I don't think he meant that it was a requirement for ALL basketball teams to be U23, only team USA would make that a requirement.
The US would lose. Argentina and Spain would be better. Scola or Gasols would destroy the US front court.
Basically true... the Thunder would beat any country's U-23 team. Also I wonder if you really meant to type "minus well"?
Yeah, I also agree that the NBA would get too much push back from FIBA and the international community assuming the "ban" would apply to all NBA players over the age of 23. London games would be void of the Gasol brothers, Tony Parker, Scola and Manu, etc. Can't see that going over well. Sure, Yao theoretically may have been able to squeeze out a few more years in the NBA if he avoided international competition, but would the Chinese govt. even allowed him to come to Houston in 2002 if they knew he'd be banned from playing in Beijing six years later? (I think China had already been granted the summer games by then).
There is already a "World Cup" for basketball held every 4 years held by FIBA (USA won it the last time with Durant leading the team). One of the arguments for the U-23 Olympics is that it would give this championship more importance and such it could grow on its own just like FIFA did with the Football World Cup. Honestly this would be a good long term move for FIBA and possible one of Stern's better moves.
How could this possibly be one of Sterns better moves given all that you've already read in this thread?
It would be great for bureaucrats at FIBA because they could then pocket the loot for their own personal use rather than having to split it up with their IOC fellow-vampires. FIFA's got it figured out. No need to cut the IOC a check when you can have alll the Five-star hotel rooms and cushy dinners for yourself.
For what it's worth, here's an excerpt from a 1992 interview with David Stern addressing some of the public backlash about allowing NBA players to compete in the Olympics for the first time: All of that said, I really wouldn't mind a U-23 Olympics if the recently renamed FIBA World Cup of Basketball were to get some credence as THE international tournament which crowned a true world champion. Every other two-year interval we'd have a different style of international competition, and it would share the spotlight with up and coming talent instead of continuing to oversaturate the airwaves with a select few stars. However, I'm skeptical of how the international community will respond, seeing as what's being proposed is the first time in which the NBA instituted a ban on it's players while FIBA did not.
Let's not compare basketball to soccer. If Olympic basketball changed to U-23, there would be a huge drop in interest globally. Granted, if the proposed World Cup for basketball became the greatest thing since sliced bread, the drop in interest in Olympic basketball wouldn't be as big a deal for many of us.
In 2016, PG: 2015 first pick SG: 2014 second pick SF: 2015 third pick PF: 2013 first pick C: 2014 8th pick Bench: Morey's second round picks in 2013, 14, and 15.
This is exactly why they are considering this move. Soccer lost alot of interest when it switched to this model to funnel all the interest towards their world cup. I think it is eventual that this happens. FIBA basically wants to copy FIFA's model and I think it'll be good for everyone except the IOC. The IOC already has swimming, track and all those other olympic sports anyway. I think if basketball were switched to u-23 for the olympics, then other sports would just be featured more prominently.
keep in mind, "U23" in typical definition = players who became/will become 23 in that calendar year. So no Love, Durant, Westbrook, Parsons, maybe someone else on that list (won't double check everyone).
Who the hell want to see rookies playing in the olympic. This will surely disappoint many international fans. The US is winning it regardless of U23 so why not just send the most popular players there to put on a show.
