Jump to content

Philadelphia 2016?


Recommended Posts

U speak w/ forked tongue, barrack.  Seems like you're looking for ants under every New York rock.   :suspect:

Actually, I didn't bring up NYC at all. I was speaking about Philly in the Philly 2016 thread. I'm not sure why NYC was brought up, but it seems to be brought up in ANY thread about other US cities nidding for 2016. My apologies for coming off as rude. It's not that I don't want NYC to have the games. I just don't see why it is automatic that NYC would be the US candidate for 2016, as is implied by many here.

That's just the way it happens on here Barrack.  Anytime any city other than NYC is brought up as a potential candidate it suddenly gets turned around and your talking about how NYC is soooooo superior to anyplace else in the U.S.  :glare:  :hmm:

thats b/c it is

:glare:  :glare:  :glare:

Matter of opinion I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I rowed in high school and Philadelphia was always associated as the leading US rowing city.) Boston's got some good rowing too though.

Actually, NYC's projected venue at Flushing Meadows Park is/was probably one of the more centrally located placements of the rowing venue in a long time -- it's even officially within the host city's actual borders.  (The 2003 San Francisco plan had it all the way outside Sacramento.)  

You really seem to be stretching it, barrack.   :wink:

Stretching what? I was asking what each respective sport's capital was, giving rowing and Philadelphia (or Boston) as an example.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at. Are you tyring to say that NYC's plan of hosting rowing in Flushing Meadows makes it rowing capital of the US? I think it's great that they planned to have it so close, it's absolutely my favorite summer sport to watch.

(Most of my friends think swimming is choice cos of the lack of clothing and the svelt bodies, but with these new shark suits swimmers wear, rowers now wear less than swimmers, have more muscle... it's all just very very nice.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rowed in high school and Philadelphia was always associated as the leading US rowing city.) Boston's got some good rowing too though.

You really seem to be stretching it, barrack.   :wink:

Stretching what? I was asking what each respective sport's capital was, giving rowing and Philadelphia (or Boston) as an example.

Your m.o. of discussing NYC's chances.  On the one hand, you concede the points presented to you; then within the same breath, you say something, like "...well, but New York isn't known for this...or that."  It's such a contradictory, 2 steps forward-1 step back pattern that maybe you should sort it out yourself, b.   :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your m.o. of discussing NYC's chances.  On the one hand, you concede the points presented to you; then within the same breath, you say something, like "...well, but New York isn't known for this...or that."  It's such a contradictory, 2 steps forward-1 step back pattern that maybe you should sort it out yourself, b.   :wink:

Baron,

Are you trying to rile me up? I feel like you're twisting my intended words. I asked a specific question... regarding what cities you (plural, meaning those who are reading this) would consider the American capital of each sport. I mentioned rowing and Philly and maybe Boston. You are the one who brought up NYC with regard to rowing, not me. You could have said, "I think Annapolis is all sailing" or "Seattle is all kayaking." That's what I was looking for. Instead you mentioned Flushing Meadows and then say that I was dissing NYC? If you think NYC is rowing, you coulda just said that.

Anyway, I will amend my promise made earlier. Not only will I not discuss an NYC bid, I will not continue a discussion about a non-NYC bid should it somehow become "NYC's got a better bid than that." I'm not against an NYC bid, I'm jut open minded to other ideas (except MSP) and will entertain them until the USOC makes it decision official. I'm just tired of people asking "what about X city in 2016 and it's immediately shot down as being not NYC."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your m.o. of discussing NYC's chances.  On the one hand, you concede the points presented to you; then within the same breath, you say something, like "...well, but New York isn't known for this...or that."  It's such a contradictory, 2 steps forward-1 step back pattern that maybe you should sort it out yourself, b.   :wink:

Baron,

Are you trying to rile me up? I feel like you're twisting my intended words. I asked a specific question... regarding what cities you (plural, meaning those who are reading this) would consider the American capital of each sport. I mentioned rowing and Philly and maybe Boston. You are the one who brought up NYC with regard to rowing, not me. You could have said, "I think Annapolis is all sailing" or "Seattle is all kayaking." That's what I was looking for. Instead you mentioned Flushing Meadows and then say that I was dissing NYC? If you think NYC is rowing, you coulda just said that.

Anyway, I will amend my promise made earlier. Not only will I not discuss an NYC bid, I will not continue a discussion about a non-NYC bid should it somehow become "NYC's got a better bid than that." I'm not against an NYC bid, I'm jut open minded to other ideas (except MSP) and will entertain them until the USOC makes it decision official. I'm just tired of people asking "what about X city in 2016 and it's immediately shot down as being not NYC."

