Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 95

Thread: Should Olympic basketball be for the U24 category ?

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R1ou View Post
    I think it'd be better to open a thread discussing about the current Olympic system,who deserves to play stuff etc.Would be nice to hear non-Europeans(actually my point would be Asians)I don't really know why some people insisted on the current system of qualification and found it fair and now it's even unknown if they'll manage it be at the WC.I mean,Asia sends automatically China,and Europe Lithuania and Spain.Like saying,that being gold at FIBA Asia is a better achievement than being bronze at Europe.
    But this isn't new. Top teams have always been left out. In 1988 Greece was probably the 4th best team in the world judging by their '87 and '89 Eurobasket results. A tight loss to Spain prevented them from qualifying. It has never been fair.
    And as long as the field is limited to 12 participants it will always be that way.

  2. #22
    Senior Member thegreekmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Lietuva (special for JGX)
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachZ View Post
    LOL. You are using terrible logic. Just finding excuses for each sport. I said Olympics is NOT the pinnacle of most important sports in the world. Not what they mean to countries that participate, what is their interest etc. etc.

    When u ask, what it means behind NBA and NHL. If it was more important than NHL or NBA, they would not keep cancelling They would make it a priority. Like I said in 2 out of top 10 sports in the world, Olympics are not the highest level of competition or the pinnacle of the sport. So yeah, if you are into fencing, archery, waterpolo and shit like that, yeah go Olympics.
    Your logic is flawed because you compare national teams vs clubs (nba, nhl). The corect comparison in terms of basketball: Olympics, World cup and Eurobasket.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,273
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon_Koncak View Post
    Olympics is much more prestigious than World Championships.That's just the way it is.Tony Parker has never played a WC in his career(cause he chose not to).USA sends way better teams in Olympics than in WC.It's not even close.Eurobaskets before an olympic year are much more stronger than the ones before WC.And i'm not sure using u23 teams in olympics would make World Cup more prestigious.It would just leave Basketball with no major tournament.
    First of all, that was entirely due to injuries and in the last WC due to wear and year, etc. They had just won the championship for Christ's sake. Second, there's a reason he's literally the only non-US player you can name. The World Championships are only seen as a joke by arrogant US players/owners/fans.

    Also, literally all of those great old players are retiring after this Olympics. It's why we've been looking forward to it and were to 2014 for so long. And all of them with the exception of Parker not only played in the WC but embraced it.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,273
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by usagre View Post
    I can't speak for other countries but I can almost guarantee you that for the USA its Olympics or nothing. So you would never see any great USA teams again. And how prestigious can an event be if the best team is not properly represented.
    The World Championships even with Nba star participation draws no interest in this country. Reruns of cartoon beat it in n the viewer ratings.
    I completely disagree with this. Not getting into the fact that only arrogant Americans share his view, the fact is a US U-24 team would still be stacked. Unfortunately we can't really know who will be for example the point guard (I think this is the slot you use on an older player than 23 or younger) but year after year the draft is producing very good wing players and especially big men. The US could for sure still dominate.

    Plus it puts the onus on us to actually develop our young players properly, something we desperately need.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CHBB View Post
    I completely disagree with this. Not getting into the fact that only arrogant Americans share his view, the fact is a US U-24 team would still be stacked. Unfortunately we can't really know who will be for example the point guard (I think this is the slot you use on an older player than 23 or younger) but year after year the draft is producing very good wing players and especially big men. The US could for sure still dominate.

    Plus it puts the onus on us to actually develop our young players properly, something we desperately need.
    Yeah I agree. USA could definitely still compete at a high level, I just meant we wouldn't see the super teams like '08 '12 usa.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CHBB View Post
    First of all, that was entirely due to injuries and in the last WC due to wear and year, etc. They had just won the championship for Christ's sake. Second, there's a reason he's literally the only non-US player you can name. The World Championships are only seen as a joke by arrogant US players/owners/fans.

    Also, literally all of those great old players are retiring after this Olympics. It's why we've been looking forward to it and were to 2014 for so long. And all of them with the exception of Parker not only played in the WC but embraced it.
    Although I agree that non us country players value the worlds a lot there have been some notable omissions.
    Tony Parker '06, '10 as well as '14. Manu Ginobili '10 and '14. Pau Gasol '10 and Sarunas Jasikevicius '06 and '10.
    And the quality of player at the '98 fiba worlds was probably the worst I can recall.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,273
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by usagre View Post
    Yeah I agree. USA could definitely still compete at a high level, I just meant we wouldn't see the super teams like '08 '12 usa.
    I think we definitely can. With how young players get drafted these days, with correct development you can field a younger super team. But the idea is that he super teams go to WC instead. This would boost the event so much it's not even funny.

    Quote Originally Posted by usagre View Post
    Although I agree that non us country players value the worlds a lot there have been some notable omissions.
    Tony Parker '06, '10 as well as '14. Manu Ginobili '10 and '14. Pau Gasol '10 and Sarunas Jasikevicius '06 and '10.
    And the quality of player at the '98 fiba worlds was probably the worst I can recall.
    TP got injured in qualifiers in '06 and in '10 was coming off a really physically demanding season a year after getting injured. I think it's more a matter of bad timing than anything. Manu only thing I can say is he was getting up there at that point. I mean he came over way late.

