Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Things change. So, sure, we get nothing but the best bidding these days. But how long will that last?

Well, that's just it, isn't it. Until "things change", why would the IOC (or the USOC) choose places like Austin or New Orleans when the big player cities are still bidding for the Games. As long as the IOC has those big city chooses, they ain't gonna be settling for second fiddle. Or in the case, third fiddle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>>>> You say imagine the benefits of a well known minor city could have from hosting the games? Well, how about the benefits of a well known MAJOR city could have from hosting the games. You think it would register throughout the world, let alone the UK if Manchester had been the Olympic city? I doubt it. The Summer Olympics are a once every 4 years event that a lot of cities around the world want to host. Because of that, the IOC has the luxury of only choosing the biggest and brightest cities to award them to. That's not changing anytime soon. That's why a minor city has no shot of beating a major city in a competition between the 2.

Things change. There was a long stretch not too long ago when the biggest and brightest cities didn't want to host. In the 70's only what we would consider 2nd tier cities bid... and heck, Denver gave the games back. In the 80's things were so bad nobody wanted the Olympics other than as a cold war battefield. In the 90's we got back to 2nd or even 3rd tier cities.

So, sure, we get nothing but the best bidding these days. But how long will that last?

I agree, what happens when all our top cities do not want to host. London won't go again for at least 40 years, France seems un-interested as does Chicago and New York, Rome has the 2020's in the bag. and lord knows when Berlin will finally bid again. The only cities after the big ones host are the second and third tier cities. Now I'm sure that this will not happen till the 2060's at earliest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things change. There was a long stretch not too long ago when the biggest and brightest cities didn't want to host. In the 70's only what we would consider 2nd tier cities bid... and heck, Denver gave the games back. In the 80's things were so bad nobody wanted the Olympics other than as a cold war battefield. In the 90's we got back to 2nd or even 3rd tier cities.

So, sure, we get nothing but the best bidding these days. But how long will that last?

I agree, what happens when all our top cities do not want to host. London won't go again for at least 40 years, France seems un-interested as does Chicago and New York, Rome has the 2020's in the bag. and lord knows when Berlin will finally bid again. The only cities after the big ones host are the second and third tier cities. Now I'm sure that this will not happen till the 2060's at earliest.

Sure things change. But even to get a field with only B list cities is pretty rare (96 would probably be the prime example). If you look at all the host cities in the history of the Summer Olympics, most of them are less than fairly prominent world cities. And very few times has the IOC had to settle for less than they were probably hoping for. That includes the 70s and 80s when candidate cities were few and far between. x

So will we see some thin fields in the years to come? Maybe. And to bernham's point, once the biggest of the big cities have all had their turn, there may be a drop-off. But it's not like you could expect (or want) the same dozen or so cities each time out. My point, especially to bernham, was to say that the IOC will probably never need to resort to C level cities. There's a whole wave of potential hosts before we get to those. Even still, world economy notwithstanding, I think the IOC will have at least 1 or 2 alpha cities put in front of them each cycle for the foreseeable future, and while you can't predict things decades down the line, I could see that lasting a long time.

Edit: 1 thing to add.. if top cities no longer want to host, then at worst, they can start recycling recent hosts. Los Angeles, among other cities I'm sure, would jump at the chance at another Olympics if the rest of the big cities out there were all disinterested and only lesser cities were left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember fondly the atlanta games, the only things negative were the bombing and transport mess, no white elephants after the games and a very good atmosphere, way better than Beijing, that had no atmosphere at all.

Just curious, were you at Beijing in 2008?

I was. I thought the atmosphere was unlike anything I had experienced before. It was electric, and unique.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, what happens when all our top cities do not want to host. London won't go again for at least 40 years, France seems un-interested as does Chicago and New York, Rome has the 2020's in the bag. and lord knows when Berlin will finally bid again. The only cities after the big ones host are the second and third tier cities. Now I'm sure that this will not happen till the 2060's at earliest.

Like I just said in an earlier post, when & IF the big cities of the world don't wanna bother, then we could likely see lesser-tier cities. But it's very doubtful that it'll still be the likes of Austin or New Orleans.

