Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

if everyone in this thread just agrees to agree with you will you please stop? i'm not sure how many more pages of you posting the exact same post on the damn bus drivers getting lost we can take. i

Why do you like to repeat yourself multiple times? Its very annoying.

In sum....

This is a very rational and well-thought out post. Unfortunately, I don't believe the IOC takes the same view.

First, many feel that North America has already hosted a disproportionate number of Games. The issue is that there are very few countries in North America capable of hosting so it feels like the US and Canada get more than their fair share in comparison to Europe.

Second, many view North and South America as one continent. Therefore, they consider Rio to fulfill the unofficial American quota. This doesn't seem right at all to those of us who actually live here, but it is one way the IOC can reduce the frequency of American Games. In response, I would ask how Europe would feel if we considered them one continent with Africa, but I digress. According to IOC math, the Americas host in 2010 and 2016. Europe hosts in 2012 and 2014. Therefore, one could argue that Europe is first in line for Summer Games.

Third, two-thirds of the IOC is from Europe. They have never asked Europe to go more than two cycles (12 years) without hosting Summer Games. It is unlikely that they would do so now, particularly considering the fact that many still resist the idea of Games in the United States. If they break this 12-year pattern, they will only do so for a solid African bid.

Fourth and finally, there is enormous desire to see the Games in Africa. Whenever Africa submits a workable plan, it will host, irrespective of the quality of the competition. This is my firm view, but there are some who disagree. There are three primary continents that rotate hosting duties: North America, Europe and Asia. Then there are those places that do not fall easily into the above categories and have fewer capable hosts: Oceania, South America, the Middle East, Africa. Whichever one of the "big three" can't beat Africa to the punch, will have to wait until after African Games to host. If the IOC had a wider selection of choices for 2020, I think it is unlikely they would've returned to Asia quite so soon. However, Tokyo's bid turned out to be perfectly timed. That leaves North America and Europe to duke it out because both know Africa is waiting in the wings. For the reasons already mentioned, I believe North America is almost certain to lose that battle.

I still think the likely scenario is:

2022 Europe

2024 Europe

2026 North America (USA)

2028 Africa

2030 Europe or Asia (Harbin?)

2032 North America (Canada)

I believe the above progression would be quite agreeable to the IOC. As an American, it is not agreeable at all to me. The only way to stop this from happening is for the US to refrain from bidding for Winter Games. I am not at all convinced the USOC has enough foresight or self-restraint to implement such a strategy,

The US has been an extremely strong partner for the IOC and has helped the Olympic movement to grow into what it is. If the above pattern holds true, then the US will probably not host Summer Games again until the 40's. A fifty-year gap between Summer hostings is far too long for such an important partner to wait. I believe it will damage the power of the Olympic movement in the US, but I also believe some of the IOC may actually desire this. It may well, however, also dampen the power of the Olympic movement worldwide.

Thanks for the response Athensfan. I guess it doesn't make sense due to the politics. Still, if the IOC wants to increase their revenue, especially during this economic downturn, they need to elect a US host. The US TV rights are the IOC's single greatest revenue source. Also, we Americans have short attention spans and need a games to reinvigorate us. The only thing keeping us interested as of know are our athletes, mainly Phelps. I am not sure it would be a good thing, as others have stated, if the US have to wait into the 30's or even 40's. (I know I am having a hard time being patient!) I don't expect or want a US games often but I think that after nearly 30 years its time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was looking for US bidding cities and Pierre mentioned Baton Rouge with Tulsa

1. What the hell is Baton Rouge? A red stick?

2. Why would someone be so stupid to think a city with a population of god knows what could host the games

3. Mavis needs to be taken out back and shot, because I am really thinking he made this post on another forum I read: Urban Planet, here is the post;

" For the past few weeks a question has been bugging me to the point of joining this board and that is could our city host an event so large named the Olympics and Paralympics. Before reading on this is just a suggestion of what the city may do in order to make this a possibility.

Fall 2013: Apple Announces a new Headquarters for Baton Rouge

Fall 2013: Kip Holden Announces the re-building of Government Street

Spring 2014: Microsoft also announces a new headquarters to be located within city limits

Spring 2014: Downtown's first David and Busters in announced

Spring/Summer 2014: Acadian Village is complete

Summer 2014: American Girl announces a new flagship store for Acadian Village

Summer 2014: more downtown development is announced

Fall 2014: Mayor announces the new commuter line linking BR, Hammond, and NOLA

Early 2015: Governor announces a small High Speed system linking Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, Houston, Lake Charles, Lafayette, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans.