    But that also kind of proves my point. Without players like that, teams are seriously weakened. Imagine if two years before the WC those teams found out just who might be able to play where for them in the big games? That's exactly what soccer does in the Olympics. The kids playing there play in the WC in two years if they're good enough. As opposed to just sticking with the same handful of great players and praying it lasts.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Yeah good examples are 2006 and 2010 where USA worlds teams were dominated with under 24 players.
    2010 Durant, Westbrook, Rose, Love, Curry, Eric Gordon.
    2006 Lebron, Carmelo, Chris Paul, Bosh, D. Howard.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Dtown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Metro Detroit, MI
    Posts
    3,391
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R1ou View Post
    I think it'd be better to open a thread discussing about the current Olympic system,who deserves to play stuff etc.Would be nice to hear non-Europeans(actually my point would be Asians)I don't really know why some people insisted on the current system of qualification and found it fair and now it's even unknown if they'll manage it be at the WC.I mean,Asia sends automatically China,and Europe Lithuania and Spain.Like saying,that being gold at FIBA Asia is a better achievement than being bronze at Europe.
    The only change I would make is merge Oceania and Asia (which is happening after this year anyway), and give the extra spot that went to Oceania to Olympic qualifying. It is a global tournament so one guaranteed spot to Asia-Pacific and Africa is fine.
    Pistons: 2018-2019 In the middle of nowhere

    Bronze medal 2013 Eurobasket prediction Game.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,273
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by usagre View Post
    Yeah good examples are 2006 and 2010 where USA worlds teams were dominated with under 24 players.
    2010 Durant, Westbrook, Rose, Love, Curry, Eric Gordon.
    2006 Lebron, Carmelo, Chris Paul, Bosh, D. Howard.
    And in both cases, the players who participated and had to prove themselves on the world stage like that improved and became great players. 2010 especially showed what Durant, Gay, Love, Rose, and Westbrook could do. I remember EG and Steph didn't play great at times but yet both went on to really make that leap over the next two years. Durant especially has been on that level ever since he balled out in the Worlds. Which in turn strengthens both the NBA and then by extension the national team. And the more players get developed and get that opportunity, the more the talent pool grows for leagues around the world.

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,370
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dtown View Post
    The only change I would make is merge Oceania and Asia (which is happening after this year anyway
    Asia and Oceania will still each get their own spot in the Olympics under the new system though. Agree that it should only be one auto spot for Asia-Oceania combined.

    From what I've seen so far this summer, the US ought to send the U18s to the Olympics, they'd still probably beat China and Venezuela and it would be a good warmup for U19 WC next year.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedfan
    Most ppl get childish when they lose.
    Quote Originally Posted by GuTO
    refs in games of Spain walks with literally poop in his pants afraid of the Spanish players

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,273
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dtown View Post
    The only change I would make is merge Oceania and Asia (which is happening after this year anyway), and give the extra spot that went to Oceania to Olympic qualifying. It is a global tournament so one guaranteed spot to Asia-Pacific and Africa is fine.
    What's funny is that was an idea I had after 2012 I believe but I figured it would shortchange some Asian teams. But now the way I see it, Africa has stepped up athletically and skill-wise even if thy haven't been able to field complete solid teams, and it's time for Asia to do the same. China and the Philippines are literally the only two teams outside of the Middle Eastern ones that ever make it to either major world event.

  13. #33
    Senior Member Dtown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Metro Detroit, MI
    Posts
    3,391
    Country: United States

    Default

    It's funny talking about guaranteed spots for Asia when the next Olympics is in Japan. I wonder if FIBA will give them the same treatment as they did Great Britain or will they just hand them a spot?
    Pistons: 2018-2019 In the middle of nowhere

    Bronze medal 2013 Eurobasket prediction Game.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,273
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dtown View Post
    It's funny talking about guaranteed spots for Asia when the next Olympics is in Japan. I wonder if FIBA will give them the same treatment as they did Great Britain or will they just hand them a spot?
    I was thinking the exact same thing today! If they stick to their guns, this could get ugly. Can anybody really see Japan doing well enough to earn that? Which would be a crime because it's a great opportunity to grow the sport.

    I'm really looking forward to the Korean hockey team though. Talk about being thrown into the fire!

  15. #35
    Senior Member Steadysoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    376
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dtown View Post
    It's funny talking about guaranteed spots for Asia when the next Olympics is in Japan. I wonder if FIBA will give them the same treatment as they did Great Britain or will they just hand them a spot?
    Not likely. The Great Britain team only exist because FIBA mandated they actually try before getting a slot. Before that The UK competed as separate teams...when they did compete. Japan has a history of competing.

