Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I ever only speak for myself. Yes, London completed the requirements and Beijing provided a spectacular games with loads and loads of government money and fantastical propaganda (now that was fascinating to watch!). I’m sure future games will be interesting to watch too. We’ll jut have to see what happens.

Interesting for who exactly? :blink:

The last few Olympics have gone just fine without the US hosting, and so will the next few, and probably the ones after that too. The IOC shows no sign of collapsing any time soon. You might be waiting a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The United States government will never and should never bankroll an Olympics extravaganza like some other governments, all our games require a successful business plan and partnerships that many bidders are not burdened to coordinate.

Just want to pick up on this point too. That's all fine, and quite admirable. But it's not "some" other governments. It's not like this is developed Western Nations doing one thing and New Frontiers doing another. Every rival bid a US bid will be up against will be proposing fair amounts of public money going towards their Games. France will spend public money, Germany will spend public money, the UK just spent a great chunk of public money - and they're all developed Western Nations whose governments are accountable for public spending just like the US. This isn't a new model the BRICs have come along with in the last ten years. The US makes things harder for itself by having the pressure of doing things differently from literally everyone else.

I can see the point of view Athensfan brought forward though; that Beijing and Sochi are making things so much bigger and how can the US compete with that if it doesn't have billions upon billions to fritter away? That's definitely a fair point. But then again, I'd quite like to see a cost breakdown of recent Games with public infrastructure budgets removed. Beijing's apparent £40bn budget surely included subways and things; things which developed cities already have so won't have to budget for in the build up to their Games. I wonder how comparable the spend would be between Beijing 2008 and others if they all started from the same base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not trying to be pessimistic, but I am going to be a realist....

If Tokyo wins 2020, I don't think the U.S. should waste its time and money with a 2024 bid. There is just too much probabilty in my mind that a European city or South African city has the best chance in that race. Europe has NEVER gone more than two cycles without hosting, and the IOC will not give the Games to both of the Americas without returning to Europe. I know that the "Two cycle rule" will be broken someday, but the U.S. is not going to break that cycle, only a new horizon (e.g. South Africa) has the best chance of changing that dynamic.

Now if Istanbul wins 2020, it becomes murkier for who has the best chance for 2024 in my opinion, and there could be more of an opening depending on who gets in the 2024 race, and what U.S. cities decide to bid.

But at the end of the day, I don't think any city outside of NYC, LA, SF or Chicago should be seriously considered by the USOC. Dallas, Houston, Philly, Seattle, Miami, Boston, etc. are either not recognized enough internationally or are big enough to be considered. If none of the big four are interested in bidding, than the USOC should just sit out the race. Simple as that.

I think the U.S. should bid for 2028 that their best chance because I believe Africa will get 2024 because the IOC will be determined to get the games to Africa and their best bet would be Durban, South Africa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this has been mentioned anywhere here yet:

Mayor Nutter sends letter on Philadelphia hosting 2024 Olympic

PHILADELPHIA - April 22, 2013 (WPVI) -- Could Philly host the 2024 Olympic Games?

Mayor Michael Nutter has sent a letter to the United States Olympic Committee (USOC), confirming the city's commitment to working with the USOC to bid on the 2024 Olympic Games.

In the letter, Nutter wrote of the city's interest in the possibility of becoming the U.S. Candidate City, and ultimately, the Host City.

"The Philadelphia region has enthusiastically embraced the prospect of bidding on and hosting a future Olympic Games, and we look forward with great anticipation to the opportunity to work with the USOC on this project," Mayor Nutter said in the letter.

"The City of Philadelphia shares the USOC's dedication to building a spectacular experience for the Olympic athletes, the Olympic family, and the watching world. We have had great success partnering with other organizations to host world-class events and we are committed to working cooperatively and effectively under the direction of the USOC in the months - and hopefully - years ahead."

The USOC wrote to the 25 largest cities in the United States, together with the cities that have previously expressed interest, to gauge interest in bidding to host the 2024 Olympic Games.

The 2016 Olympic Games will take place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, followed by the 2020 Olympic Games in a yet to be determined location.

6abc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the sake of clarification, I think the concept of the Olympic Games and the international athletic competition is a good in itself. I will always enjoy watching the Olympics.

I do not believe HOSTING the Olympic Games is a good in itself, particularly now that it's descended into such a prodigal battle of egos. Therefore I don't think it makes sense for the USOC to bend over backwards to ingratiate itself to the IOC. If other countries want the Games, fine.

The revenue deal was a joke from the American perspective. I do wonder if there was some sort of unofficial "we'll back your bid" element to the talks because otherwise the deal really makes no sense. If such a wink-wink arrangement exists, I think it was foolish on the part of the USOC to enter into it. Regardless, I think it's clear the IOC resents the way its fortunes have been connected to the US and isn't particularly invested in American interests, much less American Games.

So I'll enjoy watching the Games and will hope our athletic programs continue to thrive, but I have soured somewhat on the idea of any American bid in the near future.

Based on that ATR article, I now think there's a good chance the USOC will submit a a Dallas bid and I'm not particularly excited about it.

I would also like to point out that the IOC knows all the extra infrastructure spending is part of the package when they vote. Just because it's not part of the "official" Games budget, doesn't mean the IOC isn't banking on it. They are choosing partners who are willing to promise the moon. The US will always be more fiscally responsible than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is great to hear Philadelphia is considering going for 2024. Quite personally, I think this is the dark horse to watch. As I think RobH mentioned earlier, a US city could find success in really promoting the Olympics helping with urban renewal - and I think if you consider the history of Philadelphia, and the urban renewal potential it has (check out its waterfront) it is quite the American East London. Philadelphia could market its Olympic bid as promoting itself as a city that reflects the American story - it has a glorious history, but not without struggle, and the Olympic Games could be part of that regeneration.

With the absence of Chicago, I think I'd be right behind Philadelphia. And for those who right it off as not being part of the "big 4" - I think if marketed well, Philadelphia could overcome this. It is still a substantial and significant American city in its own right - being 5th largest in population, and 8th largest in overall metro area (slightly less than Dallas). Also, being the first East Coast American Summer Olympics is something to be trumpeted also.

Edited by runningrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is great to hear Philadelphia is considering going for 2024. Quite personally, I think this is the dark horse to watch. As I think RobH mentioned earlier, a US city could find success in really promoting the Olympics helping with urban renewal - and I think if you consider the history of Philadelphia, and the urban renewal potential it has (check out its waterfront) it is quite the American East London. Philadelphia could market its Olympic bid as promoting itself as a city that reflects the American story - it has a glorious history, but not without struggle, and the Olympic Games could be part of that regeneration.

With the absence of Chicago, I think I'd be right behind Philadelphia. And for those who right it off as not being part of the "big 4" - I think if marketed well, Philadelphia could overcome this. It is still a substantial and significant American city in its own right - being 5th largest in population, and 8th largest in overall metro area (slightly less than Dallas). Also, being the first East Coast American Summer Olympics is something to be trumpeted also.

As I've said before, I'd love to see Philadelphia in the mix. I think after the big cities, they're at or near the top of the next tier of American cities and I think they could put together something good.

But.. this letter leaves more questions than answers. Okay, so Mayor Nutter (yes, that's his real name) has confirmed Philadelphia's interest. Well, what took 2 months to respond? He hasn't offered anything or anyone to the USOC other than to say he'd like Philadelphia to partner with the USOC. So who exactly does he expect to do the work? There's been sparks of interest in Philadelphia before, but I don't know where Nutter is expecting this to go from here. I don't see this coming together for the 2024 bid, but maybe it will lead to some sort of long-term plan. In short.. I'm pleased to see this, but I remain very skeptical and what to expect here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He hasn't offered anything or anyone to the USOC other than to say he'd like Philadelphia to partner with the USOC.

Do you really expect anybody to give any detailed bid plans yet? That would surely only be a loooong time down the track. The USOC hasn't really asked for anything but expressions of interest. If they dcide to take it further, THEN, maybe, they'd ask for more nuts and bolts.

As for the two months wait - I'd say, so? It probably indicated more they haven't gone off half-cocked on just enthusiasm alone. I'd say it indicated that Nutter's asked staff to see if it would still be feasible, and only now feels it's time to put his hat in. And considering they've shown sparks of interest before, I'd assume they probably have the bones of a bid outline ready to fill in the details when or if the USOC ask for it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is great to hear Philadelphia is considering going for 2024. Quite personally, I think this is the dark horse to watch. As I think RobH mentioned earlier, a US city could find success in really promoting the Olympics helping with urban renewal - and I think if you consider the history of Philadelphia, and the urban renewal potential it has (check out its waterfront) it is quite the American East London. Philadelphia could market its Olympic bid as promoting itself as a city that reflects the American story - it has a glorious history, but not without struggle, and the Olympic Games could be part of that regeneration.

