Int'l Basketball Semantics

[yum dukie]

I find it interesting that the recent FIBA tournament in Las Vegas is overwhelmingly referred to as an Olympic qualifying tournament rather than the championship of North and South America. While factually correct that the top 2 qualify for the Olympics, my understanding is that the other continents (Europe, Asia, Africa) always prefer to call their tournaments the European Championship or Asian Championship. Is this an issue of pride vs. priority? I think USA is much more proud of having qualified for Beijing than being the Champion of these continents (I've seen the articles of team members enjoying their gold medals, but again i think that's because they actually won a tournament, not because they are Champion of the Americas). But I would guess Iran is probably just as proud of being Asian champion as they are of qualifying for Beijing.

Did media in other N/S American countries refer to this tournament as the continental championship or Olympic qualifying tourney?

Similarly, I've always thought it curious that we value the Olympics over the Worlds. What is it about the Olympics that if we win we think of ourselves as more of a world champion than if we actually won the World Championship (is this like valuing either the ACC regular season or the ACC tourney? :) ). Is it that the Olympics are an extravaganza? ok, then why not baseball? Soccer I understand, that's under-23 only.

[hc5duke]

I don't think it would make sense to call it continental, since that could describe any of the different championship games :p And technically N.A. and S.A. are on different tectonic plates AND separated by a canal. Maybe "American Championship" sounds like it's for (with apologies to Ms. Upton ;)) U.S. Americans. I would guess maybe because other continents have more competitive history - as an example, on even years when the Summer Olympics aren't held (I guess that's when the winter one is?), Asian countries have Asian Games (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Games),

[mapei]

Of course, the US has a long tradition of informally calling its pro championships in various sports the "world" championships. It's even imbedded in the name of the World Series.

[SilkyJ]

Similarly, I've always thought it curious that we value the Olympics over the Worlds. What is it about the Olympics that if we win we think of ourselves as more of a world champion than if we actually won the World Championship (is this like valuing either the ACC regular season or the ACC tourney? :) ). Is it that the Olympics are an extravaganza? ok, then why not baseball? Soccer I understand, that's under-23 only.

well for one, each of the olympics are held every 4 years as opposed to every year. Maybe it would help to imagine the ACC tourney being played every year, but the NCAA happening every four years...or every other year for that matter.

[hc5duke]

Of course, the US has a long tradition of informally calling its pro championships in various sports the "world" championships. It's even imbedded in the name of the World Series.

I know you're probably joking, but that's because the various pro championships are played by the world's best athletes. For example, the U.S. baseball team didn't win the world baseball classic, but the cardinals team from last year would have no problem taking care of whoever won the Japanese or Korean league last year, and the Spurs would beat any Euro league champions.

[SilkyJ]

I know you're probably joking, but that's because the various pro championships are played by the world's best athletes. For example, the U.S. baseball team didn't win the world baseball classic, but the cardinals team from last year would have no problem taking care of whoever won the Japanese or Korean league last year, and the Spurs would beat any Euro league champions.

well if you said it, it must be true.

[Johnboy]

Huh. I thought that's why they played the games. I mean, the Russians would have no problem with the U.S.A. in 1980, right?

[Carlos]

I could be wrong... but that's never stopped me before.

First, it should be noted that the official entity for the American team - USA Basketball - does refer to the competition as the FIBA Americas Championship.

Beyond that though I think part of the reason for the use of "Olympic Qualifying Tournament" as opposed to Championship is that the US doesn't always participate in the tournament - foregoing it on those frequent occasions when they don't have to use it to qualify for either the Olympic games or the World Championships. (As compared to Spain who, despite qualifying for next year's O games is still playing in the Euro tournament - although that may have something to do with the fact that they are the host country as well.)

At any rate, since the US may not always participate it's hard for anyone here to call the tournament any kind of "championship" if the best team in the area is routinely not involved.

[mapei]

I know you're probably joking, but that's because the various pro championships are played by the world's best athletes. For example, the U.S. baseball team didn't win the world baseball classic, but the cardinals team from last year would have no problem taking care of whoever won the Japanese or Korean league last year, and the Spurs would beat any Euro league champions.

Actually, I wasn't joking. Yes, the US pro league champions probably could beat the other leagues 9 times out of 10, or even 19 out of 20, in the big US sports (not so in soccer, obviously) but making the assumption without actually playing the game strikes me as wrong.

[hc5duke]

Actually, I wasn't joking. Yes, the US pro league champions probably could beat the other leagues 9 times out of 10, or even 19 out of 20, in the big US sports (not so in soccer, obviously) but making the assumption without actually playing the game strikes me as wrong.

Fair enough, but by that logic, shouldn't the BCS champ have to play ASU before being called national champs?

[Exiled_Devil]

I'm with you. The 'world series', the NBA 'world champions' are both all-out innacuracies. marketing at its worst. the NFL being world-champs is legit, but that is only becuase we don't play proper football.

The World cup is the only legitimate world championship I can think of - everyone can participate, and most do.

Exiled

[Wander]

Fair enough, but by that logic, shouldn't the BCS champ have to play ASU before being called national champs?

Not exactly, but something like that. There is no national championship in college football.

[hc5duke]

Not exactly, but something like that. There is no national championship in college football.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/BCSGameNO08.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCS_National_Championship_Game

[Wander]

That game is for the BCS title, not a national championship. There's a difference. I don't care what they call it or what trophies they hand out afterwards. There is no national championship game in college football.