Jump to content

Let's say NYC does pursue a 2016 bid......


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I hate to say it.....but I also like to say it at same time.  There was NO real chance of NYC winning 2012.  The voting showed that.  Barely beating out Moscow as the first to go!!!

There last chance to save their bid was to offer up some STAR firepower in Singapore.  They didn't really do that.  Who do they send.... Ali and Hilary.  Get Real!!!!  Notice that the two finallists sent their HEADS OF STATE.  Even with the G8 Summit ready to start close to the announcement.  Chirac and Blair were there to show support.  This is VERY important.

As quoted by many columnists on MSNNBC, it will be a tough job for NYC if they run for the games of 2016.  It will also be a tougher job for NYC to even get the nomination as the USOC candidate.  Tim Dahlberg of the Assoc. Press said that the lands that would have been used would probably be used for something else and that 2012 was NYC's time.  The USOC has also stated that there will be new rules and formats for selecting new bid cities in the future.  The fact that experience in the bid process doesn't seem to help all that much.....ask Paris.

If the games are going to come back to North America soon, I think that the USOC should send a stronger candidate.  This may very well be NYC.....but they need a much better plan.  If 2016 doesn't go to a North American city (and it very well not with South America and Africa saying it is OUR TIME)  A 2020 North American host city will most likely come down to a city in the US and Toronto, Canada.  Toronto has bid twice before and after their loss for the 2008 games, their committee member were chased down by IOC members to bid again very soon.  Toronto also never finished in a bid attempt weaker than NYC just did. (3rd for 1996 and 2nd for 2008)  Toronto also has the experience of finishing higher than Paris in the 2008 bidding war and is still holding the same lands for something BIG in the near future.

The next North American city to host a summer games will most likely be Toronto or somewhere in the USA.  However, I don't ever count out Havana or a city in Mexico.  It's interesting to note that NO other country has hosted as many games (Summer or Winter) as the USA.  Maybe the bid contest of 2012 was just a prelude of the times to come? The USA or more important NYC "Isn't the Centre of the Universe"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nice thoughts by rjmac, thank you.  And civilized too.

But I don't think Toronto will bid again, knowing Canada will not ever get both 2010 and 2016.  

If South America, Rio,  puts up a very good bid, they will be the sentimental choice, in fact I think they should get it.  I'll be rooting for S. America.  The games really need to get to the 2 remaining continents.  

Deep inside, I just don't think Capetown, Havana, or Instanbul is ready yet for 2016.

The New York people in this forum still think NYC is center of the world, but the USOC must accept that NYC2012 finished BELOW Madrid, and come up with a City more palatable to the 100 or so IOC voting members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally uninteresting or irrelevant points.  I don't think the IOC, or we, will be consulting either of you at any time soon.  

Perhaps if you came in here under more 'auspicious' tones, you would not be met w/ such resistance.  However, let me play along with you for a moment and quote from another post I made in the NY folder re San Francisco's chances:  

If NYC's weakest point was switching to Plan B for the T&F Stadium, I don't see how -- for all of you pushing SF and much as I would want the City to bid again -- y'all can push SF when its main stadium will be an upgraded university stadium 1 hour south of the actual host city - SAN FRANCISCO?  

There is no talk of the new 49er stadium pushing thru.  One day it's a go; the next it's not.  Until Candlestick is totally demolished by the next big earthquake, I don't think the promised 49er stad will see the light of day.

There is no land available now for an Olympic Village.  The Moffet Field site was, I believe, a 1-time offer.  Plans for other uses of the site have been drawn up and advanced.  

I would know if there's any Olympic activity perking in SF.  But maybe you SF-lovers know something more about an SF bid that I don't?  

So, we happen to believe strongly in a return NYC bid -- and NOT in your arguments.  As such, there's an impasse..,  

So why do you even post here?    :suspect:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im from san francisco.  i found it highly ironic that on the day of the IOC decision, BART (SF's pseudo subway system) was on the verge of going on strike, stranding employees around the entire bay.  while the world awaited the IOC decision, we all waited for the midnight decision on whether a BART strike would happen.

the big joke about the SF 2012 bid was that BART was gonna have a line running down to San Jose/Stanford, where the major events would have been.  BART is no closer to that goal today than it was three years ago when SF lost it's bid for 2012.

