Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes!! Finally! I'm so sick of Olympic Committees pandering to ridiculous ideas. Finally the USOC is showing some realistic action towards this fluff, and saving them a lot of time, emotion and energy.

Poland-Slovakia, take note.

Their response should've been: We can get around the IOC. We answer only to a higher Committee!!

What happens in Vegas...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes!! Finally! I'm so sick of Olympic Committees pandering to ridiculous ideas. Finally the USOC is showing some realistic action towards this fluff, and saving them a lot of time, emotion and energy.

Yeah, but I'm waiting for the real show! When the USOC finally has the balls to tells Tulsa to take a hike already & stop smokin' that bong! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMG_4660.jpeg

logo.png13FEMK195_First%20Olympics%20logos-2.png

BUY TICKETS

Colorado Springs, Colo. - Every two years, the most talented athletes from around the world prepare to follow their dreams and take their place in history at the Olympic Games. The only film about the London 2012 Olympic Games supported by the International Olympic Committee, "FIRST: The Story of the London 2012 Olympic Games" follows a dozen first-time Olympic athletes on their journey from their homes in different corners of the globe to meet their fate in London.

Scored by Sacha Puttnam and with a stunning contemporary soundtrack, "FIRST" captures the London Olympic Games as a recollection, evoking the emotion and magic experienced at the Olympic Games by the following athletes*:

  • Missy Franklin - USA - Women's Swimming
  • John Orozco - USA - Men's Artistic Gymnastics
  • Queen Underwood - USA - Women's Boxing Lightweight
  • Caroline Buchanan - Australia - Women's BMX
  • Chad le Clos - South Africa - Men's Swimming
  • David Rudisha - Kenya - Men's Athletics 800m
  • Katie Taylor - Ireland - Women's Boxing Lightweight
  • Laura Trott - Great Britain - Women's Track Cycling
  • Christophe Lemaitre - France -Men's Athletics 200m
  • Majlinda Kelmendi - Albania - Women's Judo
  • Heena Sidhu - India - Women's Shooting 10m Air Pistol
  • Qiu Bo - China - Men's Diving 10m Platform

"'FIRST' is a sports documentary with soul that follows these extraordinary athletes as they meet their fate in the swimming pool, boxing ring, gym and on the track," said Shelly Maxwell, executive vice president of NCM Fathom Events. "This exclusive in-theater event features stunning sports imagery from inside the London Olympic Park that will give audiences a new perspective on the dreams and determination that lead these athletes to the greatest sporting event in the world."

Edited by paul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of your comment about NYC's silence being "deafening" a month or more ago - or at least I think you mentioned that.

I'd be willing to bet NYC is going to jump into this. I'd be quite happy for either Philadelphia or NYC to be the US 2024 candidates - both for different reasons. I think if a city from another region of the US is selected, I might shift my mental support to Durban or Paris. I'm really hooked in the idea of a truly East Coast US Olympics.

What I said was that it was interesting we hadn't heard anything from New York either way. Because they're an Alpha city and a previous bidder, people will naturally be very curious about their response. The fact that they did not issue a "no way in hell" letter like Chicago, leaves the door open and may signal the fact that they are entertaining the possibility.

Personally, I've never been a huge fan of the idea of New York Olympics. It's fine by me if they don't bid. I wouldn't say the silence is "deafening", just "potentially pregnant."

The thing I find "interesting" about Blackmun's statement is that it proves what I have always said: some cities prefer to keep their bidding plans confidential in the early stages, therefore lack of media coverage is not necessarily proof of lack of interest or activity.

Quite a few people have scoffed at my assertion and wrongly characterized it as a belief in "secret bids." I am pleased that Blackmun made it clear that some cities prefer to begin quietly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SIGH, Blackmun's comments on NYC don't "prove" anything on your part. But if it did, then Chicago's blatant NO proved that many of us were right on that one when you "scoffed" at the rest of us for coming to that assertion.

Blackman merely mentions New York in passing. He also admits that they'd have to wait 'til AFTER the mayoral race there in November to know what the 'Big Apple's' intentions really are. None of that still equates to "wanting to keep their plans confidential". It's still nothing more than speculation since "we don't know".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackmun declined to identify the other cities considered as potential candidates, saying they preferred to keep it confidential for now.