Some of us here before have already talked about what the next U.S. bid needs to include in order to be competitive in the rising international arena. I think that ANY U.S. city that tosses it's hat in the ring is going to need to have that "oomph" in order to actually incite interest within the IOC. Not just Philadelphia, but whether it's Boston, Dallas or even L.A., any of them are going to need a solid project that's going to stir excitement. And urban renewal of some sort seems to be the only card left that the U.S. can play. Can't ride anymore on the "we've have everything in place & can host tomorrow" card. And we are far from a new-frontier being the only country on the planet having hosted the most Olympic Games than any other. So this seems the only way, in the immediate outlook, to a path of a successful U.S. summer bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the fact it has taken two months to respond - it shows a measured/non-flippant approach to the situation.

Anyway, I'll bring this list over to this thread:

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Dallas

San Diego

San Francisco

Boston

Miami

Seattle

Phoenix

Sacramento

Denver

Washington

Jacksonville

Orlando

Atlanta

Baltimore

St. Louis

Las Vegas

New York City

Charlotte

Columbus

Tulsa

Portland

Pittsburgh

Memphis

Austin

Houston

San Antonio

Nashville

Rochester

Minneapolis

Detroit

Chicago

San Jose

Indianapolis

Glad to see Philly in the blue. :)

Edited by runningrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really expect anybody to give any detailed bid plans yet? That would surely only be a loooong time down the track. The USOC hasn't really asked for anything but expressions of interest. If they dcide to take it further, THEN, maybe, they'd ask for more nuts and bolts.

As for the two months wait - I'd say, so? It probably indicated more they haven't gone off half-cocked on just enthusiasm alone. I'd say it indicated that Nutter's asked staff to see if it would still be feasible, and only now feels it's time to put his hat in. And considering they've shown sparks of interest before, I'd assume they probably have the bones of a bid outline ready to fill in the details when or if the USOC ask for it.

It takes about 100 steps to have an Olympic bid. Detail bid plans come along around step 87. No, I'm not asking for that. I'm looking for step 4 or 5 where they have some sort of organizing committee or exploratory study. Anything other than a simple proclamation from the mayor that they're interested. At least where we heard that from L.A., there's an organizing committee behind this. If "Philadelphia" is interested, who is behind that effort? Who is going to work on it? Nutter may be the figurehead for this, but he won't be leading the effort. Okay, so Nutter is offering up Philadelphia. If the USOC inquires and asks for more nuts and bolts, does Nutter know what or who they're going to point the USOC to? That's what I want to know at this point. Not much more than that. IMO there needs to be something a little more than "yea, we're interested, call us back." Again, that it's been 2 months since the USOC letter, that's the time Nutter should have used to figure that one out and perhaps offer that up to the USOC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of us here before have already talked about what the next U.S. bid needs to include in order to be competitive in the rising international arena. I think that ANY U.S. city that tosses it's hat in the ring is going to need to have that "oomph" in order to actually incite interest within the IOC. Not just Philadelphia, but whether it's Boston, Dallas or even L.A., any of them are going to need a solid project that's going to stir excitement. And urban renewal of some sort seems to be the only card left that the U.S. can play. Can't ride anymore on the "we've have everything in place & can host tomorrow" card. And we are far from a new-frontier being the only country on the planet having hosted the most Olympic Games than any other. So this seems the only way, in the immediate outlook, to a path of a successful U.S. summer bid.

For better or worse, most American cities couldn't play that card anyway because none are likely to have a main stadium or plans for a village (including LA). A lot of bid cities, particularly established world cities like London or Paris but still to a less extent a Dallas or a Philadelphia is going to have a certain amount of infrastructure in place. But I agree that whoever emerges as the best bid will likely have some sort of renewal effort going on and I'll be you they'll immediately be looking to London as the template for how to do it right.

