Jump to content

U.S. Winter Bid for 2022 or 2026


Recommended Posts

That's beside the point. But you get my idea that even with a everything going for Salt Lake City (weak competition for example) it needs to be mostly different from the 2002 bid, whilst offering far more and being more compact than the 2002 games. Otherwise, why go back there if they're proposing something similar to 2002?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It came across as arrogant (maybe that's far too strong a word actually) because it's making an assumption that the vote was about a message to America, when quite frankly it wasn't. It's viewing the

The thing that surprises me the most in this thread is that there are so many people who are unwilling to just be patient. Is it really that hard to wait and put forward a top-drawer American bid when

And do u really think they will turn down the whatever $.5 million deposit for over a year + all the interest it can add to its coffers, at the outset--just to put US supporters' mind at rest? And wh

. Otherwise, why go back there if they're proposing something similar to 2002?

Because there aren't many alternatives. Because you wouldn't have to lay out extra spending which is what you are proposing and is ridicuous.

Uhmmm....why did the IOC go back to St. Moritz? Innsbruck (yes, we know the answer to that)? Lake Placid (which had a 48 year-gap in between)? Only a new Figure Skating arena is really necessary. The transportation system was pretty much flawless. Rice-Eccles is fine at 50,000. Why should they put in 70,000 when it wound't fill at that capacity for football games?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhmmm....why did the IOC go back to St. Moritz? Innsbruck (yes, we know the answer to that)? Lake Placid (which had a 48 year-gap in between)? Only a new Figure Skating arena is really necessary. The transportation system was pretty much flawless. Rice-Eccles is fine at 50,000. Why should they put in 70,000 when it wound't fill at that capacity for football games?

St. Moritz - Chosen because Switzerland had remained neutral during WWII so they wanted an economical option

Innsbruck - Yes, we all know

Lake Placid - Chosen because they were the only city that bid

So really, there isn't precedent for a previous host city to win for a 2nd time in a legitimate competition. Salt Lake probably does need to do something new, especially being a recent host, let alone in a country that could potentially produce other options. To simply build a new figure skating arena and say the rest is in place sounds like a nice plan, but will the IOC which is usually looking for newer and bigger and better be interested when SLC is up against other competition? I have my doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

St. Moritz - Chosen because Switzerland had remained neutral during WWII so they wanted an economical option

Innsbruck - Yes, we all know

Lake Placid - Chosen because they were the only city that bid

So really, there isn't precedent for a previous host city to win for a 2nd time in a legitimate competition. Salt Lake probably does need to do something new, especially being a recent host, let alone in a country that could potentially produce other options. To simply build a new figure skating arena and say the rest is in place sounds like a nice plan, but will the IOC which is usually looking for newer and bigger and better be interested when SLC is up against other competition? I have my doubts.

Those were rhetorical comments about the repeat cities. I KNOW why they were chosen.

Well, will a smallish city like Salt Lake (with a core urban pop of some 190,000) need a whole new set of venues? That's Olympic extravagance in play again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were rhetorical comments about the repeat cities. I KNOW why they were chosen.

Well, will a smallish city like Salt Lake (with a core urban pop of some 190,000) need a whole new set of venues? That's Olympic extravagance in play again!

That was my point though.. the IOC went back to those cities because of a lack of option. For them to go back to Salt Lake, they would probably need something new. I don't know if that means all new venues, but that's what it's suggested to expand Rice-Eccles or do other things to differentiate the bids. I don't know how they could pull that off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2022 or future Salt Lake City bid should be dramatically different to 2002. It should be more compact, if not highly compact in comparison to the 2002 games in which some events were held in nearby counties.

I'd expect Rice-Eccles-Romney Stadium to undergo a fully realized upgrade with individual seating, more skyboxes and other amenities seating well over 50,000. Perhaps with the possibility of being over 70,000, as to secure the highest capacity crowd(s) seen at the Opening and Closing Ceremonies of a Winter Olympics.

Energy Solutions Arena could be used for Ice Hockey 1, if a new arena is built to serve the city proper for Figure Skating/Short Track Speed Skating. You'll need a venue for Ice Hockey 2, perhaps build an arena at the University of Utah. Then you need a venue for Curling, maybe try Vancouver's approach with the proposal of a venue turned multipurpose public venue after the games.

The Speed Skating Oval, Ski Jumps, Sliding Track remains. As would the Biathlon/Cross Country Course. Snow venues remain the same.

The only way Salt Lake City has a decent chance of winning (aside from being up against lesser bids) is if this bid is more compact than the previous games and addressing the problems which arose from hosting the 2002 games.

I think SLC's path to hosting isn't just "weak competition" but in convincing the IOC that it is irresponsible to keep building new (and largely unneeded) venues. As such, I think not only can SLC reuse most venues, they almost have to. But you are right, they need to tighten up a bit.

