Jump to content

U.S. Winter Bid for 2022 or 2026


Recommended Posts

When did Blackmun say that they had no interest in a Chicago or NYC Games ever? That's news to me. So far, Blackmun seems to be treading very carefully, avoiding extreme statements and working hard at building bridges. I can't imagine him saying that Chicago and New York are non-starters forever and ever, amen.

Blackman didn't name Chicago & New York 'specifically'. What he said was; "the IOC sent us a message 'loud & clear', that they 'don't want' the Games to be in the United States". That was news from last month, when the USOC finally decided in Vancouver that they weren't going after the 2020 Games. Take it as you will.

http://www.sports-city.org/news_details.php?news_id=10912&idCategory=82

  • Like 1
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

I'm not dismissing 1976, but I'm not at all convinced it will be such an instant deal-breaker years from now if Denver is ever interested again. I'll hold out before making definite assertions about races years from now.

No one in New York views the 2012 loss as a slap in the face if that's what your suggesting. The 2012 loss certainly doesn’t sting New York as much as the 2016 stings Chicago. If anything the city's own made stadium debacle left the bitter taste that may hurt public support and civic will for a future bid, not the IOC's decision.

The 2022 race is hardly 'years from now' by Olympic standards. That campaign has to get going now for all cities that are interested in those Games. And I'm not saying that a Denver bid would be an "instant" deal breaker either. I'm sure the IOC would just love to string Denver along as much as possible before they gave them the boot.

And I'm not suggesting anything about New York. Other than most New Yorkers could care less if the Olympics decended on to their town for the "global stamp of approval" that most of them say their city doesn't need anyway, cause New York already has that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blackman didn't name Chicago & New York 'specifically'. What he said was; "the IOC sent us a message 'loud & clear', that they 'don't want' the Games to be in the United States". That was news from last month, when the USOC finally decided in Vancouver that they weren't going after the 2020 Games. Take it as you will.

http://www.sports-city.org/news_details.php?news_id=10912&idCategory=82

I'm aware of that quote. I would think most of us Gamesbidders would agree too. The IOC has made it clear that they want global Games and are not going to continue awarding Americans such frequent hostings. I don't see how that statement relates to the possibility of Chicago or New York or some other American city putting forth a strong bid for 2024 or 2028. For the present, the IOC has clearly said no to the U.S., but I can't imagine that Blackmun thinks the IOC NEVER wants to see another American Games. It seems like you may have overstated the negativity a bit in your earlier post.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you did say that you couldn't imagine Blackman saying extreme statements. And too many, especially the Gamesbidders outside the U.S., believed that statement to be excessive & that it might've not sit too well with some in the IOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you did say that you couldn't imagine Blackman saying extreme statements. And too many, especially the Gamesbidders outside the U.S., believed that statement to be excessive & that it might've not sit too well with some in the IOC.

He said what needed to be said excessive or not, it's the truth, sort of like we're not going to keep playing a game that were pre-determined to lose. And, that we'd need concrete signs before we even enter the race again. Dumping millions into a race when you know the outcome is fixed against you is stupid, and at least he has the priorities in the right place for now, I'd like to see them sit out call if "indefinitely" maybe several games till like the 30's-40's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm only mentioning the assertation that is out there abroad by Blackman's statement. Athensfan said the he couldn't imagine Blackman saying "extreme statements", but yet that statement alone seems to be exactly that.

A statement that many foreigners perceive as "arrogant", since the U.S. didn't win, it must mean because the IOC absolutely does not want the Games in the United States. Because the U.S. must be "incapable" of losing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm only mentioning the assertation that is out there abroad by Blackman's statement. Athensfan said the he couldn't imagine Blackman saying "extreme statements", but yet that statement alone seems to be exactly that.

A statement that many foreigners perceive as "arrogant", since the U.S. didn't win, it must mean because the IOC absolutely does not want the Games in the United States. Because the U.S. must be "incapable" of losing.

Ohh I didn't mean it in a negative way. I apologize if it came out that way, I just meant "arrogant" or whatever outsiders may view it, why would anyone throw good money into a blackhole, to keep participating when we can reasonably expect to be left out or not chosen. If they want to think that's arrogant let them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Extreme or not, I think that it was good for him to say it. Sure, some will be offended, but it is true. The IOC gave Chicago just 18 votes. Less than NYC in 2012, and just one more than Istanbul's 17 votes for 2008. Clearly, the IOC was saying something, and we received that message whether they find it offensive or not. Anyway, we were the ones offended on October 2nd (well, at least I was).

