Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Incidentally, I suggested before the bid deadline that 2020 could be an opportunity of sorts for the US considering global economy, possible absence of SA and a potentially weak field. I was criticized up one side and down the other as a hopelessly romantic pipe-dreamer. The fact is, I wasn't even hoping for that outcome. I was making an objective hypothesis that turned out to be well-founded.

The thing about 2020 with the USOC.. if they really wanted to bid and they saw an opportunity in there, they probably could have pushed along the revenue deal with the IOC and maybe gotten that done in order to put them in a position to bid. With the benefit of hindsight, clearly the USOC wasn't interested in doing that, either because they didn't have a bid they wanted to present (given the options, that's not surprising) or because they didn't want to rush a revenue deal to insert themselves into a race they didn't think they could win, and we could all give a dozen reasons why we thought that was the case.

You held onto the idea that the fact the USOC hadn't formally announced they weren't bidding for a while meant that it was still under discussion. Now we don't know for sure what went on behind the scenes, but here's the picture I imagined.. you have a classroom, Scott Blackmun is your teacher and all the prospective cities are sitting in the room. And the teacher says to the class "so is anyone interested in bidding for the 2020 Olympics?" Of course you have several kids raising their hands, including some practically jumping out of their seats. Meanwhile the teacher is looking at the seats normally occupied by Chicago, New York, and LA and realizes they're absent that day. "Anyone at all, anyone interested in the Olympics?.. Okay, I guess no one is interested." And that's the end of it.

So did the USOC miss what could have been an opportunity to put in a bid for 2020? Maybe they did, but you can't fault them for thinking it was a bad idea for several reasons, from the 2012/2016 results to the lack of a revenue agreement to the geo-politics of it all that were screaming "don't bother." Even if things did set up favorably, that's only half the battle. You still need that city to offer themselves up. And there would have been no New York, no Chicago, just a bunch of also-rans that probably wouldn't have been too competitive. Geo-politics are one thing, but unless you're in South America or Africa or a new frontier where the IOC is eager to go, you still need a solid bid in order to be competitive, and that's simply something the USOC was never going to have anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your post is long-winded and lacking in supporting evidence. It's also an inaccurate summary of my view.

It's presumptuous to think that the USOC could've rammed a revenue deal through if they'd really wanted to. We don't know what the IOC is demanding. Why give in just for the chance to bid? Very unwise.

We also still don't know who was interested or how interested they were.

Finally I was solely arguing that there could've been an opening for 2020. That doesn't mean there was a good candidate to step into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's presumptuous to think that the USOC could've rammed a revenue deal through if they'd really wanted to. We don't know what the IOC is demanding. Why give in just for the chance to bid? Very unwise.

That's why I used the qualifier "probably" to preface that statement. You're right we don't know, and yes I'm making a presumption. Pretty sure I'm allowed to do that here if I want to state my view of things. And I'll go so far to say that the status of the revenue deal as we move closer to the 2022 bid deadline could, like 2020, be a reflection of the USOC's willingness to put forth a candidate.

We also still don't know who was interested or how interested they were.

We have some pretty good ideas of who was interested. We also have a pretty good idea of who wasn't interested. Which is to say (to borrow 1 of your phrases here), we saw who was making noise.

Finally I was solely arguing that there could've been an opening for 2020. That doesn't mean there was a good candidate to step into it.

That one I agree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh, Y R we rehashing this for the one million-eth time already. I don't think anybody here, I certainly wasn't, was ever refuting the circumstances that could've played out for 2020 in the *international arena*. It was in the "domestic field" where you, Quaker & I disagreed at.

The USOC still had no revenue (like you like to point out & a point we all agree at, anyway), & all signs were pointing that no compelling, worthwhile bid was in the works or even hinted at. And no, none of that is "supported by evidence". But when does what anybody say around here ever is? Like you, we "were making an 'objective hypothesis' that turned out to be well-founded". Y is it that everything anyone else says on the subject has to be "supported by evidence" but you can have an objective hypothesis'. Whatever.

Yeah, 2020 "could've been" an opportunity of all sorts for the U.S. But like Italy & Rome 2020, it is a missed opportunity now. Plus, it still would've remained far from certain that a U.S. 2020 bid could've had a decent shot, tbw. There is no "evidence" that would've backed that up. Tokyo, Istanbul & even Madrid (like a few like to say, inclduing you, "don't underestamate") are still formidable contenders to deal with. And who knows what kind of magic hat tricks Doha may use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Madrid gets 2020, than the IOC is going to be hesitant to award the U.S. the 2024 games, because it would just be a repeat of the 1992/1996 host countries.

If South Africa is serious about bidding, I don't really see any easy scenario for the U.S. hosting a summer games earlier than 2032. If the U.S. bids and wins 2022 or 2026, that pushes a summer games to the 2040's. I would be in my 60's then :o.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Madrid gets 2020, than the IOC is going to be hesitant to award the U.S. the 2024 games, because it would just be a repeat of the 1992/1996 host countries.

If South Africa is serious about bidding, I don't really see any easy scenario for the U.S. hosting a summer games earlier than 2032. If the U.S. bids and wins 2022 or 2026, that pushes a summer games to the 2040's. I would be in my 60's then :o.

Go for Turkish citizenship in the 20s; if that fails, try South African citizenship for 2024, etc., etc. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Madrid gets 2020, than the IOC is going to be hesitant to award the U.S. the 2024 games, because it would just be a repeat of the 1992/1996 host countries.

Sorry, Soaring. I don't see that at all. So what if one pair accidentally gets duplicated 30 years later? No one's going to care. Ot won't be the same cities anyway.

I maintain that Madrid 2020 is the US best hope for hosting in 2024 or 2028. Any other host for 2020 all but guarantees that the US will have to wait until the 30s or 40s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it as silly, but I just think the US is not in a good position regardless of whoever wins 2020. It would have been optimal for South Africa to be in the 2020 race, and win. That would have at least allowed 2028 to be a better chance for N. America to host.

That is why I am warming up to the idea of having a US winter bid in 2022 and/or 2026.

Having two "been there, done that" countries in a row for 2020 and 2024, is less likely IMO. Especially if the US only offers a 2nd tier city, or LA.

If NYC is offered as the bid, I think the IOC will find that more appealing over Philly, LA, Boston or Chicago, and would stand a better chance at landing 2024.

Edited by Soaring
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why we keep harping on Summer chances for the US in the 20s whether Madroha wins it, or Istantokyo. A U.S. Summer bid is NOT competitive until 2032 at least. The US has a better chance for a Winter Games for 2022 or 2026. Why squander that?

You don't have to participate in the thread if you find it pointless. Your opinion is that the US has no chance until 2032. That may or may not prove to be well-founded. I see no reason why the rest of us have to accept it as fact.

As for Winter Games, the crop of candidates is decidedly iffy.

1. Unattractive Reno with virtually no existing venues and a crazily spreadout plan that relies on Sacramento.

2. Black sheep Denver who famously rejected the Games and has serious transportation questions.

3. Scandal-tarnished Salt Lake City who just hosted a mere 10 years ago.

There's not a humdinger among them -- certainly nothing compelling enough to render all discussion of Summer Games pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/\/\ U're, what? one in 5,000, who's allergic to Reno. As you said, and maybe you HATE your relatives there, you DON'T have to go to Reno, if that happens. Sacramento will just be a Site "B" for ice events that won't find a space. Your "bias" is completely showing. But hey, Reno-Tahoe-Sacramento will still get a bid together regardless; I don't see dumb Denver getting a less troubled bid together If the USOC and IOC don't like Reno and Tahoe, then they can shop elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Madrid gets 2020, than the IOC is going to be hesitant to award the U.S. the 2024 games, because it would just be a repeat of the 1992/1996 host countries.

