Should the tired Olympic theme song be retired?

DWill

What I really mean is should the Olympics themselves be phased out? The argument currently concerns whether to boycott the summer games in Bejing over the actions of the horribly repressive China regime. I tend to lean towards not boycotting on that one, feeling that the boycott of the Moscow Olympics in '80 (was it?) didn't do much good. If we participate in the games, we might pay more attention to what the Chinese are doing to Tibet, and the Chinese might possibly feel more heat. At any rate, I don't think that there is serious thought of the U.S. boycotting. GWB won't even consider skipping the opening ceremonies, an action that would have a meaningful impact.

But back to the larger question. It was my favorite sports commentator, Frank Deford on NPR, who said that the era of the Olympics is passing. The World Cup of soccer (football) is the global sporting event now, though we in the U.S. are not buying it. The Olympics, Deford charged, are a showcase mainly for sports that no one knows anything about or cares about other than for a few weeks every four years. To have the Olympics remain as a welfare progrtam for these sports is probably unjustified in terms of the immense costs of the games for whatever city is vainglorious enough to bid and win, and for the countries maintaining and sending teams.

Back when the world was larger, it was quite an event to get athletes from all over the world together for competition. Now, not so special.

He might have a point. I also have found that ever since professional athletes have been allowed to compete, I have cared much less. Sending our NBA players over to play other countries' pro players is a joke.

Nothing is forever, as Deford said.

Ophelia · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:24 am Post subject:

DWill · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 1:07 pm Post subject:

Ophelia,
Of course, avenues for competition for all these athletes would still exist, even in the form of world championships. It's not my impression that any sport depends for its existence on the Olympic games. It does represent a pinnacle of achievement for many lesser-known sports; I don't deny that. We get to watch a bit of these sports just because they are included in the Olympic games--but not much of many of them, as you say. Again, I'm thinking that the absence of the Olympics would not kill off the sports. I wouldn't want that.
Will

Ophelia · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 2:14 pm Post subject:

Perhaps the absence of the Oplympics would not kill off the sports, but the Olympics mean a lot to the athletes.
One might think we might as well watch the world championships, they're with the same sportsmen mostly, but from the disciplines I follow there is something special about the Olympics. i follow figure skating, and of course the skaters are happy to win the world championships, but they do build up their careers and efforts in view of the Olympics, and sometimes something special happens during the Olympics, as if they could reach into their souls for that sort of dream, a collective moment of sport that happens only every four years.

The thing that goes wrong with the O is the money, and mostly the investments and getting into debt for the host city.
I have never followed that up, if the buildings are used again fine, if not it's a waste. The idea of individual cities competing for their own glory or that of their country to host the games is strange to me, and money shouldn't be wasted on this if the country lacks for more basic things.

Tonight they showed on television the stadiums and infrastructure that was built in Athens for the previous games: only 30 % of the equipment has ever been used again, Athens is still paying off the debt and paying money to maintain all the unused facilities. They also pay for guards to prevent people from entering. Around it, it's just wasteland, they haven't done anything about the ecological park they were supposed to build.

I'm all for bringing some sense into all this and using those equipment that have already been built several times instead of just the one. One for the whole of Europe would be enough for example, they could keep using the one in Athens as far as I'm concerned. Why should a country go into debt so that some companies can make some profit for one summer?

DWill · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 11:20 pm Post subject:

I think it makes a tremendous amount of sense to have one Olympic site, just as in ancient times. It would be interesting to see if doing that would keep the games healthy or lead to an erosion of participation. Despite the craziness of building all these facilities to be used to capacity only once, leaders seem to get stars in their eyes thinking about grabbing all that attention.

President Camacho · Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:37 pm Post subject:

Regardless of what happens to the evolution of individual sports, it’s important for the Olympics to continue. The significance of the event is too large to extinguish it.

Although the games were originally a religious affair, it is what the games accomplished rather than why they were held (religious festival) that’s important. It fosters competition, enhances national pride, and creates real heroes. It also has the power to bring two unfriendly nations together. May the best person/country win!

The Olympics also provide a test. The people sent to the games are representing an entire nation. They are, ideally, the best of what a culture has to provide. This may not be applicable as much today as it was during 6th century BC but it is still something to consider.

I don’t think I cheer as loud watching any other sporting event than I do with the Olympics. I’m pretty skeptical of what my country does but when one man/woman sacrifices their life training, eliminates all other contenders inside the country, and steps up to take on the world…. They have my support!

I don’t agree with all the political interference with the games. I was talking with the old man the other day about this. He brought up a pretty good point that the athletes shouldn’t be cheated. I agree to a fault. It’s not about politics. If you want to prove you are better – do it on the field of competition. Don’t turn your back… rise to the challenge. It should be all the more reason to cheer our athletes on. Bring them to war and don’t forget your bull-horn and national flag.

There are many benefits that the Olympic games provide besides entertainment and enhanced national pride. It brings people together. Whoever has a chance to watch T.V. will see people from all over the world competing. It’s amazing. A person from a relatively unknown country can have a chance of putting his nation and himself in the spotlight. It’s awesome.

It also focuses everyone on greatness. It provides inspiration and motivates kids to become interested in sports, in competition, and in being the best through hard work and sacrifice.

On a sad note:

I have to admit that it’s a colossal economic booboo, though. I say it is worth it.

“The Athens Olympics 2004 operating expenses was estimated at 500 million Euros but the cost had grown up to a close 2 billion Euros. The state only covered 14% of the total costs. These expenditures were concentrated in the years 2003 and 2004, this has contributed to the widening of the governments budget deficit.”


	HOME	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT