News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

It also kind of hurts us that the one sport we're absolutely killer at can result in just 2 medals at most. Contrast with speed skating: there are 60 medals up for grabs there.
 
Clearly someone doesn't really pay attention to these things :)

We won 24 in 06 ...

Although I do think we'll be higher when everything is said and done

whoops ... misread that ... sorry! yep your right more golds already.
 
jn_12 said:
I understand your argument. I disagree with it though. I don't think Own the Podium's sole goal was to win the most medals. I think that was one of many goals and by far the most ambitious. Nothing wrong with being that ambitious and not attaining it. Also, I'm not sure how you can be so sure that we won't see long term benefits from this program. If your argument is that money should be spent entirely on grassroots programming instead, then I don't completely agree. I think you need good funding at the top and good funding at the bottom. You need the best at both ends of the spectrum to ensure that participation is wide-spread but also that those who excel are taken care of to pursue their ambitions.

The reason we're so good at hockey is because of the funding and investment in infrastructure, coaching, etc all the way through the system and much of that was government led, particularly arenas. The difference is we have a professional system that takes over when the elite turn 16. I think if you want kids to continue with athletics at an elite level beyond a certain age, they need to know they can compete without having to worry about their next meal. Ya, you can make an argument that the private sector should take over like in hockey, but I think it'd be unrealistic to hold any sport to the financial standards of Hockey Canada which is a multi-million dollar corporation and maybe one of the most important organizations in the country.

Also, don't forget, 5 of those medals last time were Klassen's. Take her out of the picture and you're down to 19 medals and 40 top 5s in 2006. So this year would be a pretty good improvement over that.
Click to expand...

No, my argument isn't that we should only spend money on grassroots sports programs. My argument is more a simple statement of reality that for some reason people don't understand: Own the Podium is only about winning the most medals. That's it. The name may not seem important, but a) it needlessly sets the program up for media attacks should its goals not be reached, and b) it says to athletes that 4th isn't good enough and that this funding is a loan, to be paid back in the form of medals – not personal bests or tears. It's not about excellence for the sake of excellence and personal bests and future legacies, and how can it be when the only athletes funded are the elite group already within striking distance of the podium? Some people may question the money spent (like on the alpine skiiers) but they're wrong...we should have spent more, not just given a short-term funding boost to a few athletes, many of whom would have medalled no matter how much funding they got.

It's not like Canadian athletes are doing poorly – and they're not doing poorly – but Own the Podium isn't accomplishing what it set out to do, and that's a fact. I admit it was sometimes a pleasant change to see athletes upset that they didn't make the podium, instead of just going "aww, shucks, at least I tried" when they slipped back into 12th place, but the constant attention on medals has made some of the Canadian coverage annoying enough to watch that I've tried to watch more American coverage, if only for a bit of pomp and schmaltz...which the Olympics needs. Hopefully, we'll win a medal in every single event we have left, keep the Americans shut out, and beat them, but if coming in second or third in the medal count means structural and strategic changes to the funding scheme, so be it. Win/win.

I'm obviously not making the argument that private sector sporting groups should take over or that every sport should take place at the scale that hockey does. If I did make that argument, I'd bother to scratch out a few shades of grey between zero funding for obscure sports and the moneyed state of hockey in Canada.

If you're gonna take someone out, it's McIvor (competing in an event not even held in 2006), not Klassen. We send more athletes in more events with every passing games, so it's no surprise that our top 5 total and our medal count creeps up. And, of course, they're competing at home now, which has enormous but unquantifiable benefits, anything from louder crowds to less jet lag.
 
As I said, I understand your argument, but I disagree with it. I think that's fair. It seems like we're both just repeating ourselves now so it's probably fair to just agree to disagree about Own the Podium in its current form.

Going forward what do you think we should do?
 
jn_12 said:
As I said, I understand your argument, but I disagree with it. I think that's fair. It seems like we're both just repeating ourselves now so it's probably fair to just agree to disagree about Own the Podium in its current form.

Going forward what do you think we should do?
Click to expand...

I've already said what I think we should do as part of my explanation (not opinion) of why Own the Podium has been a dud.
 
To be honest, I only focused on your criticisms. Looking back I agree though with your assessment of what should happen regarding funding and how its spent.

And going back a bit, the reason I referred to Klassen was simply because I bet when they did the Own the Podium medal assessment 4 or 5 years ago, they thought Klassen would still be an impact player. The fact is iit took one extraordinary multi-generational athlete to single handedly take us from 19 medals to 24, and 3rd place to 5th. If not for her injuries and what happened to her sister, would she have won another 5 in this Olympics? That would have a pretty significant impact on our perception of these games, wouldn't it? Considering we will probably match Turin's medal total without those 5 medals, (which essentially means more athletes won medals this time than last time) you have to see Vancouver as an improvement over Turin. To ignore Klassen's impact but to say "ya but McIvor won gold and she wasn't there last time" is somewhat perplexing.
 
My concern is that this will turn the general public off to the idea of spending money on our athletic programs (though thankfully this much stronger second week has probably silenced a lot of the criticism.)

A lot of left-leaning people are very anti-Olympics, and I sort of get it intellectually, but I do think there are tremendous societal benefits to be had from our athletes succeeding, especially when you look at rising obesity rights and the general health of Canadians.
 
GraphicMatt said:
My concern is that this will turn the general public off to the idea of spending money on our athletic programs (though thankfully this much stronger second week has probably silenced a lot of the criticism.)

A lot of left-leaning people are very anti-Olympics, and I sort of get it intellectually, but I do think there are tremendous societal benefits to be had from our athletes succeeding, especially when you look at rising obesity rights and the general health of Canadians.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But for general fitness promotion, the summer games are more feasible. Winter sports are more facility-dependent and Canadians are spread out pretty thinly compared to other nations, so access would be an issue. But stuff like track, cycling, martial arts...those can be done anywhere with relatively minimal investment.
 
Not about the Canadian team but was just watching figure skating with the wife and it's interesting to note that the just crowned Olymipic Champion Kim Yu-na from Korea actually trained in our backyard at the Toronto Cricket, Skating and Curling Club since 2006. She's the best know athlete in Korea and is treated like a rock star there, more famous than Gretzky in Canada.

Not much has ever been reported in the local media here, but it's good to know that someone that famous that far away and that good chose Toronto as her home base. Congrats to Ms. Kim and the now world famous Toronto Cricket, Skating and Curling Club!
 
I don't think public money should be given to private corporations, especially ones that support human rights abuses and try to censor the media.
 
doady said:
I don't think public money should be given to private corporations, especially ones that support human rights abuses and try to censor the media.
Click to expand...
Then the same logic, we shouldn't pay our taxes to a government that tries to censor the media and supports human rights abuses?
 
Investment in athletics should begin at a young age. It could be that we won't be seeing the fruits of our investment for many years to come. Nevertheless, I think we've had a respectable showing at these Olympics... a lot of gold medals and memorable moments. We'll end up with 20+ medals by the end of it, which is nothing to sneeze at.
 
I think extreme physical activity comes at the cost of mental activity. If we promote more developed bodies, we also have the possibililty to end up with less developed minds. Just look at the homophobia that is rampant among sports peoples, not only professional athletes but also fans. Undeveloped minds.

But with the obesity rates and the evolution of weaker people due to so many generations of sedentary lifestyles, promoting physical activity is probably needed regardless. But I don't think throwing away billions of taxpayer money to the Olympics or to other pro sports organizations is the right way to do it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top