Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I knew that once Minne looked at the real, raw figures that they'd recoil & call it a day. Good job USOC! :lol:

Welcome to the new age.. the process is working! And as much as certain people here won't want to hear it, good for Minneapolis. Let them sink their time and effort into the new Vikings Stadium so that they ensure that the Vikings stick around (not to mention that it could help them get back in the mix for a Final Four and maybe even another Super Bowl).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see the need to publically focus on the loser with the TV cameras glaring at the least popular city's delegation. That is a bit too cruel and I think that shock was the thing which hurt Chicago most. And actually, remembering back to 2009, Danny and a few other Brazillians were really pissed off so much of the focus was on the "shock" of the first round rather than Rio's victory. So I think it'd help in that sense too.

If a losing city can't cope with a fully transparent voting process with voting patterns published a few hours afterwards, that's tough. Someone has to finish last and there's only so much you can do to spare feelings and encourage a repeat bid. If FIFA said, "no, we won't publish our votes because it might hurt the bidding nation's feelings" we'd be laughing at another Blatterism and the opaque nature of FIFA, I'm sure.

And besides, the Chicago delegation were pretty sure they knew what had happened afterwards anyway. Making that inside knowledge public probably isn't going to change much. But making it less of a drama and less of an unecessary ordeal for the city, its Mayor, its President, might make a difference.

Publicity and TV coverage for the winner only, full transparency everywhere else publshed online afterwards. Think that'd be the right balance.

Hey, I'm just responding to the original question about whether a different voting structure might encourage repeat-bidding from the losers.

You can't dictate what the media covers. If the information is presented, they will make a big deal out if the losers loss.

Think about the Oscars. It was bad enough that Crash won over Brokeback. Now imagine that Brokeback finished a shocking LAST in the voting. That's by far the bigger story. Of course the media will zoom in on it. Of course that kind of negative attention will be off-putting. So the Academy never reveals the vote tally.

Translate that to an Olympic context and you can see why the current process would deter quality candidates from bidding. In most cases, the bigger they are, the harder they fall, the more they have to lose.

Your post indicated that this isn't a problem for you and that the bidders should just man-up and take their lumps if/when they come. That's a fine and defensible position. However, the IOC should consider that their current methods may be deterring the best candidates from bidding. Maybe they don't care. If they do though, they should make an adjustment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indianapolis also said no. Not a peep from the big cities, though.

I found Indianapolis quite pleasantly surprising as a city, but it's not surprising they would bow out.

Chicago has said no. NYC, LA, Philly haven't said anything. SF is rumored to be working on funding. Boston seems intrigued. Dallas is hot to trot. Nothing from anyone else.

I can see why the bigger markets would stay mum for a while. Politically speaking, there's more at stake. It is significant that they haven't offered up a "hell no," which is pretty much what Chicago did. That's still so disappointing to me.

My mistake. Minneapolis said no as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Francisco is already working

on establishing a non-profit to lead a bid and its being led by its mayor.

Not gonna happen unless they plug the holes in the America's Cup race this summer; and NOT impinge on the social services. How can SF go for a billion-dollar event when it can barely find the missing $15 mil in the AC budget, without tapping the City treasury. Supervisors are already disgusted and feel burnt. Nice that Lee is thinking Olympic but it's a long road from an AC (where of the projectd 12 boats in the finals, it's now down to 3) to a Summer Olympic Games. If there were a stadium, I'd say SF would be in the running. But not until then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clear your inbox.

Not gonna happen unless they plug the holes in the America's Cup race this summer; and NOT impinge on the social services. How can SF go for a billion-dollar event when it can barely find the missing $15 mil in the AC budget, without tapping the City treasury. Supervisors are already disgusted and feel burnt. Nice that Lee is thinking Olympic but it's a long road from an AC (where of the projectd 12 boats in the finals, it's now down to 3) to a Summer Olympic Games. If there were a stadium, I'd say SF would be in the running. But not until then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not heard a single good reason why Houston shouldn't host.

How about this: they haven't bid and the IOC hasn't elected them.

"Should" is a strange choice of words. "Could" would fit the situation a bit better.

A.) Does Houston want to bid?

B.) Does Houston have all the requisite facilities or the money required to build them?

C.) Is Houston's character and atmosphere appealing to internationals?

D.) Will Houston offer more to the IOC than any other American city interested in bidding for 2024?

E.) Will Houston be more exciting to the IOC than Rome, Paris or Durban?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not heard a single good reason why Houston shouldn't host.

Houston tried for 2012 & 2016, but the USOC passed on them both times. I'd imagine that they would be passed up again, unless the USOC was got no one else more appealing, on the international stage that is, to go with they may look at them a little more closely next time. But they still would have an image problem going up against the other big international cities. Plus, Houston's probably jaded by the USOC rejections by now that they probably don't wanna bother anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not heard a single good reason why Houston shouldn't host.

