***Paris 2024 Summer Olympics: July 26-August 11*** USA dominates medal count; Finish tied w/ China for most golds - See ya in Milan 2026! (1 Viewer)

[Nathan R. Jessep]

First time there has ever been a tie for most gold medals at a Summer Olympics, they just said on NBC.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

Police arrest a man climbing the Eiffel Tower, prompting an evacuation hours before closing ceremony

French police have evacuated the area around the Eiffel Tower after a man was seen climbing the Paris landmark hours before the Olympics closing ceremony Sunday.

apnews.com

 

[belljr]

If you haven't seen it yet the Australian break dancer is the best thing of these games

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

Closing ceremonies at 3pm EST for those who are into that sort of thing.

How to watch the 2024 Olympics closing ceremony

A guide to the Paris Olympics closing ceremony.

apnews.com

Let us see how many people we can offend this time.

 

[SoBeDad]

So are we done or are there other events left. We are currently tied with China for Golds.

That’s a wrap. Most medals is the tiebreaker see ya later China

If the Math Olympiad, held just before the Olympics, were the tiebreaker ... the USA would still be the winner. BTW, 4 of the 7 USA team members are Chinese-America.

Team USA Takes First Place in the International Math Olympiad

Weeks before the Paris Olympic torch was lit, the US took first place in Bath, England at the 2024 International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO). The six members of the team include. Jordan Lefkowitz, 17 (CT), Krishna Pothapragada, 18 (IL), Jessica Wan, ...

finance.yahoo.com

 

[Major]

Two outstanding gold medal basketball games.

Legends were born. Legacies cemented. Long-standing records broken. Absolutely love it all.

Thanks for playing along, y'all! See ya in a couple years for the Italy winter games!

Sounds like somebody needs a hug

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

For me, it's been the start times. I don't have Peacock, so missed some stuff. But I got to see almost every event I wanted to see live - except boxing, which I didn't get to see at all.

The L.A. Games are gonna suck for me from a viewing perspective.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

I know they're iconic, but can we move on from Al Michaels and Bob Costas? I guess we have with Snoop but who's the next Bob Costas (who I've enjoyed for decades but I'm ready for someone new). Same goes for Jim Nantz and a handful of others. New blood please.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Closing ceremonies at 3pm EST for those who are into that sort of thing.

How to watch the 2024 Olympics closing ceremony

A guide to the Paris Olympics closing ceremony.

apnews.com

Let us see how many people we can offend this time.

The likelihood that some will feign offense at some innocuous moment or another is a 100% certainty in our world today.

 

[GregR]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

Timing was definitely part of it. A lot more live events than Beijing or Tokyo for sure. The ability to go catch on Peacock something I missed live or with the DVR was a bonus. I didn't really use the multi-view too much after the first day or two as I settled in on what I wanted to watch and recorded a lot of it. But my work schedule allowing me to catch a lot of things live was a big boon for it.

Some of it was just the competition itself I think. I connected with the athletes more these games than in some past ones I think. I'm often kind of lukewarm about track and field for instance. Maybe the lack of Usain Bolt dominating the sprints helped hold my interest more there. The two medals in the distance races where we don't normally do well were the two events I got the most invested in, yelling at the TV to try to spur them on. Even the medal race held my interest more this year.

This thread was also a big benefit too. Having people to discuss it with and watch alongside with was a big plus.

 

[UncleZen]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

For me, it was Peacock. I got to see so much more this time around than ever before.

 

[GregR]

Gabby Thomas didn't hurt either.

 

[pollardsvision]

Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big

Zero minutes in an incredibly competitive game.

We can criticize whatever we want. That's what the internet is for.

But understand when you are criticizing the decisions of USA Women's Basketball, that's pretty rich.

You gonna tell Apple how to make more money? You gonna nitpick Mahomes or Brady? You gonna tell Toyota how to make a better truck? You gonna tell Warren Buffett how he might need to adjust his portfolio?

Pick your analogy of domination, it fits. 61 straight Olympic wins. Undefeated since 19-freaking-92. They've dominated the Olympics so badly that there's no reason to even compare them to anyone else anymore.

If you and Clay Travis have better ideas about what USA Women's Basketball needs to do, that's fine. You can.

