Jump to content

Which US city will host the Olympics next?


saireea

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

In all seriousness, I'd like to see Chicago take another crack at the Games, maybe this time with a permanent stadium in mine and the USOC and IOC happy again, they might grab it.

Beyond that... San Francisco or a return to Los Angeles would be my next choices. And, yes, I'm also one of the people who honestly do believe Minneapolis/St. Paul could host a SOG.

As for the WOG, either Denver or the Reno/Tahoe joint bid would be the most obvious candidates to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, yes, I'm also one of the people who honestly do believe Minneapolis/St. Paul could host a SOG.

Yes, Minneapolis COULD host (with a 'compelling' bid that is, & not some cheap, thrift-store kinda plan that they would like to go with), but so could literally dozens N dozens N dozens of cities around the world. But not even a fraction of them are going to actually host.

Y would the IOC go to the 16th ranking metro area wise in the U.S. when they've never been beyond the top 5 (other than Atlanta, N even then they ranked #10) of any nation that's hosted. Don't C the IOC doing that in the least. Minneapolis (along with many, many, many other cities around the world are just deluding themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next US SOG is so far away, that a host of other cities may be viable contenders by then: Miami, Houston, Seattle, Washington, etc.

Hmmmmm, still, I don't see the IOC going to somewhere like Houston (or to a lesser extent, Miami). Atlanta left a bitter taste in their mouth & most likely would view those cities (or any like them, especially Houston) as a "Atlanta part 2" Games. Don't think the IOC would relish such a scenario, regardless if they only come here for the money or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmm, still, I don't see the IOC going to somewhere like Houston (or to a lesser extent, Miami). Atlanta left a bitter taste in their mouth & most likely would view those cities (or any like them, especially Houston) as a "Atlanta part 2" Games. Don't think the IOC would relish such a scenario, regardless if they only come here for the money or not.

Not today, but in 27 years' time, which is when the host for '44 will be chosen, who knows how competitive those cities may be?

Personally, I'd rather see Chicago, San Francisco, New York City, or even Boston. What do you guys think about Washington, D.C.?

I don't see Boston as viable. It is small and not growing fast enough, and really doesn't have the space for a Games, in my opinion. Can Boston do it? sure. Is it the best the US has to offer? not by a long way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if some of those mid ranking cities mentioned above do grow fast and furious over the next 20-30 years, it will come down to their competition. And a lot of those middle ranked US cities are perceived internationally as bland, banal and boring with cookie-cutter skylines and stadiums surrounded by suburb sprawl. Hard for that to compete against a Tokyo or a Paris or a Buenos Aires...especially considering they could have had NYC or San Francisco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Absolutely agree. And growth is something many, many global cities will experience, too, in the next couple of decades, & not just the mid-tier U.S. cities.

And canis, I was also talking about way later down the road, not tomorrow. And I still don't see Houston. I would say Boston would be more appealing regardless. Boston surely has more international appeal than Houston does. I just don't see the IOC biting with any 'Texan' city (N especially after Atlanta). Houston is *not* 'the best the U.S. has to offer', if that's how you're going to categorize it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...