FYI Posted December 9, 2012 Report Share Posted December 9, 2012 In an effort to get some substance back into this thread (as those of us on the East coast hunker down in preparation for the arrival of Sandy), I thought we could revisit everyone's favorite question of who is interested in the 2024 Olympics. And I think we have an answer. These articles are a little dated, but I didn't see them posted elsewhere here (which is a little surprising knowing this crowd) and they definitely deserve to be shared, because sports fans.. THIS is what actual interest in an Olympic bid from a city looks like... http://www.wfaa.com/...-166479916.html http://www.nbcdfw.co...pics-/165202666 So what do we have here? A well formed organizing committee, including someone to lead it (that has been involved with previous Dallas efforts, not to mention bids from other cities). Evidence of planning. Carryover of efforts from previous bids. And as if that all weren't enough, the guy running the show (Matt Wood) was in London during the Olympics to survey what was going on there. I think we can very much consider Dallas an interested party for the 2024 Olympics. I'm sure we'll continue to debate the merits of our bid here, but these are the types of planning efforts a city needs to make in order to go after an Olympics. And it's all very much out in the open, as it should be. Sorry, but even here I remain skeptical. Okay, so he's 'ran' a previous Dallas attempt & has worked with another winning bid in the past. But I would still hardly call this "a well formed organizing committee". These pieces you have here make no other mention of other key figures that would need to be involved or how they would exactly excute the plan. Only mention of how "it could work" & that this guy travelled to London. This to me is only a step above over the likes of the yahoo "business men" over in Vegas & Tulsa trying to get something "organized". I tried goggleing this & not much else revealing than these articles here. Until I see correlations with local & state governments (like we've seen with Denver, Salt Lake & even Reno), I'm not going to take such pieces very seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted December 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Not that I'm pushing for a Dallas bid, but it's a better option that people give it credit for. It's got decent transportation options (especially out to the fairgrounds / Cotton Bowl area) and surprisingly high international appeal thanks to the TV show. Dallas had a serious committee that went public for 2020. They might not be a strong option, but they are far from crackpots. FYI - Website for the Dallas 2024 committee - www.dallas2020.org. I agree that Dallas isn't chopped liver, but I question whether they can win. Weather and international appeal are two big issues for them. I do recall those Dallas stories. Dallas has been been laying low though -- unlike their Winter counterparts. I don't think that Dallas was out if line or crackpot-like for having a website. They obviously dialed the volume way down when it became clear that the USOC was going to call the shots. If Dallas were campaigning like crazy, I'd question their judgment. They're just laying low for the moment. That still doesn't convey anything to me about any other city. Dallas was gunning for 2020 before they learned the USOC nixed 2020. Therefore it makes sense that we would've heard a tiny bit from them already. The gears were already turning. A city that is just now zooming in on 2024 wouldn't be as far along and therefore there would be less public information. So the fact that Dallas has a website that was built for a 2020 campaign really doesn't say anything about other cities' thoughts on 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I do recall those Dallas stories. Dallas has been been laying low though -- unlike their Winter counterparts. I don't think that Dallas was out if line or crackpot-like for having a website. They obviously dialed the volume way down when it became clear that the USOC was going to call the shots. If Dallas were campaigning like crazy, I'd question their judgment. They're just laying low for the moment. That still doesn't convey anything to me about any other city. Dallas was gunning for 2020 before they learned the USOC nixed 2020. Therefore it makes sense that we would've heard a tiny bit from them already. The gears were already turning. A city that is just now zooming in on 2024 wouldn't be as far along and therefore there would be less public information. So the fact that Dallas has a website that was built for a 2020 campaign really doesn't say anything about other cities' thoughts on 2024. Doesn't make them an anymore attractive city than San Francisco. Philadelphia or Dubai. I mean, can't these people see that they're NOT exactly the #1, 2 3, or 4 top travel destination in North America. And what is pleasant or attractive about Dallas?