They aren't perfect, and the rest of the world is clearly catching up. But for you or me to think we could do it better? Again, that's rich.

People that don't follow women's basketball are suddenly experts on women's basketball. That's fine. Except that you are talking about the most dominant sports program in the history of sports.

In any other world, an old fart sitting on the couch telling this program how they should do it better would be the most laughable stance ever. But here we are.

 

[GregR]

Way back in college there was the one year they had the four or so pay per view Olympic channels and we had gotten all of them. That was one of the best Olympics ever for me, between having the time to watch and having the ability to.

This may have been the closest to that experience.

 

[bigbottom]

Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big

Zero minutes in an incredibly competitive game.

We can criticize whatever we want. That's what the internet is for.

But understand when you are criticizing the decisions of USA Women's Basketball, that's pretty rich.

You gonna tell Apple how to make more money? You gonna nitpick Mahomes or Brady? You gonna tell Toyota how to make a better truck? You gonna tell Warren Buffett how he might need to adjust his portfolio?

Pick your analogy of domination, it fits. 61 straight Olympic wins. Undefeated since 19-freaking-92. They've dominated the Olympics so badly that there's no reason to even compare them to anyone else anymore.

If you and Clay Travis have better ideas about what USA Women's Basketball needs to do, that's fine. You can.

They aren't perfect, and the rest of the world is clearly catching up. But for you or me to think we could do it better? Again, that's rich.

People that don't follow women's basketball are suddenly experts on women's basketball. That's fine. Except that you are talking about the most dominant sports program in the history of sports.

In any other world, an old fart sitting on the couch telling this program how they should do it better would be the most laughable stance ever. But here we are.

You were the one who said she wasn’t going to get many more minutes. And you were 100% right. You were the one who said she was a legacy pick. And you were 100% right. I’m not sure I’ve seen anyone be so comically defensive when they are 100% validated.

You are also right about this being what the internet is for. I guess we should laugh at all the non-musicians who share their opinions on music. Or heck, people sharing their opinions about professional sports at all!

In any event, my response wasn’t even a criticism. It was a response to identikit that she would get rolled out in the gold medal game, but only if they were up big. He too was 100% right.

Too funny.

 

[pollardsvision]

Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big

Zero minutes in an incredibly competitive game.

We can criticize whatever we want. That's what the internet is for.

But understand when you are criticizing the decisions of USA Women's Basketball, that's pretty rich.

You gonna tell Apple how to make more money? You gonna nitpick Mahomes or Brady? You gonna tell Toyota how to make a better truck? You gonna tell Warren Buffett how he might need to adjust his portfolio?

Pick your analogy of domination, it fits. 61 straight Olympic wins. Undefeated since 19-freaking-92. They've dominated the Olympics so badly that there's no reason to even compare them to anyone else anymore.

If you and Clay Travis have better ideas about what USA Women's Basketball needs to do, that's fine. You can.

They aren't perfect, and the rest of the world is clearly catching up. But for you or me to think we could do it better? Again, that's rich.

People that don't follow women's basketball are suddenly experts on women's basketball. That's fine. Except that you are talking about the most dominant sports program in the history of sports.

In any other world, an old fart sitting on the couch telling this program how they should do it better would be the most laughable stance ever. But here we are.

You were the one who said she wasn’t going to get many more minutes. And you were 100% right. You were the one who said she was a legacy pick. And you were 100% right. I’m not sure I’ve seen anyone be so comically defensive when they are 100% validated.

You are also right about this being what the internet is for. I guess we should laugh at all the non-musicians who share their opinions on music. Or heck, people sharing their opinions about professional sports at all!

In any event, my response wasn’t even a criticism. It was a response to identikit that she would get rolled out in the gold medal game, but only if they were up big. He too was 100% right.

Too funny.

You're the best people my brother.

I get a little drunk and carried away.

 

[bigbottom]

Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big

Zero minutes in an incredibly competitive game.

We can criticize whatever we want. That's what the internet is for.

But understand when you are criticizing the decisions of USA Women's Basketball, that's pretty rich.

You gonna tell Apple how to make more money? You gonna nitpick Mahomes or Brady? You gonna tell Toyota how to make a better truck? You gonna tell Warren Buffett how he might need to adjust his portfolio?

Pick your analogy of domination, it fits. 61 straight Olympic wins. Undefeated since 19-freaking-92. They've dominated the Olympics so badly that there's no reason to even compare them to anyone else anymore.

If you and Clay Travis have better ideas about what USA Women's Basketball needs to do, that's fine. You can.

They aren't perfect, and the rest of the world is clearly catching up. But for you or me to think we could do it better? Again, that's rich.

People that don't follow women's basketball are suddenly experts on women's basketball. That's fine. Except that you are talking about the most dominant sports program in the history of sports.

In any other world, an old fart sitting on the couch telling this program how they should do it better would be the most laughable stance ever. But here we are.

You were the one who said she wasn’t going to get many more minutes. And you were 100% right. You were the one who said she was a legacy pick. And you were 100% right. I’m not sure I’ve seen anyone be so comically defensive when they are 100% validated.

You are also right about this being what the internet is for. I guess we should laugh at all the non-musicians who share their opinions on music. Or heck, people sharing their opinions about professional sports at all!

In any event, my response wasn’t even a criticism. It was a response to identikit that she would get rolled out in the gold medal game, but only if they were up big. He too was 100% right.

Too funny.

You're the best people my brother.

I get a little drunk and carried away.

I love your spirit my man!

 

[Instinctive]

The US men's BB team going forward needs to pick the best 8 player rotation they can. It will be made clear this is the starting rotation.

Then add the best backup role players who are used to getting only a few minutes here and there.

Plus the games are only 40 minutes so you have to get your rotation time to play together. tough to keep playing different lineups in a 6 game season.

The players who are stars in the NBA can`t handle sitting and not getting the bulk of the playing time and pout.

Even though the guys players are as good or better. Then all the pundits giving their 2 cents. Steve Kerr even said in the NBA playoffs they rarely play more than 7-8 players. And if the 8-9 guys are in it is only for a few minutes here and there to give starters a rest.

The most important thing they can do is have a real coach who learns and coaches in FIBA context at all times and isn't beholden to NBA team dynamics

 

[Tau837]

Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big

Zero minutes in an incredibly competitive game.

We can criticize whatever we want. That's what the internet is for.

But understand when you are criticizing the decisions of USA Women's Basketball, that's pretty rich.

You gonna tell Apple how to make more money? You gonna nitpick Mahomes or Brady? You gonna tell Toyota how to make a better truck? You gonna tell Warren Buffett how he might need to adjust his portfolio?

Pick your analogy of domination, it fits. 61 straight Olympic wins. Undefeated since 19-freaking-92. They've dominated the Olympics so badly that there's no reason to even compare them to anyone else anymore.

If you and Clay Travis have better ideas about what USA Women's Basketball needs to do, that's fine. You can.

They aren't perfect, and the rest of the world is clearly catching up. But for you or me to think we could do it better? Again, that's rich.

People that don't follow women's basketball are suddenly experts on women's basketball. That's fine. Except that you are talking about the most dominant sports program in the history of sports.

In any other world, an old fart sitting on the couch telling this program how they should do it better would be the most laughable stance ever. But here we are.

Seems like valid criticism to me. I follow college WBB, not WNBA. But the quality of the US play in today's game was pretty awful. They were lucky to win IMO. Obviously, I was rooting for them, so I'm glad they did, but watching the game I thought it was clearly obvious that they made a mistake leaving Clark off the roster.

 

[UncleZen]

I'm not criticizing because they did win, but seems they would have liked to have someone who could have provided an offensive spark today instead of a 42 year old legacy cheerleader.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

It's a sign of how engaged we are as fans when it comes to basketball that our men's and women's teams have completely dominated the international game our entire adult lifetimes, have just each won gold, and less than 24 hours later the main topic is what both teams need to do to be better next time.

 

[bigbottom]

Okay, I know I’m beating a dead horse, but I think it’s worth pointing out that Diana Taurasi’s stat line through three games is 2 points and 2 assists. That’s aggregate, not average. And it’s not like she’s been stuck on the bench. She was in the starting lineup for all three games I believe, with over 14 mins of playing time in each of the first two games, but ultimately sitting for most of today’s win against Germany.

I don’t know, maybe her leadership on the court was a major contributor (I only watched bits and pieces), but her +/- in the last two games against Belgium and Germany was -4 and -7 (which is pretty crazy in double digit wins). The argument that the committee simply selected the best 12 players continues to lose credibility.

Taurasi is the GOAT of women’s basketball. There was no way they weren't inviting her.

The question is: would true leadership have been for her to turn down the invite and say it was the time for a young player to get their chance and experience of representing their country?

I would say that keeping rookies off the squad is one way for Taurasi to protect her record for consecutive Olympics women’s basketball teams.

So Taurasi was a legacy pick. I get it. Then just say so. Don’t say it’s all about selecting the best basketball players.

And this was the predictable result:
https://www.outkick.com/sports/team-usa-womens-basketball-olympics-lowest-attendance-caitlin-clark

Of course, there was a packed house for the USA Belgium game. But that’s because it was neighboring Belgium fans packing the house.

My recollection is the committee chair was pretty open about the process and said they looked at international experience, leadership, experience with the national team coaches and similar team-based factors. I don't remember her claiming to have picked the 12 best players in a vacuum. I remember some tweets and such where she said the committee was not asked to consider marketability, tv viewership and the like and she talked about how they tried to stick to the process they were tasked with.

Fair enough. But that process saddled them with a 42 year old legacy pick who appears to have contributed little to nothing on the floor despite being in the starting lineup for the first three matches. And as pollars has noted, she probably won’t see the court much from here on out.

Bet they'll roll her out in the Finals at the end, if they're up big

Zero minutes in an incredibly competitive game.

We can criticize whatever we want. That's what the internet is for.

But understand when you are criticizing the decisions of USA Women's Basketball, that's pretty rich.

You gonna tell Apple how to make more money? You gonna nitpick Mahomes or Brady? You gonna tell Toyota how to make a better truck? You gonna tell Warren Buffett how he might need to adjust his portfolio?

Pick your analogy of domination, it fits. 61 straight Olympic wins. Undefeated since 19-freaking-92. They've dominated the Olympics so badly that there's no reason to even compare them to anyone else anymore.

If you and Clay Travis have better ideas about what USA Women's Basketball needs to do, that's fine. You can.

They aren't perfect, and the rest of the world is clearly catching up. But for you or me to think we could do it better? Again, that's rich.

People that don't follow women's basketball are suddenly experts on women's basketball. That's fine. Except that you are talking about the most dominant sports program in the history of sports.

In any other world, an old fart sitting on the couch telling this program how they should do it better would be the most laughable stance ever. But here we are.

Seems like valid criticism to me. I follow college WBB, not WNBA. But the quality of the US play in today's game was pretty awful. They were lucky to win IMO. Obviously, I was rooting for them, so I'm glad they did, but watching the game I thought it was clearly obvious that they made a mistake leaving Clark off the roster.

Agreed, but heck, it’s not even about Clark necessarily. How about go make peace with Ogunbawale (or maybe don’t snub her three years ago for political reasons)?

 

[bigbottom]

It's a sign of how engaged we are as fans when it comes to basketball that our men's and women's teams have completely dominated the international game our entire adult lifetimes, have just each won gold, and less than 24 hours later the main topic is what both teams need to do to be better next time.

There is no time for complaceny! Back in the gym training tomorrow!!!

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Taurasi didn't play much, deservedly so I suppose, but her bona fides is beyond reproach. 6 gold medals in a team sport puts her on a very short list. 3X WNBA champ, 7X Russian League Champ, 6X Euro League Champ, one Turkish League Champ, and 3X NCAA Champ, dozens of MVP/All-star seasons along the way. She's one of one. Its very hard to tell the coach of this team that she would be better off with a rookie who's less than 6 months removed from playing her home games in Iowa City.

 

[General Malaise]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

For me, it's been the start times. I don't have Peacock, so missed some stuff. But I got to see almost every event I wanted to see live - except boxing, which I didn't get to see at all.

The L.A. Games are gonna suck for me from a viewing perspective.

Got a room here in Oregon for you GB.

 

[Osaurus]

How many of these athletes actually know who Phoenix are?

 

[Mr. Mojo]

My first reaction: "What - Breakdancing???"
Then I watched it and those guys were amazing!

