If this Olympic Games leaves us with any legacy, let it be that the phrase 'podium pants' now enters the lexicon.
The Irish brothers Gary and Paul O'Donovan might have only taken home the silver medal, but they've become global stars thanks to the hilarious interviews they've been giving after their event in Rio, from going into unnecessary detail about the process of giving urine samples, to expressing their disappointment about not being back at the pub at home in Skibbereen.
In fact, most of my favourite moments at the Olympic Games this year have been from 'losers' — presuming you can really apply that label to anyone who's reached the elite level of a global sport.
Australian runner Ella Nelson was informed in a live TV interview that she'd missed out on qualifying for the 200m final by 0.1 of a second. You can see the disappointment flash across her face in the video but then moments later she recovers as she takes in the whole moment.
'I just ran a PB (personal best) at the Olympic Games,' she says. 'I couldn't have asked for a better 2016. I hate that it's one hundredth ... but I'm so happy. How can I not be?'
These moments provide a fascinating contrast to the columns that have been appearing in the media following what has been a disappointing Olympics in terms of medals success.
Australia appears likely to fall well short of its pre-games medal target of 13 gold medals, with many of its more fancied contenders failing to live up to the high public expectations. In fact, Australia looks like not even reaching its medal total for the London Olympics (35 medals), which was the country's worst performance in 20 years.
Apart from the women's rugby sevens and the men's basketball team, Australia's performances in team sports have been disastrous, with teams in rugby, hockey, basketball and soccer dropping out in early rounds. Swimmers and cyclists and other athletes who had previously had success in world championships have failed to win medals.
"How inspired does a local butcher get when they see the little kid who used to come into the shop with her parents competing in the judo tournament? How do you put a financial price on these outcomes?"
Criticisms have been raised about the government's Winning Edge funding strategy, which has seen money poured into elite sports where Australia has traditionally been most successful or where medals seemed most likely. It has seen increased funding directed into 14 Olympic sports, including basketball, cycling, diving and shooting.
This approach to funding inevitably leads people to calculate whether Australia has received 'value for money' for its investments. If a gold medal represents such value, then any achievement that doesn't end up in gold feels like money squandered. It might be well and good for an athlete to talk about achieving a 'personal best', but then the inevitable response is, 'Do taxpayers fund people to compete only against themselves?'
While the mercenary response to our games efforts is an inevitable consequence of our approach to funding mostly those with a chance of achieving medals, it doesn't necessarily have much to do with what people actually get out of watching or being part of the Olympics. There's another factor in the equation, a human factor, that's a lot harder to put a monetary value on and a lot harder to measure.
How much of a lift to the spirit does a school get when it watches one of its recent graduates compete in the track cycling against the best in the world? How inspired does a local butcher get when they see the little kid who used to come into the shop with her parents competing in the judo tournament? How proud do Ella Nelson's parents and friends feel about the way she conducted herself after her event? How do you put a financial price on these outcomes?
I'm not saying that, in a limited funding picture, there shouldn't be some consideration given to directing so much money to elite sport over grassroots competitions. I'm also happy to concede that we can be just as inspired by the stories and examples of overseas athletes as we can be by Australians. I'm just wondering if perhaps this focus on value for our investment has somewhat overshadowed the deeper value of having Australians striving to be part of this gathering of the world's greatest athletes.
As so many of the 'losers' at the Olympics have shown, in the grace and humour of their responses to failure, it's not winning that makes a person great. Indeed, a few of the winners at this games haven't acted like great people outside the competitive arena. What draws people to a person, what will make them cheer for that person even when they've fallen down and injured themselves and all that's left is to stumble across the line, is that we see something of ourselves in their efforts. Their small victories are our small victories.
If we're going to review where we direct our Olympic funding, perhaps we should look less at those people who are the best chance for medals, and more at those people who are most likely to inspire us with their efforts. Even if that's a lot more difficult to measure.
Michael McVeigh is the editor of Australian Catholics magazine and senior editor at Jesuit Communications.