Jump to content

Which US city will host the Olympics next?


saireea

Recommended Posts

Chicago = Not going to bid again, that ship has sailed

NYC = Not enough interest, that ship has sailed. If NYC really wanted the games as much as some on here think they do, they would have bid for 2016. They didn't. That says it all.

San Francisco = Maybe. If they can solve the politics and venues issues

Washington = Not in the near-future. Security in the US Capital for an Olympic Games? Hell NO!

Denver = No way. Like FYI said, you don't give the IOC the middle finger and then come crawling back

Reno-Tack-Ho = Well, I'd say "no way, too tacky", but I suspect that if they were the candidate, the IOC might just throw them a bone to prevent the US having any chance at all till the 40's.

I don't think I would dismiss Chicago completely for the future...I think there is more civic will to rebid in the future than one might see on the surface

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If its Chicago 2020

1. Commit to a proper or better stadium

2. Get better renders

3. Get a fresh face to lead the bid. Not a grey man

4. Sign the IOC guarantees

5. Lobby harder

6. Improve transport concept/plans and provide more detail

7. Pay for something. Athletes travel costs, use of venues for training before Games, unveil a training camp brochure for NOC's before the vote

8. Do not present your OV as a old-age or retirement village

9. Hire Mike Lee

10. Hire Mike Lee

11. Hire Mike Lee

12. Where is Michael Johnson?

13. Do not use that annoying gymnast in any video

14. DO use that male decathlete or heptathlete?

15. Do a "Olympic themed" celebration event or day in that giant park at the lake (see Paris 2012)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If its Chicago 2020

1. Commit to a proper or better stadium

2. Get better renders

3. Get a fresh face to lead the bid. Not a grey man

4. Sign the IOC guarantees

5. Lobby harder

6. Improve transport concept/plans and provide more detail

7. Pay for something. Athletes travel costs, use of venues for training before Games, unveil a training camp brochure for NOC's before the vote

8. Do not present your OV as a old-age or retirement village

9. Hire Mike Lee

10. Hire Mike Lee

11. Hire Mike Lee

12. Where is Michael Johnson?

13. Do not use that annoying gymnast in any video

14. DO use that male decathlete or heptathlete?

15. Do a "Olympic themed" celebration event or day in that giant park at the lake (see Paris 2012)

1. Non sense. Chicago's stadium plan made perfect sense and met the city's long term needs. London is another example of how difficult it is to cope with the legacy of a stadium even with very early planning.

2, Come on, we all remember your multiple orgasms when Chicago unveiled its bid book. Chicago had excellent renders but didn't use them during the final presentation

3. That you got right

4. They did

5. Lobby better not harder (Chicago did lobby as hard as the other 3)

6. That you got right as well

7. They did (refer to bid book)

8. They did not. Chicago's OV presentation was great

9. 10. 11. Mike Lee is not a rainmaker. He did not succeed with Salzburg 2014 and Doha 2016 and would have not given the victory to Chicago either.

12. That was one of Chicago's failure: not to put enough athletes in the spot light

13. ??

14. Decathlete Mo, so much for your knowledge of sport...

15. Again they did during Olympic Day but again fell to leverage on it.

Chicago's main issue was timing (at the end of the day, they could not have won against Rio) and failure to secure enough votes in first round (again, when you are competing against Nuzman, Samaranch, it's tough, especially when your relation with your NOC is a disaster)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Non sense. Chicago's stadium plan made perfect sense and met the city's long term needs. London is another example of how difficult it is to cope with the legacy of a stadium even with very early planning.

2, Come on, we all remember your multiple orgasms when Chicago unveiled its bid book. Chicago had excellent renders but didn't use them during the final presentation

3. That you got right

4. They did

5. Lobby better not harder (Chicago did lobby as hard as the other 3)

6. That you got right as well

7. They did (refer to bid book)

8. They did not. Chicago's OV presentation was great

9. 10. 11. Mike Lee is not a rainmaker. He did not succeed with Salzburg 2014 and Doha 2016 and would have not given the victory to Chicago either.

12. That was one of Chicago's failure: not to put enough athletes in the spot light

13. ??