I don't know why I still have a bitter taste in my mouth...

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I'm not suggesting anything about New York. Other than most New Yorkers could care less if the Olympics decended on to their town for the "global stamp of approval" that most of them say their city doesn't need anyway, cause New York already has that.

In general, I've found most average opposition to the Games revolves around questioning the city's capabilities to actually host the Games efficiently what with traffic, waterways dividing the city, space, etc. This goes back to that almost-stubborn process of trying to cram a stadium into Manhattan for 2012 (again the process of bidding for 2012 stings more than the IOC's rejection). Most of the NY "doesn’t need the global stamp of approval" discussion within the city comes from the filthy rich uptown Manhattan folks that escape the city every summer anyway, not from average people. Any future bid will most likely be anchored by and focused on the outer-boroughs anyway. They “need” the urban regeneration that could come. But as said many times in this thread, it’s all speculation for now; many things can change from here to whenever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any future bid will most likely be anchored by and focused on the outer-boroughs anyway. They “need” the urban regeneration that could come.

That would be welcoming news if New York could get a plan like this together, like the London model & somewhat of what Chicago wanted to do on the West & South sides of the city. Certainly would be a compelling one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm aware of that quote. I would think most of us Gamesbidders would agree too. The IOC has made it clear that they want global Games and are not going to continue awarding Americans such frequent hostings. I don't see how that statement relates to the possibility of Chicago or New York or some other American city putting forth a strong bid for 2024 or 2028. For the present, the IOC has clearly said no to the U.S., but I can't imagine that Blackmun thinks the IOC NEVER wants to see another American Games. It seems like you may have overstated the negativity a bit in your earlier post.

Agreed. Don't count anything out. Anything can happen between now and the vote. The IOC might still hate us, or they will want us to host again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the NY "doesn’t need the global stamp of approval" discussion within the city comes from the filthy rich uptown Manhattan folks that escape the city every summer anyway, not from average people. Any future bid will most likely be anchored by and focused on the outer-boroughs anyway. They “need” the urban regeneration that could come. But as said many times in this thread, it’s all speculation for now; many things can change from here to whenever.

Good observation. This is probably one of the only things that irked me about Chicago as well. The loud opposition trumpeted in the Tribune came mostly from the rich, white north-shore folks. The folks who would see the travel disruption on the south side were in favor of the games. The south-siders realized that putting up with road works, construction and a few weeks of pa gentry would result in major investments in infrastructure for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good observation. This is probably one of the only things that irked me about Chicago as well. The loud opposition trumpeted in the Tribune came mostly from the rich, white north-shore folks. The folks who would see the travel disruption on the south side were in favor of the games. The south-siders realized that putting up with road works, construction and a few weeks of pa gentry would result in major investments in infrastructure for them.

Actually, my interpretation was that while there were "elitist" rich folks squawking about the tennis and equestrian venues, the most support came from people living in the burbs. I came across many folks who were concerned about the cost, and disruption of the games, most of these were people from the south side. Again, these were just my personal experiences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, my interpretation was that while there were "elitist" rich folks squawking about the tennis and equestrian venues, the most support came from people living in the burbs. I came across many folks who were concerned about the cost, and disruption of the games, most of these were people from the south side. Again, these were just my personal experiences.

As a Chicago resident for the past 4 years, I have to second Soaring Higher on this one. "City" folks with whom I talked about the 2016 bid tended to have the impression that people in the wealthier suburbs were the ones who were most enthusiastic about having the Games, rather than the more urban dwellers. And that that was because these suburbanites would experience more of the benefits of the Games without necessarily bearing the costs in terms of taxes and disruption. And in the South Side, while it seemed that there was strong backing of the bid in the business community and among some of the aldermen, I don't think that necessarily carried over widely enough into the populace at large.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First post... kind of sort of long time observer.

Before I head back towards topic, an observation. I'm thinking of how folks in "The City" (San Francisco to the internationally inclined) would make Vancouver's protesters look like playground pacifists, or how Seattle has voted essentially an anti-stadium ordinance into law based on the situations with Safeco Field, Qwest Field, and- at the time- how the Sonics were carrying out their threat to leave Seattle because of the state of Key Arena.

The potentially gross generalization I've come to- people in the suburbs LOVE their sports. People in the cities live there for other reasons. Exceptions, of course, but not enough for a voting plurality. It's more true on the coasts than in flyover country. Just saying.

Next: philosophy. This "USA should strategize because it can conceivably control what bid happens when" concept is bunk. Frankly, I suspect USA is greenlighting 2022 because they suspect there aren't a lot of other bids floating around. Winter Games carry the Olympic expectations without a lot of the resulting benefits... though Vancouver fans did make it seem like home. I suspect that, somewhere in the back of many IOC minds, they know USA can pull off things that others can't. STILL, even if you throw a stinker bid out there, you learn things from it. That's why USA (hey, anyone else as well), given the capability of throwing out bid after bid, should continue to do so when possible.

Now...

If politics weren't a part of all this, Denver would be the runaway choice. However... well, has it been long enough?

Salt Lake? Why do I get the sense that the scandal is even more fresh on IOC minds than Denver's refusal?

Reno. People apparently think Vegas without having visited. Reno has plenty of tacky elements (though not as many strip clubs as Salt Lake City; not that anyone choosing between the cities would frequent the SLC clubs, or so I'm told)... but it is not Vegas. There's some sense of history there. There's a mining background to the place. The casinos are mostly centered downtown, which has taken its bumps and bruises of late. That's why they built a ballpark recently, despite a poor history supporting minor leagues. They'll change if they have to. For that matter, I consider the place a fixer-upper with reasonable potential. They certainly have the moxie to pull it off.

The question: can they build 3-4 facilities and impart a massive facelift on a 5th? Lawlor would take a million of work to properly fit for hockey, and that's presuming 12,000 seats is sufficient (it'll have to be IMO). Reno Events Center is primarily a CONCERT facility, I understand that 7,500 capacity includes floor seats (a basketball team currently plays there), it's downtown, and I highly doubt it could hold a hockey rink without major expansion. It's not big enough and is unwise to expand. Mackay Stadium is a metallic base, an erector set, practically bleachers, and that will need a serious facelift IMO. Oh, people who believe they're getting a hockey team (we're talking minor league, BTW)... they keep trying, someone keeps hold of an ECHL franchise for reasons I can't fathom, because they keep failing to get over that hump. So the major problem- the movers and shakers may have the moxie to pull it off, but will they have the support after they get the bill? Reno is probably a big Tea Party base right now, if you get my meaning.

Two possibilities; one mentioned in passing previously, one not mentioned yet.

Portland... my hometown, of course. Let it be known that leaders in town HAVE previously discussed making a Winter Olympics bid, mostly 20 years ago (and earlier had actually attempted to get the 1968 Summer Games). Rose Garden and Memorial Coliseum are next to each other, and there are discussions about renovating and downsizing the Coliseum from about 10,000 for hockey to 7,500. I strongly suspect the Portland Metropolitan Expo Center could temporarily hold 10,000 for hockey OR figure skating (depending on what you place at the Rose Garden) AND have space set aside for curling (though there are other options for curling). I can envision taking some of the TV rights fee for the speed skating venue, converting into something for concerts and events that a suburban county has always wanted. Also, Portland State University is currently discussing options regarding more student housing in and around the downtown campus, as well as trying to raise funds for an arena expansion (it would be a matter of begging them to consider winter sports in the venue somehow).

The problems: while there are several resorts on US 26 up towards Mount Hood, Government Camp isn't much. You can actually fit infrastructure all over Hood and take care of everything in the process, but that will be the major part of the project. Moreover, while I mention San Francisco protesters, Portland got the codename "Little Beirut" for good reason.

(Truth be told, if you ask about an underrated place for a Winter Olympics that would truly cherish it, I offer the Central Oregon city of Bend. It would need a complete infrastructure infusion in terms of indoor arenas, but Mount Bachelor is close by, Hoodoo Ski Bowl isn't too far away, and there are some other development options people would like to pursue. It's also in the middle of several major resorts. Tie this into the college they've always wanted there, something could happen perhaps.)

