Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="tomcat, post: 2476771, member: 961"] I don't watch Olympic coverage much, but I generally watch the women's basketball, at least a little. Count me among those who think this is a wonderful idea. There are only a dozen or so spots on the roster, and whenever a team is "picked," we all can predict, with near certainty, the vast majority of players who will be on it. So here's what happens: For all but maybe 16 players or so, there is absolutely zero chance or making the team, and for three or four others, you can make it only if you manage to beat out a superstar (hoping, all the while, that she's gotten past her prime and you can out-quick her). Maybe that's the way it's supposed to be, but I'm not so sure. What if he accepted way of doing things would be two-and-done? Those completing their second Olympics would retire gracefully, with all the honors from fans of a grateful nation. Each time a team was chosen, there would be lots of strong competition for however many spots were open, so a stronger, more motivated bench would be available. I am not saying this would make for a higher quality team. I am all but certain it would not. But it would put a lot of new faces in front of Olympic fans and would probably make coaching this new combination of players more challenging. The downside is that for some other countries that now can field a really good first-string team, retiring their stars would deplete the ranks. Please note that this idea has nothing to do with politics or giving players a turn (really?) or feeling that there are too many players from one team on the roster (I'm a UConn fan. How could I think that?). It probably stems from the fact that I am one of those dinosaurs who believe that when it comes to basketball and hockey and yes, any other sport where professional players are allowed to represent their country in Olympic competition, it was far better when only amateurs were allowed. Was the quality of play as good? Mostly no. Was the competition better? I for one think so. Was it more interesting? Go back to the "Miracle on Ice" days and tell me all those great back-stories about all the players weren't fascinating. They were people no one had heard of, and partly because they were unknown, they became real heroes. Diana Taurasi, say, may excel in the Olympics, but I don't think many people would consider her level of excellence to be heroic. However, I do sort of like the Holiday Inn Express idea. :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach