Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Personally, I think 2nd-tier US cities match up nicely with Toronto. Paris would be tough to beat, but RSA is only a worry if they can put forth a great bid. We don't know if they can do that.

I don't agree with that. Toronto is a big booming world city that has much more international recognition and intangibles that a Philadelphia lacks. Bottom line is the city is on a different level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with that. Toronto is a big booming world city that has much more international recognition and intangibles that a Philadelphia lacks. Bottom line is the city is on a different level.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why the IOC picked Atlanta over Athens. Athens over Cape Town, etc.

Athens just wasn't ready for 1996, so Atlanta benefitted from that & merely got lucky. And Athens 2004 was a symbolic choice. It was the Olympics "finally coming home". Cape Town, was more or less, in the same position for 2004 that Athens was for 1996.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes Philadelphia a better choice? Lmao

It's a great, historic American city with huge amounts of cultural capital, and a strong, distinct identity. Furthermore it is on the American North East Coast, which has never had the Summer Olympics - Canada's East Coast has in 1976.

It sits within a huge population area. Furthermore,depending on the bid, Philadelphia could present the IOC with an American version of London 2012 - goals of fixing a generation, restoring a city with its enourmous urban renewal potential.

As for your comment about second tier American cities global status, with regards to Toronto; while I can see that Toronto's does have an important role in North America, and a growing global profile, I'd say (at least from an Australian perspective) it's no LA, NY or Chicago. Smaller US cities benefit from simply being US cities and all the cultural and economic bonuses that come from that. It could be argued that Toronto's handicap to these cities is that it is not within the most influential country in the Olympic movement. Lets not lose sight of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore it is on the American North East Coast, which has never had the Summer Olympics - Canada's East Coast has in 1976.

It sits within a huge population area. Furthermore,depending on the bid, Philadelphia could present the IOC with an American version of London 2012 - goals of fixing a generation, restoring a city with its enourmous urban renewal potential.

As for your comment about second tier American cities global status, with regards to Toronto; while I can see that Toronto's does have an important role in North America, and a growing global profile, I'd say (at least from an Australian perspective) it's no LA, NY or Chicago. Smaller US cities benefit from simply being US cities and all the cultural and economic bonuses that come from that. It could be argued that Toronto's handicap to these cities is that it is not within the most influential country in the Olympic movement. Lets not lose sight of that.

-Technically you are wrong because no event was held on the "coast" Atlanta however had sailing on the "coast".

- So what almost any city can present that aspect imo. IF the USA wants to win they should go with a repeat bidder ie. NYC or Chicago

-Toronto is more comparable with Washington DC/San Francisco. La would however be considered below (see Alpha city list).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't read too much in an 'alpha city' list. After the true top 10 global cities, everything else is subjective. Can't see that Toronto would top Los Angeles anymore than Abu Dhabi, Nicosia or Birmingham topping Rio de Janiero. It's mainly perception once we start to travel down the city totem pole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Technically you are wrong because no event was held on the "coast" Atlanta however had sailing on the "coast".

- So what almost any city can present that aspect imo. IF the USA wants to win they should go with a repeat bidder ie. NYC or Chicago

-Toronto is more comparable with Washington DC/San Francisco. La would however be considered below (see Alpha city list).

- Perhaps I am 'technically' wrong with the Savannah role in 1996, however that is really clutching at straws, given that we could also mention that 1984 football was held in Maryland. Reality is, the only Olympic experience this region has had in the post-WW2 era is Lake Placid 1980, which was more an event of necessity, following Denver. My point is, the most densely population region in the western world has NEVER staged the Olympic Games. This could have significant "new frontier" appeal, in addition to practical appeal (depending upon if this aspect is marketed to the IOC).

-Sure, any American city can trump the US benefits card, but Philly, as I've mentioned, is probably one of the best "second tier" options because it has actually shown interest in the event (while Chicago ran in the opposite direction), and it is not just *any* US city - it is one of the continents most historic and culturally important, this would wield it power in building a narrative for its bid, and even in the Games themselves (right now to distant details like the overall theme, ceremonies, etc...)

-Alpha city lists are not exactly the be all, end all. In terms of international profile, Los Angeles is off the charts compared to Toronto (the fact that Toronto calls itself "Hollywood North", is in itself a reflection of this). Again, from an Australian perspective, I'd say that DC and SF have a substantially more influential profile than Toronto, SF being one of the most iconic North American cities, and DC being the US capital.