 

[bigbottom]

Taurasi didn't play much, deservedly so I suppose, but her bona fides is beyond reproach. 6 gold medals in a team sport puts her on a very short list. 3X WNBA champ, 7X Russian League Champ, 6X Euro League Champ, one Turkish League Champ, and 3X NCAA Champ, dozens of MVP/All-star seasons along the way. She's one of one. Its very hard to tell the coach of this team that she would be better off with a rookie who's less than 6 months removed from playing her home games in Iowa City.

She was already the GOAT. Lauding her for her getting her record sixth team gold medal almost takes a little of the shine off when she rode the bench and contributed very little on the floor. But she may have been extremely valuable as a team leader and unofficial assistant coach. That doesn’t show up in the stats.

And again, I’m not an expert on current WNBA talent. I can’t say whether they would have done better with Clark over Taurasi (she likely would have rode the bench as much or more). But I’m sure there are a bunch of other talented guards (like Ogunbawale if they could have made peace with her) that made more sense. I guess I just don’t like legacy picks. And the logic was, “hey we can afford a legacy pick because it’s not like anyone is going to come close to beating us.”

 

[Osaurus]

Grim Reaper's guitar solo is epic

 

[The Kansas Comet]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

As with others, the start times were a big factor in my enjoyment. It was great to watch the big events during the day as they happened and not have to wait for the compressed primetime coverage. Also, if I missed something, being able to catch up and watch it online was a good option to have. I also liked that the organizers tried to create amazing backdrops for the competition, such as having beach volleyball in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower or the equestrian competition at Versailles.

Aside from that, I really enjoyed the different stories and performances from US track & field team as well as the men's basketball competition.

 

[UncleZen]

How many of these athletes actually know who Phoenix are?

I don't.

 

[Chris B.]

Gabby Thomas didn't hurt either.

I love that woman with all my heart. Oh, and Ana Hall... and the triple jump girl with the pegleg husband. And Sydney McLaughlin. And the super muscular American discuss thrower.

 

[UncleZen]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

As with others, the start times were a big factor in my enjoyment. It was great to watch the big events during the day as they happened and not have to wait for the compressed primetime coverage. Also, if I missed something, being able to catch up and watch it online was a good option to have. I also liked that the organizers tried to create amazing backdrops for the competition, such as having beach volleyball in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower or the equestrian competition at Versailles.

Aside from that, I really enjoyed the different stories and performances from US track & field team as well as the men's basketball competition.

Yeah, I have to agree regarding the scenery. That was an incredible part of these Olympics.

 

[bigbottom]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

As with others, the start times were a big factor in my enjoyment. It was great to watch the big events during the day as they happened and not have to wait for the compressed primetime coverage. Also, if I missed something, being able to catch up and watch it online was a good option to have. I also liked that the organizers tried to create amazing backdrops for the competition, such as having beach volleyball in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower or the equestrian competition at Versailles.

Aside from that, I really enjoyed the different stories and performances from US track & field team as well as the men's basketball competition.

Yeah, I have to agree regarding the scenery. That was an incredible part of these Olympics.

Ditto. Absolutely amazing backdrops.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I can’t say whether they would have done better with Clark over Taurasi

Yeah, the 11th player on the bench is the 11th player on the bench -- so bringing a vet that's been there and done that probably makes sense.

OTOH, based on my deep knowledge of the WNBA from watching 10 players for two games in the Olympics and seeing occasional Twitter highlights of Clark, I'm reasonably sure Clark is the best passer in the league already.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

This has been an extremely enjoyable Olympics to watch.

I agree, but why? Ability to see so many events via streaming? European start times during the day? Good US performance? I was trying to think why I liked 2024 so much more than prior years and I'm not really sure.

As with others, the start times were a big factor in my enjoyment. It was great to watch the big events during the day as they happened and not have to wait for the compressed primetime coverage. Also, if I missed something, being able to catch up and watch it online was a good option to have. I also liked that the organizers tried to create amazing backdrops for the competition, such as having beach volleyball in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower or the equestrian competition at Versailles.

Aside from that, I really enjoyed the different stories and performances from US track & field team as well as the men's basketball competition.

Yeah, I have to agree regarding the scenery. That was an incredible part of these Olympics.