Spring 2015: California, New Mexico, and Arizona announce plans to link their high speed system with Louisiana and Texas's

Summer 2015: Mayor announces Baton Rouges bid for the 2028 Olympics in the following press release:

v8kn7m.jpg

In the past few years Baton Rouge's growth and development has been recognized on a national and global stage. It is our intention to continue this growth in the 2028 Olympics. The Olympics are an important time for the world to come together and celebrate and by having our city contribute to that would be a great duty. In the next few years we will begin more development in order to meet the requirements for an Olympic host city. In the hope of our city receiving this great task we have created rough sketches of what our celebration may look like.

The 2028 Olympics would be centered on the LSU Campus, our sport's program will expand and currently used facility's will be renovated to create a unique, traditional, and modern look for 2028. New buildings that will be constructed include the Olympic Village; A new vertical neighbor hood of twenty twelve story towers, 8 training facility's, and 8 dinning rooms. Various other building will be revealed and announced at a latter date. For the Opening and Closing Ceremony Tiger Stadium will be re-modeled. A Temporary track and ceremony stage will be placed over the field and an extra 50,000 seats will be added to increase the stadiums capacity. Below is early concept of what it may look like:

jubgc7.png

To enhance the city's look, feel, and transportation the Mississippi River Bridge will be re-built with the new design featured below:

3343rzr.png

In the future more information will be released.

That's all I can think of but please answer the question: Could we do it?"

It received a somewhat mediocre response, latter in the thread he said he would join this board. I think we found BR2028's real identity. And he is not a 20 year old from Texas. He is probably younger then me (I'm 15) and from Baton Rouge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was looking for US bidding cities and Pierre mentioned Baton Rouge with Tulsa

1. What the hell is Baton Rouge? A red stick?

2. Why would someone be so stupid to think a city with a population of god knows what could host the games

3. Mavis needs to be taken out back and shot, because I am really thinking he made this post on another forum I read: Urban Planet, here is the post;

" For the past few weeks a question has been bugging me to the point of joining this board and that is could our city host an event so large named the Olympics and Paralympics. Before reading on this is just a suggestion of what the city may do in order to make this a possibility.

Fall 2013: Apple Announces a new Headquarters for Baton Rouge

Fall 2013: Kip Holden Announces the re-building of Government Street

Spring 2014: Microsoft also announces a new headquarters to be located within city limits

Spring 2014: Downtown's first David and Busters in announced

Spring/Summer 2014: Acadian Village is complete

Summer 2014: American Girl announces a new flagship store for Acadian Village

Summer 2014: more downtown development is announced

Fall 2014: Mayor announces the new commuter line linking BR, Hammond, and NOLA

Early 2015: Governor announces a small High Speed system linking Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, Houston, Lake Charles, Lafayette, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans.

Spring 2015: California, New Mexico, and Arizona announce plans to link their high speed system with Louisiana and Texas's

Summer 2015: Mayor announces Baton Rouges bid for the 2028 Olympics in the following press release:

v8kn7m.jpg

In the past few years Baton Rouge's growth and development has been recognized on a national and global stage. It is our intention to continue this growth in the 2028 Olympics. The Olympics are an important time for the world to come together and celebrate and by having our city contribute to that would be a great duty. In the next few years we will begin more development in order to meet the requirements for an Olympic host city. In the hope of our city receiving this great task we have created rough sketches of what our celebration may look like.

The 2028 Olympics would be centered on the LSU Campus, our sport's program will expand and currently used facility's will be renovated to create a unique, traditional, and modern look for 2028. New buildings that will be constructed include the Olympic Village; A new vertical neighbor hood of twenty twelve story towers, 8 training facility's, and 8 dinning rooms. Various other building will be revealed and announced at a latter date. For the Opening and Closing Ceremony Tiger Stadium will be re-modeled. A Temporary track and ceremony stage will be placed over the field and an extra 50,000 seats will be added to increase the stadiums capacity. Below is early concept of what it may look like:

jubgc7.png

To enhance the city's look, feel, and transportation the Mississippi River Bridge will be re-built with the new design featured below:

3343rzr.png

In the future more information will be released.

That's all I can think of but please answer the question: Could we do it?"

