Jump to content

USA Gold

Members
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by USA Gold

  1. For second tier cities and below in the United States looking to host an international sports competition, would you prefer to have your city host a Pan-Am Games or the Youth Olympic Games?
  2. Just looking at the photo and the first and second decks, it looks like it might be similar to Stade France. There the lower stands on both sides and both ends slide under the stands to reveal more space. I'm assuming that's the same with Madrid's stadium. Look up Stade France and you'll see what I'm talking about for both track and soccer.
  3. Here's more evidence. The red lines represent the angle of the second and third decks. Where the line ends on the field represents the sight line. Anything behind there can't bee seen from that stand. As you can see the line goes straight to the near sideling. You would have to fill the entire lower stands with dirt to get a track in there and then you have to worry about the weight of all that dirt on the stands, especially the lower rows since they will have to bear more pressure from the dirt. Plus that's removing about 20,000 seats. Plus the endzone upper decks couldn't be used. Explain to me why the IOC would be remotely interested in such a half-baked setup?
  4. Hampden Park and Lincoln Financial Field are to completely different stadiums. There is nothing about the two that is similiar. There is a lot more open space at Hampden Park between the field and the stands than at the Linc. Also, the lower level stands at Hampden stretch farther back. All you have to do is plop a 40 As you can see I have superimposed the practice track from London over the football field. The north upper deck obviously could not be used as you wouldn't see the turn closest to it at all. Also, the superimposing doesn't take into account the jumping pits which are normally outside the track not inside (expect for Atlanta). And there needs to be more room for the track cameras and the photographers pits. That will easily take up another 50 feet. And if you're in the upper deck, there is no way you'd be able to see the straight aways.
  5. The point is if you can't do a first class job for the main stadium, you have no chance at winning a bid. There would be very few seats in the second and third decks where you can see the entire track. The IOC will not be impressed at all with a plan like that. If I had a cross section of the Linc, I would show you exactly what I mean. The track alone would take up seats past the tunnel and you need additional space for the "track cameras on the outside perimeter of the track. The end seats end the upper deck couldn't be used as 3/4 of the view would be obstructed. Plues, it looks like there isn't even enough room on the ends to fit in an IAAF regulation track.
  6. That won't work for Lincoln Financial Field. A track would go well into the lower level seats. You would essentially have to gut the entire lower level. But that still wouldn't work because all of the loge and upper level seats would have obstructed views. Those stands are just too close to the center of the field to make a temporary fix work. That goes for all of the stadiums built in the past 20 years.
  7. How many cities have a use for a 20,000 mixed use facility in the USA? Unless a city is getting an MLS team, not many.
  8. The stadium is indeed a problem for those three cities. The 49ers and Raiders most likely will share a new football stadium that will not be in San Francisco proper so that puts them out of the running. Unless an Olympic Stadium would become a new home for the Cubs baseball team, Chicago is going to have a tought time. And New York has new facilities for baseball, football, and soccer. The only cities that have even a shot for meeting the reuse criteria for a stadium would be Dallas (replace Cotton Bowl), and St. Louis (Edward Jones Dome), and Washington (replace FedEx Field althgough it's the largest stadium in the NFL). Minneapolis could possibly be thrown into the mix if the new football stadium was designed for retrofitting as a track stadium. But that is it.
  9. You mean great crowds like the one at the gold medal basketball below . Look at all those empty seats just in the one section. I'm sure I can find more examples. You are right about London having some nicer venues. But London is a much older city. There aren't many buildings in Atlanta that go back more than 100 years or are culturally significant, although the cycling and archery at Stone Mountain had a nice view. In the U.S. there aren't many cities that you could have really unique, historical or culturally significant venues. Cities like Washington DC (National Mall), Philadelphia (Independence Hall), New York (Central Park), St. Louis (Cahokia Mounds, Gateway Arch, Forest Park), Chicago (Lakefront) have some but there would be logistical issues with some like the National Mall. Or how about
  10. It wasn't a small number of seats that were unused. If you watched any of the events (North Greenwhich Arena, Earls Court, and Horse Guards Parade specifically), when the camera did a wide shot, there were not just empty seats here or there, but large chunks of seats in the same area empty. Two seats empty here or there will go unnoticed 20-30 seats in the same area will not. I don't remember that in Atlatna when I attended the games. Atlanta didn't have a security issue. You had to go through metal detectors at every venue. Centennial Olympic Park did not have metal detectors, but was fenced off to where there I think were three areas you could enter and exit the park. There shouldn't have been a need metal detectors for a public park. Unfortunately there will also be crazy people out there looking to cause chaos as with what happened on July 27, 1996.
  11. I believe the issue of public funding has to do with a governmental body being responsible for any shortfalls. There is nothing I have seen in writing that says X-amount has to come from public sources. And by the way, the Atlanta games made $11 million, so there was no deficit.
  12. Actually there really weren't many specific examples. The most specfic things mentioned were technological breakdowns (not specific - like what technological breakdowns?), under-trained drivers and shoddy buses (not specific - what made them undertrained? what do you mean by shoddy? ). You can't have a temporary event with temporary facilities and not expect some types of problems to arise with all that is involved. I attended the games in Atlanta and anyone who says the games there were bad, obviously did not go to Atlanta for the games. The vendors I don't even really remember while walking down the streets of Atlanta. But you can't tell me there aren't street vendors in London or any other city that has hosted the games or could such as New York. The commercialism wasn't that bad. I mean in Olympic Park there was BudWorld which was actually pretty cool as did Swatch, GM and some others and Coca-Cola had their special area across the street from Centennial Olympic Park, but again, the commercialism didn't seem to gawdy. After all, that's what happens when private companies spend money on events like this. Taxpayers should not have to flip the bill for the Olympics especially when there are plenty of private ventures out there. Remember, the most profitable games every (1984 Los Angeles) was done solely with private money. As for my transportation experience at Atlanta, I thought it was great. You parked at a lot outside the perimeter, paid $20 to park on the lot and then the bus ride downtown was free if you had tickets to the events. There was only one day, after a baseball game at Fulton County Stadium, where it seemed we had to wait a long time to catch the bus back to the lot. But you can't expect everything to be perfectly on time with such a major undertaking.
  13. Here's one U.S. that could meet all those qualifications. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=114477269073372138169.000480686fe9002585c80
  14. Why would NYC want to bid for 2024? They couldn't even get a stadium deal struck for their 2012 bid when they could build a stadium and actually reuse it for one of the area's teams. Now all of the baseball and football teams have new stadiums with long term leases.
  15. Here's you London 2012 Bid Book. http://web.archive.org/web/20060413195547/http://www.london2012.com/en/news/publications/Candidatefile/ And here's your Sochi 2014 Bid Book. You're welcome. http://web.archive.org/web/20080602051426/http://sochi2014.com/sch_questionnaire
  16. Here's a link to Toronto 2008's bid book page. I'm not sure if all the links are active. By the way, do you have Atlanta's 1996 bid book? Whoops...here's the link. http://web.archive.org/web/20010605104933/http://www.to-2008.com/english/page_blue_1345.asp
  17. OK, so what is there plan? Are they going to have fewer teams than in the previous Olympic games. If not, it's impossible to work. Just look at the previous games' schedules. Also, you would have to play baseball first because its easier to skin off the grass infield than to place sod and have it take in a day or two. I just do see how the logistics would work.
  18. The only way baseball and softball could share a venue is if the infield was totally skinned for baseball. That's not gonna happen. You really can't play baseball and softball at a high level in the same venue. The dimension are to different to be compatable.
×
×
  • Create New...