Winter Olympics: To stop down or not to stop down

My virtual friends Bob and Dan had a long conversation on their show yesterday regarding their (and America's) interest in the Winter Olympics. Their discussion, conclusions, and theories struck a chord with me.

The discussion revolved around the Winter Olympics' status as a sports-viewing choice. As kids, Bob and Dan (and me, too) remember putting aside all other sporting events to watch the Olympics each night. Back in the pre-cable, three-networks day, the Winter Olympics (and the Summer Games, as well) were required viewing for everyone. The other two networks usually curled up into a little ball for those two weeks and presented reruns, knowing they had no chance against the ratings juggernaut that was the Olympic Games.

Now, not so much. Bob and Dan both commented on the fact that they were far less interested than they used to be. They concluded, and I agree, the Olympics have lost their mystique and are now sort of run-of-the-mill sports TV, not worthy of a complete stop-down.

The theories as to why were especially interesting to me. Bob and Dan seemed to agree on three primary reasons:

1. Sports clutter
If you remember the 70's, you'll probably also remember the lack of sports programming during prime-time. Sports was a weekend thing with very few exceptions. It was rare to be able to tune in a national game of any consequence on television on a random Tuesday night. The Olympics were the big exception - you had two weeks of non-stop prime-time sports coverage and, thus, it was a vacation for the sports fan.

No longer. Now, the nights without a game of some interest to just about anyone is a rarity. The Olympics are just another choice. Even though the NHL is taking the two weeks (or most of it) off, the NBA, college basketball, a full slate of ESPN and Fox Sports programming continue.

2. The disintegration of the Soviet bloc
The Olympics used to be a relatively safe venue for the Cold War to heat up. The Soviets, East Germans, Romanians, Czechs, and other Communist bloc countries always fielded huge, skilled, and highly trained teams in both the Summer and Winter Games. Gymnastics, hockey, swimming, figure skating, basketball, and other sports were always tremendous competition between the good guys (the US) and the bad guys (the commies). National pride was always at stake, with the biggest and best example being the hockey and basketball tournaments.

Now, the bad guys are a lot harder to find. We hate Iran (I guess - they're making it easy to hate them lately), but it's politically incorrect to get too worked up about them. And, maybe more to the point, Iran is not much of threat in the Alpine Skiing events, or any other events that Americans give a hoot about.

The Chinese are a more formidable opponent during the Summer Games, but are they really the "bad guys"? Certainly not in the sense that the Soviets were. Our relationship with the Chinese is confusing, and sports is no place for confusion. We need a clear good guy/bad guy confrontation, like Red Sox-Yankees. EVERYONE has a clear rooting interest in those contests. There's nothing like that on the Olympic stage any more.

3. The pros dominate
Even the "amateurs" are professional these days, and in the marquee team sports (hockey and basketball), it's become a twist on the NHL All-Star format. The days of hungry college kids getting worked into the ground by a Herb Brooks are long gone, and so are the inspirational stories that went with those hungry college kids. The Games are much more bland and less exciting as a result.

I agree with all of these theories.

I'm trying to get my kids into the Olympics, with some success so far. Colorful characters like Bode Miller and Hermann Maier help a lot, as do some unique events like luge and skeleton. The kids seem semi-interested in those things.

But it's not the same. The Olympics represent some cherished memories from my childhood. I don't think it's going to be the same for my kids.

And that's too bad.