It received a somewhat mediocre response, latter in the thread he said he would join this board. I think we found BR2028's real identity. And he is not a 20 year old from Texas. He is probably younger then me (I'm 15) and from Baton Rouge.

The ironic thing is many cities actually think they could pull that bid off. About a year ago someone on this site who shall remain nameless mentioned Columbus and I think Louisville as possible cities to host the games. He used the same bid plan with the main football stadium, new dorms, etc. I'm guessing you weren't being serious, but no, it wouldn't work.

BTW, nice editing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response Athensfan. I guess it doesn't make sense due to the politics. Still, if the IOC wants to increase their revenue, especially during this economic downturn, they need to elect a US host. The US TV rights are the IOC's single greatest revenue source. Also, we Americans have short attention spans and need a games to reinvigorate us. The only thing keeping us interested as of know are our athletes, mainly Phelps. I am not sure it would be a good thing, as others have stated, if the US have to wait into the 30's or even 40's. (I know I am having a hard time being patient!) I don't expect or want a US games often but I think that after nearly 30 years its time.

I feel like this is the type of thinking that gives Americans a bad name. The idea that the IOC needs to put an Olympics in the United States because without it, us Americans and our short attention spans will lose interest in the Olympics. Or that the IOC is going to be in trouble if there's no Olympics here in the not so distant future. I've made the point before that the IOC will start to sweat if the television money from the United States ever starts to dry up. But that hasn't happened yet..

Look at how much interest there was in the London Olympics. The ratings were outstanding compared to virtually any other event on American television other than football. This was for an Olympics that everyone said was in a bad timezone and had a lot of the same storylines as the previous Olympics. And sure Phelps will be gone come Rio, but it's not like he's the only athlete out there that draws folks to the Olympics. Maybe there won't be a new mega-talent to emerge before the next Olympics, but either way, I don't think a lack of an American Olympics is hurting the IOC. Yet.

Our time will come, even though it may still be a long ways off. Interest in the Olympics hasn't exactly been waning since Salt Lake `02. No reason to think that's going to change anytime soon. And when the United States does land another Olympics, especially a Summer Olympics, let's hope it's the type of once-in-a-generation event the Olympics is supposed to be for the host country.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like this is the type of thinking that gives Americans a bad name. The idea that the IOC needs to put an Olympics in the United States because without it, us Americans and our short attention spans will lose interest in the Olympics. Or that the IOC is going to be in trouble if there's no Olympics here in the not so distant future. I've made the point before that the IOC will start to sweat if the television money from the United States ever starts to dry up. But that hasn't happened yet..

Look at how much interest there was in the London Olympics. The ratings were outstanding compared to virtually any other event on American television other than football. This was for an Olympics that everyone said was in a bad timezone and had a lot of the same storylines as the previous Olympics. And sure Phelps will be gone come Rio, but it's not like he's the only athlete out there that draws folks to the Olympics. Maybe there won't be a new mega-talent to emerge before the next Olympics, but either way, I don't think a lack of an American Olympics is hurting the IOC. Yet.

Our time will come, even though it may still be a long ways off. Interest in the Olympics hasn't exactly been waning since Salt Lake `02. No reason to think that's going to change anytime soon. And when the United States does land another Olympics, especially a Summer Olympics, let's hope it's the type of once-in-a-generation event the Olympics is supposed to be for the host country.

Don't forget Gabby Douglas and that other swimmer.

The ironic thing is many cities actually think they could pull that bid off. About a year ago someone on this site who shall remain nameless mentioned Columbus and I think Louisville as possible cities to host the games. He used the same bid plan with the main football stadium, new dorms, etc. I'm guessing you weren't being serious, but no, it wouldn't work.

BTW, nice editing

This wasn't my doing but by some kid named "Timelordnerd" on Urban Planet.

As to his question would it work- no. The games require long term investment and national support and I have a hard time believing the nation would back a Baton Rouge bid. The only way it could happen is if it became a city like Houston and used the games like Barcelona did to re-invent the city. The only Louisiana bid that could domestically bid is New Orleans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like this is the type of thinking that gives Americans a bad name. The idea that the IOC needs to put an Olympics in the United States because without it, us Americans and our short attention spans will lose interest in the Olympics. Or that the IOC is going to be in trouble if there's no Olympics here in the not so distant future. I've made the point before that the IOC will start to sweat if the television money from the United States ever starts to dry up. But that hasn't happened yet..

