Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Great link, thank you for posting!

What's funny is that they don't even make much, if any mention of new sports facilities in the NYC area. You have 2 brand new baseball stadiums (not all that much use for an Olympics, but still), a new football stadium that has managed to attract the Super Bowl, new arenas in Newark and Brooklyn, and ongoing renovations to Madison Square Garden. All of these have been built since 2005 (the Prudential Center in Newark broke ground in October of that year so it was already in the planning stages) and all but the arena in Brooklyn (scheduled for completion this fall) and the last phases of the renovations to MSG will be done by this summer. Again, all of this happened in spite of New York not getting the Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article, and a lot of what has been said here. The alpha cities in the US are development minded. As such, the time for a bid is generally unique, and what is a great plan for a certain bid year, won't be workable in future years as the space will have been developed regardless. The same is the case for Chicago. Development will proceed, and given the result of the 2016 vote, there was really no reason for Chicago to consider hanging around and bidding again.

European cities have a major NIMBY problem. As such, in some of them, nothing really happens without an external shove. London's east side regeneration would have gone nowhere without an Olympic Commitment.

And that's also about how financing an Olympics works as well. A city in the United States bidding for the Olympics isn't relying on government funding like most other prospective bid cities are. So where, say, Istanbul is bidding for the Olympics, they have backing based on if they win the bid. Whereas New York or Chicago has to be ready to be very self-sufficient and if they're going to have funds on hand for if they win an Olympics, chances are they'll have an alternate plan in place for if they don't win the Olympics that may or may not involve trying again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

European cities have a major NIMBY problem. As such, in some of them, nothing really happens without an external shove. London's east side regeneration would have gone nowhere without an Olympic Commitment.

What utter utter nonsense.

Numerous European cities capable of holding the Summer Olympics have invested in infrastructure projects which are entirely independent of any successful hosting of the Olympics.

There were existing proposals for West Ham United to build a new stadia long before the Olympics came into the picture, whilst Tottenham Hotspur had similar plans. The fact the former has taken advantage of an existing facility is simply something that happens. The Lee Valley Arena was already an area highlighted for development whether London won the Olympics or not.

Berlin, Madrid, Paris etc have all moved forward with the development of sporting facilities independent of any Olympic victory or even bid, whilst Istanbul had long invested in the major infrastructure for the Olympics.

ALL cities gain from bidding for a games because whilst not all infrastructure is completed, much actually is, though maybe not to the same scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in the UK, there is a culture of private enterprise developing sporting facilities with minimal charge to the public sector and this is spreading to Europe where the stadiums are no longer paid for and owned by the city, but are paid for by the individual sports teams.

Look at the sports stadia built in the USA, and low and behold, in a lot of cases the taxpayer picks up 50% or more of the cost. So much for private enterprise.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article, and a lot of what has been said here. The alpha cities in the US are development minded. As such, the time for a bid is generally unique, and what is a great plan for a certain bid year, won't be workable in future years as the space will have been developed regardless. The same is the case for Chicago. Development will proceed, and given the result of the 2016 vote, there was really no reason for Chicago to consider hanging around and bidding again.

European cities have a major NIMBY problem. As such, in some of them, nothing really happens without an external shove. London's east side regeneration would have gone nowhere without an Olympic Commitment.

The regeneration of this area of the East End would likely have taken much, much longer without the Games, and especially with the recession. But as Blacksheep says it is in the Thames Gateway zone and as such was already earmarked as a furture development area. Westfield was already going ahead without the Olympics, for example.

I don't think the difference in timescales between what's happening and what would've happened without the Games is down to NIMBYism though. I think you're failing to grasp just how big the Olympic project in London is to be honest. Nothing New York or Paris or Madrid proposed is on a similar scale or really comparable. It would have been extremely difficult to get this project going in normal circumstances.

But even without the Olympics, the notion that nothing really happens without a shove is wrong anyway. The Olympic development wouldn't have happened on the same scale most likely, but we're building Crossrail right now, Spurs and Chelsea are both likely to be in new stadiums in the next few years, the city itself has suddenly had several world-class skyscrapers emering over the past few years, Kings Cross regernation is ongoing etc etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How New York City Won the Olympics

Didn't know where else to put this, but this thread seems like a good spot and if you're confused about the title, here's an except from the end..

This report demonstrates that New York City, though not winning the competition to be the Host City for the 2012 Olympic Games, has achieved virtually all of the key elements of the NYC2012 Plan without having to hold the Games. The bold and visionary NYC2012 Plan has strengthened neighborhoods across the City and fostered new public and private investment in long-neglected, underused, industrial corridors. The legacy of the NYC2012 Plan is not confined to one project, borough, or community.

Essentially, this goes along with what I've said about NYC2012. That it was largely a 1-shot deal and after the loss to London, the city essentially said "screw it, we don't need the Olympics, let's do these things anyway." I know it's the antithesis of what the USOC should be looking for in a potential host city (i.e. the type of city that will keep at it until they win), but when an Olympics is tied to infrastructure improvements, that's the problem with the potential of not winning. New York is a world class city in every sense (not that I'm biased or anything) and we don't need the Olympics to justify that. So unlike Los Angeles of the 1960s and 1970s, we're not going to wait around for it to come to us when there's othe projects/infrastructure improvements to worry about in the meantime.

i'd rather NYC not bid again. the whole thing with the west side stadium was a hot mess express and pretty humiliating when our number one chief global rival trumped our first bid for the olympic hat trick.

i'd be more interested in chicago or SFO giving it a go. and has anyone ever given a thought to boston?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a lot, and Boston is in a bigger land crunch then New York.