14. Decathlete Mo, so much for your knowledge of sport...

15. Again they did during Olympic Day but again fell to leverage on it.

Chicago's main issue was timing (at the end of the day, they could not have won against Rio) and failure to secure enough votes in first round (again, when you are competing against Nuzman, Samaranch, it's tough, especially when your relation with your NOC is a disaster)

1. Its not the concept I am against but do commit to something larger than 5,000, and do commit to it as an athletics training facility for "generations to come". I never quite got that feeling that the stadium would be a meaningful legacy for the city. As I've said before, it was always placed in the park, rather than being part of the park.

Its all in the presentation. Present unrealistic renders if you have to. Its all about marketing.

2. The renders were great, but not good enough. More CGI, more detail, more, more, more London 2012

4. They did it very late

5. Chicago did not lobby well enough....see vote count.

7. Yes, they did, but not enough

9,10,11: Hire Mike Lee.

13: The one that "retired", became a D-list celeb, then decided to return to gymnastics. eesh, that voice. hands on the hips...really?

14. Its a joke!

15. Not big enough. See Paris 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Its not the concept I am against but do commit to something larger than 5,000, and do commit to it as an athletics training facility for "generations to come".

Ironically, the IOC were VERY enthusiastic about the stadium concept in person. Maybe you have "special" information about why this will matter in the future, but in 2009 the IOC were very much in favor of our stadium.

5. Chicago did not lobby well enough....see vote count.

So basically, what you're saying, is that the city that lobbies well enough wins regardless of ANY other factor. Rubbish. We've been through this before. Chicago, eliminated in Round 1 for political reasons. End of story. The ONLY way Chicago could have changed this result would have been to buy votes. Maybe that's what you mean by lobby harder?

12. Where is Michael Johnson?

Say what? The Chicago serial killer?

I don't think I would dismiss Chicago completely for the future...I think there is more civic will to rebid in the future than one might see on the surface

Chicago's bid had some of the weakest civic support of all the bids (Kind of ironic that Mo doesn't mention this - which is actual a real issue - in his list of things to change). That support has gone down, drastically since the embarrassing first round elimination. Anyone that thinks you're going to get 70%+ of Chicagoans to support a bid in the next 40 years is not tuned into the city, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the USA, wouldn't Los Angeles be the only viable option? I mean they already have the infrastructure, with the Coliseum, the Rose Bowl, Staples Center, weather, exc... Basically, with the ridicolous costs of hosting an olympics, you better have a good amount of the stuff already built. Maybe just expanding your stadium or something. Or maybe USE the stadium after the Olympics(BEIJING)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the USA, wouldn't Los Angeles be the only viable option? I mean they already have the infrastructure, with the Coliseum, the Rose Bowl, Staples Center, weather, exc... Basically, with the ridicolous costs of hosting an olympics, you better have a good amount of the stuff already built. Maybe just expanding your stadium or something. Or maybe USE the stadium after the Olympics(BEIJING)

No. The IOC does not like to go to TIRED old stadia...regardless of their history. They were only FORCED to use LA in 1984. It was their only choice. All the return trips to London, Lake Placid, Paris and Athens all saw NEW stadia with each visit. (Only LA and Stockholm were the re-visits because the IOC's back was to the wall.) But given the Doha's and Turkey's out there who can buy future Games, a tired old Memorial COliseum is NOT such a strong card. If it were given an entire face-lift, maybe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Exactly. And even for 1984, the IOC still had the GALL to be nit-picky about it, scrutinize & "review L.A.'s case" N STILL vote on it. :rolleyes:

The only way Los Angeles could host for a 3rd time is by having a compelling case that would make the IOC droll with frenzy. None of this re-hashed, already there venue stuff.

If the IOC was being so stand-offish when they had no other choice but L.A., surely they'd balk at them with a bland, already used-up, been there, done that venue plan, when the list of other compelling candidates would be offering up brand-new shiny toys.

It's only human nature to want new (or at least new-ER) versus decrepit, faded-out stuff. People do it (or would like to do it) all the time with their things, & the IOC is no different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats why I said it would need to be extended or reworked or modified.

The basic concept is quite snazzy and with some Olympic colours it can be transformed into a much stronger brand than the 2016 logo, which was quite nice, pretty, translated well in the bid book.

Thats another thing I would change for a future bid. Keep the brand simple and iconic. Present a logo which resonates in the minds of locals and internationals by using the "C" in Chicago effect, in moderation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can run an Olympics great, but running their state is a whole other story...

Hey, Arnold will be long gone whenever it comes. So the next governor and mayor might be able to. But my problem is that if we played Mexico in soccer, we would be outnumbered by the crowd in our second largest city...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...