While I understand where you're coming from about the plethora of options that the US has, the problem you have to address is the fact that, whether it's Philadelphia or anywhere else, only New York has that real global 'wow' factor that seems to be very important for an Olympic host city in the current climate.

Assuming that New York wants to try again, they surely have to be allowed to bid for 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I totally agree, it's just not that. If you'll take a look at the Megalopolis that is from Boston, NYC, Philly to DC, the rankings for population would be NYC, DC, Philly and Boston. But, if you'll consider international recognition and awareness, it's NYC, Boston, DC and Philly, IMO.

I am very confused as to where you get this information.  If you did your homework you would see that Philadelphia is the 5th largest city in the United States and the 4th largest metropolitan area:

Top 5 U.S. Cities:

City, State, Population

1. New York City, New York 8,104,079

2. Los Angeles, California 3,845,541

3. Chicago, Illinois 2,862,244

4. Houston, Texas 2,012,626

5. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1,470,151

24. Boston, Massachusetts 569,165

27. Washington, District of Columbia 553,523

Source

Top 5 Metropolitan Areas:

Area, Population

1 New York-Northern NJ-Long Island 18,709,802

2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana 12,925,330

3 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet 9,391,515

4 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 5,800,614

5 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 5,700,256

8 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 5,139,549

11 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy 4,424,649

Source

Anyway, that is not a big deal anyway.  The point is that Philadelphia is a large city with a large metropolitan area that actually would compete well against other world bid cities.  It has never nor will ever be a requirement to be the largest city in a country to be able to host a Summer Olympics.  Last time I checked, Barcelona was not the largest city in Spain (2nd to Madrid, which has never hosted an Olympics).

Finally, I would cringe if somehow NYC ended up as the US Bid City.  There is no way it would win for 2016 after the terrible bid put together for 2012.  In fact, the USOC still hasn't decided whether or not to even bid a city in 2016 because of the NYC loss.  Yes, NYC is a world city and I was in favor of it for 2012, but after the way it was mishandled, I think it would be a bad idea.

Look at Atlanta.  That city and metropolitan area is not even near the top 5, yet it hosted a Summer Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry but the NYC "blew" it argument just is complete garbage....any US city that went in the 2012 competition wouldn't have gotten any farther...it was Europe's...also, unfortunately 2012 will work in NYC's favor...and prepare to cringe, NYC will be the frontrunner in botht he domestic and international fields if they chose to bid (which is likely)

And exactly, Philly is FIFTH....menaing there are FOUR other US cities on that list (all bidding for 2016 mind you)....sorry but fifth place isn't going to cut it this time....the USOC and IOC of 2006 is different then those who chose Atlanta, Barcelona, etc.....they are going for the big time cities, and unfortunately up against the majority of the other US cities, and international cities bidding Philly (although a great city) just isn't one of them...sorry :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, let me say that I have nothing against NYC getting the bid if they are worthy of it.  Above all else I want 2016 to be in the U.S.  On that note, however, I think that had another U.S. city with a better bid been in the running, they may have won.  You can't say that no other city in the U.S. wouldn't win if NYC didn't win because New York didn't have an Olympic stadium.  I'm sorry, but without a stadium, you don't have a shot.

I think it's also important to note that 2012 wasn't Europe's.  Yes, the four other contenders were European cities, but I don't think it was a given.  2004 was Athens...which is in Europe.  Given the short amount of time between the two games, it wasn't a given that the games would go back there.

However, this topic is going wildly off track, as it is about Philadelphia 2016.  On that note, here is a link to an article from April 14, 2006 in the Philadelphia Daily News about the upcoming visits that the USOC will make to interested cities.

Philly in Olympic mode

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, let me say that I have nothing against NYC getting the bid if they are worthy of it.  Above all else I want 2016 to be in the U.S.  On that note, however, I think that had another U.S. city with a better bid been in the running, they may have won.  You can't say that no other city in the U.S. wouldn't win if NYC didn't win because New York didn't have an Olympic stadium.  I'm sorry, but without a stadium, you don't have a shot.

I think it's also important to note that 2012 wasn't Europe's.  Yes, the four other contenders were European cities, but I don't think it was a given.  2004 was Athens...which is in Europe.  Given the short amount of time between the two games, it wasn't a given that the games would go back there.

