Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Let's be careful about what got reported here. Early in the week, we hear that "DeFrantz made it clear that a bid for one of the two Games is now imminent" and "Experts are predicting that the Working Group will advise the USOC to mount a bid for the 2024 Summer Games given that it would be far more finacially lucrative than a 2026 Winter Games but DeFrantz said the team are looking carefully at all the information available"

Obviously the experts got that one wrong since that clearly didn't happen. And who knows what exactly it was that DeFrantz said, but obviously a bid is not imminent when the USOC has made it clear they're not announcing anything anytime soon.

I suspect we're still at the same spot we've been at for a while now, only the USOC is on the record as saying it.. they're still unsure and need more time and information to make a decision. Who knows how much they've done to feel out the potential candidate cities or if this is just a starting point to say to those cities "we'll be talking phone calls soon, so start getting ready." Again, it's very possible that the USOC will select a candidate for 2024 and not submit them to the IOC. That's probably where some of the gray area comes into play. There's plenty of middle ground between where the situation is completely unclear and they situation is clear but they don't want to tip their hand.

So, my view of this largely remains the same.. right now, the USOC probably doesn't know who their key players will be and they need more time to determine who is out there and who they can work with. But again, in reading between the lines a little bit here, the fact that they seem to be stalling on the process indicates to me that they're less than confident about what is out there right now and hope that will change once they open up the phone lines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having "private conversations" is not the same thing as "secretly plotting a bid behind closed doors", which is what u were always alluding to, AF.

It's quite clear the USOC hasn't been hit up by any players that they would like to work with, other than possibly having those types of hidden conversations with simpletons like Tulsa who've probably bothered the USOC with their silliness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, the USOC just wants to be ready with all options and fools going forward. (1) Depends on who wins next September. (2) If the pool for 2024 isn't strong or is very weighted to, say, Durban, then the summer US bidders will just have to retreat while (3) the USOC would start to prime Reno-Tahoe, SLC and denver for 2026. I mean it doesn't take a genius to leverage that scenario out. In other words, get ready to move fast or rescind just as quickly as the fast-changing circumstances demand it. That's it basically.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, the USOC just wants to be ready with all options and fools going forward. (1) Depends on who wins next September. (2) If the pool for 2024 isn't strong or is very weighted to, say, Durban, then the summer US bidders will just have to retreat while (3) the USOC would start to prime Reno-Tahoe, SLC and denver for 2026. I mean it doesn't take a genius to leverage that scenario out. In other words, get ready to move fast or rescind just as quickly as the fast-changing circumstances demand it. That's it basically.

Υou have stacked in Durban...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The USA can`t expect another city like an Atlanta to win so it will need to pick a city which can beat international competition and competition within its continent. That leaves only 3 options: Ny, LA and Chicago

What about San Fran? I would think it has even more international appeal as a city than Chicago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calgary hosted 8 years earlier and the election was a year after Calgary. Coupled with Coca Cola's influence Toronto wasn;t going to win even though it presented a more superior plan.

After all these years, I don't think Coca Cola bought Atlanta the games..lol...at the end of the day they won fair and square. And I would like to add you can't compare the Toronto of today to the Toronto of 1989 when the vote took place. Toronto has moved into a different league status wise worldwide IMO.

If the USA bids I do believe they'll be the frontrunner from North America but you know I'll be supporting Toronto 100% :) I'm thinking they'll go with NYC. So is there absolutely no talk of a future bid within the NYC mayor's office? I really haven't kept up-to-date with what's been going on lately besides the fact that the USOC will be exploring bids for 2024/26

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all these years, I don't think Coca Cola bought Atlanta the games..lol...at the end of the day they won fair and square. And I would like to add you can't compare the Toronto of today to the Toronto of 1989 when the vote took place. Toronto has moved into a different league status wise worldwide IMO.

At the risk of nitpicking here.. the vote took place in September of 1990, not 1989. Which probably isn't all that insignificant because it means that SkyDome was up and running for more than a year before the 1996 vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of nitpicking here.. the vote took place in September of 1990, not 1989. Which probably isn't all that insignificant because it means that SkyDome was up and running for more than a year before the 1996 vote.

Meh, I just counted 7 years back from 96 :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot about San Francisco. Yes them too. But where does stadium go?

Well, per the 2016 plans, it would rise beside the present Candlestick stadium. There is land there; Candlestick would've been an adjunct facility; and there was enough room left for a warm-up track too. The Village was going 2 going up in Hunters Point; and a small pedestrain bridge would've connected the Village to the Stadium complex. It was really a nice, neat, compact plan for 2 of the major components of a winning Olympic bid. However, that snake Jeff York scuttled San Francisco's plans. May his team sit forever in LAST PLACE!!