Yeah, New York & Chicago may not be interested. But we still have Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston & Philadephia that could be. Same for Paris. It's still too early to count the French out. But even if they don't want to, we still could have Rome, Berlin & St. Petersburg. Not to mention Istanbul & perhaps South Africa. So I don't see the field drying up that fast that the IOC will have to settle for very small places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I just said in an earlier post, when & IF the big cities of the world don't wanna bother, then we could likely see lesser-tier cities. But it's very doubtful that it'll still be the likes of Austin or New Orleans.

Yeah, New York & Chicago may not be interested. But we still have Los Angeles, Dallas, Boston & Philadephia that could be. Same for Paris. It's still too early to count the French out. But even if they don't want to, we still could have Rome, Berlin & St. Petersburg. Not to mention Istanbul & perhaps South Africa. So I don't see the field drying up that fast that the IOC will have to settle for very small places.

Oh no I think the field will start to dry up towards the 2060's. Like you said earlier previous host could start rotating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's only about 4 cities that I think would be compelling enough for the IOC to pass over new territories and other exotic locales in order to give the US another turn. Those cities are NY, LA, Chicago and SF...DC would also make a decent candidate but the political undertone of a DC bid would overshadow the city's attributes. Australia, England and Japan all learned this same lesson, put your best foot forward. Australia put forward a bid for Brisbane, Melbourne, before finally succeeding...

I attempted to read your novel and got this far and abandoned you, obviously you have no idea what you're talking about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956_Summer_Olympics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh no I think the field will start to dry up towards the 2060's. Like you said earlier previous host could start rotating.

Previous hosts could start rotating? It's already happening and it's inevitable to continue. Nothing wrong with that. What we'll get through the 21st century is a mixture of new and repeat hosts - basically as has already been happening.

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

Previous hosts could start rotating? It's already happening and it's inevitable to continue. Nothing wrong with that. What we'll get through the 21st century is a mixture of new and repeat hosts - basically as has already been happening.

I think Tokyo might be that wake up call - expect more repeat hosts. I'm starting to feel that the "there are SO many new places to go before X and Y host again" argument might not hold up as much as popular belief - I could see that well drying up in the next 10 or 20 years. Then its for some repeat action.

In Australia's case - I think that is partly why Brisbane, and to a lesser extent, Melbourne, shouldn't just expect that it is down to just the two of them. I firmly believe when Australia's time comes again (2040s onwards) we could see a legitimate push for a second Sydney Games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we could see a legitimate push for a second Sydney Games.

Not if the Melburnians have any say in it!

Just got back in Sydney now from yesterday and this morning in Melbourne. Every time I'm there, the biggest impression I get is it is just soooo much an Olympic host city in waiting!

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not if the Melburnians have any say in it!

Just got back in Sydney now from yesterday and this morning in Melbourne. Every time I'm there, the biggest impression I get is it is just soooo much an Olympic host city in waiting!

It's really taken an amazing turn in the last decade, boom town. It really has shaken away the image it had when it was bidding for 1996.

I think if the IOC can budge even slightly, a late Sept-early Oct staging of the Games could happen - late September is when the city starts to get some beautiful warm, summary days - just a risk of a few chilly nights.

Brisbane and Sydney do have the weather card - particularly Brisbane - but Melbourne will make a good go of it in about 20 years. One thing I'd give Melbourne is that it would play it sensibly - it ain't no Madrid!

If Canada is brashly walking towards four Olympics in 60 years - I see no reason why we can't look at three within 80 years. It would be asking a lot - but it might just happen.

**Summery days --- not summary - lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Canada is brashly walking towards four Olympics in 60 years - I see no reason why we can't look at three within 80 years. It would be asking a lot - but it might just happen.

**Summery days --- not summary - lol.

2 being Winter, so really Canada has waited longer then Australia did for its Second Games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that's a really tortuous and twisted justification. I thought Canadians keep saying WOGs are their big passion. Now you're trying to say they're not really Olympics.

No not saying that. Using justification for hosting multiple games (winter included, which is a different event than the summer) shouldn't be used to argue for multiple hostings of the SAME summer event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No not saying that. Using justification for hosting multiple games (winter included, which is a different event than the summer) shouldn't be used to argue for multiple hostings of the SAME summer event.

As I've mentioned before - while your argument that Canada shouldn't be penalised for being a capable winter host does hold water, it can very easily be flipped on its head to say "why should the non-winter capable world be penalised." Australia doesn't have the luxury of choosing - we can only go for the more competitive summer Games.