However, this topic is going wildly off track, as it is about Philadelphia 2016.  On that note, here is a link to an article from April 14, 2006 in the Philadelphia Daily News about the upcoming visits that the USOC will make to interested cities.

Philly in Olympic mode

NO MATTER WHAT USA CITY BID they would have lost...the Olympics were not comming to the USA in 2012....it was EXTREMELY obvious they were destined and well planned for Europe...if you do not know that you obviously didn't follow 2012 very closely.....and NYC did have the best 2012 bid out of all the other USA candidates....the IOC would have found a weakness in any USA bid that would have been used to dismiss it from winning, and I doubt any of the others would have even made it as far as NYC in the race....and they did have an Olympic stadium back up plan that would/will work for an Olympics (although the timing did hurt)....NYC deserves to have another shot at 2016 (where there obviously be no venue problems), and will present another bid that will be extremely strong and probably flawless.....

And I am sorry, Philly isn't going to happen for 2016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to the board Orange Eagles...  :)

Unfortunately, I can count you to the growing number of people here who are dwelling on NYC2012's mistakes. I just don't know why some people think NYC will dwell on it, and not improve from its mistakes.

In baseball, it's 3 strikes and you're out. It's not necesarrily 3 tries for NYC until it wins, but not giving the largest city in America, the 2nd most visited in the world, and one of the Top Alpha Cities in the World another chance to grab the Games when the other 3 Top Alpha Cities in the World already hosted, will be a really bad move for the USOC. Why give Anchorage and Salt Lake City their second chances, and not NYC?

NYC has a lot to prove here specially after the humiliating loss from the 2012 race. The City had kept its promise and continues on building its venues. Focusing on one mistake would be the worst thing the USOC would do at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to the board Orange Eagles...  :)

Thanks for the welcome  :D   I'm not sure quite why SOlympiadsW is so hostile to anyone that doensn't support NYC.  Would I support Philly over NYC while competing for the nation's bid?  Yes.  Would I support NYC if it were selected as the USA's bid for 2016?  Yes.

To be honest, I think 2016 is a bit early for Philadelphia to have a realistic shot, however, just like NYC tried once and failed, it is important to put the wheels in motion.

A more logical solution would be for Philadelphia in 2024 or 2028.  Please, there's no need to jump down my throat, I just think that some of you are being a bit elitist in assuming New York is the best choice when you haven't seen any plans for the other cities yet.  It's a bit too soon for that.

All I'm saying is don't just rule it out.  It might have a better chance than you may think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, there's no need to jump down my throat, I just think that some of you are being a bit elitist in assuming New York is the best choice when you haven't seen any plans for the other cities yet.  It's a bit too soon for that.

Elitist? Or it could very well be the truth.

I have posted this on the "The United States and the 2016 Summer Olympics" thread...

Granting, all of the interested cities have their stadiums, arenas and infrastructure ready for 2016, which one you think the USOC and IOC would choose? With the USOC trying to iron out some of the kinks in the relationship with the IOC, and specially with a not-so-good standing of the USA in the International Community, we'll most probably see the USOC trying to please the IOC in some way or another, choosing NYC would please them a lot...

I'm pretty sure, the USOC and the IOC will go to the city with the Newest, Most Modern, and Grandest Stadiums and Arenas of all of them... Nearly 85% of the venues would be the newest, most modern and grandest of all of the interested cities. No doubt about which city that is

New Yankee Stadium, New Mets Ballpark, New Meadowlands Stadium, New Madison Square Garden, New Brooklyn Arena, New Nassau Coliseum, New Meadowlands Stadium, New Red Bull Park, New Newark Arena... and, there's a big surprise coming up!!!  

Add to that, NYC's World's Status (do I need to elaborate?)

With that situation, I don't think it would be an elitist act if we logically conclude NYC is the best candidate for the USOC to put forward to the IOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to the board Orange Eagles...  :)

Thanks for the welcome  :D   I'm not sure quite why SOlympiadsW is so hostile to anyone that doensn't support NYC.  Would I support Philly over NYC while competing for the nation's bid?  Yes.  Would I support NYC if it were selected as the USA's bid for 2016?  Yes.

To be honest, I think 2016 is a bit early for Philadelphia to have a realistic shot, however, just like NYC tried once and failed, it is important to put the wheels in motion.

