Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by FYI

  1. Well, “good for you” that you’re “standing ‘firm’ on this one”. As if that’s suppose to mean anything around here. And if I’m playing devils advocate now, according to you, it’s BCUZ I had a very good teacher here for it. Empty rhetoric? Pot meet kettle! You’re like no. two here for that. And we both know who no. one is! But the very fact that the Swedish gov’t, at the very last hour, has come out & said that they’re now supporting the bid (which even by your own admission took everyone by surprise) changes the whole dynamic of the 2026 process. So not taking that into account now is NOT being “wishy-washy” nor is it playing devils advocate. It’s actually taking into account a MAJOR factor that has JUST now come into play. Yes, I absolutely agree that the low-level support is an issue for Sweden (a pretty big one, I’d say) but it’s the IOC that is soooooo gung-ho about Sweden that they seem to be willing to give/do anything for the Stockholm bid, like extending the guarantee deadline for them not just once, but even willing to give them ‘til Election Day to hand them over if the Swedes hadn’t met the April 12th deadline. Plus, as you always like to say; someone still has to host 2026. We now have, two top & powerful NOC’s & lobbyists each on their own behave, that want to bring this whole thing home. But which one is the IOC willing to disappoint now? A conundrum that seems very parallel between the USOC & the French OC for 2024, in an era where almost everybody else has fled the bidding scene. Yeah, I also agree that Stockholm & Milan are not Paris & L.A. But the former two I think are as good as the IOC is gonna get in Europe right now considering everything else. Is there a risk? Of course there is. But isn’t there always. That was certainly the concern for Paris & L.A. even though hindsight is always 20/20, isn’t it. Stability may be too simplistic for you, but I’m sure it would mean a heck of a lot for the IOC these days & they’re the ones that matter here. And for the umpteeth time, I’m not trying to “predict” anything. You’re the one with your “near-zero” & “inevitable” garbage. And that’s what’s “fucking stupid”, when you just wanna run around here like your opinion is the be-all & end-all of things Olympic. Sounds like a certain so-called la la land columnist that gets ‘parroted’ around here. And if not Stockholm, then there’s always SLC in the background!
  2. I can concur with this. But of course a certain other (know-it-all) poster, who enjoys to play devil’s advocate all the time (& thinks that they have an “inevitable” Olympic crystal ball) & dismisses everything with a simplistic “he just likes to bring up the idea that it’s possible”, but does the same exact thing but in the opposite effect bcuz, well, that’s what playing devil’s advocate is. He was gloating when it was thought when Milan was out, but when in fact they weren’t, he had nothing left to say. But I don’t see how both Milan & Stockholm finally confirming that they’re staying in now makes it a “thrown out the window of it happening”. For 2024 all we had was two candidates left too. Even if Stockholm hadn’t committed, we still had SLC in the background as well. What better but two confirm two Western European Winter Olympics now that the IOC so desperately wants & needs (especially after Sochi & two Asian Winter Olympics). How could that be “no good reason to do it”. How would that be “extremely foolish” to do after the roller coaster ride the IOC has been experiencing with cities dropping out like flies from the past few bid races. A (winter) double would again create “less losers” & stability on the winter side of things. And perhaps that’s why the Swedish gov’t finally decided to come onboard, perhaps possibly anticipating something of the same scale.
  3. Well, Jesse(ca) is right about one thing; “the amount of (OTT L.A.) bullish!t here is, well, staggering”.
  4. Maybe not a big sigh, though. But a cautious one. Like I said in the Milan thread, the IOC in the past, didn’t want to take the Games where less than 65% of the population didn’t support it. Sweden still falls quite a bit below that benchmark at 55%. Milan, OTHO, enjoys overwhelming support at 85%, which is a great #. But beggars can’t be choosers anymore. Gotta take what you can get, but that low support could still be a risk. But maybe we could still have “less losers” in this race, too!
  5. Well, that is a turn of events. But now the question is, as much as the IOC wants Sweden, will they still be willing to take the Games to a place where the people there hardly want them (Stockholm), or to a place where the overwhelming majority of the people do want them (Italy). Historically speaking, the IOC doesn’t like to take the Games where less than 65% of the people want them. And Sweden still falls quite a bit below that threshold. Or can we still have TWO “winners” come June in Lausanne!!
  6. Well, there’s still no word on the guarantees from them, so..
  7. It’s only been 18 months since the 2028 Games have been awarded to L.A. so no, not “long after”, relatively speaking. Again, the 2028 Olympics are sooooo far away, that most people in L.A. I’m sure are clueless to it or either don’t care because they feel that it’s too far out to even care about ATM. Will there even be a world left by 2028 anyway, especially if King Cheetoh were to get re-elected (yikes)! What’s going on in Paris too is not necesarily against the Olympics, but mostly against the gov’t in general. Plus, most Europeans are more in tune with their domestic politics than the average American. All we mostly care about here are sport stats & how many likes one can get on their social media page. Let’s see if things are still so calm in L.A. come 2027, then a determination can be made if the people there are still totally okay with the Olympics horning in on their city.
