runningrings

Ok - just had this thought and decided to float this thread. We've had threads before about "Which previous Olympics would you have most liked to have attended" so what about "Which failed Olympic Games bid would you have most liked to have attended, had it come to fruition?" For me: -Melbourne 1996. Call it hometown bias, but this would have been an amazing, compact Olympics with great energy. Sure, it would have meant no Sydney 2000, but it would have been a fantastic follow up to Barcelona and provided a very dignified and majestic Centennial Olympic Games - in a previous host city (and where better than the city with the largest Greek diaspora?). -Paris 1992. If this had happened, I dare say it would have been as iconic, if not more, than Barcelona's effort. A truly brash, European affair in the French capital. Imagine all that early 90s French fashion going about too. Would have been marvellous. -Athens 1996. For obvious reasons. I really want to know if they could have actually pulled it off. -Detroit 1968. Not too hard to imagine - the Olympics in middle America. I think it would have been an iconic Olympic Games, at the height of a highly political period in American history. Even more so the following decline of Detroit would have made these Games a bit like Sarajevo in retrospect. Perhaps it would have pushed Detroit over the edge like Montreal? Or maybe it would have been its saving grace? -Istanbul 2020. (See Athens 1996)

Hi everyone... Just thought I'd create a thread to discuss the logo - we can't be too far off now from hearing about dates regarding its unveiling. Frankly - I'm looking forward to this more than I am the 2022 decision (lol - who cares, just give it to Almaty). While I'm not at all a fan of the 2020 bid logo, I loved the 2016 bid logo. I have an early hunch that the 2020 logo will bear some resemblance to the iconic 1964 emblem.

Such overwhelming consensus favouring Paris. Perhaps the most obvious front runner since the 2008 race? My only hope is that LA doesn't get anything less than 2nd place - lower would be a snub. Let Budapest and Rome fight it out for 3rd and 4th like the bottom feeders they are.

"Several of the client groups that had General Admission" - thats really not that much of a big deal - especially for some of the smaller sports in smaller venues, its quite manageable.

I'll agree that the comparison between Paris 2024 and Beijing 2008 does have merit - but I think Los Angeles will perform better than Toronto did for 2008.

I don't think so - Los Angeles is mounting a very strong bid. Paris = Hillary, Los Angeles = Bernie.

Its rubbish like this which is why I refuse to renew my paid membership. Free forums have greater respect for their participants by actually moderating trolling behaviour.

Too true. Still surprised by the USOC overlooking 2020. Even before the candidates started to drop out, they would have stood a significant chance. Most US cities - perhaps even the second tier ones like Dallas or Philadelphia - would have stood a very good chance of landing 2020 over Tokyo and Istanbul,.

So by your logic Brisbane 1992 would have kept that Koala motif in your avatar as its official logo?

I'm well aware - I saw it in person in 2008. Also - that would be 12 years (seeing as we're obviously excluding Rio and London's efforts).

I actually think this stadium is going to be one of the best in a very long time. If it turns out well it would be worth the loss of heritage from 1964.

If only we had Doha in the race - the Trump.

I love Paris' font! I hope something like that eventuates in a real logo - Very slick, very Sydney 2000.

I've always seen the logo as vital as a point of organisation - it distinguishes the brand of the Game from the brand of the Games. I see your point but I feel its an important representation of place and time.

I really dislike the "We're so ready we could host tomorrow" card that is trumped out by cities. Its brazen, shows arrogance, and underestimates the complexity of organising an Olympic-magnitude event in the 21st century. It even irritates me when its wheeled out every few years by politicians in Melbourne. Rome, like Melbourne (and Los Angeles) would need years just like any other city to appropriately prepare. Rome should also be careful of using this card with respect to fellow competitors in its cohort like Paris and especially Los Angeles that are both logistically better placed to stage the Games than decrepit Rome.

Love the logo, best for 2024 so far. Looking forward to seeing LA's bid evolve. As I've mentioned before, I'm rooting for a Paris triumph in 2024, but would be happy to see LA come through also. I hope the USOC sticks with LA if it loses 2024. Might do them good to stick with the one city instead of going elsewhere like they always do. Although if Chicago changed its tune, it could be a steal for 2028.

LA isn't exactly a bad back up plan! TBH Paris has been quite quiet in the new year, and LA is becoming more and more appealing. Would be pleased with either prevailing at this point. Cant be bothered with Budapest or Rome. Boring.

To a lesser extent, in the early stages of the 2020 race, it seemed like we'd have a white-hot race between Istanbul and Tokyo... until the wheels fell off Erdogan's bandwagon. Wasn't Rome and Athens quite neck and neck for 2004?

My god, we are in for another huge Olympics. The Winter Olympics really are a doomed decadence.

I know I've said it before - but those wide open paved spaces desperately need some green. I understand that a lot of the site will change as it moves into legacy mode, but it can't be too much to bring in some trees (or even canopies) to provide shade. It almost reminds me of Sydney Olympic Park in its early days - quite open (although 16 years later its maturing quite well).

Interesting observation - and perhaps reflective of a cultural difference within Europe. The IOC is very much anchored within Anglo/Franco/Northern European values which tend to expect zero self inflation with these things- but we have seen numerous Med bid cities flounder in the face of brash hot headedness- the Madrid bids, Rome 2004 (& 2020?), Athens 96,

Any references to Paris perceived security (thiny veiled or explicit) in the wake of the attacks is a very slippery sloap for the Italians for a number of reasons : - all Olympic hosts are potential targets by virtue of being Olympic hosts. - Paris could gain some degree of sentimental support (I know Madrid and NYC didn't, but they weren't front runners) - Rome is continually referenced by ISIS as the pinnacle enemy . So they should just keep quiet and respectful.

While I agree with your assessment of this logo, I do think some countries that have a very strong brand go to these brands out of safety - Japan, Canada and the US have all done this with their logos, drawing on national symbols, even Sydney 2000 drew heavily on these symbols (albeit less obviously than say Calgary or Montreal). While I didn't really love its logo, I at least appreciated London for straying away from this and going with something completely wild and offbeat - which I think startled many peoples impressions of 'Britishness'. I have a feeling we may see a similar type of eccentric boldness in 2024 with either LA or Paris. I hope LA draws on distinctly Californian themes over American, and Paris tries to stay away from tricolour and the tower. Also Vancouver was a great example of presenting a new icon - something LA or Paris should attempt to do.

All i see is some mutated Mickey Mouse silhouette. I don't like it, and I don't think the IOC will like their butchered logo either. These designs are boring and lame. Feel very sad about the plagiarism that confronted the last logo - because it was perfect.

Does anybody know where a copy of the Atlanta 1996 bid book could be obtained from? I'm also intrigued to know if anyone has ever come across plans for Minneapolis' proposed 1996 bid? Venues, etc. Given that Athens was clearly a no-go, its safe to assume Minneapolis may have also got across the line so its a very real 1996 alternative as much as Melbourne and Toronto.