Jump to content

Quaker2001

Members
  • Content Count

    6890
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    144

Everything posted by Quaker2001

  1. Quaker2001

    Los Angeles 2028

    They changed the format for Tokyo to reduce the number of games (teams will play 3 games in the preliminary round rather than 5), probably in response to the addition of the 3x3 tournaments. Perhaps LA is proposing to go back to the previous format and decided it would be smarter to hold the women's games in a smaller venue rather than to use the Staples Center for 6 games a day 10 straight days.
  2. Quaker2001

    Tokyo 2020 Media Updates

    Tokyo 2020: Additional sports to be broadcast live.. A total of 21 Paralympic disciplines from 19 sports will be screened
  3. What krow said. If no one really cares, why are we discussing this? Drug cheating is different because you can take away a person's medals, although if it happens after the fact, isn't that a FUGGEDABOUT IT? Hard to leave something for posterity that doesn't match with what people experienced. You're right that it would be tough to figure out what happened. For an organization like the IOC thought that's trying to regain the public's trust and desperately trying to prove to cities it's still worthwhile to host the Olympics, this is not a good look. If anyone involved in this (whatever it was that happened) is still connected with the IOC, then it's absolutely worth pursuing to throw them out on their asses. Yes, the IOC will probably get through this even if it turns out to be a bigger deal than it seems. But maybe they shouldn't be so quick to say "oops, we missed it.. oh well, what can ya do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯." After all, it was years before they figured out what went on with Salt Lake and they still dealt with that.
  4. As much as Rio didn't go well (although some of the negative stories that were predicted never came to pass.. as it is with most Olympics) and there was some political fallout, I don't think this is something that will cast a black cloud over the IOC in terms of future bidding. Salt Lake certainly didn't, as if this is something the IOC hasn't dealt with before. And yes, I'll be curious to see how it goes for FIFA with Qatar. Because usually once the games start, most of the minutiae gets pushed off to the backburner. Might not be quite so easy to do that with the World Cup.
  5. What does 1 have to do with the other? And what statute of limitations are we talking about? Athletes have been stripped of medals years after the fact. Obviously Brazil can't un-host the Olympics, but if there are people still with the IOC who were involved in wrongdoing, then they should get kicked out of the club. If Brazilian officials were involved, that's for them to sort out on their own. Either way, this is definitely not a case of "well, the Olympics already happened, so who cares to do anything about it"
  6. My thoughts exactly. With Salt Lake for 2002, I would have taken a lot of votes to change the outcome. With 2016, not so much. So yes, this definitely creates the possibility that it affected the outcome of the vote.
  7. IOC makes sweeping changes to their host selection process. And around a week later, this news comes down. Not a good look for the IOC
  8. A Summer Olympics in January?..
  9. What "anyone else"? These Olympics are still 13 years away. The IOC hasn't set any sort of timeline for how or when they'll decide on who hosts 2032. Australia doesn't get extra credit just because they're the first ones to raise their hands and start working with the IOC. Like you said, if China comes along and says they're offering up Shanghai - and they still have years ahead of us to do that - then no one is likely to remember that Australia was potentially offering up Brisbane years in advance.
  10. Like I said, if that's the direction the AOC wants to go, then the IOC doesn't really get to have an opinion or a preference on that one. If the AOC is putting forth Brisbane because they feel it has a better chance of being selected than Melbourne or Sydney, I'm sure they've weighed those options. But from what I'm reading - and correct me if I'm wrong here because this is your city we're talking about - it sounds like it's going to be pretty expensive. They say it fits in with some of the city's long term urban development plans, but I have some reservations about just how much they will need to spend and how that's going to look in an environment where the IOC is looking for existing infrastructure and to avoid large amounts of spending. Because the most recent string of hosts for the most part have been some of the world's largest and most prominent cities. No disrespect to Brisbane, but I don't know if it fits that mold. So if the IOC is given a choice between Brisbane or a larger city/region (who knows if they'll have that choice though), which city is the IOC could to choose? Key phrase in that last sentence.. "at the moment." If we were still operating under the old formula, applications for the 2028 Olympics Olympics probably wouldn't be due for another couple of months and we'd be 2 full years from the vote. I don't get where people on this site are making it seem like the IOC is ready to choose the 2032 host city right now just because they have 1 country that's showing interest. Of course the IOC should take it seriously. But it takes a whole lot more than a couple of meetings to get a deal done. It's a good start and I'm sure the IOC has to love a country that seems enthusiastic especially after what just transpired with 2026. That shouldn't imply the IOC is ready to hand them an Olympics in the near term. IMO, we are years away from that even being a consideration.
  11. Not getting in the middle of that one. Maybe John Coates and the AOC have done the math and feel they are better off offering up a less than ideal Brisbane bid in the preferred time window rather than going with Melbourne in a non-traditional window. And who is to say if that's a smart decision or not, but at the very least, let's assume they've thought this one through, even if it's not necessarily the right call. I honestly don't have a strong enough opinion on this one other than to reiterate that Australia is free to propose whatever they want, a "rule" be damned, so long as they understand the consequences and risks of that decision.
  12. The IOC is still a business, so for any notion of altruism on the part of their organization's mission, I can't entirely fault them for being about making money. The IOC has made it increasingly clear they'll say no to any bid for whatever reason they deem fit. That's probably not a bid thing. I doubt they'd reject Australia outright simply for proposing an October Olympics (although that seems like it's a moot point anyway), but it's something the IOC will have to try and put a value on. If the numbers don't work out, then it's likely not going to happen.
  13. Quaker2001