16 years have passed since the 1989 earthquake and the city is STILL fighting over a new bridge and retrofitting of the bay bridge (the one that partly collapsed).  we cant even fix our own infrastructure to save the lives of our own citizens.  what makes BASOC (bay area sports organizing committee) think SF can upgrade it's infrastructure for the olympics?

glad SF lost it's bid.  dont bet on SF being a possible bid candidate in the near future.

doesnt seem like there are any major US cities left that could bid for the olympics and have a chance at winning internationally--besides LA and New York.

this city cant even

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, no other subway system in the world ever strikes.   :rolleyes:

All you I heart NY people need to take your blinders off.  As soon as someone comes on here with anything short of irrational exuberance for NY, they get blasted.

Face the hard cold facts - NY lost and lost big.  SF is 47 square miles.  Insisting that all event have to occur in city limits is like saying all NY games must occur on Manhattan and Staten Island.  Athens 2004 was in reality Greece 2004 - look at where the events were held - pretty much in every corner of the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, no other subway system in the world ever strikes.   :rolleyes:

All you I heart NY people need to take your blinders off.  As soon as someone comes on here with anything short of irrational exuberance for NY, they get blasted.

Face the hard cold facts - NY lost and lost big.  SF is 47 square miles.  Insisting that all event have to occur in city limits is like saying all NY games must occur on Manhattan and Staten Island.  Athens 2004 was in reality Greece 2004 - look at where the events were held - pretty much in every corner of the country.

Not to quibble, but SF is actually 43.something sq, miles.  Won that on a bet once, and I don't think new islands have recently erupted, so...

Well, I think you've convinced me about SF, Pliny.  Go ring Anne whatshername's number and BASOC and tell them you're ready to lead the charge.  We shall follow...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally uninteresting or irrelevant points.  I don't think the IOC, or we, will be consulting either of you at any time soon.  

Perhaps if you came in here under more 'auspicious' tones, you would not be met w/ such resistance.  However, let me play along with you for a moment and quote from another post I made in the NY folder re San Francisco's chances:  

If NYC's weakest point was switching to Plan B for the T&F Stadium, I don't see how -- for all of you pushing SF and much as I would want the City to bid again -- y'all can push SF when its main stadium will be an upgraded university stadium 1 hour south of the actual host city - SAN FRANCISCO?  

There is no talk of the new 49er stadium pushing thru.  One day it's a go; the next it's not.  Until Candlestick is totally demolished by the next big earthquake, I don't think the promised 49er stad will see the light of day.

There is no land available now for an Olympic Village.  The Moffet Field site was, I believe, a 1-time offer.  Plans for other uses of the site have been drawn up and advanced.  

I would know if there's any Olympic activity perking in SF.  But maybe you SF-lovers know something more about an SF bid that I don't?  

So, we happen to believe strongly in a return NYC bid -- and NOT in your arguments.  As such, there's an impasse..,  

So why do you even post here?    :suspect:

oh please...

rjmac thinks Toronto is going to host the next Olympics in NA....Ahsing person doesn't know what they are tlaking about...and cato thinks SF ahd a good 2012 bid, and doesn't realzie that the IOC vote amounts doesn't matter where you can say someone "lost big", because that just isn't true....if you lose the IOC vote you LOSE there is no ranking afterwards....oh well....but as you said Baron we have to really wait for the dust to settle....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, no other subway system in the world ever strikes.   :rolleyes:

All you I heart NY people need to take your blinders off.  As soon as someone comes on here with anything short of irrational exuberance for NY, they get blasted.

Face the hard cold facts - NY lost and lost big.  SF is 47 square miles.  Insisting that all event have to occur in city limits is like saying all NY games must occur on Manhattan and Staten Island.  Athens 2004 was in reality Greece 2004 - look at where the events were held - pretty much in every corner of the country.

do you live in SF? STFU unless you know what youre talking about.  i didnt say no sytems ever strike.  i said it was ironic that the laughability of BASOC's 2012 bid again manifest itself in a high profile BART strike on the very day San Francisco hoped to be in Singapore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to quibble, but SF is actually 43.something sq, miles.  Won that on a bet once, and I don't think new islands have recently erupted, so...

Well, I think you've convinced me about SF, Pliny.  Go ring Anne whatshername's number and BASOC and tell them you're ready to lead the charge.  We shall follow...

Nice try.  http://www.zpub.com/sf/sf-info.html

46.7 sq miles to be exact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you live in SF? STFU unless you know what youre talking about.  i didnt say no sytems ever strike.  i said it was ironic that the laughability of BASOC's 2012 bid again manifest itself in a high profile BART strike on the very day San Francisco hoped to be in Singapore.

Yeah, I own a house at 10th and California.  Where do you live?  Oakland?  I attended the Athens games as a translator.  Every group from the garbage collectors to toll booth people were threatening strike.  They've done it many times before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently visited Philadelphia and noticed how run-down some of its outer-city areas were (a lot like East London). It crossed my mind at the time, that an Olympic Games in Philadelphia could leave a lasting legacy if it ever staged the Games. It was a great city and I really enjoyed my stay.

New York certainly has the X Factor and profile, but obviously the US bidding process will have to start over for the next USA bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently visited Philadelphia and noticed how run-down some of its outer-city areas were (a lot like East London). It crossed my mind at the time, that an Olympic Games in Philadelphia could leave a lasting legacy if it ever staged the Games. It was a great city and I really enjoyed my stay.

New York certainly has the X Factor and profile, but obviously the US bidding process will have to start over for the next USA bid.

Good observations, Torch.  Philadelphia was at one time a world-class city (think Centennial celebrations) that is only just beginning to find its identity as a historic city.  FDR park adjacent to the sports complex would be a great place to develop an Olympic Village.  The city government would first have to get its act in order and NY would have to be a willing supporter - tough.  We're talking 20-30 years away me thinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that IOC have a very random criteria.

After 2012, London will be the only city to host 3 Olympic games, 10% of all history, while NYC and Madrid have never hosted any. Paris had a more realistic project and more public support, so what's the criteria for the IOC?

Considering this, the theory of rotation of continents it´s important but may not be the most important thing as they are not being fair on their elections. So I think NYC has more chances for 2016 but an european city could bid too and Europe could host 2016 games.

Don't get me wrong, I congratulate London for their victory but I think they were not the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good observations, Torch.  Philadelphia was at one time a world-class city (think Centennial celebrations) that is only just beginning to find its identity as a historic city.  FDR park adjacent to the sports complex would be a great place to develop an Olympic Village.  The city government would first have to get its act in order and NY would have to be a willing supporter - tough.  We're talking 20-30 years away me thinks.

Centennial celebrations?  Who remembers 1876?  

For the BICENTENNIAL, Philly was a dud like Denver.   (Don't get me wrong, I like Philly.)  But it was supposed to co-host a B-C Expo w/ Miami.  Both fizzled.  Philly's a good location site for movies; and I am looking forward to the new home for the Barnes Foundation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no rule that you have to be pro-NYC to participate in this forum or in any particular thread.   Try to be a bit more civilized.  The Olympics is about participation, right?

There are no right and wrongs, except may be the IOC.  For today, London is right, and everybody else is wrong.  And NYC is almost as wrong as Moscow.

It is my opinion that NYC is a terrible place for the Olympics.  

As bad as Atlanta, widely regarded as "below average".  Only SFO and LA are good site in the USA.  Since LA will never get another chance within my life time, all my hopes are in SFO.  I wish the USOC will open up 2016 to all cities in the USA.  I also wish that the USOC will learn from 2012 and try to think more like the IOC members who are voting.  (I admit that Vancouver 2010 simply doomed NYC, and SFO would have zero chance in 2012.)  I hope that the USOC wil conclude that NYC2016 is not a good choice.

Again, there's no rule that says everyone must be pro-NY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good observations, Torch.  Philadelphia was at one time a world-class city (think Centennial celebrations) that is only just beginning to find its identity as a historic city.  FDR park adjacent to the sports complex would be a great place to develop an Olympic Village.  The city government would first have to get its act in order and NY would have to be a willing supporter - tough.  We're talking 20-30 years away me thinks.