Meh, I just counted 7 years back from 96 :P

That was the one time in recent history that the IOC allowed only 6 years before the event. They knew Atlanta could do it; but NOT Athens. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of nitpicking here.. the vote took place in September of 1990, not 1989. Which probably isn't all that insignificant because it means that SkyDome was up and running for more than a year before the 1996 vote.

You are not nitpicking lol your stating the truth. I said 1989 as well earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is regarding the stadium issue. If Paris were to bid for 2024 they would probably use Stade de France for track, ceremonies, etc. But the stadium isn't located in Paris. It's located a few miles from it. The point is, could a bid like that lead to other cities using a stadium not in the city as the olympic stadium? Like Metlife Stadium for NYC, or Cowboys stadium for Dallas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about San Fran? I would think it has even more international appeal as a city than Chicago.

San Francisco is a good option, but I isnt more appealing than Chicago, Chicago has even a better rank as global city. I would say LA, Chicago and San Francisco are the US best options... Not that sure about NYC at least the venues take place in Meadowlands :S
Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Francisco is a good option, but I isnt more appealing than Chicago, Chicago has even a better rank as global city. I would say LA, Chicago and San Francisco are the US best options... Not that sure about NYC at least the venues take place in Meadowlands :S

Other then LA, I think NYC maybe the most equipped city to host the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, per the 2016 plans, it would rise beside the present Candlestick stadium. There is land there; Candlestick would've been an adjunct facility; and there was enough room left for a warm-up track too. The Village was going 2 going up in Hunters Point; and a small pedestrain bridge would've connected the Village to the Stadium complex. It was really a nice, neat, compact plan for 2 of the major components of a winning Olympic bid. However, that snake Jeff York scuttled San Francisco's plans. May his team sit forever in LAST PLACE!!

I know, right? How dare the 49ers think of themselves instead of sacrifice their own well being for the off chance that maybe they'd land an Olympics. Hate to tell you this though, but Jed York's team is in first place in their division right now. They just barely missed making the Super Bowl last year and they're more than likely headed to the playoffs again this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, right? How dare the 49ers think of themselves instead of sacrifice their own well being for the off chance that maybe they'd land an Olympics. Hate to tell you this though, but Jed York's team is in first place in their division right now. They just barely missed making the Super Bowl last year and they're more than likely headed to the playoffs again this year.

Jeff.. Jed...same snake...diff name. Couldn't be bothered how they do. I DON'T follow any of the US pro sports leagues AT ALL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) There's a difference between not having a bid now (which is what I said) and knowing a bid isn't forthcoming.

3a) Please don't suppose what I assume. You are terrible at it. I said there's a possiblity they are incompent. We shouldn't ignore that option when listing all the posibilities.[/quote

Good grief, man.

1. Of course there isn't a bid now. Was that your original point? I would think that much should be pretty obvious.

3a.) you said that there is no guarantee the USOC is conducting research when that is the exact job the exploratory committee was tasked with. The only way your hypothesis could be true is if they are ignoring their assigned responsibilities and doing nothing. I'm not mind-reading (I don't presume to know what you think) -- I'm just pointing out the logical extension of your comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having "private conversations" is not the same thing as "secretly plotting a bid behind closed doors", which is what u were always alluding to, AF.

It's quite clear the USOC hasn't been hit up by any players that they would like to work with, other than possibly having those types of hidden conversations with simpletons like Tulsa who've probably bothered the USOC with their silliness.

I simply said that absence of public information is not an indicator that a bid is not in the works. I also said that if someone wants to keep a bid under wraps until it is advantageous to publicize it, it is possible to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3a.) you said that there is no guarantee the USOC is conducting research when that is the exact job the exploratory committee was tasked with. The only way your hypothesis could be true is if they are ignoring their assigned responsibilities and doing nothing. I'm not mind-reading (I don't presume to know what you think) -- I'm just pointing out the logical extension of your comment.

No, I didn't say that. The board has a quote feature, please use it. Respond to what people actually say, instead of pretending they said something and then responding to what you've made up.

And for gosh sakes... before you try your hand at pointing out logical extensions of my comments, practice getting the actual comments right first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I didn't say that. The board has a quote feature, please use it. Respond to what people actually say, instead of pretending they said something and then responding to what you've made up.

And for gosh sakes... before you try your hand at pointing out logical extensions of my comments, practice getting the actual comments right first.

I already quoted you once when I made the original comment. To humor you, I'll do so again. At the moment I'm on an iPhone so it is more cumbersome.

3a) What makes you think they are doing careful research 3-years ahead of time. We have no idea what they are up to or doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...