No 2016 bid from USOC?

[Athensfan]

Greetings all.

I've been something of a Gamesbids voyeur for the last year and a half and finally decided to become a member.

Here's a question to ponder: Do you think it is a given that the USOC will field a candidate in 2016?

I suspect the USOC will seize their window of opportunity and put forth a bid. However, based on Peter Ueberroth's comments, I would not be totally shocked if the USOC chose to sit 2016 out.

In my estimation, Mr. Ueberroth is a very wise man (who, by the way, would've been an excellent governor of California). Over the last few months his remarks have made it clear that the USOC does not want to put forth another losing bid. This suggests that if no city is a sure-fire winner, the USOC will take a breather. There are serious question marks about all the prime contenders: Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Philadelphia. Most importantly, it is extremely unclear whether or not the U.S. can sufficiently demonstrate commitment to the Games at all levels of government.

In taking a cautious approach to 2016, Mr. Ueberroth conveys a respect for the IOC's requirements and a commitment on the part of the U.S. to take the Games seriously. Despite the success of Salt Lake, the U.S. still needs to win back the trust it squandered in Atlanta.

Mr. Ueberroth has also observed that, for financial reasons, the IOC needs the USA to host the Games more than the USA needs to play host. Although the USA needs to demonstrate humility and respect towards the IOC, it also needs to maintain its dignity and avoid the appearance of desperation.

Perhaps Mr. Ueberroth's non-commital attitude to 2016 is partially calculated to whet the IOC's appetite for a US Games.

But maybe, just maybe, there is a real possibility that the US won't bid.

In the absence of U.S. bid the 2016 race could be extremely unpredictable and exciting. Tokyo suggested their 2016 bid was intended to pave the way for 2020, but they could find themselves to be a frontrunner earlier than expected. Even a strong technical bid from a European city (especially an eastern European city) might not seem totally far-fetched.

Any thoughts?

[rjmac]

Looking at the list of bid cities from all the past year (can be found on the Olympic site) the USA almost always puts forth a candidate for every year.

This might be another reason that they have won more games than everyone else.  Much like playing the lottery, you can't win if you don't play.....lol

[baron-pierreIV]

Greetings all.

I've been something of a Gamesbids voyeur for the last year and a half and finally decided to become a member.

Here's a question to ponder: Do you think it is a given that the USOC will field a candidate in 2016?

I suspect the USOC will seize their window of opportunity and put forth a bid. However, based on Peter Ueberroth's comments, I would not be totally shocked if the USOC chose to sit 2016 out.

In my estimation, Mr. Ueberroth is a very wise man (who, by the way, would've been an excellent governor of California). Over the last few months his remarks have made it clear that the USOC does not want to put forth another losing bid. This suggests that if no city is a sure-fire winner, the USOC will take a breather. There are serious question marks about all the prime contenders: Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Philadelphia. Most importantly, it is extremely unclear whether or not the U.S. can sufficiently demonstrate commitment to the Games at all levels of government.

In taking a cautious approach to 2016, Mr. Ueberroth conveys a respect for the IOC's requirements and a commitment on the part of the U.S. to take the Games seriously. Despite the success of Salt Lake, the U.S. still needs to win back the trust it squandered in Atlanta.

Mr. Ueberroth has also observed that, for financial reasons, the IOC needs the USA to host the Games more than the USA needs to play host. Although the USA needs to demonstrate humility and respect towards the IOC, it also needs to maintain its dignity and avoid the appearance of desperation.

Perhaps Mr. Ueberroth's non-commital attitude to 2016 is partially calculated to whet the IOC's appetite for a US Games.

But maybe, just maybe, there is a real possibility that the US won't bid.

In the absence of U.S. bid the 2016 race could be extremely unpredictable and exciting. Tokyo suggested their 2016 bid was intended to pave the way for 2020, but they could find themselves to be a frontrunner earlier than expected. Even a strong technical bid from a European city (especially an eastern European city) might not seem totally far-fetched.

Any thoughts?

Tokyo hopes there won't be a US entry.  Ha!  Dream on, Tokyo.

[millertime1851]

I think 2016 will end up in the Americas, regardless of whether or not a US city enters the fray.  If the US does not enter a city, you can bet Toronto will want in.  Also, look out for a serious bid from Mexico.  2016 is a bit soon after the 2014 World Cup for Rio de Janeiro, but they could bid.

You will also see some "feeler" bids for what is expected to be a wide-open, "new frontiers" 2020.  Cape Town will be testing the water, and possibly a bid from India.

[Athensfan]

I think 2016 will end up in the Americas, regardless of whether or not a US city enters the fray.  If the US does not enter a city, you can bet Toronto will want in.  Also, look out for a serious bid from Mexico.  2016 is a bit soon after the 2014 World Cup for Rio de Janeiro, but they could bid.

You will also see some "feeler" bids for what is expected to be a wide-open, "new frontiers" 2020.  Cape Town will be testing the water, and possibly a bid from India.

I dunno, millertime.

There hasn't been any noise about a Canadian bid -- not surprising since the 2016 host will be chosen in the summer of 2009 -- less than a year before Vancouver 2010. There was a little talk about Montreal, but I doubt anyone will take it seriously. No buzz about Toronto. And with the cost rumors swirling around Vancouver, I just don't see another maple-leaf Games that soon.

It's nearly impossible for me to imagine a successful bid from Mexico -- especially if it's up against Tokyo. That country simply doesn't have the finances or organization -- not to mention the security.

Delhi is gung-ho about bidding, but I can't imagine them being a contender.

As for Rio -- your point about the World Cup is well taken, plus I just don't see them being ready in time.

I'd love to see the Games in Cape Town, but last I read they weren't thinking about a serious play until 2020.

I can imagine the IOC returning to Asia or even holding back-to-back Games in Europe rather than awarding the Olympics to a "new frontier" before they are ready. Beijing and London will be extremely tough acts to follow. In a way I hope the US doesn't host in 2016. I'm a little afraid that the 2016 host is in for a thankless job: economic realities will force Olympic-downsizing -- whoever hosts. How do you limit the lavish scale of the Games without appearing cheap? It's not going to be easy. I just can't see the IOC entrusting that task to a "new frontier". It would be more of a punishment than a reward.

[Guardian]

Toronto could be still in the dark about wanting to bid for another Olympic Games again. Right now, the city is concentrating on bidding for Expo 2015. However, I still don't know about whether it is an official bid or not. Plus, the awarding of this event occurs about the end of next year.

That does leave some time on whether the city wants to bid for the 2016 Olympic Games because the awarding of these Games occur in 2009. About a year and a half to make its mind after the Expo 2015 decision.

[Sir Rols]

Toronto could be still in the dark about wanting to bid for another Olympic Games again. Right now, the city is concentrating on bidding for Expo 2015. However, I still don't know about whether it is an official bid or not. Plus, the awarding of this event occurs about the end of next year.

That does leave some time on whether the city wants to bid for the 2016 Olympic Games because the awarding of these Games occur in 2009. About a year and a half to make its mind after the Expo 2015 decision.

I'm not too au fait with the Expo bid (I never go to the world's fair thread) but is the Toronto bid still centred around the waterfront development plan? And would winning the expo preclude  a Summer Olympics bid then? Surely a lot of the structures that would be used for a World Expo _ big exhibition halls etc _ are exactly the type of things that would be needed for an Olympics.

[Guardian]

I'm not too au fait with the Expo bid (I never go to the world's fair thread) but is the Toronto bid still centred around the waterfront development plan? And would winning the expo preclude  a Summer Olympics bid then? Surely a lot of the structures that would be used for a World Expo _ big exhibition halls etc _ are exactly the type of things that would be needed for an Olympics.

I think it still is, from the failed 2008 Olympics bid. Of course, if Toronto does manage to win the Expo 2015 bid, then I cannot see how it could host the 2016 Olympic Games, too. Especially if the press conference later today regarding the financial status of Vancouver 2010 may spook them and the COC from pursuing a bid in the near future.

[canada_olympica20]

If the USOC puts forth a bid for 2016, which seems pretty likely, Toronto shouldn't waste its time. Toronto going up against NYC would almost certainly result in another disappointed loss.... if NYC or an American bid wins 2016.... Toronto can't really be seen as a serious threat until at least 2024.... maybe 2028..... will Toronto ever get its much deserved Olympic games   ?

[baron-pierreIV]

If the USOC puts forth a bid for 2016, which seems pretty likely, Toronto shouldn't waste its time. Toronto going up against NYC would almost certainly result in another disappointed loss.... if NYC or an American bid wins 2016.... Toronto can't really be seen as a serious threat until at least 2024.... maybe 2028..... will Toronto ever get its much deserved Olympic games   ?

Canada would be extremely stupid and foolish to put in a bid for 2009-16 when the Winter Games are happening in Vancouver the following year.  Yeah...I know. Salt Lake - 1995, and Atlanta, 1996.  That's because it was the US; but ain't gonna happen again.

[Suit U Sir !!!]

Tokyo hopes there won't be a US entry.  Ha!  Dream on, Tokyo.

Maybe......but USOC will also be hoping that Tokyo does not bid for 2016.

Tokyo is maybe the only city that the capability of stealing the 2016 olympics away from America. Even if USOC puts forward a 1st tier Amercian city like NYC or Chicago, the Tokyo bid would still have a good chance of winning.

[canada_olympica20]

If the USOC puts forth a bid for 2016, which seems pretty likely, Toronto shouldn't waste its time. Toronto going up against NYC would almost certainly result in another disappointed loss.... if NYC or an American bid wins 2016.... Toronto can't really be seen as a serious threat until at least 2024.... maybe 2028..... will Toronto ever get its much deserved Olympic games   ?

Canada would be extremely stupid and foolish to put in a bid for 2009-16 when the Winter Games are happening in Vancouver the following year.  Yeah...I know. Salt Lake - 1995, and Atlanta, 1996.  That's because it was the US; but ain't gonna happen again.

So exactly my point..... but assuming NYC or an american bid wins 2016....... I mean Toronto then is left out of the running for another decade..... 2020 I see being an olympic games of the future being awarded to a host that no one would have even considered viable 10-20 years ago. Cape Town or Rio perhaps?

[Guardian]

To some, it makes one wonder if Toronto will ever get the chance to do it in my lifetime. To me, I think Canada is getting pummeled from the IOC to the point that is leading to the question on whether the country should even bother being part of the Olympic Movement. Could Vancouver 2010 be the very last Olympic Games on Canadian soil?

[Suit U Sir !!!]

To me, I think Canada is getting pummeled from the IOC to the point that is leading to the question on whether the country should even bother being part of the Olympic Movement.

Not really.......... the IOC hasn't really been nasty or harsh towards Canada, in comparison to other countries.

Canada has been awarded 1 summer and 2 winter games. Montreal beat world cities like Los Angeles and Moscow to win 1976.

Then despite the construction and financial problems of Montreal 1976, the IOC still decided to pick Calgary for the 1988 winter games, only 12 years after 1976.

Also, Vancouver was picked for 2010, only 8 years after Salt Lake City, so North America hosting a winter games again.

In contrast, Istanbul has been rejected 4 times consecutively- in 2012 they didn't even make the short list. Other well-known world cities/ no.1 cities like Rio (2012), Bangkok (2008), Milan (2000), Cairo (2008) have also not been short listed.

In contrast Toronto finished 3rd in 1996 (despite canada recently hosted in 1976 and 1988) and 2nd in 2008 ahead of an A+ world icon like Paris.

[baron-pierreIV]

In contrast, Istanbul has been rejected 4 times consecutively- in 2012 they didn't even make the short list. Other well-known world cities/ no.1 cities like Rio (2012), Bangkok (2008), Milan (2000), Cairo (2008) have also not been short listed.

Guardian, is Mikel channeling thru you?  

Suits,

1.  Detroit sits up there with Istanbul as being denied 7x.  

2.  Cairo got the brush-off again with the 2009 Session.

3.  Montreal was actually the 'compromise' candidate (the IOC being 'chicken-sh*ts' most of the time) between 2 leading 'cold-war' cities in 1970.  

4.  I think Milan never even made the IOC short-list.  I don't think the city was ever serious about bidding.

[Stu]

Detroit must have been glutten for punishment, being rejected seven times by the IOC it must be the most unsuccessful city in Olympic history!

Cheer up - it's not so bad Istanbul!

[BSTOUT1221]

For me, the 2016 race in the US will be interesting because any city the USOC puts forward will have to have all the sh** together before going to the IOC.  I still am not sure how the USOC gets around some of the IOC requirements.  US bids will have to show support at all levels of government and provide a commitment to cover Games shortfalls.  These are things that past hosts in the US have not worried about.  The federal government usually lets the local government handle all of this.   And if voters are asked to pass legislation to cover these shortfalls, that will be difficult if the commitment the IOC requires is large.  In my opinion, no US city would ever have to tap into that reserve but asking voters to vote for it gets into 'touchy' waters.   Those are to me the biggest roadblocks to a 2016 US Games.   And whose bid is it - the host city or the USOC's?   The USOC seems to want to 'drive' this more now.   The 2016 bid could be in for some trouble even though i think whatever city the US puts forward is in a 'favorite' status position at this very pre-mature point in time.

[baron-pierreIV]

The USOC seems to want to 'drive' this more now.

Well, it has and is and will always be a partnership.  The USOC is the presenting entity to its mother-ship, the IOC.  That's how it was set up to stage the LA and Atlanta Games.

The problem is the IOC.  They WERE NOT left holding the bag in Montreal.  What more could they want?  It seems to be a vindicative organization in that...oh, darn it, the American way worked fine.  How do we make it more difficult for them next time?

That's how I view it.  And I've never heard them (the IOC) express regret or admonish (NOT ATHOC) but the Greek gov't in having the 2004 Games cost $12 billion -- even though the Greeks have taken it all with a stoic smile.  That's because they secretly 'bleed' gov'ts of their finances.  THat's how Athens was done; Rome has had to subsidize Torino; 2008 of course will be a massive showcase for the Communist Chinese way of life; and the British welfare state will finance its extravganza in 2012.  

This is NOT how the USOC plays it.  It does not want to be in the public dole.  It does NOT want to be subsidized by the US gov't.  To be true to grandpappy's original charter, it maintains its independence so as not to be beholden to Washington.  If that means being in the driver's seat, then so be it.  

Unfortunately, Mr. Ueberroth only knows too well how the game has changed (how that depraved organization based in Lausanne operates), and it sort of has to be played by their rules this time.

[Guardian]

No, baron. Mikel is not channeling through me. At least, the other NOCs seems to be doing one thing or another right in the IOC's eyes to me, including the USOC, in the award of IOC membership and other ISFs appointments.

The COC now only has Pound to answer to the IOC in behalf of Canada and he (Pound) gets a rocky road in return. Pound had to really convince the lot of them that Canada is no push-over in the Olympic Movement since his appointment in 1978. Without him and him ALONE, Canada would not have gotten what it had and gets now. My concern is that, when he's gone from the IOC, Canada will end up having no voice in the Olympic Movement. Ask the other NOCs that have gone and still is going through that. Have their Olympic concerns been voiced? Are they satisfied that they are getting their "fair share" of responsiblity for being accepted in the Olympic Movement? Chances are that the answer to these questions are "no." This could backlash in Canada and I don't like what the answers that could come up here.

[Guardian]

Detroit must have been glutten for punishment, being rejected seven times by the IOC it must be the most unsuccessful city in Olympic history!

Cheer up - it's not so bad Istanbul!

When was all of Detriot's official bids for the Olympic Games? Did they occur during one particular IOC's president's time?

[LA84]

Detroit must have been glutten for punishment, being rejected seven times by the IOC it must be the most unsuccessful city in Olympic history!

Cheer up - it's not so bad Istanbul!

When was all of Detriot's official bids for the Olympic Games? Did they occur during one particular IOC's president's time?

Yes - mostly during Avery Brundage's reign.  Which is odd since he was born in Detroit.

[dawn94762004]

Don't you mean that the USOC rejected all of Detroit's bids? Or are you talking about the bids Detroit made to host the games with Windsor, Canada?

[Suit U Sir !!!]

1.  Detroit sits up there with Istanbul as being denied 7x.  

2.  Cairo got the brush-off again with the 2009 Session.

4.  I think Milan never even made the IOC short-list.  I don't think the city was ever serious about bidding.

Precisely....... other countries have had to put up with rejection from the IOC as well as canada, the examples you've given being the

USA. Eygpt and Italy.

[Guardian]

Don't you mean that the USOC rejected all of Detroit's bids? Or are you talking about the bids Detroit made to host the games with Windsor, Canada?

No. All of Detriot's bids for the Summer Olympics, under the Brundage presidency, were official and accepted by the USOC. However, I have to re-fresh my memory, but I think some of the official bids were a "free for all" venture. What I mean by that was that certain NOCs was not bound to just send only one candidate city bid for one particular Games, as it is now.

[Stu]

Don't you mean that the USOC rejected all of Detroit's bids? Or are you talking about the bids Detroit made to host the games with Windsor, Canada?

No. All of Detriot's bids for the Summer Olympics, under the Brundage presidency, were official and accepted by the USOC. However, I have to re-fresh my memory, but I think some of the official bids were a "free for all" venture. What I mean by that was that certain NOCs was not bound to just send only one candidate city bid for one particular Games, as it is now.

We're lucky that the US is obliged to choose only one these days - or the candidate list would be dominated by the likes of Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Minneapolis-St Paul and Detroit again and again and again.  Perhaps even Atlanta would be now attempting to become a repeat host!

:help: