Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not to mention that in the team sports, the US teams seemed to do extremely well across the board.

I know. The U.S. Women's Indoor Volleyball Team just won the 2011 Grand Prix (again), heading into 2012:

http://usavolleyball.org/news/2011/08/28/u-s-women-claim-fourth-fivb-world-grand-prix-title/44371?ngb_id=2

So how can U.S. summer athletes be getting weaker? It is the Winter athletes that need all the help. There is no Top 3 Singles women's skater right now; Men's we might have a #4 or #5. So a Reno/Tahoe...maybe quite distantly a denver Games might be a boost for U.S. winter sport.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 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....

Athens, tell me something.. where is the United States getting weaker in Summer Olympic sports? In Athens, the United States won 103 medals including 35 gold. In Beijing, it was 110 medals and 36 gold, and that was with China's surge in the medal counts. Not to mention that in the team sports, the US teams seemed to do extremely well across the board.

Yes, the U.S. certainly is not getting weaker overall in the Summer Games, and it's likely that the U.S. will win between 100 and 110 medals in London. Even with the rise of other countries in swimming and track, the U.S. is still going to win about 30 medals in swimming and at least 20 medals in track.

The U.S. may be winning the medal count at the Winter Games, but interest and viewership have declined steadily since Salt Lake. The TV ratings for Vancouver, a mostly live Olympics, were lower than the ratings for Nagano, when much of the coverage was shown on a 15+ hour delay. There's no guarantee that the U.S. will be able to repeat its Vancouver success in Sochi, as athletes like Miller and Ohno may not even compete, and I doubt the U.S. will win 8 medals again in alpine skiing. The U.S. is mostly a non-factor these days in long-track speed skating. The main thing saving the U.S. medal count in the Winter Games is all of the new "extreme" events that are added to the program. Overall, though, interest in the Winter Games is much less than in the Summer Games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S. may be winning the medal count at the Winter Games, but interest and viewership have declined steadily since Salt Lake. The TV ratings for Vancouver, a mostly live Olympics, were lower than the ratings for Nagano, when much of the coverage was shown on a 15+ hour delay. There's no guarantee that the U.S. will be able to repeat its Vancouver success in Sochi, as athletes like Miller and Ohno may not even compete, and I doubt the U.S. will win 8 medals again in alpine skiing. The U.S. is mostly a non-factor these days in long-track speed skating. The main thing saving the U.S. medal count in the Winter Games is all of the new "extreme" events that are added to the program. Overall, though, interest in the Winter Games is much less than in the Summer Games.

Well, because of the time zone and distance, Sochi is already a loss insofar as televison viewership. Thus, per your comment above, all the MORE SHOULD the USOC bid for a Winter Games soon...to get US winter athletes back on track!!

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

The US is getting stronger in Winter Olympic sports and weaker in Summer Olympic sports. It's clear which type of athlete is more in need of the benefit derived from Games on home soil.

Please do some research before you make blanket statements like that.

EDIT: Quaker beat me to it.

Edited by nykfan845
Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S. may be winning the medal count at the Winter Games, but interest and viewership have declined steadily since Salt Lake. The TV ratings for Vancouver, a mostly live Olympics, were lower than the ratings for Nagano, when much of the coverage was shown on a 15+ hour delay. There's no guarantee that the U.S. will be able to repeat its Vancouver success in Sochi, as athletes like Miller and Ohno may not even compete, and I doubt the U.S. will win 8 medals again in alpine skiing. The U.S. is mostly a non-factor these days in long-track speed skating. The main thing saving the U.S. medal count in the Winter Games is all of the new "extreme" events that are added to the program. Overall, though, interest in the Winter Games is much less than in the Summer Games.

The thing about the medal haul from Vancouver is that it was largely front-loaded. Most of the medals won by the United States came in the first week and of the 9 gold, 4 came on that first Wednesday which, not at all coincidentally, was the highest-rated night of the games. The only golds in the 2nd week came from nordic combined (which most viewers before the games had probably never heard of) and the 4-man bobsled.

I think part of the issue with the Olympics is that it's hard to hold onto people's attention for 17 straight days and nights. People tend to get burned out a little bit after the first week, so it's not helping that a lot of the more compelling action of the Olympics tends to take place during that first week. The advantage (but also somewhat the disadvantage) for the Winter Olympics is that they're held during a television sweeps month, so the viewers are there, but the other networks aren't exactly getting out of the way knowing that NBC will have the Olympics. And Sochi could be largely a non-factor unless some big name Americans emerge. I agree that it could be very tough to equal the medal haul from Vancouver, especially in a sport like alpine skiing when they over-achieved in 2010.