The weather. That's a pretty good reason. More hot and humid during the summer in Houston than it is in Atlanta. So much so that their baseball and football teams have been playing in climate-controlled stadiums for half a century. That plus everything FYI brought up. They might try again, but I can't see them being a serious contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOLLL at this:

Pittsburgh is virtually a shoo-in to host the 2024 Summer Olympics

Only 11 years 'til torch time.

People are reeling over the news, as they should be. The 2024 Summer Olympics are Pittsburgh-bound, a stunning development made all the more flabbergasting by the fact the U.S. Olympic Committee came to us.

The organization sent city officials a letter asking if we would be interested in hosting the games. Would we? Heck, yes!

It's unfortunate that some cynics always attempt to engage in parade precipitation, and are doing so amid the jubilation and celebration over this incredible coup.

Naysayers note the deal technically isn't official. They point out the committee sent the same letter to 34 other cities. They say that even if the committee backed a Pittsburgh bid, we'd compete for the games with second-rate foreign cities such as Toronto, Paris, Rome and Berlin.

As if any of that matters.

There are complaints that Pittsburgh doesn't meet the requirements stipulated in the letter for hosting the event. Let's refute that ugly falsehood by addressing each essential element the committee listed:

• An international airport

Pittsburgh International has extremely limited international service and offers nonstop flights to just 37 cities, but that hardly puts us at a disadvantage. We can sell the fact that lengthy layovers will provide athletes from distant locales a chance to see a greater number of American attractions, such as the Philadelphia International Airport Saladworks.

• Approximately 45,000 available hotel rooms

The region falls short of that requirement by about 15,000 rooms, but that's no biggie. Simply house folks in the many empty buildings the Pittsburgh Public Schools closed in recent years.

The accommodations might not be four-star. But a certain Findlay-based company probably would donate a sufficient number of tents to serve as sleeping quarters for everyone, as long as the event is rechristened “The Dick's Sporting Goods Games of the XXXIII Olympiad.”

• An Olympic Village for 16,500 athletes and officials

No need to construct an Olympic Village when we can simply retrofit the cavernous, recently shuttered Parkway Center Mall near the city-Green Tree border. This 19-acre slice of urban blight easily could be transformed into a bustling, centrally located Olympic campus with this bonus: With a Giant Eagle supermarket being the last surviving business on the property, the athletes won't risk running out of Gatorade and protein bars.

• A workforce of 200,000

Assuming Western Pennsylvania's 10-county population base of 2.6 million remains constant, that's doable with one minor caveat: It might prove difficult to find someone to perform the requisite shovel duty after equestrian events.

• A $3 billion operating budget

True, raising that amount seems daunting. But by dipping into the secret Pittsburgh Police Bureau credit union accounts the FBI is investigating, the city should be able to come up with the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Does Los Angeles have a shot at hosting the 2024 Summer Olympics?

No one doubts that Los Angeles is ready, willing and able to host another Summer Olympics.

There are a handful of major league sports venues and an ample fan base, not to mention a reliably sunny climate, all of which contributed to two successful Games in the past.

pixel.gif

"L.A. is the one place in the world that is always ready to host," said Anita DeFrantz, an International Olympic Committee member and longtime resident. "It's a city that loves sports."

But that doesn't mean the U.S. Olympic Committee or the IOC necessarily favors returning to Southern California.

As Los Angeles pursues the 2024 Olympics — domestic and international bidding will continue for nearly four years — local organizers must navigate a series of challenges.

"It's going to be tricky," said Robert Livingstone, whose GamesBids.com will track the process. "They have obstacles to overcome."

Start with money. The Olympics always start with money.

When the USOC sent out feelers to 35 major U.S. markets last month, it warned about the size and scope of the undertaking, telling potential candidates the operating budget for the Games could exceed $3 billion, not including cost of venue construction and other infrastructure.

London ended up spending more than $15 billion on the 2012 Summer Games.

That seems particularly expensive given Los Angeles' current budget crisis. Earlier this month, voters defeated a sales tax hike aimed at lessening the budget gap.

"Los Angeles might have to come to grips with the same issues that other cities are considering," said Ed Hula, editor of Around the Rings, a publication that chronicles the Olympic movement. "They have to ask, 'Can we really afford it?'"

The USOC, which will submit a single American candidate in 2015, hopes to streamline the domestic process by replacing formal presentations with informal discussions, at least during the early stages. That could greatly reduce the millions of dollars that cities have spent during recent cycles.

The Southern California Committee for the Olympic Games will seek private donations for its bid effort, President David Simon said. He points back to 1984.

"Anyone who was here will remember the Games were privately funded and took in more money than they cost," he said. "We would hope to do the same thing again."