One not mentioned: Boise, Idaho. The previous governor of Idaho actually targeted 2034 or 2038 for a Winter Olympics, so it is on the minds of leaders and even some citizens there. A couple arenas are already in place, though the 5,000-seat Qwest Arena could stand to be expanded a bit, and the 12,000-seat Idaho Center (actually an indoor arena built for rodeo, but often used for basketball) would need an ice plant and a few adjustments to be ready. A rec rink could be expanded with more seats to accomodate curling. Taco Bell Arena (Boise State University campus, about 12,600 for basketball) would need a major renovation to accomodate a rink, but I suspect that's not too much of a stretch, the main limitation being the three-deck design of the place. Given talk of moving the Western Idaho Fairgrounds to a new site, including a very large building that happens to hold speed skating a few times isn't out of the question. There's also Bogus Basin, less than 20 miles from town, that has hosted some freestyle competitions. Boise's tricks: Sun Valley is about 150 miles east by car, and that's where the downhill-sized run and the worthy slopes are, while a couple resorts (Tamarack and Brundage) could host some events, but requires major improvements to Idaho Highway 55 to link there. You could also characterize Idaho as very Tea Party-ish, but the major landholders in the state have a history of bankrolling certain improvements (for instance, Bronco Stadium) for the benefit of the city and the campus.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually don't think it was extreme or out of order for Blackmun to comment about the IOC making it "loud and clear" that they didnt' want the Games in the U.S. I doubt many in the IOC would argue with that statement. Blackmun was just calling a spade a spade. When that comment is factored into the larger body of his statements about his hopes for USOC/IOC relations, I really see no problem whatsoever. Even taken out of context it doesn't sound like sour grapes. It just sounds like a fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of times how Americans & foreigners view the same things are sometimes very, very different.

Judging by some of the postings by some of are very objective & informed Non-U.S. posters when Blackman's comments were released, the statements were viewed as arrogant & somewhat offensive. Of course Americans aren't gonna view them that way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that the International Olympic Committee hates the United States might be a bit short sighted. Sure, things between the IOC and USOC are not great, but the IOC loves having American athletes involved at these games, especially if they happen to be professional athletes such as the Hockey players and basketball players. The IOC has said that they want the NHL back for Sochi in 2014. Most of the NHL teams are based in the United States and the NHL has the best players in the world.

Don't think that the IOC didn't pay attention to the reception that the NBA players got in Beijing in 2008. From all accounts, the NBA players were the ones receiving the most attention among the American athletes at the start of the last Summer Olympics, Kobe Bryant and LeBron James especially. Kobe and LeBron are the two biggest Basketball stars on the planet and the IOC likely knows that. The IOC knows that they would lose a large chunk of their international audience if they did not allow NBA players to play in the Olympics or if they end up removing basketball from the Olympics. One of the smartest things the IOC has ever done was to allow NBA players to play in the Olympics starting with Barcelona in 1992. If the IOC was totally Anti-American, they would have not allowed the NBA and the NHL in the Olympics in the first place.

Yes, they removed baseball and softball from the Olympics, but if Olympic baseball had Japan's Dice-K throwing to Dominican David Ortiz or to the American Derek Jeter, I don't think baseball would have been removed from the Olympics. Major League Baseball wasn't going to suspend play for two weeks for the Olympics, which was one of the factors behind the removal of baseball in the Olympics.

Again, I don't think the IOC is totally Anti-American. Sure there's some bitterness between the IOC and USOC but the IOC wants the NBA and NHL players in the Olympics, and both leagues are largely based in the United States.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the IOC is anti-American, but I can see why people would think that they are. They especially aren't anti-American when it comes to money. But let's not confuse their feelings with that of the USOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blackmun didn't say the IOC "hates Americans" and he din't accuse them of being "anti-American." He has voiced a very strong commitment to rebuilding US/IOC relations. He acknowledged that the IOC clearly doesn't want the Games in the U.S. right now -- at least not until several significant issues are dealt with -- many of which Blackmun acknowledges are solely the USOC's responsibility.

I haven't read anything that suggested that anyone in the IOC had a problem with Blackmun's statements -- to the contrary they have been very encouraged by his leadership thus far. It is bizarre to me that FYI's "very objective and informed" foreigners find it "arrogant and offensive" to say that the IOC doesn't want Games in the U.S. right now. Are we reading the same boards? The majority of foreign posters didn't want the Games in the U.S. either. I have spent years living outside the U.S. and have worked in a variety of cultures. No matter what coutry you are from, I don't see how anyone can logically interpret Blackmun's statement as being arrogant. To the contrary, he has cultivated refreshing humility. The statement about the IOC not wanting to come to the U.S. was not directed in bitterness at the IOC -- it was directed as a wake-up call to Americans.

It might be arrogant to say, "The IOC owes us," but Blackmun has consistently eschewed that kind of thinking. After two decisive losses how is it arrogant to say the IOC doesn't want to come to the U.S.?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what coutry you are from, I don't see how anyone can logically interpret Blackmun's statement as being arrogant. To the contrary, he has cultivated refreshing humility. The statement about the IOC not wanting to come to the U.S. was not directed in bitterness at the IOC -- it was directed as a wake-up call to Americans.

Huh? A wakeup call as to what?

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...