bgdrewsif Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 To each their own.... a response to whom and meaning what??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted January 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 a response to whom and meaning what??? We're clearly going to have to agree to disagree on multiple points. The three of you (FYI, Quaker and bgdrewsif) disagree with me. I've made my points and they're all dismissed out of hand. I'm weary of the conversation. As I said, to each his own... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted January 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Charming. Exactly why I'm over this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 I never knew it was so easy to be charming on here... 5 smileys is all it takes! :P :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 We're clearly going to have to agree to disagree on multiple points. The three of you (FYI, Quaker and bgdrewsif) disagree with me. I've made my points and they're all dismissed out of hand. I'm weary of the conversation. As I said, to each his own... What's so bad about disagreeing? You have different viewpoints than I do and some others do, nothing wrong with that. Probably makes for better debate/discussion than if we agreed on everything. If you don't want to have the conversation because you don't like our opposing viewpoints based on our opinions, whether you see them as fact-supported or not or however strongly we want to support them.. well then yes, I guess to each his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 What's so bad about disagreeing? You have different viewpoints than I do and some others do, nothing wrong with that. Probably makes for better debate/discussion than if we agreed on everything. If you don't want to have the conversation because you don't like our opposing viewpoints based on our opinions, whether you see them as fact-supported or not or however strongly we want to support them.. well then yes, I guess to each his own. Athensfan was having a bad hair day. I think he just got discombobulated that Reno might just get picked because Denver will implode on its own AGAIN!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 I think what has been outlined here by others for a potential future L.A. bid, versus any other worthwhile city, has been rightly detailed than just simply being 'dismissed out of hand' any opposing view. If anything, I feel weary whenever this particular topic comes about because my thought out viewpoints (as well as some from others on the matter) simply get "dismissed" just as easily by you. I think it's pretty safe to come to a conclusion based on what IS there versus on what is not, even if it's not "supported by fact". That's what educated guesses are anyway, they're not fact. But even with hypotheses, one can come to their conclusions based on other tangible, established 'facts'. But your continuous bout that something has to give in order for it to be one way or another, is another way of just "dismissing out of hand" anyone elses hypothetical points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 Tampa, Orlando, Minneapolis, Not in this century, at least for the Florida cities. Like I've said before, the only city in Florida that I could see is Miami. And even there I have my doubts. Tampa doesn't even have enough 3-5 star accomodations for the Superbowl, let alone an Olympics. And that's before you evern start to calculate their other deficiencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 I think what has been outlined here by others for a potential future L.A. bid, versus any other worthwhile city, has been rightly detailed than just simply being 'dismissed out of hand' any opposing view. If anything, I feel weary whenever this particular topic comes about because my thought out viewpoints (as well as some from others on the matter) simply get "dismissed" just as easily by you. I think it's pretty safe to come to a conclusion based on what IS there versus on what is not, even if it's not "supported by fact". That's what educated guesses are anyway, they're not fact. But even with hypotheses, one can come to their conclusions based on other tangible, established 'facts'. But your continuous bout that something has to give in order for it to be one way or another, is another way of just "dismissing out of hand" anyone elses hypothetical points. I agree 100%. I too have tried to be calm, rational, though, thoughtful, and realistic in my multiple analysis and received the same response of 'dismissed out of hand' by certain members on their forums... Not in this century, at least for the Florida cities. Like I've said before, the only city in Florida that I could see is Miami. And even there I have my doubts. Tampa doesn't even have enough 3-5 star accomodations for the Superbowl, let alone an Olympics. And that's before you evern start to calculate their other deficiencies. If you look back I was being dismissive of ALL of these cities... I simply mention them as all of them have bid for the games in recent bid cycles and been quickly rejected by the USOC for a variety of reasons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 I will also quote/paraphrase/re-edit my analysis on the United States' prior bidding history form another discussion on the potential for a Denver 2022 bid on another thread. I have done my best to re--write or re-edit as necessary to fit within the context of this 2024 discussion: It needs to be noted that the United States has bid 36 times for the Olympic Games and only hosted 8 times in 6 cities... With one successful bid that was later rejected by the citizens of that city (Denver 1976) for a total of 9 successful bids and for two of those (Lake Placid 1980 and Los Angeles 1984) there was no other city in the world even competing... so the USOC has only won 7 competitive bids out of 36 attempts... so to act like '3 strikes in a row' should a 2022 (or 2024) bid from the USOC fail is some sort of obscene tragedy for the USOC is rather absurd from a historical perspective... yes, 2012 and 2016 were rather embarrassing and disappointing for the USOC, but not unprecedented by any historical context... Heck, the USOC nominated 5 cities for the 1952 summer games and all five lost and they nominated 6 US cities to host the 1956 summer games and all six of those lost... the USOC also nominated Detroit in 1952, 56, 60, 64, 68, and 72 and they lost all 6 consecutive bids... (in the interest of self-disclosure let me say that i'm just conveniently ignoring the issues with Detroit itself and focusing on the bidding effort itself...) So to act as if a third (or even a fourth or fifth) consecutive bid loss by the USOC would be some sort of disaster that undermines the long-term foundations of the American Olympic movement may be entertaining in the context of contemporary internet discussions but it is also historically flawed and demonstrably inaccurate... Personally I do believe that we are likely entering a drought for the US Olympic bidding process for the next few summer and winter bid cycles in the context of the political, financial, and social difficulties the United States currently faces, but just as the USA survived the bidding drought from 1960-1980 (and even through to Atlanta 1996 if once discounts the 1980 Lake Placid and 1984 Los Angeles games as 'victories' since there was simply no other country in the world that even expressed interest in hosting those games at the final IOC votes... so an uncontested win is a very weak 'victory' at best from a bidding perspective). The USOC even survived the humiliating rejection of the 1976 winter games by the voters of Denver to go on and win the very next winter games in 1980 by Lake Placid (which has also previously been rejected in bids for the 1948, 1952, 1956, and 1968 games after having previously hosted the 1932 winter games). However, even for Lake Palcid in 1980 it should also be noted that Lake Placid 1980 also won by default since the only other city bidding for 1980 was Vancouver and they withdrew their bid before the final vote... so in terms of the United States winning a competitive bid for an Olympic games, the USOC did not win a competitive bid between 1960-1996... a period of 36 years... the only games the US hosted in that period we both due to winning as the only city bidding... And again 1976 was rejected, 1980 was won by being the only city trying as was 1984... and 2002 was won through bribery and corruption... so in reality the only real 'legitimate' completive bid victory the USOC has had since 1960 was for Atlanta 1996... Ultimately, between 1960-2020, a 60 year period the US has only 'fairly' won ONE competitive Olympic bid... Hopefully that puts the potential 2022, 2024, and 2026 bids, should the USOC even choose to put forward an American bid to the IOC, in a slightly different historical context within these discussions... Finally, it is notable that Anchorage also bid unsuccessfully for the 1992 and 1994 winter games and tried for the 1998 winter games but the USOC nominated Salt Lake over Anchorage in 1998. Salt Lake was rejected in 1998 to come back and win in their next bid for 2002 (although that bid was severely tainted by bribery and impropriety in the bidding process and ultimately resulted in significant changes being made to the IOC's bidding procedures and the disgraceful fall of several IOC member in light of the corruption that look place between them and the Salt Lake bid committee) So again, one has to recall that the last successful American bid was mired in corruption and caused significant reforms to take place within the IOC. Now you have Denver putting forth a serious bid, having been the only prior successful applicant to ever subsequently reject a games, following the last previous American games mired in corruption, and in the light of a current dispute between the USOC and IOC over revenues, television rights, and general leadership disputes and instability within the USOC... These factors and even stiffer likely global bid competition all play against a US 2024 summer bid and a further-out winter 2026 bid from the United States... So like I said previously, the forces against a successful American bid in 2022 or 2024 (and in particular against a Denver bid) are strong. I would never rule anything as impossible, but certainly the chances for success in 2022 or 2024 and even in 2026 for the USOC are remote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deawebo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 As i've said the main mistake can be that the arent showing a huge legacy, being everyting temporary...the IOC really considers that. But the US time for SOG will be in the 30's or 2024 perhaps... 2026 will be quite easy to win for the US. The US only competitive bid was Atlanta...!! Weird?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 Drew, I disagree on chances for a US WOG for 2022-26, if the revenue-sharing issue is resolved. And I don't see how it can be stretched out much longer. And if I were the USOC, I'd just go tell the IOC to go f*ck themselves since they have other big daddies to go to anyway!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 As i've said the main mistake can be that the arent showing a huge legacy, being everyting temporary...the IOC really considers that. But the US time for SOG will be in the 30's or 2024 perhaps... 2026 will be quite easy to win for the US.The US only competitive bid was Atlanta...!! Weird?!?! I think the US could win in 2026 but I don't know who would bid... but I am always hopeful... and yeah... the only competitive bid the US has won in 60 years is Atlanta... Salt Lake was not very competitive in that they just bribed their way to victory... and thats the bidding equivalent of doping... :-( Drew, I disagree on chances for a US WOG for 2022-26, if the revenue-sharing issue is resolved. And I don't see how it can be stretched out much longer. And if I were the USOC, I'd just go tell the IOC to go f*ck themselves since they have other big daddies to go to anyway!! Again, I have heard nothing lately about the revenue issue being resolved, that does not necessarily mean there are not some quiet behind-the-scenes discussions, but the fact that the USOC automatically rejected the possibility of even bidding for 2020 is not promising... as for telling the IOC to F-off and go to their Euro-Asian-Arab sugar daddies, I agree! But sooner or later the IOC will figure out that NBC is their largest broadcast rights source by far and the American people quickly lose interest in games that are in countries they cannot find on a map... which is basically everything beyond the western and northern hemispheres.. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 By the way... it is so comforting to know that no matter how much reasonable analysis or thought or time I put into a post that there is someone on here who can be counted on to consistently vote down what I write no matter what... I think most of us on there forums can take a pretty good guess who that someone is... so tragically petty of them... If I was ranting, making personal attacks, or just trolling on here I could understand purposely voting someones reputation down... but to just do so to spite them because you disagree with them... really sad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 I really wouldn't dupe Salt Lake's victory as such. People said the same of Atlanta, & even Nagano & Sydney. All the bidding cities were doing it, but Salt Lake was the unfortunate one to get their hand caught in the cookie jar. Even Richard Pound said that he didn't understand Y Salt Lake did some under-handed dealings when they were clearly a favorite among the competition. Only like what, 10 members or so were expelled for this? Salt Lake won by a landslide. If their victory was truelly "tainted", many more members would've been expelled. Salt Lake still would've won, hence Richard Pound's remarks. And besides, it takes two to tango. It also takes someone to accept the bribe, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 If I was ranting, making personal attacks, or just trolling on here I could understand purposely voting someones reputation down... but to just do so to spite them because you disagree with them... really sad... It happens all the time, though. The rep. abuse by premimum members. And then there are those who give kudo points for simply saying one-liners, like; "yeah, I agree with you, or YES X-city 20XX", etc, etc. It's almost like a clique here sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 It happens all the time, though. The rep. abuse by premimum members. And then there are those who give kudo points for simply saying one-liners, like; "yeah, I agree with you, or YES X-city 20XX", etc, etc. It's almost like a clique here sometimes. Well, I tink it is more the issue that I don't think it is you FYI, or Baron, or Quaker, or Daewaebo, or Davey, or a lot of others who apparently find amusement in arbitrarily voting down everything I say... and i'll leave it at that... how did that song go... Greece is the word....? Oh, I mean Grease Edit: Think^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deawebo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 I think the US could win in 2026 but I don't know who would bid... but I am always hopeful... and yeah... the only competitive bid the US has won in 60 years is Atlanta... Salt Lake was not very competitive in that they just bribed their way to victory... and thats the bidding equivalent of doping... :-( Intresting... Bribery=Doping (y) I've never seen Salt Lake City as a good winner... It was for Östersund (to my taste) but their olympics were great... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gangwon Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 It happens all the time, though. The rep. abuse by premimum members. And then there are those who give kudo points for simply saying one-liners, like; "yeah, I agree with you, or YES X-city 20XX", etc, etc. It's almost like a clique here sometimes. Points for all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgdrewsif Posted January 10, 2012 Report Share Posted January 10, 2012 Points for all! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 10, 2012 Report Share Posted January 10, 2012 lmfao, you're a riot, Gangwon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted January 11, 2012 Report Share Posted January 11, 2012 Points for all! "Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!!" Yea, I don't put much into the whole points/reputation system either. Especially given who some of the clientele on this site is. I respect strong opinions and heated discussion, but sometimes it's a little much and I can see where some people just don't want to be a part of it. Back on topic though.. to drew's point, I think when we view America's chances of landing an Olympics, we're looking at it somewhat from the standpoint of who the potential candidate city would be. Atlanta didn't win because their bid was that spectacular, they just happened to be in the right place at the right time. Hard to imagine that happening again anytime soon. And don't take too much away from Salt Lake. The bid scandal aside, they were 2 votes shy of winning 1998, so it's not like Salt Lake only won because of their indiscretions. That all said, and I know at least 1 poster here doesn't want to hear it, but 2022 and 2024 don't seem like they set up favorably for a United States win. 2026 however could be ripe for the taking. Like you pointed out, the United States has bid many times in the past and kept persisting until they won. Sadly that hasn't happened much these days, but that's why it could be easier to land a Winter Olympics given the weaker competition compared with a Summer Olympics. I think the overriding question on both sides of the coin is if you're a prospective bid city, just how much are you willing to risk when there's a possibility that you'll lose and end up with absolutely nothing for your efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gangwon Posted January 13, 2012 Report Share Posted January 13, 2012 "Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!!" LOL! That crossed my mind earlier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted January 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I don't see 2022. 2024 could go different ways. It may not be favorable for the US at all, but I think its too soon to know. I'm not adamant that the US host ASAP. I am adamant that the US shouldn't assume they have no chance for decades as some have suggested -- particularly in posts that are now many months old. I also think the US' chances improve every cycle from here on out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.