Anyway, thats my 2 cents. In a shallow note, a "PHILADELPHIA OLYMPICS" has a nice ring to it, it flows nicely. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Alpha city lists are not exactly the be all, end all. In terms of international profile, Los Angeles is off the charts compared to Toronto (the fact that Toronto calls itself "Hollywood North", is in itself a reflection of this). Again, from an Australian perspective, I'd say that DC and SF have a substantially more influential profile than Toronto, SF being one of the most iconic North American cities, and DC being the US capital.

Vancouver is also known as Hollywood North.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Perhaps I am 'technically' wrong with the Savannah role in 1996, however that is really clutching at straws, given that we could also mention that 1984 football was held in Maryland. Reality is, the only Olympic experience this region has had in the post-WW2 era is Lake Placid 1980, which was more an event of necessity, following Denver. My point is, the most densely population region in the western world has NEVER staged the Olympic Games. This could have significant "new frontier" appeal, in addition to practical appeal (depending upon if this aspect is marketed to the IOC).

-Alpha city lists are not exactly the be all, end all. In terms of international profile, Los Angeles is off the charts compared to Toronto (the fact that Toronto calls itself "Hollywood North", is in itself a reflection of this). Again, from an Australian perspective, I'd say that DC and SF have a substantially more influential profile than Toronto, SF being one of the most iconic North American cities, and DC being the US capital.

Anyway, thats my 2 cents. In a shallow note, a "PHILADELPHIA OLYMPICS" has a nice ring to it, it flows nicely. :)

-That is something the USA should use to its advantage and why an NYC and to an extent Chicago makes sense.

-I guess that is fair because some rankings do not make sense such as Rio being down the list. But again your undermining the influence To has I;d put it at the same level as Chicago, LA, San Francisco.

To add Phili could benefit from NYC being nearby/vice versa

Edited by intoronto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-That is something the USA should use to its advantage and why an NYC and to an extent Chicago makes sense.

-I guess that is fair because some rankings do not make sense such as Rio being down the list. But again your undermining the influence To has I;d put it at the same level as Chicago, LA, San Francisco.

To add Phili could benefit from NYC being nearby/vice versa

- But at this point Chicago is out, and we're still waiting to hear from NYC. Yes, with a good plan, NYC would have a far greater chance at 2024 than Philadelphia would. But Philadelphia might be the next best option, I'd certainly rate it higher than Dallas.

-As for the influence of Toronto with North America, sure, it is without doubt part of about 5 to 8 or so cities that lead the continent (depending on what you consider), but from an Australian perspective, cities like Chicago, LA and SF have a stronger, more recognisable brand - I'd even say Vancouver would be on par, if not a notch higher for Aussies than Toronto, given its the only Canadian city you can fly into directly, and BC/Alberta are some of the most popular holiday destinations in North America for Australians along with California/Nevada and NYC.

All things considered, Toronto has the best template of any North American city to work with at this stage (but this alone is not enough). I'm not against Toronto, as an urban planner I'm a big admirer of the city, I just ultimately think after 2010, Canada could benefit from waiting longer, otherwise Toronto runs the risk of becoming a North American Madrid. (even though I'd take a Toronto Olympics in a heartbeat over Madrid).

Edited by runningrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toronto's biggest advantage is it's NOT the USA.

This has always been my viewpoint. If the IOC was inclinded to go there, it would be bcuz they didn't want to go to the United States. Bcuz apart from that, I can't see why they would want to return so soon to a small country, that doesn't do that well at the Summer Games tbw, that's already hosted 3 Olympic Games in only 34 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All things considered, Toronto has the best template of any North American city to work with at this stage (but this alone is not enough). I'm not against Toronto, as an urban planner I'm a big admirer of the city, I just ultimately think after 2010, Canada could benefit from waiting longer, otherwise Toronto runs the risk of becoming a North American Madrid. (even though I'd take a Toronto Olympics in a heartbeat over Madrid).

- I'll be there in 1-2 years B)

-2024 might be too soon but you have to try at any point to win. If you don't you can't win. With USA struggling to come up with a city Toronto might sneak in. If they lose that's fine because they won't bid again until the 40's judging by recent bidding patterns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has always been my viewpoint. If the IOC was inclinded to go there, it would be bcuz they didn't want to go to the United States. Bcuz apart from that, I can't see why they would want to return so soon to a small country, that doesn't do that well at the Summer Games tbw, that's already hosted 3 Olympic Games in only 34 years.

And that is it in a nutshell. If Vancouver never happened, I'd be right behind Toronto has the North American option for 2024. But thats not the case.

