Athensfan

I don’t buy the premise of this article. If everything happens quietly, out of the public eye, without any publicly released timetable, then what is there for the media to report? Just a lot of speculation. I foresee a lot of “maybe,” “perhaps,” and “we’ll have to wait and see.” Even after future hosts are decided, we won’t know much about how those decisions were made — apart from what the IOC chooses to make public. It seems to me that the primary reason for cloaking the process in secrecy and abolishing most structure is for the IOC to avoid media scrutiny. No one can comment on low n

This begs the question, why should GamesBids.com continue to exist? BidIndex has been irrelevant for some time. There have been very few bidders in recent years. Now the whole process has changed to something with no set timeline that will be decided mainly behind closed doors. What is there to analyze or discuss? It’s difficult for me to envision any meaningful future for this site.

I’m surprised you all are arguing the merits of the various “bids.” At the moment, they are only “interested parties.” The big question is how many (IF ANY) of them go the distance and make it to a vote. All the remaining “players” could still go down. Erzurum: venue plan? no winter sports tradition. political instability. Stockholm: funding? Calgary: plebiscite? Italy: CONI is reliably unreliable. Italians have withdrawn from the bid process in recent memory. This plan is cobbled together and wobbly. I’m betting at least two of the above go down in flames before a

Like so many, I've always believed Paris would host 2024. I still do. However, I think the IOC really needs the Games in LA ASAP -- even if they don't realize that. I think it's a bit much to suggest that LA will "save" the Games. But I do think that LA can put forth a dramatically different model and generate much more youth interest and energy than Paris. The IOC has dug itself into a huge hole with three consecutive Games in Asia. Western audience share will decline -- especially among youth. LA, IMO, would do more to rebuild than Paris. Generally speaking, the French

Well, the IOC isn't FIFA, but it is not a meritocracy. In that respect, I can understand calling it "cooked." The 2016 evaluation report was quite slanted and made it clear that the IOC already favored Rio. For instance, it omitted any mention of crime in Rio and drastically under-represented transportation times. Chicago received negative comments in both those areas. Rio's financing was lauded over Chicago's as well, which seems especially bizarre. The language describing Chicago's bid betrayed the underlying strain between the IOC and the USOC. As soon as Paris entered the race fo

This. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/08/08/armour-mens-gymnastics-usa-team-final/88431532/

I agree that the problem is largely mental, but I don't think a psychologist is the sole answer. If the team's heads are not in a good place, that goes back to leadership and the team culture. A psychologist may help, but I suspect they really need to get rid of Kevin Mazeika.

The way the gymnasts were talking it sounded like they were in denial about what happened in London. I don't think they really faced up to the fact that they had a total meltdown. I think they did everything the exact same way in Rio and got an identical result. Obviously poor preparation. The definition of insanity is doing everything the same way, but expecting a different outcome. There MUST be a leadership change in the men's program.

It seems clear to me that serious changes need to be made in USA men's gymnastics -- particularly with regard to coaching. This is a repeat of London, but worse. Can't call it a fluke anymore. This is a pattern now.

Miss Eurasia, what do you think of my Hernandez theory?

I'm irritated with the 2per rule too, btw. Doesn't the FIG want their medalists to be the top three competitors, irrespective of nationality? I guess not.

This shows, however, that there's a problem with the FIG's system. Basically a coach just picked an all-around medalist.

So here's my theory on Hernandez not doing bars: Marta believes Raisman is the stronger all-arounder right now. I think it's that simple. Despite a big error from Raisman on beam and no major mistakes from Hernandez, on floor, vault and beam combined, Raisman outscored Hernandez by .508. And that was WITH the big balance check on beam. So that brings us to bars where Raisman scored 14.733. Hernandez would have had to score better than 15.241 on bars to overtake her. That would've been a tall order, but not impossible. However, if Raisman had not bobbled on beam, Hernandez woul

US has number one qualifier in every event final and qualified 2 athletes for every event final except vault. It really was SPECTACULAR domination.

The US is nearly 10 POINTS ahead of China. Unbelievable. Biles, Raisman, Douglas 1,2,3 in AA. It would've been super close between Hernandez and Raisman if Hernandez had done bars. Raisman had huge balance check on beam and Hernandez qualified in 2nd for beam finals. Simone. Just astonishing.