Important Note:

Opinions are fun. My friends tell me I am someone with lots of opinions and that's fine since I don't get mad at others when they disagree with me. In this same spirit I am interested in hearing yours views as long as you are able to share your views without boiling over. I look forward to hearing from you. I tend to write in the form of short essays most of the time, but contributions do not need to be in this same format or size. Some of the content here will date itself pretty quickly, other content may be virtually timeless, this is for the reader to judge.

Displaying 1 - 1 of 1

The fading of Amateurs from the Olympics                                                                                    

Posted at: Aug/01/2012 : Posted by: mel

Related Category: Perspectives, Sports,

If you are a person who likes quiet places, the Olympics are probably not going to be one of your travel destinations. Even if you watch the various sporting events from the comfort of your living room, there is still plenty of opportunity to cheer and make noise. Despite all this, one of the most significant events of the modern Olympics history took place with little more than a yawn to acknowledge it.

A yawn is symbolic of how the public seems to have greeted what one could have viewed as the most controversial change in Olympic rules that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) ever instituted. The one firm rule that we were all taught decades ago governing the Olympic Games was that amateur athletes were the only athletes permitted to compete. Professional athletes were absolutely forbidden; that’s what made the Olympics the Olympics and distinguished them from any other athletic competition.<br />

And then it didn’t.

Despite this amateur focus being a foundation of the Olympics for many decades, there was virtually no noise, clamor of protest or outrage at the change. To my surprise, the fans of the Olympics seem to actually like it a lot.

Television has changed the Olympics a lot. Before television, any athlete who accepted money for their performances might as well have been a leper in the eyes of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). If it was discovered that you got paid for playing (in any sport), or that you accepted commercial endorsements, you were shunned, banished, branded and cast to the cold winds of obscurity.

One of the most famous examples of the inflexibility of the Olympic organizers involves Jim Thorpe, perhaps America's finest athlete of all time. Thorpe had his gold medals in the decathlon and pentathlon in the 1912 Olympics stripped, and his achievements nullified because he had once accepted small amounts of money for playing semi-pro baseball during his college summers. It broke his heart. The medals were reinstated in 1983; a mere 30 years after his death and 30 years after the moment could have given him any comfort. The money was for playing baseball in a summer league and was not even the same sport to which he competed in during the 1912 Olympics.

It may be difficult for the current Olympic audience to imagine, but all the sponsorships, advertisements and marketing hype we associate with a contemporary Olympic Games were thought to be an insult to the Olympic spirit not so long ago. The Olympics were supposed to be about love of sport, not love of money.

Then came TV.

The president of the IOC during the years when television's matured to have a dedicated spot in nearly everyone’s living room was an American named Avery Brundage. Brundage stood atop the IOC from 1952-1972; during this tenure his guiding principle was what he called the "amateur code." He was unbendable on the subject. In a 1955 speech, Brundage said:
"We can only rely on the support of those who believe in the principles of fair play and sportsmanship embodied in the amateur code in our efforts to prevent the Games from being used by individuals, organizations or nations for ulterior motives."

In case you are challenged by old English, the ulterior motives he speaks of means “to make money” or that “money will corrupt the Olympics”.

Once Brundage was gone, the floodgates, I mean wallets opened. After his regime the IOC realized that commercial interests and sponsorships could turn the Olympics into a bottomless goldmine. To bring in viewers it was determined that the best bait would be the presence of the greatest and most famous athletes in the world; many of whom are professionals in their sports.

Ron Rapoport, a noted sports journalist who has covered six Olympics once remarked, "The pros are there for a reason." "People will tune in to watch athletes they know. The pro athletes are pre-sold to the public, which means increased viewership."

While bringing professionals to the Olympics would have seemed impossible to sell 20 years earlier, in the 1970-80’s it was an easy pitch. What made it an easy sell was the suspicion that athletes from certain Eastern Bloc nations (not to be named) were de facto professionals anyway. These athletics were supported full-time by their governments to train and compete. So, by the end of the 1980s, the move toward professionalization of the Olympics had gained full steam. All this went over just fine with sports fans. If the best athletes were being paid for their skills, or for granting endorsements; good for them! The concept of "selling out" -- once an insult for many athletes had become a measure of success. Making a lot of money for being good at a sport was now a badge of honor.

This transition was completed when the Dream Team of National Basketball Association (NBA) players from the United States competed in the Barcelona Olympics in 1992. If you were around at that time to read about members of the Dream Team: In the months leading up to the Olympics they were clearly not exactly a bundle of nerves working hard to be ready to compete at some new and higher level. They were going to win, and they knew it -- Michael Jordan spent much of his time in Barcelona either playing in all-night card games or getting in 36 holes of golf a day. In truth, the Barcelona Olympics were a very successful business trip for U.S. basketball interests. David Stern, the NBA commissioner realized that the Olympics were the best global marketing tool the NBA ever had and it didn’t cost him a dime.

How much did they outclass their competition? The Dream Team won their games by an average of almost 44 points. Less noted, but equally telling: The Dream Team was so good that its head coach, Chuck Daly, did not call a single timeout during the entire Olympic basketball tournament.

Of course the problem with the Dream Team, and its successors representing the United States in Olympic basketball, is that they are automatic overdogs (if there isn’t such a word, you know what I mean). The world beyond the United States would love to see them lose; it's like saying "Break up the Yankees," but on a planetary scale.

I love underdogs. The amateur U.S. ice hockey team of the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics was loved because they won when no one in the sports world said they had a chance. No Olympic team of U.S. basketball pros will ever know that feeling; I suspect the "Do you believe in miracles?" emotion will be reserved for teams from other countries trying to knock them off.

The size, scope and money of a 21st century Olympics are a far cry from how the games began and there is clearly no going back. I am confident that few people would want them to go back anyway. The spectacle is hypnotic in its scale, ceremony, structures and every other aspect.

Obviously, if going back and the purity of amateur athletics are important to you, all you have to do is talk the IOC into adding one phrase to the Olympic charter:

"The Olympic Games shall not be televised."

Good luck on that.

Comments (0)                                                                                                                                                    [Add Comment]