Even if you take the popular Canadian perspective that the Winter and Summer Olympics are separate and should not impact each other (which has actually been argued, to Toronto's benefit), so that Canada hasn't hosted "the Olympics" since 1976- hosting again in 2024 is still doing significantly well for a country of its size and relative status within the SOG. Australia waited 44 years from 1956 to 2000 (obviously with no OWG in between) and I can concede that we got VERY lucky in terms of being in the right place at the right time with Sydney 2000. If Sydney missed those two votes, it is not unreasonable to picture a scenario where in 2013 Australia would have only had the 1956 event up its sleeve. And this is a country that represents a region of the world that rarely hosts, and does significantly better at the Summer Olympics (both in sheer numbers and in per capita) than Canada. I doubt deny that Toronto has a right to vote, its offering a great venue, but the even the claim of "we haven't hosted the Summer Olympics since 1976" still falls flat for me. 48 years is not THAT long in Olympic years - given the Winter Olympics have tied the country over very well in between.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that is it in a nutshell. If Vancouver never happened, I'd be right behind Toronto has the North American option for 2024. But thats not the case.

Even if you take the popular Canadian perspective that the Winter and Summer Olympics are separate and should not impact each other (which has actually been argued, to Toronto's benefit), so that Canada hasn't hosted "the Olympics" since 1976- hosting again in 2024 is still doing significantly well for a country of its size and relative status within the SOG. Australia waited 44 years from 1956 to 2000 (obviously with no OWG in between) and I can concede that we got VERY lucky in terms of being in the right place at the right time with Sydney 2000. If Sydney missed those two votes, it is not unreasonable to picture a scenario where in 2013 Australia would have only had the 1956 event up its sleeve. And this is a country that represents a region of the world that rarely hosts, and does significantly better at the Summer Olympics (both in sheer numbers and in per capita) than Canada. I doubt deny that Toronto has a right to vote, its offering a great venue, but the even the claim of "we haven't hosted the Summer Olympics since 1976" still falls flat for me. 48 years is not THAT long in Olympic years - given the Winter Olympics have tied the country over very well in between.

If Sydney had lost those in 2000 and Beijing won, there is a great chance that 2008 would have gone to Toronto and we would not be having this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sydney had lost those in 2000 and Beijing won, there is a great chance that 2008 would have gone to Toronto and we would not be having this discussion.

Who's to say that Sydney (or someone else) wouldn't have come back for 2008? What makes you so sure that Toronto then would've won 2008? Beijing winning 2000 would changed the WHOLE cycle of bidding races thereafter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's to say that Sydney (or someone else) wouldn't have come back for 2008? What makes you so sure that Toronto then would've won 2008? Beijing winning 2000 would changed the WHOLE cycle of bidding races thereafter.

Of course it is all speculative, but my point is that Australia did very well to get 2000. I distinctly remember the general vibe after the Sydney Olympics was "that was great, but won't happen again in my lifetime", which is to an extent true. All the murmurs from Melbourne and Brisbane are just proud mayors thumping their chests. Comparatively, since 1976 there seems to constantly be a concerted effort from many Canadian cities to host the Olympics again, and again, with an almost Madrid like stamina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's to say that Sydney (or someone else) wouldn't have come back for 2008? What makes you so sure that Toronto then would've won 2008? Beijing winning 2000 would changed the WHOLE cycle of bidding races thereafter.

What makes me so sure is that Toronto presented the best technical bid in 2008 and lost to Beijing because it was China's time. Sure Sydney may have made a bid after 2000, but I am basing this off of what runningrings said about Australia still games-less since '56 in 2013 if Sydney had lost in 2000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All things considered, Toronto has the best template of any North American city to work with at this stage (but this alone is not enough). I'm not against Toronto, as an urban planner I'm a big admirer of the city, I just ultimately think after 2010, Canada could benefit from waiting longer, otherwise Toronto runs the risk of becoming a North American Madrid. (even though I'd take a Toronto Olympics in a heartbeat over Madrid).

I totally view it as another Madrid. And Spain has only hosted one Olympic Games, let alone 3. I think 2036 makes more sense. Making it a longer gap from both Vancouver & Montreal. Just like many argue that an L.A. 2024 bid, 40 years after 1984, is still too soon. Perhaps even in that case, 2032 makes more sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes me so sure is that Toronto presented the best technical bid in 2008 and lost to Beijing because it was China's time. Sure Sydney may have made a bid after 2000, but I am basing this off of what runningrings said about Australia still games-less since '56 in 2013 if Sydney had lost in 2000.

When was the last time the "technically best" bid actually won the Olympics? Besides, technically best is a little debatable, given China has a far greater pool of wealth than Canada - so even if it wasn't "technically best" compared to Toronto in 2001 - it certainly was by 2008. I would say that Beijing's absence wouldn't automatically equate to Toronto, although its chances would have markedly improved.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...