FIBA, which is the French acronym for bored basketball fan civil servants, is floating the idea of introducing a three-on-three tournament for the 2016 Olympics, which leads me to ask a question.Who, other than these blockheads, thought this was needed?I mean, have you ever watched a basketball game and thought, You know, I like this, but there are just too many players to keep track of, and I get confused?Let me answer that for you. No. Nobody. Ever.What this is, the only thing it can be, is medal envy. There is one gold medal winner well, 12, actually, but only one event. Basketball. And since the U.S. usually wins it, nobody in America has ever felt the need to want more.But FIBA sees swimming, which has 130 events or so, and gymnastics, which has about 200, including the always popular stick-figures-waving-ribbons-and-hula-hoops to music you would only play outside houses with criminals inside whom you wish to draw out into the open.And there really is only one other basketball event. I mean, even they wouldnt offer up layup lines, or H-O-R-S-E, or play to 21 by twos. Not even the greatest H-O-R-S-E player ever would watch it, probably because he lives at a playground and doesnt have Internet service.In short, FIBA, having failed to provide an answer to Who Asked For This, Why? or Is This Something You Want To Propose Out In The Open With Your Names Attached To It, Really? doesnt have a compelling argument. True, we didnt ask for an endless series of shows about rich spoiled housewives trying to de-eye each other while wearing ball gowns on television either, but thats our fault for watching to begin with.This is beyond fathoming. 3-on-3 is best in its natural environment, the playground. You know, where you find the teeter totter and the monkey bars and the chain link fence and the round metal backboards and the sand pit and the hopscotch games. Somehow, with Brazil so far unable to provide most of the stadia required of it, this is the one thing they probably can manage.But thats still no reason to give people something they dont want, never wanted, and believe that there will be minimal competition.FIBA, at the very least, should be forced to show that there are other countries that could effectively challenge the U.S. in 3-on-3. I wager there are not there are certainly fewer than challenged the U.S. for gold in stodgy boring old 5-on-5.But once it manages to fabricate that evidence, it should then be forced to produce people who give a damn. That they will not be able to do, unless its by using the Hey, you want more rhythmic gymnastics on TV? argument. And even then theyll barely break even.Oh, well. Progress, I suppose. And now, back to Real Housewives of Council Bluffs, Iowa. This weeks episode, The Grange Meeting Pie Incident.
No logic, explanantion behind FIBA's 3-on-3 idea
August 15, 2012, 10:10 pm