A more logical solution would be for Philadelphia in 2024 or 2028.  Please, there's no need to jump down my throat, I just think that some of you are being a bit elitist in assuming New York is the best choice when you haven't seen any plans for the other cities yet.  It's a bit too soon for that.

All I'm saying is don't just rule it out.  It might have a better chance than you may think.

I'm not being hostile, I'm speaking the truth (and I guess that hurts to a Philly supporter)....Philly is a great city, but will definately not be the USOC 2016 nomination

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to the board Orange Eagles...  :)

Thanks for the welcome  :D   I'm not sure quite why SOlympiadsW is so hostile to anyone that doensn't support NYC.  Would I support Philly over NYC while competing for the nation's bid?  Yes.  Would I support NYC if it were selected as the USA's bid for 2016?  Yes.

To be honest, I think 2016 is a bit early for Philadelphia to have a realistic shot, however, just like NYC tried once and failed, it is important to put the wheels in motion.

A more logical solution would be for Philadelphia in 2024 or 2028.  Please, there's no need to jump down my throat, I just think that some of you are being a bit elitist in assuming New York is the best choice when you haven't seen any plans for the other cities yet.  It's a bit too soon for that.

All I'm saying is don't just rule it out.  It might have a better chance than you may think.

I'm not being hostile, I'm speaking the truth (and I guess that hurts to a Philly supporter)....Philly is a great city, but will definately not be the USOC 2016 nomination

Get a clue, he said that it is probably unlikely that Philadelphia would get 2016.  As mentioned before around 2024 and 2028 would be a more reasonable goal for Philly.

And no one has officially thrown their hat in for this thing; so all these rumors 'bout NYC, Philly, Chicago, etc are just that, rumors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to the board Orange Eagles...  :)

Thanks for the welcome  :D   I'm not sure quite why SOlympiadsW is so hostile to anyone that doensn't support NYC.  Would I support Philly over NYC while competing for the nation's bid?  Yes.  Would I support NYC if it were selected as the USA's bid for 2016?  Yes.

To be honest, I think 2016 is a bit early for Philadelphia to have a realistic shot, however, just like NYC tried once and failed, it is important to put the wheels in motion.

A more logical solution would be for Philadelphia in 2024 or 2028.  Please, there's no need to jump down my throat, I just think that some of you are being a bit elitist in assuming New York is the best choice when you haven't seen any plans for the other cities yet.  It's a bit too soon for that.

All I'm saying is don't just rule it out.  It might have a better chance than you may think.

I'm not being hostile, I'm speaking the truth (and I guess that hurts to a Philly supporter)....Philly is a great city, but will definately not be the USOC 2016 nomination

Get a clue, he said that it is probably unlikely that Philadelphia would get 2016.  As mentioned before around 2024 and 2028 would be a more reasonable goal for Philly.

And no one has officially thrown their hat in for this thing; so all these rumors 'bout NYC, Philly, Chicago, etc are just that, rumors.

you get a clue....the USOC won't wait around until 2024, 2028, etc. just so Philly can build itself up and improve it's bid...it's most likely 2016 or nothing (for a very long time) for any USA city...and unfortunately it will probably be nothing for Philly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, welcome to the board Orange Eagles...  :)

Thanks for the welcome  :D   I'm not sure quite why SOlympiadsW is so hostile to anyone that doensn't support NYC.  Would I support Philly over NYC while competing for the nation's bid?  Yes.  Would I support NYC if it were selected as the USA's bid for 2016?  Yes.

To be honest, I think 2016 is a bit early for Philadelphia to have a realistic shot, however, just like NYC tried once and failed, it is important to put the wheels in motion.

A more logical solution would be for Philadelphia in 2024 or 2028.  Please, there's no need to jump down my throat, I just think that some of you are being a bit elitist in assuming New York is the best choice when you haven't seen any plans for the other cities yet.  It's a bit too soon for that.

All I'm saying is don't just rule it out.  It might have a better chance than you may think.

I'm not being hostile, I'm speaking the truth (and I guess that hurts to a Philly supporter)....Philly is a great city, but will definately not be the USOC 2016 nomination

Get a clue, he said that it is probably unlikely that Philadelphia would get 2016.  As mentioned before around 2024 and 2028 would be a more reasonable goal for Philly.

And no one has officially thrown their hat in for this thing; so all these rumors 'bout NYC, Philly, Chicago, etc are just that, rumors.

you get a clue....the USOC won't wait around until 2024, 2028, etc. just so Philly can build itself up and improve it's bid...it's most likely 2016 or nothing (for a very long time) for any USA city...and unfortunately it will probably be nothing for Philly

Again, maybe its you that needs to take a closer look at what people write around here.  No one said to have the USOC wait til 2024 or 2028 to have Philly ready for the Olympics. And no one said that Philly was going to come in and take away the 2016 thunder from NYC.