  16. #36
    Member SashKX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    97
    Country: Serbia

    Default

    I thought this topic was guaranteed to have very polarizing opinions between Americans and the rest, and it did start off that way, but ended up with mixed opinions on both sides.
    FIFA World Cup is the biggest sporting event for Europeans, and probably most of the world, except for the USA who couldn't care less about it. I think this event alone makes world cup seem like the logical format for the most prestigious event for us. Americans have for some reason chosen Olympics as the most prestigious basketball tournament, and so most of the world had to follow where the best go. However, FIBA World Cup is still equally important for us here, and I think it would be better to have just one of the two, doesn't make a lot of sense to have two different world title events in the same category, so I'm on board with restricting the Olympics to U24.
    It's obviously not an easy thing to do, Olympics are where the original Dream Team has made history, but, without any intention to offend anyone, world shouldn't revolve around the USA. If they are gonna act like "nuh-uh, either it's our way or the highway, not gonna send our best to the world cup so your title means nothing", then screw them, its their loss, there will be plenty of quality basketball without them.

  17. #37
    Senior Member Victorious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,428
    Country: Netherlands

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by usagre View Post
    But without a representative USA team is it really a world championship? It's basically a glorified Eurobasket sprinkled with a couple of South American teams and Australia.
    Who said the USA would not be represented in the WC? If I am not mistaken, it was the NBA which first proposed this model of U24 at the Olympics. That way, they only have to assemble their best players once every four years. I am sure that most NBA stars would like to join a unique event. Yes, the original Dream Team has made history at the Olympics. But I don't see why this tradition can not continue at the WCs.

    Also, the NBA is all about selling its product. And in a World Championship the USA would also encounter many more countries than at the Olympics. This offers them (and FIBA) a far larger market to sell their product. Potential additional participators at the WCs this year would be: Philippines, Iran, Russia, Turkey, Italy, Germany, Greece, Cameroon, Israel, Puerto Rico, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Mexico etc. We are talking about an additional market of hundreds of millions to a billion people. That in itself makes the WC a greater event than Olympic basketball tournament.
    PAO EUROPEAN CHAMPION 1996 - 2000 - 2002 - 2007 - 2009 - 2011

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victorious View Post
    Who said the USA would not be represented in the WC? If I am not mistaken, it was the NBA which first proposed this model of U24 at the Olympics. That way, they only have to assemble their best players once every four years. I am sure that most NBA stars would like to join a unique event. Yes, the original Dream Team has made history at the Olympics. But I don't see why this tradition can not continue at the WCs.

    Also, the NBA is all about selling its product. And in a World Championship the USA would also encounter many more countries than at the Olympics. This offers them (and FIBA) a far larger market to sell their product. Potential additional participators at the WCs this year would be: Philippines, Iran, Russia, Turkey, Italy, Germany, Greece, Cameroon, Israel, Puerto Rico, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Mexico etc. We are talking about an additional market of hundreds of millions to a billion people. That in itself makes the WC a greater event than Olympic basketball tournament.
    By representative I meant in correlation to the ability of the USA. There always have been representation at the world championships but very rarely has it been representative in those terms. And I truly believe that if the Olympics went to an age limit thereby excluding the best possible USA team, you still would not see them in the Worlds. You just can't invent prestige or history, and it has 0 in this country.

  19. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,243
    Country: Singapore

    Default

    No, it shouldn't because then it will suck so much that nobody will even give a damm about watching it.

    I know what you mean by saying its not the pinnacle of a sport. Like NBA is clearly at a higher level than the olympic basketball.
    But then again, Olympics is a chance for different countries to play each other. It's a chance to see your countries best against
    another. It may not be the highest level of basketball, but it sure is fun (At least fighting for silver lol).

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SashKX View Post
    I thought this topic was guaranteed to have very polarizing opinions between Americans and the rest, and it did start off that way, but ended up with mixed opinions on both sides.
    FIFA World Cup is the biggest sporting event for Europeans, and probably most of the world, except for the USA who couldn't care less about it. I think this event alone makes world cup seem like the logical format for the most prestigious event for us. Americans have for some reason chosen Olympics as the most prestigious basketball tournament, and so most of the world had to follow where the best go. However, FIBA World Cup is still equally important for us here, and I think it would be better to have just one of the two, doesn't make a lot of sense to have two different world title events in the same category, so I'm on board with restricting the Olympics to U24.
    It's obviously not an easy thing to do, Olympics are where the original Dream Team has made history, but, without any intention to offend anyone, world shouldn't revolve around the USA. If they are gonna act like "nuh-uh, either it's our way or the highway, not gonna send our best to the world cup so your title means nothing", then screw them, its their loss, there will be plenty of quality basketball without them.
    The problem with the football comparison is that when the FIFA World Cup was created in 1950 it didn't truly replace another event as the true best vs best. The fiba World Cup was and still is a secondary event from the beginning. It was only starting in 1986 that it kind of blossomed somewhat. Not to be disrespectful but I think many Serbians wish to elevate it to such status because of their great history in it as opposed to the Olympics. I would bet that the old Soviet Union understood that back in the day these world championships were not the equivalent of the Olympics when they battled the USA in the 60's, 70's and 80's. And although I agree that it might suck that the USA could kind of dictate which tournament is more important, that cat has been out of the bag for a long time. And finally any tournament title is great but if the best team fields very low quality teams is it truly a world title? Can you imagine if Brazil didn't participate in the World Cup for the first 20 years? Would the winner really have the same standing and prestige ?

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •