The U.S. Olympic men's basketball team lost for the first time in 16 years to Puerto Rico. I guess it had to happen sometime.

This brings up the age-old question: should professional athletes be allowed to compete in the Olympics? It's a tough question to answer - I can see both sides of the argument.

On the one hand, if you bring in professional athletes in basketball, you are going to be in a situation like we have had for the last 16 years, where one country dominates the sport. Using amateur athletes generally assures a fairer contest.

Another interesting observation is that athletes that make tens of millions of dollars per year tend not to get as much out of the Olympic experience. They fly in just before their event, stay in the most expensive suite in a 5-star hotel, and fly back to their home country after their event is over. They miss the Olympic village, the comraderie with other athletes, the ceremonies - some athletes make friends that will last a lifetime. But I doubt Ervin “Magic” Johnson took those experiences away with him during his Olympic games in 1992.

And thirdly, amateur athletes spend four years of their life preparing for the next Olympics. That is their "world championships". Professional baseball players have the World Series, basketball players have the NBA Championships, hockey players have the Stanley Cup. These pros already HAVE a dream to persue. It would seem that, to many of them, winning at the Olympics is actually worth less than winning their own sport's championship. It's almost a wasted gold medal - I'd rather it go to someone who appreciates it.

Looking at the other side of the coin, if the Olympics are about finding the best athletes in the world, noone should be excluded. If the professional figure skaters were excluded from the Olympics, then the gold medal winner could not claim to be the best skater in the world, as some professionals might be able to beat them.

Second, the only difference between a "professional" and an "amateur" is money. A professional makes a living from the sport - endorsements or winnings. Do we want all of our Olympic athletes to be poor and destitute? Or should the only people eligble to compete come from rich families that can afford to subsidize them? That seems like a silly distinction to me. If you can make a living being a professional weight-lifter, all the power to you. If you work at Home Depot and only weight lift on the side, you might not be able to devote as many hours to training as the professional, but it's still a fair competition.

In the end, I guess I agree that professionals should be allowed in the Olympics. Perhaps I have a problem with some of these modern sports being Olympic events. I mean, if baseball, basketball and soccer are Olympic sports, why not football and chess?

But that's another argument for another day. ;)