Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Then there's "South Africa," which seems to be code for Durban. I remain skeptical that the IOC would give the games to that particular South African city. Cape Town is swankier and one of the most naturally beautiful cities in the world. It's also better known worldwide, which adds a little comfort to ease the fear of the first African Olympics. With a few minor exceptions (Atlanta comes to mind-- no offense Atlantans-- and some of the early hosts before there was as much interest in the Games), the SOG have always been held in major world cities. Durban just doesn't seem to be on that level, if you ask me.

This has been discussed ad nauseum here already. But where Durban has more merit over Cape Town is that for starters, they already have the main center piece for the Olympics, which is the main stadium already built. They also have a sports precinct already in place to house a lot of the other sports. And they also have the ideal weather over Cape Town during the IOC's preferred Games-time period, which is July/Aug.

Not to mention, as some have pointed out before, Durban is more "African" than the more European-flavored Cape Town. And besides, it's not like Cape Town is THAT well-known through-out the world. Not like a London, New York or Paris. I'd compare Durban more to being South Africa's Barcelona than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we did not exactly impress the world in 1996 now did we? I also think that sense we got the biggest games of the twentieth century we should wait 36 years.

I think San Francisco or Dallas could win if created properly, but I'm open to whoever they pick. DC would not be bad either.

The US didn't impress the world? Not sure about that one. There were some definite problems, but it was a good games. And I'd submit that Atlanta's Opening Ceremony paved the way for the spectacles that followed in Sydney, Beijing, and London.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "we got the biggest games of the twentieth century" (the 100th anniversary?), but I'd say in response that the IOC rarely does what it "should" do. If it did, Europe wouldn't be hosting a games every 8-12 years. At some point, politics and commerce will bring the games back to the US and I think it will happen sooner rather than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tokyo likely won't hurt potential U.S. bid, Pound says

Kelly Whiteside, USA TODAY Sports 8:59 p.m. EDT September 7, 2013
1378601515000-AFP-522651873.jpg

(Photo: OZAN KOSE AFP/Getty Images)

SHARE 2 CONNECT 3 TWEETCOMMENTEMAILMORE

BUENOS AIRES -- It's unclear how Tokyo's win might impact the United States' chances of hosting the 2024 Summer Games. Conventional wisdom says that the IOC's Europe-centric members might be more inclined to vote in a European city following a Games in Asia.

However, Canadian IOC member Dick Pound doesn't think Tokyo's victory will hurt the USA's chances. "I wouldn't think so. What it does do is increase the likelihood that there will be another European bid. That said, if we are in kiss-and-make-up time with the U.S. …. Why (should it)?" Pound said Saturday.

Plans for an American bid in 2024 are already in the works, but not guaranteed. Washington D.C. announced its intentions last week. About 10 other cities are still considering a bid including Los Angeles, Boston and Philadelphia.

ELECTION: Tokyo will host 2020 Summer Games

The U.S. Olympic Committee plans to have a short list of two of three potential candidates by early next year. By the end of 2014, the USOC will be in a position to make a decision. The IOC will vote on the 2024 host city in 2017.

The USA hasn't hosted a Summer Games since Atlanta in 1996.

Saturday's vote guarantees two consecutive Olympics in Asia. Two years ago South Korean sports officials won the right to host the 2018 Winter Games in the city of Pyeongchang. The city beat out bids from Munich and Annecy, France.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US didn't impress the world? Not sure about that one. There were some definite problems, but it was a good games. And I'd submit that Atlanta's Opening Ceremony paved the way for the spectacles that followed in Sydney, Beijing, and London.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "we got the biggest games of the twentieth century" (the 100th anniversary?), but I'd say in response that the IOC rarely does what it "should" do. If it did, Europe wouldn't be hosting a games every 8-12 years. At some point, politics and commerce will bring the games back to the US and I think it will happen sooner rather than later.

There's no doubt that the games will come back, but Atlanta was in many ways the first modern games, but it was too big and flashy and is now looked down upon. Also in the last century the US hosted four summer games and three winter games that's more than any other nation, so I think we can wait two more rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US didn't impress the world? Not sure about that one. There were some definite problems, but it was a good games. And I'd submit that Atlanta's Opening Ceremony paved the way for the spectacles that followed in Sydney, Beijing, and London.

While I really don't like to jump on the Atlanta bashing bandwagon - I'd disagree with your opinion that Atlanta paved the way for Sydney, Athens and Beijing.

I think the US did inspire these ceremonies - but it was LA84, not Atlanta, that did this. Moreso - Moscow was the first Olympics that really amped it up to a level never seen before. LA improved on this, so did Seoul - but then Barcelona, Atlanta and Sydney were all of the same school of thought - 90s, post cold war mass pageantry.

Athens saw a shift that ushered in the era of Beijing and London.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been discussed ad nauseum here already. But where Durban has more merit over Cape Town is that for starters, they already have the main center piece for the Olympics, which is the main stadium already built. They also have a sports precinct already in place to house a lot of the other sports. And they also have the ideal weather over Cape Town during the IOC's preferred Games-time period, which is July/Aug.

Not to mention, as some have pointed out before, Durban is more "African" than the more European-flavored Cape Town. And besides, it's not like Cape Town is THAT well-known through-out the world. Not like a London, New York or Paris. I'd compare Durban more to being South Africa's Barcelona than anything else.

Sorry to make you rehash old points. I'm pretty new here. Your points about the logistics of Durban being better than those of Cape Town are well-taken. I've been to CT in June-July and the weather is indeed chilly and rainy, not to mention that the city is very compact with little room for growth in the city center. But at some point, I just think that this is a cultural event and you want a city that excites folks. If Durban gets the games, it will purely be for the reason that the IOC wants an African games and Durban was the easiest city on the continent to host it in. Cape Town, if they could swing it, is scenic, well-developed, and (trust me) still an African city.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Durban gets the games, it will purely be for the reason that the IOC wants an African games and Durban was the easiest city on the continent to host it in.

Precisely. I've always said that the first-ever Games in Africa would be more about bringing the Olympics to the last continent that's yet to host them than being more about some beauty pagent. I mean, how "pretty" was Beijing before the got the Games? It wasn't. The Chinese had to massively clean up the capital in order to make it presentable. And it was even suggested before their 2008 bid, that they should try their luck the next time around with more cosmopolitan, & less baggage Shanghai. But that obviously didn't get anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tokyo likely won't hurt potential U.S. bid, Pound says

Kelly Whiteside, USA TODAY Sports 8:59 p.m. EDT September 7, 2013
1378601515000-AFP-522651873.jpg

(Photo: OZAN KOSE AFP/Getty Images)

SHARE 2 CONNECT 3 TWEETCOMMENTEMAILMORE

BUENOS AIRES -- It's unclear how Tokyo's win might impact the United States' chances of hosting the 2024 Summer Games. Conventional wisdom says that the IOC's Europe-centric members might be more inclined to vote in a European city following a Games in Asia.

However, Canadian IOC member Dick Pound doesn't think Tokyo's victory will hurt the USA's chances. "I wouldn't think so. What it does do is increase the likelihood that there will be another European bid. That said, if we are in kiss-and-make-up time with the U.S. …. Why (should it)?" Pound said Saturday.

Plans for an American bid in 2024 are already in the works, but not guaranteed. Washington D.C. announced its intentions last week. About 10 other cities are still considering a bid including Los Angeles, Boston and Philadelphia.

ELECTION: Tokyo will host 2020 Summer Games

The U.S. Olympic Committee plans to have a short list of two of three potential candidates by early next year. By the end of 2014, the USOC will be in a position to make a decision. The IOC will vote on the 2024 host city in 2017.

The USA hasn't hosted a Summer Games since Atlanta in 1996.

Saturday's vote guarantees two consecutive Olympics in Asia. Two years ago South Korean sports officials won the right to host the 2018 Winter Games in the city of Pyeongchang. The city beat out bids from Munich and Annecy, France.