    Tokyo 2020 Media Updates

    Yes, the beauty of an Asian Olympics is that NBCSN can (presumably) be up and running 24/7 with Olympic coverage, but they'll happily step away during the afternoon for a live event like a NASCAR race. I don't think there will be much of anything that takes priority over live Olympic coverage. We saw that from Rio when events (like NASCAR races and Premiere League soccer) got moved to other networks so that NBCSN could stick with the Olympics. That will be less of an issue from Tokyo. As to your second point.. when you say simulcast, do you mean the same event on 2 networks at once or an event repeated a different time on a different network? If you mean the former, how does NBC do that during the Today Show? The last Summer Olympics in Asia, NBC only had a 3 hour daytime show during the week. A little of it was live, but that won't be an option with Tokyo since nothing goes past 11:30pm local time (10:30am on the East coast). So if that's a 7 hour show, what are they putting there where the last 2 Olympics, the daytime show has been mostly live and could include team USA game in sports like volleyball and water polo. Will those go on cable now and not get shown on the main network? Or will the cable nets show other countries and show the USA game on delay on the daytime show. As for basketball.. I think I can probably count on 1 hand the total number of basketball games NBC has shown at each of the past 2 Olympics. I imagine that number will be similar at these Olympics. Both gold medal finals are scheduled during U.S. primetime, so those are likely both headed to NBCSN.
  14. Better question.. why shouldn't GamesBids continue to exist? The Olympics are going to continue to be held for the foreseeable future and that means a city has to host them. Even if the process of selecting a host city changes, there still needs to a be process. The IOC can have their discussions and deliberations done in private, but the cities can't. Not when public officials and funding are involved. And that may be exactly why GamesBids continues to exist. So that there's someone out there asking the questions. Even if it's less transparent on the part of the IOC, this all won't be as hidden from public view as you seem to be anticipating. Sure, the days of BidIndex and a large number of bidders with their bid books may be a thing of the past. Doesn't mean there won't be anything to analyze, even if that unfortunately gets mixed in with some overly hypothetical speculation.
  15. Find a better use of my time?
  16. Welcome to GamesBids in 2019. You know what happens when there's no data? Then the crowd here will invent their own data. And fuel their own pointless speculation about who will host the Olympics in the year 2052. Unfortunately, that's pretty much already happening. This site has gone downhill since you were a regular here, in part because the Olympic bid process isn't what it used to be and the crowd here replaced legitimate discussion and the occasional logo contest with a bunch of hypothetical BS. That all said, with regard to the Olympic bid process.. it's literally not possible for it to be as secretive these changes make it seem. So you're right because I'm not buying it either. Salt Lake City has a pretty big presence on social media. You really think there's any chance they won't give us a play by play of everything going on with their bid? The IOC might not want to tell us anything but I'm betting the cities will. Especially those that are most interested in the Olympics and not those trying to shield themselves from the public eye (i.e. Stockholm). If the media wants to report on an Olympic bidder, they'll report on an Olympic bidder. These things can't stay completely out of view if someone is there to ask the questions, and that's a much easier job to accomplish in the age of social media. More than that, you're right that it would be a mistake to go down this path and lose all sense of transparency. Then again, this is the IOC we're talking about. Can't exactly count on them to make smart decisions. I also don't buy the idea that they're going to lock in hosts as quickly as possible. It takes time to know if a partnership will work. We're starting to see the evolution of the bid process where it's not as formal as it used to be. I doubt we're on the precipice of where the IOC operates by choosing a host in private and we wake up 1 day to find out that a city has been chosen. I can't see that happening (well, unless the IOC is stupid, which again is a strong possibility).
  17. Why the Summer Olympics are held in July, August despite heat It's not just NBC. Other broadcasters and sports federations have similar preferences for that window as well. Prospective bidders are free to propose dates outside that window if they want. That's what Doha did. Yes, they got rejected, but mostly because the IOC said Do-haha to them, not necessarily because of the dates. So this was a thing before the IOC became more flexible. Still, at the end of the day, it comes down to a decision and a potentially a vote. It's not an either/or whether or not proposing different dates is allowed or not. The Aussies can do whatever they want in that regard and the IOC will put that to a decision if they think it's in their best interests. Plus, remember about NBC.. they're locked in through 2032, but rights for the Olympics after that will be up for grabs. So if Australia is looking at the 2036 Olympics, what will it to do the value of those rights fees (and not just from NBC, but from other broadcasters) if the Olympics are scheduled for September or October. That's something the IOC voters will have to weigh the value of.
  18. Someone check to see if hell has frozen over.. looks like FYI and I agree on something again. If Brisbane needs to build a lot of venues and other infrastructure in order to host an Olympics, are they really the best option for an Olympics? Particularly in a country with 2 previous hosts which each have a lot more in place ready to go. They say it fits within the city's long-term plans, but that seems like a dangerous proposition there and one that could lead to cost overruns. Seems to go against what the IOC is looking for these days with an emphasis on existing venues? The Aussies get to make the call on this one, so if that's what they are willing to get behind, more power to them. But still, you look at the past handful of hosts and they're almost all mega-cities. Brisbane doesn't really fit into that mold. And they can't play the new continent card like Rio or home of the Olympics like Athens. Probably shouldn't count on lucking into an Olympics like Atlanta did. As the story goes.. Brisbane could host an Olympics. Just like St. Louis could or Minneapolis or even Boston. The more important question is.. should they host an Olympics? And what's going to be their story if they try for one?
  19. I don't know that I agree with all of that. Do we really know if the IOC is that excited for Australia or does it just have that appearance that there's an interested party in the wake of a vote that got decided because 1 of the parties wasn't all that interested? It's encouraging that the Aussies are committed and enthusiastic. But do they have a plan in place? Can they successfully execute that plan? Does it make sense for both them and the IOC? Are there other cities out there that are worth a look as well? You're absolutely right these things take time to unfold. And it would be really irresponsible of the IOC to rush through this process. There's no reason for them to do that and I don't think we should start to assume that will happen just because it can. Besides, what about 2030? Shouldn't that happen before 2032? You mention LA getting 2028 more than a decade out. Don't forget that LA had been pursuing an Olympics for years before the 2024 bid came into being. And it was a full 2 years from when LA officially submitted their bid to the IOC before they made the deal for 2028. So if the path to a Brisbane Olympics is secured government support from all levels, plans taking shape, and evaluating potentially European bidders).. that's not something likely to happen in a matter of months. More likely it'll take years. I agree we could see the 2032 Olympics before 2025. But I think we're looking at closer to 2025 than 2019. Either way, let's not make the jump from "Australia is interested in an Olympics" to "let's lock them in as soon as possible"
  20. Just so I have this straight.. 1 or both of you are suggesting that Australia might be awarded the 2032 Olympics in the next few months and that it's already a done deal? Perhaps we should wait until we actually see if they have their act together and not give them the Olympics at the first sign of interest, 13 years out from 2032. No.. it would be the polar opposite of good for the IOC to do that. Everyone involved might want to think this all through and plan it out first.
  21. Quaker2001