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted December 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Doesn't make them an anymore attractive city than San Francisco. Philadelphia or Dubai. I mean, can't these people see that they're NOT exactly the #1, 2 3, or 4 top travel destination in North America. And what is pleasant or attractive about Dallas?? I agree with you there. I was responding to other posters. The only thing that might make a difference where Dallas is concerned would be if they had a top-flight leadership crew in place. In terms of the city itself, they're starting with a weaker hand than others (again, weather and international appeal are the issues). That means they'd have to play it perfectly to have any shot of winning. I can see the big four taking on Paris and potentially winning. The race would get much tighter with Dallas in the picture and I suspect it wouldn't be winnable. I would hope the exploratory committee is also unofficially sounding out the IOC on their feelings about potential bid cities. They have in the past. I think it's reasonable to do so again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Not that I'm pushing for a Dallas bid, but it's a better option that people give it credit for. It's got decent transportation options (especially out to the fairgrounds / Cotton Bowl area) and surprisingly high international appeal thanks to the TV show. OK, my parents remember Dallas. I don't. The next generation - i.e. those who are athletes in the 2020s - definitely won't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I would hope the exploratory committee is also unofficially sounding out the IOC on their feelings about potential bid cities. What will they tell U that u will want to hear or WON'T want to hear? They said Chicago was strong enough to get past the 1st round. Well, we all know the consequences of that. You just have to go with your gut. And if it's NOT with the top 4, don't even bother. The only thing that will really make them choose an American city if it were w/in the power of the USOC to say that NBC (or other US network) won't bid in the next round if an American city isn't chosen...and mean it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 OK, my parents remember Dallas. I don't. The next generation - i.e. those who are athletes in the 2020s - definitely won't! Athletes don't vote. IOC members ds. Anyone know what their average age is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Athletes don't vote. IOC members ds. Anyone know what their average age is? I'd say probably mid-50s. That series is NOT going to be a factor. I don't see these aristocrats and sports administrators having had to waste their precious time on something like that soap opera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 when people site "Dallas" the TV show as the main reason the city is well known I have to laugh. Never saw that show, it's the last thing i would think of when I think of Dallas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted December 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Dallas makes me think of football and bourgeois, semi-nondescript middle America. What will they tell U that u will want to hear or WON'T want to hear? They said Chicago was strong enough to get past the 1st round. Well, we all know the consequences of that. You just have to go with your gut. And if it's NOT with the top 4, don't even bother. The only thing that will really make them choose an American city if it were w/in the power of the USOC to say that NBC (or other US network) won't bid in the next round if an American city isn't chosen...and mean it. I think the IOC was pretty honest about American cities before. That's how we learned their feelings about SF and the big 4 as opposed to Washington, Dallas, etc. Chicago proves nothing because 1.) the IOC was somewhat surprised by the result 2.) they were really rejecting the USOC -- not Chicago (which is still by far the best potential American host in my opinion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 Chicago proves nothing because 1.) the IOC was somewhat surprised by the result 2.) they were really rejecting the USOC -- not Chicago (which is still by far the best potential American host in my opinion). One can make all sorts of excuses for Chicago and mitigate its loss. But the point is, it was SHOWN THE DOOR right away. And I am sure for the $76 million that Chicago spent, that wasn't the scenario they were hoping for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted December 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 One can make all sorts of excuses for Chicago and mitigate its loss. But the point is, it was SHOWN THE DOOR right away. And I am sure for the $76 million that Chicago spent, that wasn't the scenario they were hoping for. I agree, but that wasn't the point at issue. The point is that it was helpful in the past for the USOC to sound out the IOC on their attitude towards particular American cities. I suspect (hope) they are doing the same again, however unofficially. This is useful information. It was in that context that you brought up Chicago. It's in that context that I'm arguing Chicago's loss doesn't diminish the value of getting the IOC's read on potential American candidate cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquablue Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Dallas makes me think of football and bourgeois, semi-nondescript middle America. I think the IOC was pretty honest about American cities before. That's how we learned their feelings about SF and the big 4 as opposed to Washington, Dallas, etc. Chicago proves nothing because 1.) the IOC was somewhat surprised by the result 2.) they were really rejecting the USOC -- not Chicago (which is still by far the best potential American host in my opinion). I wouldn't put DC in the same realm as Dallas when it comes