stars together for a few games and then going over and dominating by athletic ability alone are gone.From here on out, the U.S. will have to put together a team that plays together for years and is always playing internationally. The key word here is team. It can no longer be a loose collection of stars.Hopefully, we will learn our lesson from this.Verzem