Well, the Olympics are finally over. And not a moment too soon, some might say. One more airing of the I Believe theme tune, and we were all ready to scream.
But before the memories and emotions die away completely, a question must be asked: Are we satisfied with the result?
Canada ended up a modest 13th in the medal standings, while winning just a single gold. We were outpaced by countries with smaller populations, such as Australia and the Netherlands. And we were left in the dust by less affluent nations, such as China and Ukraine.
That latter comparison is worth noting. The 12 countries above Canada in the final rankings averaged three times as many medals per dollar of gross domestic product. Assuming a nation's wealth should play some part in its ability to compete, we punch far below our weight.
Indeed, we only just beat out Hungary, Cuba and Kazakhstan in the medal list. And their combined economies are less than a third the size of Canada's.
Of course, the playing field isn't quite level. Some of the countries high in the standings, such as China and South Korea, view athletic performance as an extension of sovereignty or politics. They spend vast sums to prove a point.
Russia still benefits from the huge investment in sports infrastructure made by the former Soviet Union.
But accepting that reality, if Canada's Olympic performance matched our demographic and economic potential, we should at least come in somewhere around 10th. And our medal count ought to be twice as high, perhaps more.
There's another point to be considered. What advantages we have won't last.
As Third World countries slowly modernize their economies and expand their populations, the competition for medals will grow. Brazil came in three places behind Canada in the London Games, despite having a bigger economy and a population five times as large.
But the 2016 games are in Rio de Janeiro, and the Brazilian government has pledged to spend $700 million on its athletes. Other South American countries will likely follow suit. Just holding 13th place will be a challenge for Canada.
So, do we care? And if we do, is there anything we can do about it?
At one level, there are surely more important things in life. And is it really true that money spent on elite competitors will trickle down to the community?
How many residents of Greater Victoria get to row one of those racing sculls out at Elk Lake? How many of us would even wish to?
Yet there's more to the picture than that. When the schools go back next month, a lot of little girls will be signing up for soccer, thanks to Christine Sinclair's moment in the sun. Dreams that have an anchor in reality are more likely to be fulfilled.
And practically speaking, if we do care, there are some options open. A quick look at Canada's medal list reveals a striking fact: Our successes clearly tracked the resources invested in each event.
Three years ago, the federal government and a consortium of sports organizations developed a program to subsidize Olympic athletes. The Own the Podium project spent $106 million in areas where it was believed 91原创 athletes had the best chance of winning.
By far the largest expenditures came in swimming and rowing/kayaking. And it seems to have worked. In London, almost half of Canada's 18 medals were in those two fields.
In short, it does appear that targeted financial support can be successful. And while $100 million is a huge investment, it may be the least we can spend and still hope to make a respectable showing on the podium.
That scarcely sounds like an endorsement. But it does seem realistic.