Having two "been there, done that" countries in a row for 2020 and 2024, is less likely IMO. Especially if the US only offers a 2nd tier city, or LA.

If NYC is offered as the bid, I think the IOC will find that more appealing over Philly, LA, Boston or Chicago, and would stand a better chance at landing 2024.

I see this as being neither here nor there. If the dynamics happened to play out for this type of scenario, I don't see Y not.

The thing is though, that no matter when the U.S. bids & depending of who else is in the race, the IOC is going to more likely vote for whoever is on the "new" horizon or who hasn't hosted for quite a long time, rather than "which countries have hosted one right after the other recently". I don't even think such an inkling is even going to register to most of the members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so not one in 5000 who doesn't like Reno. Most of the people on these boards have never been there. I'll be shocked if the Evaluation Commission doesn't agree with me completely. I know big wigs at ESPN who agree with me in thinking Reno is a total non-starter and would make a terrible host.

Even if you are under the peculiar impression that Reno is heaven on earth (shudder), a venue plan that stretches all the way to Sacramento is totally untenable. You've been around long enough to know that. Don't let your passion blind you to the facts and lead you down the road of denial.

As I've said, I love the Games. I want the US to host. I could easily attend Games held in Reno, but I'm against them because I know they would be a national embarrassment and an international disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've said, I love the Games. I want the US to host. I could easily attend Games held in Reno, but I'm against them because I know they would be a national embarrassment and an international disappointment.

Hmmmm. I'll wait for the USOC to make the decision -- not armchair coaches w/ other agendas to grind.

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

As I've said, I love the Games. I want the US to host. I could easily attend Games held in Reno, but I'm against them because I know they would be a national embarrassment and an international disappointment.

Being a little over-dramatic, are we? We get your feelings about Reno, but stop with this nonsense that the it would be an embarrassment for the world to come see Reno. I'm with you that this spread out bid sounds less than appealing, but we don't know who their competition will be. Maybe no one else out there is that compelling and "lipstick on a pig" Reno could pull it off. Personally I don't like their odds, but they're getting damn serious and at this point, I can't see the USOC sitting out 2022 unless for some reason the revenue deal still hasn't happened by the end of next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are plenty of compelling European options for 2022 and Reno would deservedly eat their wake.

No I'm not being over-dramatic. I mean exactly what I said. Reno would be an embarrassment to the US and a disappointment to the international Olympic community-- especially after the likes of Sochi and PC. I stand by that 100%. No hyperbole.

Incidentally, if Madrid doesn't win 2020, the IOC will have elected 3 non-traditional European hosts in a row. Do you really think they'll make it four with RENO? Especially when they could head to the Alps? Highly unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally, if Madrid doesn't win 2020, the IOC will have elected 3 non-traditional European hosts in a row. Do you really think they'll make it four with RENO? Especially when they could head to the Alps? Highly unlikely.

But who in the Alps is ready? Munich's probably the only one and even then, the local farmers don't want it. Swiss? They can't be bothered. France? Again? Italy? Tell that to the Romans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I'm not being over-dramatic. I mean exactly what I said. Reno would be an embarrassment to the US and a disappointment to the international Olympic community-- especially after the likes of Sochi and PC. I stand by that 100%. No hyperbole.

No, that's still pretty hyperbolic. That's almost as hyperbolic as the roof of the Saddledome :D . But I digress..

You think it would be an International disappointment to come to Reno? Fine, have that one if you want. But an embarrassment to the United States? How is the city of Reno, Nevada going to embarrass the United States? If they don't like Reno, let them all go to Tahoe. Need a big city? Head to Vegas and put a bunch of prostitutes in their laps and they'll be fine.

And FYI.. I have a good friend out in California who freelances for ESPN who has been out to Reno numerous times. He laughed at the notion they could host an Olympics (then again, he's from LA). But he didn't go far as to say that place is too big of a dump to pull it off like you have so often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...