146 replies to this topic

[lanforod]

When you're competing to 1/5ths of a second of something you're no longer an athlete, you're a machine with millions of dollars of investment riding behind you.

 

The Olympics is no longer about human endurance and human achievement, it's about who has access to the latest gadgetry that help eek out that 1/5th of a second to beat a competitor who has a slightly lesser degree of technology and innovation riding behind them. Seriously, when you compare the Olympics of the 1970's and the Olympics of today they're two completely different sideshows.

<citation needed>

 

That really depends on the sport. IMHO, team vs team sports are still a very level playing field, rarely does one country have a huge advantage because of the 'latest gadgetry'. Granted, for some of the speed based sports, that may make a difference, but I don't think anyone is arguing that Canadian runners have a technology disadvantage or advantage to Jamaican runners.

Skill and talent > gadgetry and equipment, especially at the level of sports that are the Olympics. Sure, records keep falling, partially due to better equipment, but athletes aren't competing vs the past, they are competing vs other countries and athletes in the present, so the playing field is quite level.

[jonny]

^ I don't know Mike. There still is very much the human element, and most competitors have access to the same training facilities and equipment.

 

How many times has a favored athlete fallen, stumbled or choked in the Olympics? It happens nearly every time. Humans will never be machines.

[spanky123]

^^ Many of the team sports these days are just venues in their respective professional circuits. The only reason many countries even have teams or win medals is because some American has a distant relationship which qualifies them to represent.

 

I will watch the Olympics like everyone else, I just don't have any misconceptions about what it is. Olympic athletes these days are paid professionals who entertain us for a few weeks every couple of years.

[lanforod]

^^ Many of the team sports these days are just venues in their respective professional circuits. The only reason many countries even have teams or win medals is because some American has a distant relationship which qualifies them to represent.

 

I will watch the Olympics like everyone else, I just don't have any misconceptions about what it is. Olympic athletes these days are paid professionals who entertain us for a few weeks every couple of years.

 

No idea what you mean by "The only reason many countries even have teams or win medals is because some American has a distant relationship which qualifies them to represent."

Which sports are you talking about? The only Olympic sport I can think of that is strong pretty much only in the US, but with players that may not be American, is basketball.

 

Try again. Olympic athletes don't get paid. Some of them don't even make a living at their sport. They 'may' get a bonus IF they medal, or be lucky enough to have sponsorship deals, but the vast majority don't get paid for their work at the Olympics. I might understand your perception when talking about hockey or golf players where the majority play in the pro leagues and make big bucks, but that certainly doesn't apply to all or even the majority of Olympic athletes.

 

http://www.businessi...get-paid-2012-7

[Mike K.]

I can't think of many sporting events (other than professional sport leagues) that pay athletes to strut their stuff. Athletes are at these events to bask in the limelight should they prove to out-compete their rivals and then the money comes pouring in. Some athletes may not make a lot of money from the sport but there can be a tremendous amount of money riding behind them nonetheless. I mean some of them have regular day jobs and choose to spend their free time training in lieu of hanging out at the bar on weekends, then when big events come around off they go to compete.

[jonny]

I can't think of many sporting events (other than professional sport leagues) that pay athletes to strut their stuff. Athletes are at these events to bask in the limelight should they prove to out-compete their rivals and then the money comes pouring in. Some athletes may not make a lot of money from the sport but there can be a tremendous amount of money riding behind them nonetheless. I mean some of them have regular day jobs and choose to spend their free time training in lieu of hanging out at the bar on weekends, then when big events come around off they go to compete.

 

Maybe the top maybe 5% of Olympic athletes are famous and make any money.

 

Out of 11,000 athletes that were at the Olympics in London, how many are truly famous? A few hundred? Some basketball, soccer and tennis players, and a handful of swimmers and track stars?

 

Most Olympians are everyday people who are talented and have worked extremely hard to qualify for the Olympics in wrestling, judo, sailing, archery, cycling, weightlifting, fencing, etc.

[Bingo]

VANCOUVER - Roberto Luongo won't have any family joining him next month when he suits up for Canada at the Winter Olympics.

 

The same goes for Sweden's Daniel Sedin.

 

The Vancouver Canucks teammates are both concerned over security at the Games in Sochi, Russia, after a series of threats and terrorist attacks in the region.

 

more;http://www.nhl.com/i...s.htm?id=701885

[spanky123]

No idea what you mean by "The only reason many countries even have teams or win medals is because some American has a distant relationship which qualifies them to represent."

Which sports are you talking about? The only Olympic sport I can think of that is strong pretty much only in the US, but with players that may not be American, is basketball.

 

Try again. Olympic athletes don't get paid. Some of them don't even make a living at their sport. They 'may' get a bonus IF they medal, or be lucky enough to have sponsorship deals, but the vast majority don't get paid for their work at the Olympics. I might understand your perception when talking about hockey or golf players where the majority play in the pro leagues and make big bucks, but that certainly doesn't apply to all or even the majority of Olympic athletes.

 

http://www.businessi...get-paid-2012-7

Friend every Canadian Olympic athlete gets paid by you and I. Athletes are carded and get paid a "salary" based on their competitive level. Top carded athletes (ie Olympic contenders) get paid about $40K a year if I recall.

 

Watch any Olympic sport and chances are the top athletes live and work in the US, China or Russia even though they are representing another country.

[lanforod]

^ did you even try reading the link I had in my post?

 

Of course, it isn't cut and dried like that. Here is an article specifically regarding Canadian athletes. Obviously, it varies: http://career-advice...bs/article.aspx

 

I'd be interested in a source on the 'carding' you're talking about.

Edited by lanforod, 23 January 2014 - 08:11 AM.

[Mike K.]

Hey, so how about those tandem toilet stalls in Sochi? Are they a team building experiment or something?

[spanky123]

^ did you even try reading the link I had in my post?

 

Of course, it isn't cut and dried like that. Here is an article specifically regarding Canadian athletes. Obviously, it varies: http://career-advice...bs/article.aspx

 

I'd be interested in a source on the 'carding' you're talking about.

http://www.pch.gc.ca...1/1268413494851

[lanforod]

Funding to help with training etc isn't the same as getting paid a salary. For some sports, I'd be surprised if the funding covers much more than travel and equipment costs.

[spanky123]

Funding to help with training etc isn't the same as getting paid a salary. For some sports, I'd be surprised if the funding covers much more than travel and equipment costs.

Whether you call it a salary or a grant is a matter of terminology. I was responding to the comment that athletes don't get paid. They do. Some get paid a lot, some get paid very little but they all get paid by the taxpayer and the good ones get corporate sponsorships and ad dollars on top of that.

Edited by spanky123, 23 January 2014 - 05:47 PM.

[lanforod]

Hayley Wickenheiser will carry Canada's flag. Looking forward to what the Russians will come up with for an opening ceremony!

[tedward]

Whether you call it a salary or a grant is a matter of terminology. I was responding to the comment that athletes don't get paid. They do. Some get paid a lot, some get paid very little but they all get paid by the taxpayer and the good ones get corporate sponsorships and ad dollars on top of that.

So, the amount of money my employer pays for heating and lighting the building, supplying me with a computer, etc should all be considered part of what I get paid?

 

I think not.

[spanky123]

So, the amount of money my employer pays for heating and lighting the building, supplying me with a computer, etc should all be considered part of what I get paid?

 

I think not.

The funding I referenced is a direct grant to the athlete. It is not tied to paying for heating or lighting or a computer.

 

Programs like own the podium and other infrastructure grants are separate.

 

I don't know why you guys are getting so upset with me pointing out that we pay our athletes.

[lanforod]

Looking through those links, the most any athlete can get is $18000 as a grant, and only if considered able to be a top 16 finalist in World championships or Olympics.

Other funding opportunities are for putting on programs or events, not athlete grants.

I still don't consider that being paid for competing in the Olympics. It's a pittance.

[Mike K.]

Society has no obligation to pay athletes for their athleticism and I personally don't want my tax dollars to pay for someone's athletic aspirations.

 

If you want to compete in the Olympics, go for it. But don't expect tax payers to support you financially along the way.

[spanky123]

Looking through those links, the most any athlete can get is $18000 as a grant, and only if considered able to be a top 16 finalist in World championships or Olympics.

Other funding opportunities are for putting on programs or events, not athlete grants.

I still don't consider that being paid for competing in the Olympics. It's a pittance.

Actually the term is "has the potential to be a top 16 athlete". There are other programs available for funding but I agree that people are not becoming millionaires out of this.

 

To Mike's point I think that those athletes who receive grants and funding should be required to pay it back when they also have other endorsement or advertising deals. Although a US athlete and not a Canadian one, Ryan Locke (swimmer) makes over $2M a year in income from sponsorships as an example.

[Bernard]

about 1700 athletes in Canada currently get money from the Athlete Assistance Program.  Most get $1500 a month but some only $900, most of the lower amount goes to developing athletes.

 

Overall about $26,000,000 to $27,000,000 is given out to athletes as grants each year through this program

 

The federal government gives more money to Own the Podium than directly to athletes, about $62,000,000 a year