Thursday, March 31, 2005

Olympics over-rated? Nah.

Yahoo! Sports - MLS (article)

One of the topics that i argued last night was that the Olympics are not over-rated. One of the reasons that i said that they were not is because of the huge benefit they have for the city that hosts them. Then this morning, while on the way for getting read for class, I read this story about the 10th season of Major League Soccer, and the two new expansion teams, the Deportivo Chivas and Real Salt Lake.

Playing host to the 2002 Olympic Winter Games also was a big factor in the decision to expand into Salt Lake City.
"Salt Lake's success on the international stage with the Olympics was part of what went into making this decision," principal owner Dave Checketts said. "But we fought long and hard to bring this team to Utah."

So, in conclusion, you can see that the Olympics are not over-rated. They are the biggest thing that can happen to a city, and have replaced the Worlds Fair as the best way to showcase large cities to the rest of the world.


The Math Ninja said... are not being sarcastic -or- are being sarcastic?

I vote "advocate" (non-sarcasam)

Ookami Snow said...

The point i made during the argument is reinforced by this article, mainly the Olympics is bigger than just the sports. But in general i believe it is borderline whether or not the Olympics are over-rated.