Look at how much interest there was in the London Olympics. The ratings were outstanding compared to virtually any other event on American television other than football. This was for an Olympics that everyone said was in a bad timezone and had a lot of the same storylines as the previous Olympics. And sure Phelps will be gone come Rio, but it's not like he's the only athlete out there that draws folks to the Olympics. Maybe there won't be a new mega-talent to emerge before the next Olympics, but either way, I don't think a lack of an American Olympics is hurting the IOC. Yet.

Our time will come, even though it may still be a long ways off. Interest in the Olympics hasn't exactly been waning since Salt Lake `02. No reason to think that's going to change anytime soon. And when the United States does land another Olympics, especially a Summer Olympics, let's hope it's the type of once-in-a-generation event the Olympics is supposed to be for the host country.

First, this is not an American problem. All countries, whether they want to admit it or not are the same way. It's human nature. Everyone has short attention spans. We all here talk about how we get bored or how we want the next segment needs to start when watching the ceremonies. The US is just in a position where it is easy to call out. I should have written it as 'should' instead of 'need,' however.

I don't disagree with you either. But it's hard to see in the future what is going to happen. The IOC has there money worth through 2020, but if, for some reason, viewership declines in 2016 and even into 2020, maybe the IOC needs to consider an American bid for 2024 or 2028. It operates as a capitalist organization, they want the most money they can get. I wouldn't expect the viewership to decrease, but it could.

And yes, our time will come. There is only so many places you go. I was just a little jealous of, and excited for Tokyo. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like this is the type of thinking that gives Americans a bad name. The idea that the IOC needs to put an Olympics in the United States because without it, us Americans and our short attention spans will lose interest in the Olympics. Or that the IOC is going to be in trouble if there's no Olympics here in the not so distant future. I've made the point before that the IOC will start to sweat if the television money from the United States ever starts to dry up. But that hasn't happened yet..

Look at how much interest there was in the London Olympics. The ratings were outstanding compared to virtually any other event on American television other than football. This was for an Olympics that everyone said was in a bad timezone and had a lot of the same storylines as the previous Olympics. And sure Phelps will be gone come Rio, but it's not like he's the only athlete out there that draws folks to the Olympics. Maybe there won't be a new mega-talent to emerge before the next Olympics, but either way, I don't think a lack of an American Olympics is hurting the IOC. Yet.

Our time will come, even though it may still be a long ways off. Interest in the Olympics hasn't exactly been waning since Salt Lake `02. No reason to think that's going to change anytime soon. And when the United States does land another Olympics, especially a Summer Olympics, let's hope it's the type of once-in-a-generation event the Olympics is supposed to be for the host country.

Of course Americans will get excited about Olympics on foreign soil, but will they remain equally excited decades down the road if the children of the digital age have never seen Summer Olympics in their own country? If the US is asked to wait til the 40s, I believe you will see a fall off in viewership and sponsorship as well as athletic performance. I wouldn't expect that fall off to show up for several years yet.

This is not an America "needs" the Games argument. Not is it any sort of "threat". It's a simple statement about the likely cause and effect relationship of what will happen to one of the IOC's most important partners if they wait 50 years or more between Summer Games. If the IOC is happy to accept the risks/results of their decisions, they should move forward without worry. It appears likely to me that they will do just that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course Americans will get excited about Olympics on foreign soil, but will they remain equally excited decades down the road if the children of the digital age have never seen Summer Olympics in their own country? If the US is asked to wait til the 40s, I believe you will see a fall off in viewership and sponsorship as well as athletic performance. I wouldn't expect that fall off to show up for several years yet.

This is not an America "needs" the Games argument. Not is it any sort of "threat". It's a simple statement about the likely cause and effect relationship of what will happen to one of the IOC's most important partners if they wait 50 years or more between Summer Games. If the IOC is happy to accept the risks/results of their decisions, they should move forward without worry. It appears likely to me that they will do just that.

I think the IOC understands this. Could a 2024 bid win so they can get us out of the way and continue with Europe and Africa?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed! I have to say though that the lack of mega US cities interested in 2024 might be a problem especially if Paris joins the race.

The only "mega city" to officially state it has no interest in 2024 is Chicago. Negative suppositions about the other "mega cities" are unsubstantiated -- at least for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this has been posted here yet, but at the risk of repetition:

USOC chairman: ‘Not a long list’ of US cities that could bid for 2024 Games

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina — The newest American member of the IOC believes there are only a few U.S. cities that could realistically contend for the 2024 Olympics if the country decides to move forward with a bid next year.