Australia stepping up for a third Olympics in the 2040s onwards isn't that outrageous. We won't be the most 'deserving' of countries, thats for sure, but we'd no doubt be competitive spanner in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No not saying that. Using justification for hosting multiple games (winter included, which is a different event than the summer) shouldn't be used to argue for multiple hostings of the SAME summer event.

Even if by some spurious logic one tried to argue 2 WOGs = 1 SOG, at worst that makes Canada and Oz even, and it still doesn't disquise the fact Canada's is more recent, rather than "we've waited longer".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if by some spurious logic one tried to argue 2 WOGs = 1 SOG, at worst that makes Canada and Oz even, and it still doesn't disquise the fact Canada's is more recent, rather than "we've waited longer".

at the same logic Tokyo shouldn't be awarded the 2020 SOG because Japan was more recent (1998 WOG) than Spain (1992 SOG)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

at the same logic Tokyo shouldn't be awarded the 2020 SOG because Japan was more recent (1998 WOG) than Spain (1992 SOG)

None of their hostings were as recent as Canada, though.

I'd be really happy to see Canada host a SOGs. By contrast, I sure don't expect, or am sweating on, Oz to host another games in my lifetime. What boggles my mind is that some now try to claim that Canada's two most recent Olympic hostings weren't really Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of their hostings were as recent as Canada, though.

I'd be really happy to see Canada host a SOGs. By contrast, I sure don't expect, or am sweating on, Oz to host another games in my lifetime. What boggles my mind is that some now try to claim that Canada's two most recent Olympic hostings weren't really Olympics.

They are, however the Summer Olympics are a different event. Its like saying two disciplines of the same sport are the same (yes in hindsight they do fall under the same banner, but the events are different).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are, however the Summer Olympics are a different event. Its like saying two disciplines of the same sport are the same (yes in hindsight they do fall under the same banner, but the events are different).

But you're making a big assumption about how this is perceived when it matters the most: in the minds of voting IOC members.

I have a hard time believing that they view it this way. I think that, if presented with two cities, they're going to find anything they can think of to help them come up with a reasoned judgment - like it or not, Canada's three previous Olympics (winter or summer ) will factor into this for any near future Toronto bid. Especially if it is up against the likes of South Africa and France.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are, however the Summer Olympics are a different event. Its like saying two disciplines of the same sport are the same (yes in hindsight they do fall under the same banner, but the events are different).

It just sounds incredibly greedy to deny that Canada's hosted a pretty respectable tally of games for a nation of its size and stature in the past 37 years - only one shy of the top hosting and sports superpower USA in that time, and say it's having to wait soooooo long to host yet another soon.

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you're making a big assumption about how this is perceived when it matters the most: in the minds of voting IOC members.

I have a hard time believing that they view it this way. I think that, if presented with two cities, they're going to find anything they can think of to help them come up with a reasoned judgment - like it or not, Canada's three previous Olympics (winter or summer ) will factor into this for any near future Toronto bid. Especially if it is up against the likes of South Africa and France.

I am struggling to fond the quote but I think it was Bach? who said winter and summer are different events and Pyeongchang wouldn't affect Tokyo as people speculated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at the same logic Tokyo shouldn't be awarded the 2020 SOG because Japan was more recent (1998 WOG) than Spain (1992 SOG)

Japan is a nation of 130 million people, compared to one that's only 35 million. Japan's last hosting (1998) was also not as recent like Canada's (2010). Japan is also the world's third largest economy. Not to mention that Tokyo is truly a global, mega city. Apples & oranges.

But when you get statements of entitlement like that, it makes me really want the USA to beat Canada to it and set them back a lot longer.

Exactly. It's like the Madrid camp trying to spin everything into their court, no matter what is was. It was such a turn off.

But you're making a big assumption about how this is perceived when it matters the most: in the minds of voting IOC members.

I have a hard time believing that they view it this way. I think that, if presented with two cities, they're going to find anything they can think of to help them come up with a reasoned judgment - like it or not, Canada's three previous Olympics (winter or summer ) will factor into this for any near future Toronto bid. Especially if it is up against the likes of South Africa and France.

Yep. The IOC will "tweak" their own rules for their own convenient visions. And using Tokyo & PyeongChang is also a weak argument. At least those are in DIFFERENT countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...