Los Angeles holds a financial edge because it would not have to build much in the way of stadiums and arenas. But that could also be a negative.

Though venues such as Staples Center, Honda Center and Home Depot Center would be new to the Olympics, the Coliseum and Rose Bowl might seem too familiar, which raises the question: Will Los Angeles be viewed as a retread?

pixel.gif

The USOC, for one, doesn't think so.

"London has hosted the Games three times," said Scott Blackmun, the committee's chief executive. "It's clearly not a disadvantage."

IOC members might have a different take.

They like to make inroads in parts of the world where the Olympic movement does not have a strong presence. And for all of their talk about controlling costs, they have chosen the likes of Rio de Janeiro, Sochi, Russia, and Pyeongchang, South Korea in recent bid votes.

Even London produced a new Olympic complex in the rundown eastern part of the city, erecting a cluster of gleaming white — if temporary — arenas.

"The IOC keeps selecting cities that have to build a lot," Livingstone said. "It could be an ego thing — they like having venues built for them."

So Olympic experts wonder about Los Angeles' chances. Asked for a short list of domestic favorites, they place potential candidates such as San Francisco, Boston and New York at the top.

Dallas has also formed an exploratory committee and other, smaller cities have expressed interest, but Hula said: "the Cincinnatis of the world … the USOC won't really consider them."

The 2024 Summer Games represent an important choice for American officials.

A disagreement over revenue sharing had strained relations between the U.S. and the IOC during recent bid cycles. Simply put, the Olympic movement wanted more of the money that flowed from American broadcasters and corporations, which DeFrantz has described as 60 cents of every dollar coming in.

Under a long-standing deal, the USOC received 20% of the IOC's global sponsorship revenue and 12.75% of the U.S. broadcast rights fee. That left 203 national Olympic committees to share the rest.

As negotiations for a new arrangement dragged on, IOC members ousted Chicago in the first round of final voting for 2016 and the U.S. stopped submitting candidates.

Last spring, the two sides agreed to a split that — beginning in 2020 — will reportedly give the USOC a similar cut but only 7% of any increases in U.S. broadcast fees and 10% of increases in sponsorship money.

The USOC has also sought to become more involved in the movement, attending Olympic meetings and events worldwide. The question is: Are IOC members sufficiently mollified to vote for an American city?

"It's no longer an issue," said DeFrantz, who also serves on the Southern California Olympic board.

So the time might be right for a U.S. bid. No American city has hosted the Olympics since Salt Lake City in 2002 and no Summer Games since 1996 in Atlanta. The IOC has, perhaps, quenched its thirst for exotic locales with Brazil and South Korea on the calendar through 2018.

"It may be coming around toward a more conventional type of choice," Hula said. "Less adventuresome, less risk."

In the not-so-distant future, Los Angeles must craft the kind of narrative — Why here? Why now? — that IOC voters look for.

Much depends on the competition. It remains to be seen which other U.S. cities will fight for the domestic bid, and which international cities will vie for 2024.

At this point, DeFrantz doesn't bother to place odds on Los Angeles' chances.

"Selecting a city, it's such a unique thing," she said. "For every argument that is made, I can show the exception."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, when the US city is eliminated in the 1st round this time, do you think there will be any real repercussions? I'd hope so, getting punched in the face with NY and then the sucker punch with Chicago, should have taught us something but apparently we're like a battered wife, who keeps going back for more and more IOC "beatings."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking as a supporter of Chicago 2016, I can only hope when the US bids again it doesn't have that attitude.

The NYC bid had venue difficulties at the last minute and was in the toughest field in living memory. Not getting in a final round which included London and Paris and being beaten by a technically excellent Madrid bid WAS NOT a punch in the face - it was a fair reflection on where the bids stood. The Chicago defeat was publically horrible for them (I think making the defeated cities' fates so public as if it's the Weakest Link is not good for the IOC personally even if it does make good TV), but one city had to leave first, and I don't see why the US should consider itself too big for it not to be one of theirs.

The USA hosted four Olympics in recent decades. It's hardly the beaten wife you portray it as. Have a word with certain Madrid supporters, or Istanbullers, or Paris fans. Even the UK lost three bids on the bounce before London, a fact that's often forgotten. Pyeongchang, host of the 2018 Games, had to bid three times before they got the nod. None of them spoke of hoping for "repercussions".

Edited by RobH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, when the US city is eliminated in the 1st round this time, do you think there will be any real repercussions? I'd hope so, getting punched in the face with NY and then the sucker punch with Chicago, should have taught us something but apparently we're like a battered wife, who keeps going back for more and more IOC "beatings."

Well, the USOC is just knocking at the wrong door at the wrong time. Insisting on a SOG when the IOC has other clients to satisfy first with that...and ignoring the Winter Games when that is ALMOST there for the taking. But as u said, maybe the USOC is a masochist at heart.

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...