The route for the cycling road race was also stunning, winding past castles and museums and beautiful countryside. But I guess the French are pretty good at designing a bike route. Other than the Seinne debacle, which I guess was a calculated risk, Paris has done a fantastic job.

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

the Chiles saga may not be over yet... apparently we've submitted a time-stamped video showing they submitted their appeal on time.

USA Gymnastics requests Jordan Chiles ruling be revised, submits new video proving inquiry was filed in time

Chiles was stripped of her bronze floor medal on a technicality, but USA Gymnastics says a time-stamped video proves that proper protocols were followed.

sports.yahoo.com

FFS just give both of these poor girls a bronze medal!

 

[Don Quixote]

H.E.R. Star Spangled Banner - f yeah.

 

[bigbottom]

This is super fun. Los Angeles baby!

 

[Nathan R. Jessep]

This is super fun. Los Angeles baby!

all we needed was the 2Pac hologram!

 

[TLEF316]

Yeah....lots of fun these last couple of weeks. Caught a "good break" getting COVID the first week (so I got to stay home and watch everything) and then caught a bunch of stuff this week as well.

Will be interesting in LA when so much stuff is live in prime time. They're gonna do MASSIVE ratings on the made for TV stuff like Gymnastics and Swimming.

 

[Tau837]

Taurasi didn't play much, deservedly so I suppose, but her bona fides is beyond reproach. 6 gold medals in a team sport puts her on a very short list. 3X WNBA champ, 7X Russian League Champ, 6X Euro League Champ, one Turkish League Champ, and 3X NCAA Champ, dozens of MVP/All-star seasons along the way. She's one of one. Its very hard to tell the coach of this team that she would be better off with a rookie who's less than 6 months removed from playing her home games in Iowa City.

No one has questioned her accomplishments. That has nothing to do with what was best for this team this year. The men brought a few guys similar to Taurasi... one was tournament MVP, one won the Gold Medal game in the final 3 minutes, and the other made a strong contribution in several games. If Taurasi was able to contribute like Lebron, Curry, and Durant, it would have been the right decision to include her. But she can't, and it wasn't.

It didn't have to be Clark to replace her, that is just who came to my mind while I watched the US offense struggle to score today. The fact that Taurasi shouldn't have been on the roster is independent from who should have been on it instead.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

I get a little drunk and carried away.

We need breathalyzers for keyboards and phones.

 

[Tau837]

the Chiles saga may not be over yet... apparently we've submitted a time-stamped video showing they submitted their appeal on time.

USA Gymnastics requests Jordan Chiles ruling be revised, submits new video proving inquiry was filed in time

Chiles was stripped of her bronze floor medal on a technicality, but USA Gymnastics says a time-stamped video proves that proper protocols were followed.

sports.yahoo.com

FFS just give both of these poor girls a bronze medal!

Based on the initial US appeal, we know that Chiles actually finished 3rd but wasn't initially recognized as 3rd due to a judging error. The US identified that and immediately appealed. The fact that the appeal has to be made within 60 seconds doesn't change the correct scores. Everyone knows that she finished ahead of the other gymnast. She didn't cheat, the judges made an error. To not allow her to keep her bronze is completely absurd.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Caught a "good break" getting COVID the first week (so I got to stay home and watch everything)

Bet no one ever thought this could be even slightly good. Timing really is everything.

 

[GregR]

If you could be present at Los Angeles 2028, which events would you try to attend?

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Did the U.S. really win some kind of tiebreaker on the gold medals? If so, why?

 

[the moops]

@Terminalxylem you catch all the sport climbing stuff? man that was incredible to watch

 

[GroveDiesel]

Does China have any more chances at adding Golds?

M

the Chiles saga may not be over yet... apparently we've submitted a time-stamped video showing they submitted their appeal on time.

USA Gymnastics requests Jordan Chiles ruling be revised, submits new video proving inquiry was filed in time

Chiles was stripped of her bronze floor medal on a technicality, but USA Gymnastics says a time-stamped video proves that proper protocols were followed.

sports.yahoo.com

FFS just give both of these poor girls a bronze medal!

Agreed. Just give it to both of them at this point after jerking then both around emotionally like this.

Pretty insane though if the video really does show that they appealed in time. Gotta wonder what the 1 minute 4 seconds claim is based on.