AP

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_23113921/usoc-10-cities-interested-hosting-2024-games

FYI, Blackmun's statement proves that some cities do dialogue privately with the USOC without making public announcements. As you know, I have argued this to be the case for some time, but you have dismissed my opinion and misrepresented it as a belief in "secret bids." Blackmun's quote proves otherwise.

I don't know if New York is one of the cities keeping their interest confidential or not. It wouldn't surprise me if they were, but I have no idea. That is a separate question from the one addressed above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI, Blackmun's statement proves that some cities do dialogue privately with the USOC without making public announcements. As you know, I have argued this to be the case for some time, but you have dismissed my opinion and misrepresented it as a belief in "secret bids." Blackmun's quote proves otherwise.

Actually, if that's is the case, Blackmun's comments is making 'public announcements' then. If things are really meant to be kept 'confidential', then why even mention New York, even if it is just in passing. And if it was a question that was asked at some point, there are ways to dodge them without naming names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The United States needs to bid and win in hosting the Olympic Games in either 2024, 2026, or 2028. We have to keep in mind the USOC holds a large share of the IOC and NBC pays a record amount of cash to acquire broadcast rights. If interest starts to die down in the United States, the Olympic movement is in jeopardy. The Montreal 1976 and Moscow 1980 financial disasters almost forced the movement to end since no city wanted to host. The Americans also led a boycott at Moscow, hurting the revenue. With the retirements of Michael Phelps, Kobe Bryant, Michelle Kwan, Apolo Ohno; and Shaun White, Ryan Lochte, Usain Bolt looming, Olympic marketing could face a spiraling downfall after Rio 2016. If the IOC needs the financial support, hosting the Olympics on American soil will help spike interest and revenue.

If the United States bids for the 2026 Winter Olympics, preferably Denver or Salt Lake City, we should win the bid because it'll be the first Winter Games in North America since Vancouver 2010. It will also coincide with the 250th Independence Day Celebrations later in July. Salt Lake City still has most of their venues from 2002, so a little renovation and seating additions for each facility is really cost effective. Denver is a bigger metropolitan area, has many ski resorts in the outlying region, and has the infrastructure. Even though the Winter Olympics are more popular in the United States, the Summer Olympics is more marketable and financially successful after Los Angeles 1984 and Atlanta 1996.

To help pay for the games, both organizing committees relied on corporate sponsorship to build venues. McDonalds gave a huge helping hand in Los Angeles and Coca-Cola sponsored and supplied the beverages at Atlanta. Nike could sponsor basketball and track. Speedo can deal with swimming. Other companies such as Gatorade, Budweiser, Visa, Subway, Kellogg, McDonalds, Bank of America, and Reebok can get involved. This can help bring down the cost and its part of the American culture of capitalism. Many current Olympic athletes have endorsement contracts with these corporations.

In terms of security, the Department of Homeland Security should step in cover the costs. The 2002 Winter Olympics was considered an National Special Security Event. The British government covered the security in London. That should not be a problem.

With America's 250th Birthday looming, one of the major cities might host a Summer World's Fair/Exposition to mark the anniversary . Out of all the potential cities, the City of Philadelphia will probably host since the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution was adopted there. Even though the Summer Olympics in 2024 or 2028 is two years apart from the big birthday celebration, Philadelphia could be the most logical city to host the games. Rio hosted the 2007 Pan-American Games and had most of the venues and infrastructure built, increasing IOC appeal. The 1904 Olympics was given to Chicago, but was moved to St. Louis coincide with the World's Fair.

The United States should strongly consider to bid and host the Olympics in the next decade. It will help spur the movement for a new generation, help the IOC with financial need, and coincide with the birthday celebration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With America's 250th Birthday looming, one of the major cities might host a Summer World's Fair/Exposition to mark the anniversary . Out of all the potential cities, the City of Philadelphia will probably host since the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution was adopted there. Even though the Summer Olympics in 2024 or 2028 is two years apart from the big birthday celebration, Philadelphia could be the most logical city to host the games. Rio hosted the 2007 Pan-American Games and had most of the venues and infrastructure built, increasing IOC appeal. The 1904 Olympics was given to Chicago, but was moved to St. Louis coincide with the World's Fair.

dchang11 -- been there, done that. For 1976, the actual Bicentennial, the IOC gave the US the right to host the 12th WOG as a Bicentennial gift. But the 'gifted' city had a sudden case of imbecility and sent the gift back to the IOC. Philadelphia and Miami were supposed to host 2 concurrent World's Fairs: Philly would've been the Int'l one, and Miami was to host one for the Americas. NOTHING came of all 3 efforts. I'd be very surprised if anything turned out for the 250th birthday bash. Perhaps the XXVIth WOGs and World Cup 2026?? None of that will fall into place until 2018-19. Still another 6 years down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we're talking about Team USA - always one of the strongest teams at a games. The old generation will just make way for the next round of up-and-coming stars. Just as USA intrerest survived the departure of the likes of Spitz, Lewis, Mary-Lour Retton etc etc etc.

