ANON12, I'm sure you love your all-caps alias, but can you try out the occasional lowercase letter in your topic titles? Thanks. The topics themselves are great!

For those who haven't heard about this, FIBA are looking at the power of the soccer/football World Cup and looking to emulate it. As it stands, a top competition in the Olympics is largely outside of FIBA control so it makes sense for them to tweak things such that the retitled World Championships are the big deal.

Thus, U23 Olympic competition, then the big dogs come out for the World Champs. I don't mind it at all - would be great to see different looks at each countries talent stocks.

One benefit is that the Aussies have historically done very well at international under-23 basketball.

I have to agree Issac. The international basketball scene is extremely crowded at the moment, so making the Olympics an under-23 event has a lot of merit.

It will ensure that the players go all out to be part of it, as you're likely only to get one or maximum two shots at being an Olympian.

And the newly rebranded World Cup becomes the 'big ticket' event for senior international basketball.

XY - As you noted Australia have historically done well at this age level. I wonder how serious the USA would get if this occurred. Would they still send basically a rookie NBA side or would they use a mixture of NBA and College players or purely College players? The European teams would still be strong. Would an Under 23 competition make it a more even playing field? The other interesting question - would FIBA also make this the standard for the Women's competition? That - IMO - would certainly level the playing field.

These guys would form the core of our team for London if it was an under-23 event;

Ryan BROEKHOFF / 201cm / Guard-Forward / 23-08-1990
Mitch CREEK / 197cm / Forward / 27-04-1992
Matt DELLAVEDOVA / 190cm / Guard / 08-09-1990
Anthony DRMIC / 196cm / Guard / 25-02-1992
Hugh GREENWOOD 189cm / Guard / 06-03-1992
Brock MOTUM / 206cm / Forward / 16-10-1990

If they don't make the Olympics an U/23 event, they should at least make an effort to set up an U/21 WC.

I know lack of money will always be the biggest hurdle to overcome.

But I feel the Europeans get a really good advantage at continually been exposed to international basketball because there is the Under 20 Eurobasket.

With Aus/NZ its either Under 19 or Senior Team.

Why is it that Australia do well at the younger level championships (U18/20/23 etc) and then get destroyed in the open age Olympics / WCs?

Can someone help explain?

I want to see the best of the best compete on an international level, I don't know about the rest of you, but I like seeing Spain, Argentina, USA, Lithuania, Russia, Australia etc. playing with their best players. I pay attention to the FIFA World Cup, but not to the soccer in the Olympics, because it just doesn't have the same competitive feel. The Olympics is not for developing players, it's not for showing the best youth, it's for showing the best players each nation has full stop and winning some bragging rights along the way.

In the last decade-plus, it hasn't been an all-USA domination either, it's a different style of ball and one that I want to see played at the elitest of elite of levels.

I understand all of this insurance, potential for injury and NBA owner investment into their players, but we've persisted in the past without too many problems, I'm a fan of the status quo. I want to see the best of each nation compete, a little bit of patriotism and bragging rights to basketball.

"I pay attention to the FIFA World Cup, but not to the soccer in the Olympics"

Yep, that's exactly the point of doing this. They WANT you to think this way, so that the WC is where it's at.

I like the status quo as I get to see the best teams compete twice in a four year period. Stern only gives a shit about the NBA (which is his job). The problem is though that while in the past (before dream team) if the NBA didn't want to play it only reflected on the USA team and they could still send some college guys who were still competitive. Now all countries would lose many of their best players if they are pressured by their teams so the WC option every four years may be the only compromise available.

Keep it the same.

This isn't like Rugby where teams play each other on an international level all the time. If anything, two tournaments in four years isn't enough. I want to see more tournaments, even if they are smaller four nations cups or similar.

Vart, "The international basketball scene is extremely crowded at the moment".


No. No. No.

It is the complete opposite my friend.
There simply isn't enough International basketball.

Soccer has international friendlies in allocated windows.
Rugby has games and tours in between the WC, 4 nations, 6 nations etc.
Hockey have regular tours and tournaments
Cricket have heaps of tours and get games in.