  8. I would be extremely surprised at this point if Sweden pulled out all their cards for this. The Swedish gov’t two years ago said that they weren’t interested & that they wanted no part of it, & it looks like they still aren’t. That was the case with 2022, too. It’s the SOC that’s been stubbornly keeping this bid in the limelight. I can’t see anything changing all that much there by June that hasn’t happened already. The deadline has already been extended once, & with Italy now committing, if Sweden were to then also ignore the second deadline, then that really wouldn’t bode well as far as them coming around. There’s also the matter of the low public support in Sweden, 55% over Italy’s 85%. That’s a huge difference, which would have an impact of where the Swedish gov’t will want to go, or not go in this case.
  9. Doesn’t mean much, though, when the main partner doesn’t pledge the same thing.
  10. ^Oh my, & where have we heard that you-know-who cockamamie idea before?! Anything to have L.A. wind up with the 2024 Games afterall, huh. And opposition to an L.A. Games has already begun, it’s just not really pronounced ATM cuz the 2028 Games are still almost a decade away (so most are clueless or don’t care for now). https://www.google.com/amp/s/psmag.com/.amp/economics/meet-the-grassroots-organizers-trying-to-keep-the-olympics-out-of-los-angeles Like they say, be careful what you wish for. Switch the order around & let’s see if a NO-LAOlympics group won’t get off to a really good start.
  11. Do you keep thinking Madrid when trying to type Milan? So okay, why are they proposing the Opening & Closing ceremonies in *seperate* locations? Why not have just both at San Siro. That part to me just makes absolutely no sense, & yes, that would present even more logistical challenges to an already spread-out venue concept. So why make things even more difficult. Just crazy.
  12. IOC evaluation chief 'very, very positive' about Milan-Cortina bid https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/20190404-ioc-evaluation-chief-very-very-positive-about-milan-cortina-bid
  13. Lombardy & Veneto have the money, though. That’s why they were willing to guarantee the Games themselves before the federal gov’t finally decided to.
  14. Sweden’s silence is actually really deafening. If they don’t meet the April 12th deadline while Italy has, then I would disregard that bid at that point. Cuz nothing is going to change with them in only 2-1/2 months that’s hasn’t changed in 2-1/2 years & more.
  15. While all of that is easy to say, the reality is, though, that the IOC really doesn’t have a whole bunch of options here that we can say are truly “cost-effective”, let alone bids from coutries that would actually want to host. Sweden is still dragging it’s feet, & up until this week, Italy wasn’t looking too good either. The only other option then would’ve been SLC, which would fall in the true cost-effective category. But now that the Italian gov’t is stepping up to the plate, there’s not much the IOC can do other than thank their lucky stars that the Italian bid is now doing an about-face in their favor. Perhaps maybe later, once/if Milan is given the Games, Turin could still be included somehow. Winning bids are always tweaked from award day to Game day anyway.
  16. Strong numbers in Italy. Even stronger numbers in Utah, with a compact & sustainable plan. What more could the IOC ask for these days. Milan 2026/SLC 2030.
  17. Wow, those numbers are high (considering how these things have been going these days). If the newer poll this weekend still reflect those same figures, then it should be a no-brainer for the IOC (regardless of what they would rather “prefer”). Plus, it seems that the E.V. to Milan is more on the radar than it was in Stockholm, with a dinner reception scheduled for Friday. It seems like (northen) Italian officials are really starting to warm up to the idea, unlike it’s rival.
  18. If it wasn’t for the climate change thread already, I would’ve said that this one is the annual April Fool’s thread lol. But on a serious note, this would put, at least on a technical scale, Milan 2026 way ahead of Stockholm. And considering the anti-bidding climate these days, this should be very welcoming news in Lausanne. So.. Milan 2026/SLC 2030 starting to look more & more likely.
  19. Haha AF’s. Climate change is the least of the IOC’s worries anyway. Getting cities to actually stay in the bid races, now that’s another story.
  20. Yeah, I meant to say “snow”-cluster, which would need a significant amount of work. With as much heat the IOC is getting these days about too much frivolous construction associated with the Olympics, even without the Independence issue, I’d still question how feasible it is, especially when Spain is still recovering from it’s economic issues as well.
  21. Agreed - Catalonia’s sensitive political state is another main thorne. But of course JAS JR thinks that they could still be the 2026 savior if need be lol
  22. Absolutely LUV it when a certain other poster’s absurdities ultimately get muffled lmfao
  23. The main problem with a ‘Pyrenees Winter Olympics’, is the amount of infrastructure construction that would have to take place, in particualar for the ice-cluster, & especially the transportation links. I would also have to agree that SLC would be well-positioned for 2030. Saporro could be better positioned for 2034, but that still would remain to be seen, even if Tokyo 2020 is a great success, especially when a bribery scandal is starting to brew over the election of Tokyo 2020, & maybe Europe could return to the fold by which they would better positioned by then.
  24. Does anyone really think though that this “joint” bid was ever really possible? I think it’s all more PR than anything else. And when push eventually comes to shove, it’s just going to be a South Korean 2032 bid.
  • Create New...