I put it on the same level as the argument: "The USA public will lose interest in the games and stop watching them unless they are hosted on home soil soon."

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh A french athlete retired yesterday they deserve the Olympics.

It just sounds dumb. A country doesn't deserve the Olympics because a few have retired.

Well, he did mention Usain Bolt along with several Americans.

Personally, I believe there will be new superstars to replace the old ones. Just because Mark Spitz, Nadia Comaneci, Michael Gross, Daley Thompson, Greg Lougainis, Li Ning, etc, etc, have retired doesn't mean that a fresh crop of athletes won't emerge. Missy Franklin anyone?

While I understand the concern of keeping American audiences engaged in the Olympics, I don't think it's worth any price. The current IOC has lost all sense of proportion when it comes to staging the Games. I think it would be best for the United States to stay out of all races until the focus returns to international sport rather than astronomical price tags, white elephants and total infrastructure overhauls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I said was that it was interesting we hadn't heard anything from New York either way. Because they're an Alpha city and a previous bidder, people will naturally be very curious about their response. The fact that they did not issue a "no way in hell" letter like Chicago, leaves the door open and may signal the fact that they are entertaining the possibility.

The thing I find "interesting" about Blackmun's statement is that it proves what I have always said: some cities prefer to keep their bidding plans confidential in the early stages, therefore lack of media coverage is not necessarily proof of lack of interest or activity.

Quite a few people have scoffed at my assertion and wrongly characterized it as a belief in "secret bids." I am pleased that Blackmun made it clear that some cities prefer to begin quietly.

Do you think if you keep saying that, maybe you can will it into being true? Like FYI brought up, Blackmun pretty much said it that it's likely to the due upcoming mayoral election that we haven't heard anything yet. That's actual evidence that there's NOT anything going on there than the "absence of evidence" you're trying to use to say there might be.

Once again, let's put into perspective what "keeping confidential" is and how media coverage works. You've said many times that it could be an advantage to keep your plans quiet (and use that as an explanation for what's going on.. mostly to suit your own arguments, of course). Well, look at Boston. We know for a fact there is work going on towards an Olympic bid. We know this because the media has reported it. This committee isn't trying to things confidential. They're just not speaking openly in the way that other cities are. And the cautionary tale is when the head of the committee spoke about their progress with the city and the mayor somewhat angrily replied how the discussions were mis-represented in the paper. IMO, that's probably why a city like Boston doesn't want the USOC to mention them.

So the flip side is Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Tulsa. Is there a reason they've come out as "interested" as opposed to other cities? That's their prerogative. But take those pronouncements in stride. Does anyone think the USOC is more likely to look for a bid from interested Tulsa than not-as-officially interested Boston? Again, we've heard more than a couple of nuggets of what's going on with them and their exploratory committee. That doesn't sound like wanting to begin quietly to me. They've simply chosen to tell the USOC not to mention them.

1 more thing that occurs to me. There's a committee in Boston where we know the name of the person in charge. Ditto in Dallas. We've seen the name of Tulsa's committee. If New York is entertaining the possibility, where's their committee? If the USOC is talking to New York (which we probably wouldn't hear about), it doesn't mean NYC is thinking about the Olympics. It could imply simply that the USOC is thinking about them. Until then, I'll continue to read into the silence coming from NYC the same what I have been.. that there's nothing doing with regard to a legitimate Olympic bid effort right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The United States needs to bid and win in hosting the Olympic Games in either 2024, 2026, or 2028. We have to keep in mind the USOC holds a large share of the IOC and NBC pays a record amount of cash to acquire broadcast rights. If interest starts to die down in the United States, the Olympic movement is in jeopardy. The Montreal 1976 and Moscow 1980 financial disasters almost forced the movement to end since no city wanted to host. The Americans also led a boycott at Moscow, hurting the revenue. With the retirements of Michael Phelps, Kobe Bryant, Michelle Kwan, Apolo Ohno; and Shaun White, Ryan Lochte, Usain Bolt looming, Olympic marketing could face a spiraling downfall after Rio 2016. If the IOC needs the financial support, hosting the Olympics on American soil will help spike interest and revenue.

Getting the Olympics back to the United States is not about need. For better or worse, NBC (not to mention their viewers) made it clear that the location of the Olympics doesn't affect their bottom line. At least that's what their 2014-2020 bid implies. I've always said that if the money coming from American television ever dries up that the IOC wouldn't be able to return here quick enough to try and line their pockets again. But that's a long ways off.

Sure there are some big names due to retire, but new ones will come along. Maybe not as dynamic and successful as a Phelps or a Bolt, but there's usually no lack of compelling storylines when it comes to an Olympics.

In terms of finding a host city though, it has to work for both parties involved. Los Angeles did that. Atlanta made it work even that it was the best pick of a weak field. Salt Lake made it work. Easier said than done to find a city with the resources and the desire to host an Olympics. And to offer up corporate sponsors.. be careful with that since it was an American city that is negatively remembered for doing just that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 more thing that occurs to me. There's a committee in Boston where we know the name of the person in charge. Ditto in Dallas. We've seen the name of Tulsa's committee. If New York is entertaining the possibility, where's their committee? If the USOC is talking to New York (which we probably wouldn't hear about), it doesn't mean NYC is thinking about the Olympics. It could imply simply that the USOC is thinking about them. Until then, I'll continue to read into the silence coming from NYC the same what I have been.. that there's nothing doing with regard to a legitimate Olympic bid effort right now.

Exactly, especially when you hear Blackmun describe New York as a "global, iconic city with a very diverse population & could do a fantastic job of hosting the Games". This seems to indicate that their preference would be to work with one of the country's top, premier cities, & are holding out for hope (like some others did) that one of them will come along. Reminds of the that New York Times article that came out right after the USOC letter was sent out: "the USOC 'trolling' for Olympic bids".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think if you keep saying that, maybe you can will it into being true? Like FYI brought up, Blackmun pretty much said it that it's likely to the due upcoming mayoral election that we haven't heard anything yet. That's actual evidence that there's NOT anything going on there than the "absence of evidence" you're trying to use to say there might be.

Once again, let's put into perspective what "keeping confidential" is and how media coverage works. You've said many times that it could be an advantage to keep your plans quiet (and use that as an explanation for what's going on.. mostly to suit your own arguments, of course). Well, look at Boston. We know for a fact there is work going on towards an Olympic bid. We know this because the media has reported it. This committee isn't trying to things confidential. They're just not speaking openly in the way that other cities are. And the cautionary tale is when the head of the committee spoke about their progress with the city and the mayor somewhat angrily replied how the discussions were mis-represented in the paper. IMO, that's probably why a city like Boston doesn't want the USOC to mention them.

So the flip side is Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Tulsa. Is there a reason they've come out as "interested" as opposed to other cities? That's their prerogative. But take those pronouncements in stride. Does anyone think the USOC is more likely to look for a bid from interested Tulsa than not-as-officially interested Boston? Again, we've heard more than a couple of nuggets of what's going on with them and their exploratory committee. That doesn't sound like wanting to begin quietly to me. They've simply chosen to tell the USOC not to mention them.

1 more thing that occurs to me. There's a committee in Boston where we know the name of the person in charge. Ditto in Dallas. We've seen the name of Tulsa's committee. If New York is entertaining the possibility, where's their committee? If the USOC is talking to New York (which we probably wouldn't hear about), it doesn't mean NYC is thinking about the Olympics. It could imply simply that the USOC is thinking about them. Until then, I'll continue to read into the silence coming from NYC the same what I have been.. that there's nothing doing with regard to a legitimate Olympic bid effort right now.

What am I supposedly "willing into being true?"

Blackmun said clearly that some cities prefer to keep their plans confidential at this stage -- something you have repeatedly told me is an impossibility. Remember all those posts where you claimed an intent to bid would manifest itself in media coverage and that no city would ever engage the USOC in a quiet, private conversation regarding an Olympic bid? According to Blackmun several cities are doing just that.

I dont know if NYC is one of those cities or not. I have said I wouldn't be surprised if they are, but I have no way of knowing.

Furthermore, I've always said I'm not excited about a New York bid and I don't care if they join the race or not.

Finally, I've changed my position on American bids and have posted several posts in the last month arguing that the USOC shouldn't bid for any Games, Summer or Winter, until the IOC straightens out its priorities.

So much as I appreciate your chastisement, I have to say that it makes no sense whatsoever. I think you argue first and read later, if at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What am I supposedly "willing into being true?"

Blackmun said clearly that some cities prefer to keep their plans confidential at this stage -- something you have repeatedly told me is an impossibility. Remember all those posts where you claimed an intent to bid would manifest itself in media coverage and that no city would ever engage the USOC in a quiet, private conversation regarding an Olympic bid? According to Blackmun several cities are doing just that.

I dont know if NYC is one of those cities or not. I have said I wouldn't be surprised if they are, but I have no way of knowing.

Now who is misquoting who. I never said it was impossible to keep plans confidential, but by the same token, I still don't understand your logic that it's an advantage for cities to operate that way. And I do remember those posts where I said an intent to bid would become apparent in media coverage. I stand by that statement.. because that's exactly what's happening. Have we not heard "noise" (as you like to put it) from Boston and from Tulsa and a couple of other cities that supposedly want to keep things "confidential"? That's what I've always meant about media coverage. In terms of other cities, we can't be sure who are among the 10 cities interested in the Olympics, but I'd say there's at least some evidence for cities like..

Miami among cities to assess 2024 Olympics interest

and

Charlotte gets letter gauging interest in hosting Summer Olympics

I can understand a situation where someone like Thomas Merino wouldn't want his city to get a mentioned by the USOC. He may want to keep Boston's intentions on bidding confidential, but the goings on of their committee are being followed and reported on. It's not like there's new news to report every day, but when we're talking about cities forming committees and drawing up official resolutions, chances are someone is going to pick up on that. And we're seeing that happen in many major cities. Where we are not seeing it is in New York. And IMO, that does say something rather to just mean nothing. At some point, especially after the Mayoral election in November, it's certainly possible someone in New York will step in and decide to pursue an Olympics on behalf of NYC. But as I've said before, unlike you I would be SHOCKED if we suddenly found out that there was serious Olympic planning going on with New York and that it was so quiet and confidential that we never caught wind of it. To that point..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, especially when you hear Blackmun describe New York as a "global, iconic city with a very diverse population & could do a fantastic job of hosting the Games". This seems to indicate that their preference would be to work with one of the country's top, premier cities, & are holding out for hope (like some others did) that one of them will come along. Reminds of the that New York Times article that came out right after the USOC letter was sent out: "the USOC 'trolling' for Olympic bids".

This was definitely the USOC trolling. If they had any real sense of what cities they might want to work with, they wouldn't have blasted out a letter to 35 cities the way they did. I'm sure they would love to have something from the big cities, especially New York. I'm sure they've inquired with NYC officials and will keep pressing them in hopes of something emerging. But the USOC wanting New York and talking to New York certainly doesn't necessarily imply any interest coming from New York. We here all know and appreciate what a large endeavor an Olympic bid is, let alone all the planning it takes just to get there. That's something a politician or businessman is not going to jump into so easily. Especially in the midst of an impending change in the mayor's office, it's simply bad timing that the Olympic bid cycle falls the way it does. The problem remains though.. what the USOC wants may not be what the USOC gets. It almost seems like a mixed message where Blackmun seems to be pleased with the response but you get the sense they're not as gung ho as they probably need to be. And as we get deeper and deeper into this process, it's going to be a tougher sell to for the USOC and a prospective city to consummate a bid and the odds of the USOC entering a candidate for 2024 still seem average at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but you get the sense they're not as gung ho as they probably need to be. And as we get deeper and deeper into this process, it's going to be a tougher sell to for the USOC and a prospective city to consummate a bid and the odds of the USOC entering a candidate for 2024 still seem average at best.

I never expected any more. The USOC, just having blinked first before the IOC, was still recovering from the two successive losses and the revenue deal, as well, to the IOC. Plus, the change in leadership from Ueberroth to Blackmun, had seemed not a very easy one for the USOC to me. .

Until they go for a Winter bid,I think the USOC should just keep doing what it does best in the Summer Games, take home a lot of hardware (and prevent China from taking the majority haul). But for now, even whether NYC runs or not, this is all just a get-ready-and-see scenario,,,on the odd chance that South Africa still WON'T bid. If they do, I think the USOC will cave in, wisely, I would add.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...