    Tokyo 2020 Media Updates

    Did not know that. That's interesting they're clearing almost all the way out for the Olympics. Although worth noting.. the Cup series is off for 2 weeks, but the XFinity Series has a race the middle weekend of the Olympics. So that will tie up a couple of afternoons for them. IndyCar usually has a gap of a few weeks in August, so I have a feeling they'll do something similar next summer. In 2016, set it up so that Olympic coverage on NBCSN ended coverage at 3pm on the final Sunday so it could lead directly into coverage of the IndyCar race from Pocono. Don't think it will be so neat and tidy this time around. Also possible the Premier League will get underway that last weekend of the Olympics, so that could be some coveage on that final Saturday of the games. It'll all probably be similar to what we saw from PyeongChang. No idea if there will be anything else of note on the calendar. What's cool is that Olympic competition begins at 9am Wednesday, July 22nd with women's softball. So not impossible we could see NBCSN up and running with Olympic coverage as early as Tuesday night here in the States.
  22. Except you kinda did though..
  23. We're drifting so far away from where I started here, I'm not even sure how we got to this point. Whatever. Last thing I'll say here.. You mention that Stockholm will remember their bid history if they bid again. I don't necessarily disagree with that, but that history isn't going to be so black and white as winning or losing. The vote totals tell a story. That story can't predict the future, but it still matters. Much like Almaty, if they were to bid again, would want to acknowledge how many votes they got in 2022, not simply that they lost. Doesn't predict how they'd fare if they bid again. It's still notable though.
×