“I think it’s got to be a city that is compelling to people around the world, that resonates with all of the IOC membership,” U.S. Olympic Committee chairman Larry Probst said Tuesday. “That’s not a long list of cities, realistically.”

Moments after being sworn in as a member of the International Olympic Committee, Probst said the issue will be discussed by the USOC at its meetings in December and a timetable on the process to select the possible bid city could be created.

In addition to Probst’s election, the U.S. received a big boost when Anita DeFrantz was elevated to the IOC’s policy-making executive board.

DeFrantz will work closely with new IOC President Thomas Bach, who succeeds Jacques Rogge. Bach said he encouraged a possible U.S. bid.

Probst said he welcomed Bach’s “enthusiasm for a bid from the United States,” but said the USOC needs to be “very thoughtful” about whether to bid.

“First step is we have to decide that we are going to move forward and we have to go through a process of which city gives us the best chance,” he said.

The U.S. hasn’t held the Summer Games since Atlanta in 1996 and last hosted the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City in 2002. Washington, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Tulsa, Oklahoma, are some of the cities which have expressed interest in 2024.

San Diego wants to host a cross-border Olympics with Mexican neighbor Tijuana. Other potential 2024 contenders from around the world include Paris, Rome, and Doha, Qatar.

Probst said the USOC board will be updated about the level of interest received from the various cities.

“If we decide to move forward, we will start putting together specific steps and a specific timetable to engage with the various cities that might be interested and keep moving forward from there,” he said.

Probst said that in addition to a strong technical bid and a powerful bid leader, several other elements must have to be in place for a successful bid. Chicago bid for the 2016 Games but was eliminated in the first round of voting, losing to Madrid and eventual winner Rio de Janeiro. New York mounted a failed bid for the 2012 Games, which went to London.

“We are going to make sure we can check all those boxes if we decide we can move forward,” Probst said. “We have to put ourselves in the best possible position to win the bid. And realistically, that’s not a huge number of cities.”

Probst added that he doesn’t think the selection of Tokyo for the 2020 Games should play a significant role on a possible U.S. bid.

“I don’t think it changes the calculation,” he said.

Probst was elected to the IOC by a vote of 71-20, becoming the fourth U.S. member on the Swiss-based body. The chairman of video game publisher Electronic Arts Inc. joins DeFrantz, Jim Easton and Angela Ruggiero as IOC delegates.

DeFrantz won a three-candidate race for a spot on the executive board. The U.S. has been without a voice on the board since Easton lost his seat in February 2006.

“Having another member in the Olympic family, in the IOC, and having Anita on the executive board, I think it’s a big deal and it’s good news for the USOC and the United States,” Probst said.

On a separate issue, Probst said the USOC will defer to the IOC on how to deal with athletes who might wear rainbow pins or make other gestures in opposition to Russia’s anti-gay law during February’s Winter Games in Sochi.

The Olympic Charter states “no kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”

“That’s an IOC call and we will do everything to comply with IOC regulations and the way that they intend to handle any protest or demonstration,” Probst said. “We will conform to what the IOC decides to do.”

Washington Post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Rols. Hadn't seen that.

I wonder if Probst really believes that Tokyo "doesn't change the calculation" or if he's just playing politics. Would be curious to know.

As for the relatively short list of viable cities, I think we've all been saying that for years.

I'm glad to hear they're looking for not only the right image, but the right leadership.

It does appear that the USOC is getting their ducks in a row very deliberately: revenue deal, consistent leadership, additional IOC representation and influence. It would be nice if it translated into hosting an Olympic Games, but of course it's all in the timing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After Tokyo, I'm getting a strong feeling the US may just sit 2024 out - and I think it may be wise.

The silver lining is that Chicago may be inspired by its fellow 2016 rivals recent success - although it could be deterred by Madrid's.

If Africa and Europe is going for 2024, it shouldn't jump in. Two compelling, legit rivals is too much to counter. Take on the losing continent in 2028. Even then, if a loss, go on for 2032.

One thing I'd be willing to bet a huge amount on: South Africa, a European and a North American city will have hosted by 2032.

Frankly - I'd love a Durban, Paris and Chicago run. It would be great fun.