Shouldn't they be green along with L.A., since they did send a letter to the USOC, too. ;)

Yea, I'm confused about that. running.. remind me again what the color designations are here? This list is a little confusing without it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything other than a simple proclamation from the mayor that they're interested. At least where we heard that from L.A., there's an organizing committee behind this. If "Philadelphia" is interested, who is behind that effort? Who is going to work on it? Nutter may be the figurehead for this, but he won't be leading the effort. Okay, so Nutter is offering up Philadelphia. If the USOC inquires and asks for more nuts and bolts, does Nutter know what or who they're going to point the USOC to? That's what I want to know at this point. Not much more than that. IMO there needs to be something a little more than "yea, we're interested, call us back." Again, that it's been 2 months since the USOC letter, that's the time Nutter should have used to figure that one out and perhaps offer that up to the USOC.

Hmmmmmm, this sounds like just the opposite of the Dallas front, doesn't it. Where we heard from this Tom Wood guy, or whatever his name is, but never heard anything from the mayor's office or any other city officials. And as of late, how has Dallas moved forward 2 months after the USOC letter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shouldn't they be green along with L.A., since they did send a letter to the USOC, too. ;)

This is true, I've forgotten my own criteria.

I think it was green for official letter to USOC, blue for positive response, yellow for no response and red for a decline. Have any of the other blue cities actually sent an actual letter to the USOC expressing interest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO there needs to be something a little more than "yea, we're interested, call us back." Again, that it's been 2 months since the USOC letter, that's the time Nutter should have used to figure that one out and perhaps offer that up to the USOC.

But "we're interested" is all the USOC have asked for. And I think:

"The Philadelphia region has enthusiastically embraced the prospect of bidding on and hosting a future Olympic Games, and we look forward with great anticipation to the opportunity to work with the USOC on this project," Mayor Nutter said in the letter.

"The City of Philadelphia shares the USOC's dedication to building a spectacular experience for the Olympic athletes, the Olympic family, and the watching world. We have had great success partnering with other organizations to host world-class events and we are committed to working cooperatively and effectively under the direction of the USOC in the months - and hopefully - years ahead."

is pretty unequivacle.

I really don't think there's any great rush for a bid committee yet until the USOC moves to the next step and says: "Okay, you're interested. What are you going to propose?".

It's fair enough to be cautious. And so much of what gets talked about here is speculation or musings. But I think a lot of you are expecting far too much locked in from potential US bidders at this point - the process there seems far ahead, at least publicly, than what we're seeing from any other countries at the moment.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should Charlotte be blue? :

Charlotte Mayor Anthony Fox told Eyewitness News "I've told you before that I think an Olympics could be in our future."

lol

I've read that, too. He's obviously delusional. They always naively keep bringing up the Atlanta example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Delusional or not, Charlotte will go blue! Should Dallas be green?

Los Angeles

Philadelphia

Dallas

San Diego

San Francisco

Boston

Miami

Seattle

Charlotte

Phoenix

Sacramento

Denver

Washington

Jacksonville

Orlando

Atlanta

Baltimore

St. Louis

Las Vegas

New York City

Columbus

Tulsa

Portland

Pittsburgh

Memphis

Austin

Houston

San Antonio

Nashville

Rochester

Minneapolis

Detroit

Chicago

San Jose

Indianapolis

Edited by runningrings
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmmmm, this sounds like just the opposite of the Dallas front, doesn't it. Where we heard from this Tom Wood guy, or whatever his name is, but never heard anything from the mayor's office or any other city officials. And as of late, how has Dallas moved forward 2 months after the USOC letter.

I was thinking earlier that it's exactly the opposite of the Dallas front and MATT Wood. Maybe it's just me and I'm in the minority here, but I think we're getting too wrapped up in the "official" response for the city. The missing component for Dallas is for the mayor or any city official to field a phone call from the USOC and when they ask who the city's representative is, they know who to point them to. As opposed to Philadelphia.. sure they're interested, but when the USOC calls back and says who is your representative, right now I don't know if they've got anything. And even if they do form an organizing committee, that group still needs to convince the mayor and the city to back them. Nutter says they're interested now, but they still need to see what sort of plan or committee can be put together. And then he'll have to decide whether or not he wants to continue to move forward. So at that point in the future, they'll be exactly where Dallas is now. How was Dallas moved forward after the USOC letter? How about all the months of groundwork they've already put in. The USOC sent that letter to gauge interest. They already knew there's interest from Dallas. They didn't need a letter to confirm that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...