The only thing that Philly has to gain from participating in the 2016 contest is experience for a future bid.  If they're chosen as the USOC representative that's fine also. But if NYC is chosen and doesn't succeed in its 2nd try, that doesn't mean that any hopes for a future American Olympics are dashed.  Not only is that naive it's arrogant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that Philly has to gain from participating in the 2016 contest is experience for a future bid.  If they're chosen as the USOC representative that's fine also. But if NYC is chosen and doesn't succeed in its 2nd try, that doesn't mean that any hopes for a future American Olympics are dashed.  Not only is that naive it's arrogant.

The problem with the present process that poses for an interested US city would be that they won't taste a real race like what NYC experienced in the 2012 race. The 2016 USOC race would be totally different in that it is toned down compared to previous USOC races. Unless the city is the chosen one for 2016 of course.

So it is safe to conclude that ony little experience can be gained from bidding this time. It's basically, if you're interested, show us your plan. And the USOC can decide on that right away because they're trying to lessen the burden on the US cities that has a little if no chance at all, to win the International Competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, maybe its you that needs to take a closer look at what people write around here.  No one said to have the USOC wait til 2024 or 2028 to have Philly ready for the Olympics. And no one said that Philly was going to come in and take away the 2016 thunder from NYC.

The only thing that Philly has to gain from participating in the 2016 contest is experience for a future bid.  If they're chosen as the USOC representative that's fine also. But if NYC is chosen and doesn't succeed in its 2nd try, that doesn't mean that any hopes for a future American Olympics are dashed.  Not only is that naive it's arrogant.

Thrillos - it's a wasted effort to debate.  Despite the facts that no city has revealed their plans, nor has the USOC officially announced we are bidding, some have already crowned NYC the winner for 2016. :rolleyes:

My opinion - Philly has as good a chance as any right now.    :unclesam:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, maybe its you that needs to take a closer look at what people write around here.  No one said to have the USOC wait til 2024 or 2028 to have Philly ready for the Olympics. And no one said that Philly was going to come in and take away the 2016 thunder from NYC.

The only thing that Philly has to gain from participating in the 2016 contest is experience for a future bid.  If they're chosen as the USOC representative that's fine also. But if NYC is chosen and doesn't succeed in its 2nd try, that doesn't mean that any hopes for a future American Olympics are dashed.  Not only is that naive it's arrogant.

Thrillos - it's a wasted effort to debate.  Despite the facts that no city has revealed their plans, nor has the USOC officially announced we are bidding, some have already crowned NYC the winner for 2016. :rolleyes:

My opinion - Philly has as good a chance as any right now.    :unclesam:

oh please your just as biased as anyone......

and that's great that a Philly bid will get stronger each time it does...NO KIDDING every bid does....but unfortunately for them it's either 2016 or nothing probably for a very long time, and it won't be 2016 :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, maybe its you that needs to take a closer look at what people write around here.  No one said to have the USOC wait til 2024 or 2028 to have Philly ready for the Olympics. And no one said that Philly was going to come in and take away the 2016 thunder from NYC.

The only thing that Philly has to gain from participating in the 2016 contest is experience for a future bid.  If they're chosen as the USOC representative that's fine also. But if NYC is chosen and doesn't succeed in its 2nd try, that doesn't mean that any hopes for a future American Olympics are dashed.  Not only is that naive it's arrogant.

Thrillos - it's a wasted effort to debate.  Despite the facts that no city has revealed their plans, nor has the USOC officially announced we are bidding, some have already crowned NYC the winner for 2016. :rolleyes:

My opinion - Philly has as good a chance as any right now.    :unclesam:

oh please your just as biased as anyone......

and that's great that a Philly bid will get stronger each time it does...NO KIDDING every bid does....but unfortunately for them it's either 2016 or nothing probably for a very long time, and it won't be 2016 :(

Again you're not comprehending what I'm saying, but I can't resolve that for you.  Lemme just say this about NYC vs. the rest of American Cities, don't count your chickens before they've hatched.

And for someone who supports an NYC bid, as strong and as comprehensive as any winning bid ever presented, you seem to be the most insecure and confrontational when someone else talks about a competing bid city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...