David Stern and his 23 and under rule for Olympics

Yes.

This rule HELPS basketball if you ask me.

Olympics aren't focused on basketball, it's time for other athletes to shine not Soccer/Basketball players.

Make FIBA the main focus, it's focus is on basketball after all. Olympic basketball is so condensed, the FIBA setup is much better.

Kobe can say what he likes, Stern knows a thing or two about growing the game. I'd go with him.

 

Its about being in that Olympics village seeing all the worldwide fine foreign female athletic ASS you normally would NOT see in a FIBA b-ball event. (Or in the paper and media, it'll be about the special unique "fellowship" and the "comraderie" of the Olympics that the players miss out on.) There's some things like that where you don't mind repping your country without financial compensation. Sometimes even as a professional, being the coolest guy on campus is rewarding all its own

 

F you Stern. I don't know where the best basketball in the world is played and I need the Olympics to tell me that. Now I'll just be left wondering how the US NBA guys stack up to the rest of the world at hoops if you don't let us send our best.

 

If the US has to be suppressed, then the rule should be applied to all of the participating teams in the olympics

 

the U-23 plan is actually a good move for the progression of world basketball. Basketball will always be overshadowed at the olympics by other sports (as it should be). If you ever want to see anything like the FIFA World Cup for basketball this move would help it greatly.

 

If Olympic was 23 and under, would Kobe and other's play in the FIBA? Or is that Stern's ultimate goal, prevent players from playing to protect the NBA team's assets?

 

his goal = these guys play in the World Cup instead of the Olympics.
Instead of sending youngsters to the Worlds (remember the last team, Durant, Love, Rose, Westbrook, Iguodala --- only Durant was a 'star' in the NBA at the time).
In the process, the NBA owners pick up a piece of profit from the World Cup which they wouldn't get from the Olympics.

 

on the other hand, Olympics are great for attracting casual fans to a sport.
Soccer may not need it, it's the biggest sport in the world.
I think it's important for basketball.

Also, FIBA World Cup won't be close to FIFA in terms of attractiveness. FIFA is extremely competitive, almost every game is intriguing and has a good chance of upset.

Basketball reality is that there aren't 32 good basketball national teams in the world. There's US, there are ~10 decent teams and the rest are Nigerias.
World Cup was too big at 24 teams. Now they want to make it 32. Most games will blow.

 

because the next commissioner won't be the same.
he leads an organization with net worth at 10 billion+.
any person who leads such entity has to be focused on financials.

 

Frankly, Stern is probably the greatest sports commissioner ever, whether some individual decision is good or not.

 

And while I hate this Olympics idea (because I love the Olympics format, and I think basketball is far from ready for 32 team format), it's clearly a beneficial move for the NBA.
And that's what a sports commissioner should be doing.

If he pulls it off, you can forget all those international challengers like Euroleague, all the far fetched talk about how Russian and Greek billionaires will start stealing starters from the NBA teams.
If the NBA controls the main international basketball tournament, that puts the NBA at the top of the leagues not just factually and financially like it's always been, but legally as well.