Perhaps Istanbul - finally - in 2036.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't think the US can win till a crisis happens or just a lucky break of some sort, no one in the IOC seems ready to do the US any favors in the foreseeable future especially now that they got our revenue.

Edited by paul
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Olympics will be in the U.S in 2024, It will have been 20 Years since we hosted the Olympics by then.

I think Washington D.C would be a good choice for the 2024 Summer Olympics and I would support them if they do bid for it (I will bid for any U.S city that does). I think it about time that our Nation Capital bidded for the Olympjcs. A lot of cities who were the national capital of their home country have either hosted tne Olympics or have bidded for it. The last three Host Cities of the Summer Olympics (Athens. Beijing, London) were all the capital of their host nation and Tokyo is the Capital od Japan. D.C has never bidded for the olympics (or as far as I can remember) which surprises me. If their is one city that can truly represent any nation it the national capital.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After Tokyo, I'm getting a strong feeling the US may just sit 2024 out - and I think it may be wise.

The silver lining is that Chicago may be inspired by its fellow 2016 rivals recent success - although it could be deterred by Madrid's.

If Africa and Europe is going for 2024, it shouldn't jump in. Two compelling, legit rivals is too much to counter. Take on the losing continent in 2028. Even then, if a loss, go on for 2032.

One thing I'd be willing to bet a huge amount on: South Africa, a European and a North American city will have hosted by 2032.

Frankly - I'd love a Durban, Paris and Chicago run. It would be great fun.

Perhaps Istanbul - finally - in 2036.

Running !

The US will never step out of the 2024 race. And they would be crazy to. Not only do they have a chance, I think they're the favorite. After Rio, London and Tokyo, the next logicial stop is Northern American (I know, there's no "official" continent rule), especially with the memory of London still so vivid in everyone's mind.

Now, there's Africa. But if you guys in the US play it will, putting forward that more guarantees are given by an American candidate, use the financial influence (broadcasters...) you are more than able to beat any African bid. Also, if it's Durban, playing on the size of the city and presenting a candidate that has a more prestigious, "sexier" image than Durban will just be something that is likely to put you far ahead.

Not against South Africa....Just saying the US (and the USOC has understood it) should be in the race, and have many chances to get 2024. Now that Chicago has taken its distance with 2024, LA, SF, Philly sound like the most credible options to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstood my point. I was just using the last three as examples. But a lot of capital citites have bidded or hosted.

That's just because the capitals are often the major or biggest city of a country. For the likes of the UK or Greece, their capitals are the only viable or electable hosts they really have. It's not like Canberra, Ottawa, Brasilia or Pretoria would ever be seen as the best cities for their respective countries to put up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Africa and Europe is going for 2024, it shouldn't jump in. Two compelling, legit rivals is too much to counter. Take on the losing continent in 2028. Even then, if a loss, go on for 2032.

You bring up a point that shouldn't be understated: it's ok for the US to bid in 2024 or 2028 and lose. If USOC really wants to win, a city might have to lose once in order to win the games. And that's just fine.

Re: DC: 1) Our national capital-- and no offense to it, I've lived there previously and love it-- has nowhere near the exciting personality of recent host cities. It's viewed as rather sterile by many, both at home and abroad. In fact, it was designed that way. 2) I'm not sure the idea is that popular among locals and I have a feeling it especially won't be popular within Congress, which would have to approve any federal spending that the District uses on the endeavor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And when the United States does land another Olympics, especially a Summer Olympics, let's hope it's the type of once-in-a-generation event the Olympics is supposed to be for the host country.

What does that mean?

You bring up a point that shouldn't be understated: it's ok for the US to bid in 2024 or 2028 and lose. If USOC really wants to win, a city might have to lose once in order to win the games. And that's just fine.

I don't think it's fine, and I'm pretty sure most people who aren't as interested or paying attention would think it's fine either. Wasting millions upon millions of dollars on bids that are destined to lose for some pompous jerks in Switzerland who only have an interest in making the US look like fools? Chicago's loss was just the latest sucker punch. The only city I think could manage to bid and lose and not have a huge public backlash would be LA because the city has so much more going on, and all the venues are basically already in place, but as others have already said here LA is "boring." Just look around you don't see NY wanting to bid again, Chicago has a horrible after taste in their mouth from getting kicked in the balls. These other cities that are interested haven't yet poured the real cash in yet only to have it all be for nothing, just wait for another loss or two (or more?) and see how people are willing to accept losing a few times before we "win."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...