First, you ditch having hockey down in Provo (thought I must admit one of my favorite days of the 2002 games was going down to Provo). The easiest solution is you build a new area to replace the old Delta center... use it for ice skating, and use the old building for hockey before tear down. You can then use Maverik Center for the second hockey arena. Or perhaps you do something with Joh Huntsman Center (especially if his son it POTUS).

Next you put the big alpine events back in Park City where they belong. Which leaves only curling in Ogden as a far-flung venue. I say you sacrifice a bit of compactness and leave it there.

The "troublesome" venues are all still around and obviously get reused... sledding, jumping, long-track and cross country. Many choices for all the ski/board events in Park City. R/E stadium will get upgraded with Pac-10 money and will need nothing to host ceremonies. You've got a convention center for media/broadcast center.

So you are talking about one new venue (two if you don't want to leave curling in Ogden) and you not only get to sell the IOC on a non-wasteful plan, you are also more compact.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

First, you ditch having hockey down in Provo (thought I must admit one of my favorite days of the 2002 games was going down to Provo). The easiest solution is you build a new area to replace the old Delta center... use it for ice skating, and use the old building for hockey before tear down. You can then use Maverik Center for the second hockey arena. Or perhaps you do something with Joh Huntsman Center (especially if his son it POTUS).

That's exactly what I think they'd do. There's plenty of room next door to build a new arena and keep it there permanently. Set them up for figure skating. Get the waiver from the IIHF that Vancouver did to have hockey on an North American-sized rink. Probably saves some trouble for the E Center which is now your Ice Hockey 2 venue. I don't think Huntsman is a viable option as a venue (the floor surface there is too small, so without major renovations, you wouldn't be able to fit an ice surface there). But maybe you build something else on the University of Utah campus for curling that the school can make use of. No need then for Ogden or Prove. All the ice venues are in SLC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go for:

Salt Lake City area:

EnergySolutions Arena - Ice Hockey 1

New Arena - Figure Skating/Short Track Speed Skating

Maverik Center - Ice Hockey 2

University of Utah Arena - Curling

Rice-Eccles-Romney Olympic Stadium - Ceremonies

Outside of Salt Lake City:

Utah Olympic Oval - Speed Skating

Utah Olympic Park - Bobsleigh, Luge, Skeleton and the Ski Jumps

Park City Mountain Resort - Alpine Skiing (Giant Slalom), Snowboard

Snowbasin - Alpine skiing (combined, downhill, super-G)

Snowbird - Freestyle Skiing

Soldier Hollow - Biathlon, Cross Country Skiing, Nordic Combined

As such, you remove Ogden and Provo from the bid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Snowbasin - Alpine skiing (combined, downhill, super-G)

I'm fine with the rest of it, but there's no reason to put the big alpine events way out in Snowbasin unless you are trying to use the Olympic name to scam the US government out of valuable real estate.

I also suspect there might be transportation/development programs with putting events in Little Cottonwood Canyon (Alta/Snowbird)

Zeke, I totally agree that the IOC ought to be more responsible in reusing existing venues, I just don't think anyone will convince THEM of that.

Today? No. In the future? Maybe. Without that change of heart, I don't see the games returning to SLC for a long, long time.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if Europe has won two in a row and its 2026 and no Canada or Asia then USA would be the fav.

Not necessarily. Just because continental rotation is favorable does not mean the IOC is guaranteed to vote for any city the United States offers.

In my opinion, SLC is doomed by 2002 and Reno is doomed by virtually non-existent venues, a totally inadequate airport, and an attitude of "it is what it is" that will be sorely out of place in the wake of Pyeongchang and Sochi.

The only American candidate that may be viable for 2026 is Denver -- which I would support if they bid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. AF wants a summer one first...regardless of what the other circumstances are. Can't you see the obvious slant?

While its true that I would like to see American Summer Games before more American Winter Games, it is also true that SLC and Reno have big strikes against them -- not merely weak points (which any bid has), but big strikes.

Some posters seem to bank on the idea that the IOC will be so hard up for candidates that it won't matter what the USOC proposes. Continental rotation will trump everything and any American bid will skate to victory. I don't share this view at all.

2014 and 2018 will both be spectacular. If the USOC wants Winter Games first, ok, but they have to find a candidate that can keep pace.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While its true that I would like to see American Summer Games before more American Winter Games, it is also true that SLC and Reno have big strikes against them -- not merely weak points (which any bid has), but big strikes.

Some posters seem to bank on the idea that the IOC will be so hard up for candidates that it won't matter what the USOC proposes. Continental rotation will trump everything and any American bid will skate to victory. I don't share this view at all.

2014 and 2018 will both be spectacular. If the USOC wants Winter Games first, ok, but they have to find a candidate that can keep pace.

I think it's all a matter of the bobsled-luge track -- which now costs $100 million to erect...not unless one uses unpaid slave labor.

Right now there are already 4 tracks in North America (2 ea for the US and Canada). Do the 2 nations/one continent really need another one*? The one built for Torino, just 6 years ago -- just closed. Will continental rotation ( just between 3 continents) be trumped just for a whole new Winter City? Will the IOC push aside the idea of a used track, only 10 years old...and one where no one was killed -- just so the fantasy of a "new host" can be fulfilled? If so, then the IOC would've lost their marbles and be as cretinous as FIFA has been.

_____________________

*And yes, I'm beginning to think that a Reno-Tahoe candidacy might not be so viable after all, if only in view of one super-expensive, pretty much useless folly of a venue, such as a luge-bobsled track. Even Denver might have to rely on the SLC track for its future candidacy, to present some semblance of fiscal responsibility in its bid, because this venue is such a white-elephant one. And even more so for a Denver scenario, because if the NIMBY, anti-Games and environmentalist coalition there gets hold of the true story and facts of a bobsled-luge track, one can pretty much see a repeat of the 1972-76 debacle.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Athens 2004 and Beijing 2008 were spectacular in a sense of building too much and too big. London decided to break the tradition. With the winter games growing larger and becoming prohibitive even for traditional bidders (Austria, Sweden...), Salt Lake could bring the 'sensible host' narrative and maybe turn to be THE contender in times of crisis, sustainability etc...

P.S.: Torino 2006 just lost its underused sliding venue due to maintenance costs and this adds to the point of the cities which prefer bidding with venues they already have in place.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's all a matter of the bobsled-luge track -- which now costs $100 million to erect...not unless one uses unpaid slave labor.

Right now there are already 4 tracks in North America (2 ea for the US and Canada). Do the 2 nations/one continent really need another one*? The one built for Torino, just 6 years ago -- just closed. Will continental rotation ( just between 3 continents) be trumped just for a whole new Winter City? Will the IOC push aside the idea of a used track, only 10 years old...and one where no one was killed -- just so a new city can host? If so, then the IOC would've lost their marbles and be as idiotic as FIFA has been.

_____________________

*And yes, I'm beginning to think that a Reno-Tahoe candidacy might not be so viable after all, if only in view of one super-expensive, pretty much useless folly of a venue, such as a luge-bobsled track. Even Denver might have to rely on the SLC track for its future candidacy, to present some semblance of fiscal responsibility in its bid, because this venue is such a white-elephant one. And even more so for a Denver scenario, because if the NIMBY, anti-Games and environmentalist coalition there gets hold of the true story and facts of a bobsled-luge track, one can pretty much see a repeat of the 1972-76 debacle.

The luge track is a huge problem. I think in the future countries that are bidding again after hosting have to strongly consider a temporary venue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

/\/\ Yes (to Victor Mata's post). I think , or I hope, orgniazations like the IOC and FIFA become more sensitive to this 'white'-elephant syndrome. Even CapeTown's Greenpoint Stadium, indeed an acknowledged gem of a stadium, is now reaching a 'white elephant' status. Maybe Brazil and Russia will see some use for the stadium-bldg spree they have committed to for 2014 and 2018. I mean after 2018, Japan and Korea will have THREE luge-boblsed tracks between the 2 of them for sports that they will never medal at, since those are gravity-based sports and the average Asian body-mass type will never match the Caucasians' -- which is what is needed to even get in the finals of those luge-track sports. I mean Jamaica gets in there just for the fun of it, and fulfills the Equal Opportunity quota...but in terms of true sport, no one takes them seriously.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

The luge track is a huge problem. I think in the future countries that are bidding again after hosting have to strongly consider a temporary venue.

I don't see how, though, that for a safe, fully-functional track that will produce new WRs everytime, such a structure can be built as 'temporary'? The sports using it, are based on gravity and momentum. And I'm sure no Organizing Committee will want to hear the words: oh, it's not the fastest track in the world..but very safe. It can only be safe as a permanent venue with concrete walls and a lot of reinforcing steel. And to even think of tearing one down after its use, is equally idiotic. I think the Luge-Bobsled Federation should be less picky and more compromising in the future if it wants its sports to survive.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

/\/\ Yes (to Victor Mata's post). I think , or I hope, orgniazations like the IOC and FIFA become more sensitive to this 'white'-elephant syndrome. Even CapeTown's Greenpoint Stadium, indeed an acknowledged gem of a stadium, is now reaching a 'white elephant' status. Maybe Brazil and Russia will see some use for the stadium-bldg spree they have committed to for 2014 and 2018. I mean after 2018, Japan and Korea will have THREE luge-boblsed tracks between the 2 of them for sports that they will never medal at, since those are gravity-based sports and the average Asian body-mass type will never match the Caucasians' -- which is what is needed to even get in the finals of those luge-track sports. I mean Jamaica gets in there just for the fun of it, and fulfills the Equal Opportunity quota...but in terms of true sport, no one takes them seriously.

There is no such thing as equal opportunity quota at the WOG. All teams and athletes who qualify, met the qualification standard especially in sledding sports. Also the track and Sapporo does not exist anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...