Well, yeah. What else is he gonna say. "No, the U.S. has very, very slim chances now that the door has become wide open today for Europe 2024. They want as many bidders as possible, so they don't have another drab cherry-picking scenario like 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that Tokyo is a reality, I'd like to see the US sit 2024 out - and that comes from a place of wanting to see an American Olympics in the next 15 years. I think 2028 or 32 is a far more realistic option.

Once Europe is out of the IOC's system, and the inevitable Africa - the USA would have its most commanding and genuine claim to the Olympics the 1970s. The 2018/2020 Asia back to back would favour the US to.

You might have to wait a bit longer, but I think it might be worth waiting for - particularly if it means more time to cultivate a substantial and solid bid from the likes of Chicago or New York City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Precisely. I've always said that the first-ever Games in Africa would be more about bringing the Olympics to the last continent that's yet to host them than being more about some beauty pagent. I mean, how "pretty" was Beijing before the got the Games? It wasn't. The Chinese had to massively clean up the capital in order to make it presentable. And it was even suggested before their 2008 bid, that they should try their luck the next time around with more cosmopolitan, & less baggage Shanghai. But that obviously didn't get anywhere.

Beijing didn't have to be pretty, it's a pretty major capital. Same with Tokyo. Durban has its pluses from a logistical standpoint, like you said moreso than Cape Town, but the name matters too. As long as Cape Town is representative of Africa (and Geographer says it is), they should go with Cape Town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US didn't impress the world? Not sure about that one. There were some definite problems, but it was a good games. And I'd submit that Atlanta's Opening Ceremony paved the way for the spectacles that followed in Sydney, Beijing, and London.

I'm also not sure what you mean by "we got the biggest games of the twentieth century" (the 100th anniversary?), but I'd say in response that the IOC rarely does what it "should" do. If it did, Europe wouldn't be hosting a games every 8-12 years. At some point, politics and commerce will bring the games back to the US and I think it will happen sooner rather than later.

I've said for awhile that if the TV money coming out of the United States ever dried up, the IOC would be begging the USOC to come back here. Only problem.. that's the exact opposite of what happened 2 years ago. NBC and Comcast stupidly over-bid for a 2nd time and repeated their own unfortunate history. Basically the message that got sent was that the value of the Olympics to the United States is still trending upward despite no Olympics on American soil coming up in the near future.

As to the future.. you mentioned about the USOC finding a city where they could use a sponsor to strengthen their cause. Well, as much as that worked for Atlanta with Coca-Cola, they were in a race with less than stellar competition. Chances are that's not going to be the case in 2024 or 2028. As iffy as some of the Euro candidates seem, you could just as easily see a bunch of them enter the field, plus a South Africa entry. At that point, how do the USOC's chances look? The domestic field for the `96 Olympics, having come just 12 years after LA, wasn't a field of heavyweights. So if the USOC can't get a New York or a Chicago on board again, that's a problem.

In short, the United States needs a compelling candidate to bid with. New York lacked technical prowess for the 2012 vote and never had a shot. Chicago had to deal with political issues with the USOC and unfortunately may have gotten scared off. It's 1 of the big ongoing arguments here.. can any city beyond the big 4 of New York, Chicago, LA, and SF get it done? Is a Dallas or a Boston or a Washington DC going to be able to compete with what they're up against? And if not, is it enough that sponsors want a games back in the United States to accept less than the best this country has to offer. I think that's a very tall order for politics and commerce to overcome that.

Beijing didn't have to be pretty, it's a pretty major capital. Same with Tokyo. Durban has its pluses from a logistical standpoint, like you said moreso than Cape Town, but the name matters too. As long as Cape Town is representative of Africa (and Geographer says it is), they should go with Cape Town.

But it's everything else that FYI brought up that makes Durban the more logical choice. We all know how much the IOC wants to bring an Olympics to Africa, and yea we see what other cities of the world are getting selected as host. But if all Cape Town's biggest plus is their name, I'm not sure that's a big enough trump card over Durban which is closer to what the IOC is looking for in terms of logistics. Just like in the United States, SASCOC needs to determine which city of theirs is best suited for an Olympic bid. All things considered, I think that city is Durban, even if it's not the most representative city the country has to offer, especially given what the IOC will be looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from the weather, I don't see anything else that Durban has that Cape Town couldn't have. And if the pull to go to Africa is so strong, I don't see weather stopping the IOC from going to Africa, the same way you don't see lack of international appeal in Durban stopping the IOC from going to Africa. It will be interesting to see this all play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The weather is just ONE part of the equation. With all the talk that South Africa should be more "responsible" than focusing on a Games, I don't see why building even more sets of venues, in a country that should be more pragmatic when going after this, really helps their cause in the end.

I think it was runningrings that said, that if South Africa or Turkey were presenting a more "austerity"-type Games plan like Madrid was, then that would make more sense & be more appealing in their cases. Since I believe the IOC will view South Africa capabilities first before they would the "glamor factor". So I fail to see how sprouting up yet another set of unneeded venues in another city, when Durban already has a lot of what is needed is being "responsible" in a country that really shouldn't be overspending in such luxury extravanganzas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then perhaps they should wait for a more appropriate time to bid. They'll get it eventually. Why not showcase your country (or even continent) with your best looking and most marketable city? Cape Town is one of the most beautiful cities in the world, up there with Rio, Sydney or Vancouver. What a great image of Africa to portray to the rest of the world. Who cares if you have to wait another 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, the IOC doesn't wanna wait much longer. Look at how many senior IOC members, & some of the current presidential candidates are using "Africa" in their campaign. And I think ANY African Games could be "marketable". Look how "unattractive" Gangneung is. And look at how much of an industrial city Barcelona was before their grand transformation. I think that Durban has that same type of potential for South Africa.

Not every Games has to be about the "Alpha" cities & the "glamor" capitals. It just has to be viable. Especially on the last continent remaining. I can just imagine the "emotional" final-presentation of a Durban candidacy. It's what won it for PyeongChang 2018, & it's what won it for Tokyo 2020 yesterday afternoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, Durban exemplifies the ideals of the "Rainbow Nation" more than any of their others as well.


Durban would also offer an Indian Ocean Olympics - Cape Town is on the Atlantic.

While it might seem like a strange thing to point out - I think its an interesting idea. The Indian Ocean is the heart of the forgotten world.

What would the other contenders be. Perth or Mumbai?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, Durban exemplifies the ideals of the "Rainbow Nation" more than any of their others as well.

What would the other contenders be. Perth or Mumbai?

Mumbai perhaps in 50 years if Delhi doesn't take it first.

Perf- lol. Australia is East Coast or nothing. ;)

But I thought it could be something interesting to mention in a Durban bid- aside from the weight of it being Africa- reflecting on the idea of the Olympics finally on the shores of the Indian Ocean really brings home the idea of the Games somewhere new and largely overlooked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, I'd rather see the USOC go for a Winter Olympics in 2026. 2032 is likely the earliest realistic shot a U.S. city is going to have at a SOGs whether it's Los Angeles, New York, Washington. As mentioned, the door for Europe is wide open in 2024 especially with Rome and Paris. As for 2028, I'd say it's South Africa all the way if they decide to go for it. If South Africa goes for 2024 I think if they do win then you can pencil in 2028 for Europe. If Europe wins 2024 then it's all but South Africa in 2028. The only hope any U.S. bid has is if South Africa gets cold feet and decides not to bid for either 2024 or 2028.

That leaves 2032.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The USOC certainly has some big decisions to make in the next two years about its strategy for the 2020s. Do they continue to pursue the Summer Games even though 2024 (and 2028) seems very unlikely, or do they try to cultivate a strong city to bid for the 2026 Winter Games, which they could probably have on a silver platter with any decent bid? I just don't get the sense that the IOC is all that eager to return to the U.S. for the Summer Games unless New York were to put up a strong bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...