Jump to content

Brodie

Members
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Brodie

  1. the odds of the Queens stadium even being capable of expanding by 50,000 seats and to accommodate a track are too low to even joke about logically, winter hosting and summer hosting should be completely divorced from one another considering the limited number of countries that can host the former. Sadly, the IOC isn't a logical organization.
  2. A lot of American cities could host the Olympics, but realistically only those named and MAYBE Washington or Philadelphia will get the chance. I'd like to see a bigger commitment to the Pan Am Games here since it'd give the Detroits and Clevelands of the world a chance to throw those rings up at least
  3. Chicago's stadium problem is one likely to be encountered in any of the major US cities bidding, so in the context of this thread it's not really much of an issue
  4. what are Tokyo, Madrid and Istanbul's big iconic buildings again?
  5. I've taken friends from London, New York and Paris to Chicago over the years and each one of them has loved it and compared it favorably to their hometowns. Perhaps it does lack a global profile (outside of the Anglosphere anyway), but once people get there and see that it truly is a beautiful, buzzing, global metropolis with insanely good public transportation and parks. It's cleaner than most cities of it's size and the city supports the arts to an unprecedented degree. Besides, there aren't many cities in the world (let alone the US) where you can walk from a giant skyscraper to a white sand beach in about 5 minutes. Chicago is the ideal American Olympic city. New York doesn't need them (one could argue the likes of London, Paris and Rome don't, either, though) and LA really functions best as a back up plan. But Chicago could put on Olympics people would remember and it would benefit the city itself immensely. Only San Francisco would even be in it's league as a potential host city, though even then Chicago is streets ahead. Like, who cares if the IOC representatives haven't visited Chicago as tourists? Their ignorance isn't a reflection of fact. After a Chicago Olympics, they absolutely WOULD want to go visit it. Besides, New York and LA are their own worlds... they really feel disconnected from the rest of the country, almost like Hong Kong. Chicago is really about as American as you can get.
  6. Detroit 2024! I'm not serious, of course (I think we could handle a Pan-Am Games, though), but I'm sure such a proposal would make the IOC wet themselves
  7. I disagree with basically every premise in the original post. 1. I don't think the Olympics are in any jeopardy in the US. I think as long as we continue to excel at them and as long as the rest of the world covets them, there will be sufficient interest here. The things you mention as being threats are actually working the Olympics favor... the world is shrinking dramatically. For all the stereotypes about Americans being disinterested in the rest of the globe, that's never been less true than it is today. Travel is getting cheaper, the internet and TV are evolving to make covering events on the other side of the world much easier. If the Olympics movement dies in the US, it will because it's dying everywhere else. 2. While I agree that Summer Games are the prestige event, I think most Americans would think an Olympics is an Olympics. The fact is, the Winter Olympics generate significant interest here and I think if we were hosting one, people would be fine with waiting another decade to host another regardless of which season those Olympics were in. It's also, obviously, a lot easier (and cheaper) to win a Winter Games... I seriously question what the hell the IOC would do without the US hosting them once every other decade, it's not like there are really ANY new frontiers there and there are only two or three viable hosts in Canada. So I'm not even sure they could hold hosting a Winter Games against us, unless they want to have consecutive Games in Europe frequently (the just might, but the TV money in the US would dry up very, very quickly). 3. I think the biggest issue, if we accept that there is one, facing the Olympics in the US going forward is one of access. I imagine you're broadly in agreement there. I think people want a.) better start times on TV and b.) increased ability to attend the games. The thing is, though, I don't think either of those things necessarily rely on the US itself hosting. Any Western Hemisphere games will produce live events in primetime in the US. And, to be blunt, I don't know that most Americans wouldn't consider a Toronto Summer Olympics to be that different than one taking place in the US anyway. I know this is bound to be shouted down but let's be totally honest here: do Americans really think of Canadians as "foreigners" or of Canada as a foreign country? Toronto is a lot easier to get to for many in the most populous parts of America than, say, Los Angeles. I know this is an international sports site so obviously we're going to be more sensitive to the macro issues like nationality, but the physical and cultural gap is so small that I'm not sure a Toronto games wouldn't look and feel like a home event for Team USA or that it wouldn't get absurd TV ratings. I'd prefer a Summer Olympics, too, just because it's been so long. But the truth is, I don't think if we end up with 2026 instead that it would be THAT big a deal.
  8. A British bid can't happen, not just because England wouldn't need it but because any cooperation by those 4 FAs would be seen as a potential threat to their independent status. There are still a lot of people freaking out over this whole Olympic team thing because they're SURE Blatter's just waiting until next week to make it permanent.
×
×
  • Create New...