Centennial celebrations?  Who remembers 1876?  

For the BICENTENNIAL, Philly was a dud like Denver.   (Don't get me wrong, I like Philly.)  But it was supposed to co-host a B-C Expo w/ Miami.  Both fizzled.  Philly's a good location site for movies; and I am looking forward to the new home for the Barnes Foundation.

Sadly enough, it has been at least 100 years since Philadelphia was really a mover and shaker.  It had an awkward phase for decades where the older brother got overshadowed by its younger siblings (NY and DC).  Instead of remaking itself, the city was in denial until quite recently - happens when you get used to losing out.  

Philadelphia was still in the dumps in 1976.  It would do a much more competant job today judging by the Live 8 concert on BF Parkway.  But you have to look at '76 as a good thing in that it woke up Philadelphia and made it realize how far it's fallen in a century - that's half the battle.  

The Barnes will fit in nicely with the new Calder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no rule that you have to be pro-NYC to participate in this forum or in any particular thread.   Try to be a bit more civilized.  The Olympics is about participation, right?

There are no right and wrongs, except may be the IOC.  For today, London is right, and everybody else is wrong.  And NYC is almost as wrong as Moscow.

It is my opinion that NYC is a terrible place for the Olympics.  

As bad as Atlanta, widely regarded as "below average".  Only SFO and LA are good site in the USA.  Since LA will never get another chance within my life time, all my hopes are in SFO.  I wish the USOC will open up 2016 to all cities in the USA.  I also wish that the USOC will learn from 2012 and try to think more like the IOC members who are voting.  (I admit that Vancouver 2010 simply doomed NYC, and SFO would have zero chance in 2012.)  I hope that the USOC wil conclude that NYC2016 is not a good choice.

Again, there's no rule that says everyone must be pro-NY.

Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baron Pierre, 5402 posts in 1 year. As they say in London '...Blimey Guvna!'  

Me thinks you should head the bid for NY2016. You is wasted.  :;):

Hell....come and run London 2012!  :unclesam:

@The_Torch...

I would, too, if 2012 weren't so far off.  But thanks for your kind words.   :laugh:   (Sorry, if I seem a little testy the past day or so, there are some juvenile newbies -- not you Ashing, altho I think you're Kerrey under a new skin... nor Cato -- the other 2 I refer to know who they are -- who think they are such hotshots when they're nothing but mere babes in the woods.  And I give as good as I get...)

Anyway, Torch...again, thanks for the kind words.  And hopefully, today will be the worst on London's Road to Destiny -- and that everything will be smooth sailing hereon.  A 3xer!  How 'bout that.

But hey, if Seb Coe needs a Co-Chairman, we can talk.  

To quote Mae West:  When I'm good, I'm good; but when I'm bad, I'm better!!  :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no rule that you have to be pro-NYC to participate in this forum or in any particular thread.   Try to be a bit more civilized.  The Olympics is about participation, right?

There are no right and wrongs, except may be the IOC.  For today, London is right, and everybody else is wrong.  And NYC is almost as wrong as Moscow.

It is my opinion that NYC is a terrible place for the Olympics.  

As bad as Atlanta, widely regarded as "below average".  Only SFO and LA are good site in the USA.  Since LA will never get another chance within my life time, all my hopes are in SFO.  I wish the USOC will open up 2016 to all cities in the USA.  I also wish that the USOC will learn from 2012 and try to think more like the IOC members who are voting.  (I admit that Vancouver 2010 simply doomed NYC, and SFO would have zero chance in 2012.)  I hope that the USOC wil conclude that NYC2016 is not a good choice.

Again, there's no rule that says everyone must be pro-NY.

You haven't said "WHY" NYC would not be a good venue for a Summer Olympic Games?!

I'm willing to take any and all bets right now that in 2009, NYC will win the vote to host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games!

Any bets?!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You haven't said "WHY" NYC would not be a good venue for a Summer Olympic Games?!

I'm willing to take any and all bets right now that in 2009, NYC will win the vote to host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games!

Any bets?!!

I'd put a few quid on it, but not my mortgage...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...