Active.com 2008 Olympics: Soccer in the Olympics: Worth the Trouble?

Support | Event Directors & Organizers

Previous Next

Active.com 2008 Olympics

Currently Being Moderated

Soccer in the Olympics: Worth the Trouble?

Posted by RyanActive on Jul 30, 2008 12:32:40 PM

San Diego Union-Tribune writer Mark Zeigler had interesting insight on the world-wide issue regarding soccer in the Olympics.

The big question is: Is soccer, the world's most popular sport, even worth having at the world's most popular sporting event?

The quick response is "Of course" but Zeigler explains why the issue is way, way deeper than that.

For the men, Olympic soccer will never trump the World Cup. Realizing as much, the men's Olympic tournament has been made an under-23 affair. As Zeigler writes, "The Olympics aren't meaningful because they don't feature the best players, and they don't feature the best players because they're not meaningful."

The article goes much deeper than this, and you can read it here.

So what do you think? Can Olympic soccer be a huge event without affecting the enormous stature of the World Cup?

324 Views

Comments (3)

Jul 31, 2008 2:14 PM

Coach Corey says:

This is where Money has corrupted sports and it's participants. Soccer should in the Olympics and it should be bigger than the World Cup because it is on the grandest stage--The Olympic Games.

The rule should be simple--The best players from each country represent their country's team in the Olympics. I mean come on it's only every four years. Ridiculous!

Aug 5, 2008 10:11 AM

Jesse@Active says:

I agree that soccer should be a part of the Olympics, since it is the world's favorite sport. But in it's current state I don't think it's worth the trouble. It's basically just a U-23 tournament with a few exceptions. The same can sort of be said for baseball.

I think the IOC should pass a rule maintaining that unless a governing body (in this case FIFA) allows countries to send their best athletes, that sport is out. This would maintain basketball, softball and women's soccer, but effectively eliminate men's soccer and baseball from Olympic competition. The men's World Cup would thus maintain it's stature, and the fledgling World Baseball Classic would gain a big boost in global prestige.

Aug 5, 2008 12:38 PM

jspitzberg says in response to Jesse@Active:

What's wrong with a grand U-23 tournament? Was it wrong that the Games never allowed professional athletes until recently? Does that diminish the accomplishments of, well, every medal ever won in sports with professional competitions and leagues? I understand that the Olympics is hamstrung because FIFA makes billions on the World Cup. But that doesn't tarnish the Olympics for me. Nor does it for the Brazilians, Argentinians, Nigerians, etc (hell, even some of us here in the U.S.A.) who will follow their team this month.