to international appeal. Dallas is a business city, DC has more to offer the international visitor. I can see DC winning, but never Dallas. DC has the capital card to play at least, it has that special notoriety that isn't just some average American City in the world's eye. I just don't see where SFO could get the room for the Olympics.. it is such a small city with hardly any room to build anything. It would be one of the top options though, along with NYC and Chiago. I do not believe LA would get a third before the other top cities in the US. Again, on the topic of DC, it is far safer now compared to the bad old days, and it has done a good job on revitalizing its downtown. It also has fantastic transit for a city of its size, American that is. Philadelphia shouldn't bother. I was there a while ago. While I liked the small lively central city, the city didn't come across as an Olympic City and much of the city is a ghetto. However, when it comes down to it, there is really one two or three cities than can host in the new era of glitzy games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 I just don't see where SFO could get the room for the Olympics.. Yea, it’ll never all fit at the airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Yea, it’ll never all fit at the airport. Well, it is by the Bay. They can dredge up as much land as the environmentalists will allow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 >> I can see DC winning, I don't see how DC can even get out a bid as long as it is a fifedom of Congress and doesn't control it's own government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BABYLON Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 >> I can see DC winning, I don't see how DC can even get out a bid as long as it is a fifedom of Congress and doesn't control it's own government. The mayor of the city indicated that he wants to include both Baltimore and Richmond in a DC bid. I'm not sure that this might work for the IOC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 I think Chicago would be the best American bid. They had the best plan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BABYLON Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 I think Chicago would be the best American bid. They had the best plan For me, Chicago is the best option. I actually thought it was the best candidate for the 2016 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 The mayor of the city indicated that he wants to include both Baltimore and Richmond in a DC bid. I'm not sure that this might work for the IOC. You need effective governement to host the games. DC doesn't have it. You need to acquire land, pump up transportation and other infrastructure, etc. Unlike any city I know, DC can't do that on their own. They need permission from Congress. And there are enough anti-DC, anti-Olympics, anti-infrastructure, anti-transportation Congressmen to block any efforts DC would need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquablue Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 You need effective governement to host the games. DC doesn't have it. You need to acquire land, pump up transportation and other infrastructure, etc. Unlike any city I know, DC can't do that on their own. They need permission from Congress. And there are enough anti-DC, anti-Olympics, anti-infrastructure, anti-transportation Congressmen to block any efforts DC would need. DC has decent transit, compared to Dallas or whatever other car dependent sun-belt city you name. The Metro there is first rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Dallas was gunning for 2020 before they learned the USOC nixed 2020. Therefore it makes sense that we would've heard a tiny bit from them already. The gears were already turning. I really don't get where people here are getting this from. Dallas wasn't gunning for 2020 anymore than any other credible U.S. city was. It was merely local business tycoon Jerry Jones that was all gung-ho for it (& that was long before the USOC finally said no to 2020). But there was never any mention of much more involvement from key players that would've made 'the gears turning'. Loons Vegas & Tulsa had more of that going in that sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted December 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Dallas was gunning for 2020 before they learned the USOC nixed 2020. Therefore it makes sense that we would've heard a tiny bit from them already. The gears were already turning. I really don't get where people here are getting this from. Dallas wasn't gunning for 2020 anymore than any other credible U.S. city was. It was merely local business tycoon Jerry Jones that was all gung-ho for it (& that was long before the USOC finally said no to 2020). But there was never any mention of much more involvement from key players that would've made 'the gears turning'. Loons Vegas & Tulsa had more of that going in that sense. They did have a website. That's more than anybody else did for 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 So did Minneapolis - mpls2020. Doesn't mean it was legit or that the city was actually 'gunning' for 2020, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningrings Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Some of these bid city sites are privately run with no actual link to any local authority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.