As for the winter vs. summer argument, I'll continue to watch in amusement as Athens and the Reno Baron continue to state their cases because it's gosh darn funny watching the complete lack of objectivity from both of them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to sound stupid, but have a totally another kind of thinking. It's the first time I will write on a USA topic.

In the last month a lot of thinking of several members focusses on bidding timelapses, e.g. As for the US;

WOG 2022-2032 SOG or WOG 2026-2036 SOG. But in my view thought this could be; SOG 2024-2034. I especially support Athensfan's signatur that the USOC must go to an Summer Olympic Games as 2024 will be 28 years after Atlanta. Because otherwis if the usoc goes to bid for SOG's for 2032 or 2036 than it will be 36-40 years later than Atlanta and that means that the USA can miss out not 2-3 but 3 till 4 generations without any SOG on US-Soil.

As the matter a fact the WOG's are more dedicated for the northern hemisphere, whereby US athletes will cross only the Atlantic to Europe to ensure the increasing succes of US winter-sports, if not China bids with Harbin. If the USOC goes for a 2022 WOG (20 years later than SL and 12 after Vancouver) than this strategy will jeopardise all the new US-generations for an eventually Olympic on US-soil. So said that as an thinking-method.

But the otherside of the medal now.

Now we have the eventually 2024 Durban factor. I think that an South African bid will be ready with Cape Town than a premature Durban. Knowing in the backmind that the IOC can accept an september-october timelap for Cape Town about better summerwether as they did recently with Doha. Otherwise Durban will still be a premature even in 2024. For god sake? (in positive sense) What will/can Durban afford as a valuable plus as a city that not even will be at the organizationsl size of that of Atlanta.

Here on GB a lot of members talk about the fact that the IOC goes for bigger(if not larger) cities that have more in place about the venues aspect. Why pushing Durban forward who has to handle eventually with Boats/Botels and has to organize mathes more in (temporary) convention centers then in real venues. Will this be the valuable PLUS that Durban will bring to the Olympic History ??

Durban is just a small(er) city that has to push and force chances and opportunities to oranize a decent olympics. In this case the Sascoc & the Usoc did a strategically good job to sit out (for both) the 2020 bidding phase. You can say that from now on (2012) till 2024 there can chang a lot in 12 years. But still Durban is a city on the coast in the southern hemispher and is not a stategically city in terms of creating huge economic surroundings. Than an eventually Cape Town is more privileged on 2 issues; larger city + better wether circumstances (sept-oct) as already exercised with sydney.

And last but not least. If the IOC has to Africa (as a whole) than Morocco can spoil the chances of Durban in 2024 as Doha did now with Istanbul for the 2020 race. We all know that South-Africa is getting more prised towards the rest of Africa. Also that the FIFA stole (imo) the chances of Morocco for the FIFA 2010 and awarded to RSA. Now Morocco can say it is revenge time and we have a coin to count with South-Africa.

An Eventually race between Casablanca/Rabat with CT/Durban can be very harsh maybe. Meanwhile Chicago can spoil whole the thing and can take te 2024 Olympics. As Casablanca/Rabat do have more possibilities on several issues like wether/venues/larger trasportation possibilitis (rail, freeway and airports) & Accomodation.

Yes indeed, there can happen everything in 10-12 years. But I just want to say not be sure about a winning Durban in 2017 for 2024. Chicago will have huge/great chance of winning 2024. Last but not least, Durban will not be a real Olympics, but more a half-real/half fake olympics because a forced/pushed bid to ensure every issue/guarantees that the IOC wants (as a Doha Olympics will also be fake). As I said. Durban is a premature and still will be in 2024. A WC isn't the Olympics.

regards

fatih

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what's the general opinion here on the lapse of domestic games, combined with the ever increasing (or seemingly ever increasing, as other teams grow) loss of prominence of Team USA athletes on the general American viewer's interest and perception of the Olympic games as a whole? NBC through it's dramatization has either tapped into or trained us to only want to see USA athlete's competing and winning gold, and with the loss of prominence as the dominating team and the extended lapse of domestic hosting is this a long-term negative outlook of Olympic Games on the American consciousness?

I feel like the city's they have chosen are mostly boring to me, but I don't claim to be a bellwether of the American consciousness, but what do you all think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do some research before you make blanket statements like that.

EDIT: Quaker beat me to it.

I'm totally aware of the medal counts. I didn't need to do research. That's not the basis of my argument and I did note that the American medal haul in Beijing was impressive.

The basis of my argument is the increasing strength of China and the fact that several predictions have come out saying that the US is more likely to win around 70+ medals in London and may drop to 3rd in the overall behind Russia. These predictions are based on the decline of American performances in non-Olympic international sporting events in the last few years. There isn't similar evidence of a decline in Winter sports.

Some of you are eager to pounce at any opportunity just for the sheer pleasure of shredding someone. Next time ask what my criteria is before you dismiss my statements out of hand.

I'm sure you'll all demand references for the reduced medal count. I'm off to track them down...

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I'd love to be proven wrong about the decline in the strength of the US team in summer sports. Truly.

I realize there are a whole range of predictions out there -- everything from somebody claiming the US will win more medals than ever before to the US will decline a little or maybe even decline a lot. Russia will top the table. China will top the table. You name it, somebody's predicted it.

Personally, I found the article I cited better reasoned than, for example, the Australian Olympic Committee's prediction which didn't offer any explanation of how they arrived at their numbers.

Having been watching the non-Olympic competition in the last couple years, I have gotten concerned about a possible decline in London. Swimming is really bolstering everything else right now -- sort of like skiing did in Vancouver.

As for the winter vs. summer argument, I'll continue to watch in amusement as Athens and the Reno Baron continue to state their cases because it's gosh darn funny watching the complete lack of objectivity from both of them.

"

You're free to disagree, but I've cited very specific reasons for my positions. My arguments are not unsupported.

As far as Baron is concerned, I've got him on "ignore" so nothing you're reading from me is a direct response to any of his posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahtens has a point there;

If we are looking to the last medal tables in the last 3-4 years at other big/middle great sports organisations, than we can clearly see that the USA is loosing blood in the frame of gaining a lot medals with the new genearitions to come.

E.g; 26th World Summer Universiade in Shenzhen 2011 (a city just annexed along with hong kong on the map)

USA came 5th; http://match.sz2011.org/Medal/ENG.htm (medal table rankings)

China, Russia, South Korea are really getting stonger by each year .. year by year. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as Baron is concerned, I've got him on "ignore" so nothing you're reading from me is a direct response to any of his posts.

Ha, ha, ha. Afraid to confront the truth and SOLID ARGUMENTS. As I've said before Denial Runs Through Denver!!

BTW, was watching the final segment of the first US Pro Cycling Challenger being held in Colorado and culminating in Denver. Just some precusory observations:

- the mountain laps...gosh it was like footage inserted or stolen from any Tour de France race day. Same kinda scenery.

- the finale in Denver. The buildings were the same. The downtown scenery was even more boring than the mountain episodes that I actually dozed off to sleep for a few minutes. And then because of the buildings downtown, the live footage images kept freezing. So this is the City that hopes to host a Winter Games (again)? Huh? Dream on, Denver. OK, poll:

Which is the better Denver slogan:

- Never in Denver :lol:

- Denver is a Dud

- Denver, Dream On :lol:

- Denial Runs through Denver :lol:

Pick your favorite!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no way the U.S. will win only 75 medals in London. The U.S. is likely to win about 30 medals in swimming, at least 20 in track, and 6-10 in artistic gymnastics, meaning that the medal total for those three sports alone will be close to or above 60. The U.S. will win more than 15 medals in the other 23 sports on the program. I think 90-100 medals is most likely, which would be on par with the U.S. performance in Atlanta and Sydney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahtens has a point there;

If we are looking to the last medal tables in the last 3-4 years at other big/middle great sports organisations, than we can clearly see that the USA is loosing blood in the frame of gaining a lot medals with the new genearitions to come.

E.g; 26th World Summer Universiade in Shenzhen 2011 (a city just annexed along with hong kong on the map)

USA came 5th; http://match.sz2011.org/Medal/ENG.htm (medal table rankings)

China, Russia, South Korea are really getting stonger by each year .. year by year. ;)

Would be a good point, except the Universiade has little bearing on Olympic medal totals, at least for the United States. The US hasn't finished higher than 5th in the medal total (either ranked by total medals or by gold) since 2001 in Beijing. So I wouldn't consider that the best indicator of what will happen in London.

Here's the story on which I based my concerns about a decline in London:

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/news?slug=ap-usoc-yeartogo

Just because China is getting stronger does not mean the United States is getting weaker. Let's see how the Chinese do when they're not hosting (and I'll point out that where the article brings up the numbers about the medals at the FINA Worlds, they did that following the completion of the diving competition where China swept every gold medal and before the United States came back to top them in overall golds and finish just behind them in total medals). Is Russia really that strong now? They sure weren't in Vancouver and that's with a first ever home soil Winter Olympics coming up.

I'm with Barcelona on this one.. I see no indication to assume there will be a drop in the medal total in London or that another country like Russia or China (especially China coming off Beijing) is ready to step it up that much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Barcelona on this one.. I see no indication to assume there will be a drop in the medal total in London or that another country like Russia or China (especially China coming off Beijing) is ready to step it up that much.

Well, like I said, I really hope you're right. Guess we'll have to wait and see how London goes. And Rio. And whoever gets 2020...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The US are where they always have been - towards the top of the table, fighting the bogeymen of the Nazis, USSR and now red China for who gets first and who is runner-up. Yeah, they get more competition now, but they do remarkably well to still hold their own. I expect they'll probably top the tables (both international and Nth American counting) at London next year with the Chinese not having home advantage this time (and London should be like a home away from home for the yanks).

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I'd love to be proven wrong about the decline in the strength of the US team in summer sports. Truly.

I realize there are a whole range of predictions out there -- everything from somebody claiming the US will win more medals than ever before to the US will decline a little or maybe even decline a lot. Russia will top the table. China will top the table. You name it, somebody's predicted it.

Personally, I found the article I cited better reasoned than, for example, the Australian Olympic Committee's prediction which didn't offer any explanation of how they arrived at their numbers.

Having been watching the non-Olympic competition in the last couple years, I have gotten concerned about a possible decline in London. Swimming is really bolstering everything else right now -- sort of like skiing did in Vancouver.

"

You're free to disagree, but I've cited very specific reasons for my positions. My arguments are not unsupported.

As far as Baron is concerned, I've got him on "ignore" so nothing you're reading from me is a direct response to any of his posts.

Your arguments are supported by arguments, which is silly.

Just admit you messed up and move on.

The medal counts from the past two Olympiads are all you need to show how the US hasn't dropped off considerably, if at all. Ignoring that and citing some sports article is silly. You can't prove anything with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is the better Reno slogan:

- Never in Reno :lol:

- Reno is a Dud

- Baron, Dream On :lol:

- Denial Runs through Baron :lol:

Pick your favorite!!

Saw you made some mistakes in your post and did what I could to edit it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, like I said, I really hope you're right. Guess we'll have to wait and see how London goes. And Rio. And whoever gets 2020...

Base what you want on predictions and other guesses of how so-called "experts" seeing the London medal table playing out. Me personally.. I'll go with hard data in the form of previous medal counts until I see some sort of indication those are going to change. It's a valid point that other countries are catching up to the United States, but insomuch as China had a huge 2008 medal haul, let's see them do it when they don't have the home crowd advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw you made some mistakes in your post and did what I could to edit it.

Jeez, such a feeble attempt at parody. :rolleyes:

U can't even put together basic rhyming schemes.

Don't give up your day job. U'll never be a pseudo-poet, much less a mediocre parodyist.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, such a feeble attempt at parody. :rolleyes:

U can't even put together basic rhyming schemes.

Don't give up your day job. U'll never be a pseudo-poet, much less a mediocre parodyist.

Don't be so thin skined it was a joke. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your arguments are supported by arguments, which is silly.

Just admit you messed up and move on.

The medal counts from the past two Olympiads are all you need to show how the US hasn't dropped off considerably, if at all. Ignoring that and citing some sports article is silly. You can't prove anything with that.

Perhaps I overstated my point and wasn't as clear as I could've been. But I don't think I "messed up" in a way that warrants your criticism for not "doing research." My arguments are not based on arguments. They're based on non-Olympic sporting results for the past three years and several online news sources including the one I cited in this forum.

I never said that the medal total reflected the potential decline of US Summer athletes. I know that it doesn't and said as much in this thread.

Understand me, Beijing's medal haul was quite impressive for the US, but I think there are signs of chinks in the armor and I worry that those chinks could grow over the next few cycles in the absence of Summer Games on home soil. Several of the medal predictions that are beginning to emerge for London seem to reinforce this hypothesis. The winter athletes appear to be doing just fine and have gotten big shots in the arm very recently from Salt Lake and Vancouver. We need to offer the same to our summer athletes in the foreseeable future.

Please note the word "hypothesis." I'm talking about concerns for the future -- not the evidence of past medal tallies. I didn’t say, “the US has totally collapsed in the medal count.” I said there were signs of struggle and that I was concerned that the medal tally would decline in the future.

Due to two recent North American Winter Games and the success of the 2010 team, I think the Summer athletes need Games on home soil more than Winter athletes.

Feel free to disagree, but that's not "an argument based on an argument."

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

×
×
  • Create New...