I think the problem with New York is that when people think of New York, they are really thinking of Manhattan. And there is just no room on the island for it to be the center of any bid or Games.

Edited by faster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is worth commenting that, in an AP article on the new IOC-USOC revenue sharing agreement, they listed off US cities that were "interested" in putting forward Olympic bids:

2022 Winter Games: Salt Lake City, Denver, Reno-Tahoe, Bozeman

2024 Summer Games: Dallas, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago

This is the first I've heard of Bozeman for the Winter Games, plus surprised no buzz from San Francisco and their Olympic ambitions.

Thoughts on these potential candidates and their chances?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Give it a few more months. The USOC-IOC deal and the 2020 shortlist only happened within the past 24 hours. We have a few more years before the 2024 application process kicks into gear. But I do expect a USOC bid to come. Winter 2022 or Summer 2024? Not sure. But the US would be primed and well positioned for either and come Madrid, Istanbul or Tokyo, a USA2024 Summer bid would not be hindered by the result of 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, I'd be more interested in the Summer over the Winter. 2024 just feels good for Chicago to mount a challenge and, without the revenue monkey on their back, I like their chances. Would love to see Toronto get in the race to see North America slugging it out for 2024.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that there's a revenue deal, it's time for potential 2024 candidates to make themselves heard. I've argued that their silence has been understandable, which I still think it has, but if they've been quietly interested, now is the time to speak up. Otherwise, the USOC may move on 2022.

In the next few months, I think we'll start to get a sense of whether the US is aiming for Winter or Summer. I'm privately convinced they'd prefer Summer, but it all depends on whether the right city with the right leaders will step forward.

Think about it, Chicago. You're the best bet in my book. You've had time to nurse your wounds. Do you want to stay on the sidelines, or do you want to host the Olympic Games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that Tulsa hasn't come out guns blazing that they want to give it a whirl after a revenue-deal has finally been reached lmfao. But seriously, I really don't think that this changes much for cities like Chicago & New York. Especially with these trying times. They've more than likely moved on. It's a past chapter in their (bid) book.

Although, I do think that at somepoint soon, we're gonna start hearing from places like Los Angeles & Dallas. N maybe Houston & Philadelphia. San Francisco & Boston are very iffy. Apart from those, I can't see too many others wanting to mount this huge, expensive endeavor that may or may not pay-off for them. Especially at a time of economic hardships & budget cuts. And after these, anyone else wouldn't be that worthwhile to with anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that Tulsa hasn't come out guns blazing that they want to give it a whirl after a revenue-deal has finally been reached lmfao. But seriously, I really don't think that this changes much for cities like Chicago & New York. Especially with these trying times. They've more than likely moved on. It's a past chapter in their (bid) book.

Although, I do think that at somepoint soon, we're gonna start hearing from places like Los Angeles & Dallas. N maybe Houston & Philadelphia. San Francisco & Boston are very iffy. Apart from those, I can't see too many others wanting to mount this huge, expensive endeavor that may or may not pay-off for them. Especially at a time of economic hardships & budget cuts. And after these, anyone else wouldn't be that worthwhile to with anyway.

No, it doesn't change anything. All it means is that there's an open door. If they think they might want to walk through it, now's the time. Otherwise they'll have to wait another 3 or 4 decades.

On AP article did mention Chicago and New York alongside LA and Dallas. Not that that means much. We'll see.

It seems like the USOC has built up some capital to work with (metaphorical IOC capital). They should spend it wisely. To me, that means Summer Games in a top tier city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why Durban would easily win it...and which is why the US and Canada will probably skip 2024 if Durban bids.

Again though, there's no way of knowing if they'll bid or not, certainly not unless South Africa makes their intentions known well ahead of time. If the US and/or Canada is looking at bidding, they have to proceed as if Durban won't be there and I doubt either of them would back out at the last minute in response to Durban. The rest of the world isn't going to lay down for them and 2020 proves why they shouldn't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again though, there's no way of knowing if they'll bid or not, certainly not unless South Africa makes their intentions known well ahead of time. If the US and/or Canada is looking at bidding, they have to proceed as if Durban won't be there and I doubt either of them would back out at the last minute in response to Durban. The rest of the world isn't going to lay down for them and 2020 proves why they shouldn't.

No; but if you're foolish and stubborn and setting yourself up for a lot of heartache, then mount a bid against Durban. Hopefully, Doha and Baku will be there in 4 years time...and diehard nuts here batting for a North American 2024. Not gonna happen if Durban throws its hat into the ring...and I don't see why not. They've already abstained this round. Not unless South Africa's economy goes down the toilet, Durban is a surer thing than Paris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Durban is a surer thing than Paris.

Huh?

So the 3rd ranked South African city, which is not even an Alpha or a Beta city, has a better chance than a world famous global city, with a history of hosting numerous international events including athletics, and will by 2017 have almost all of the venues in place, including velodrome, acquatics centre, tennis centre with sliding roof, alongside a main stadium already shown to be capable of hosting world class athletics events and which will have been updated for Euro 2016.

...... South Africa will win one day but they need to bid more than once every 4/5 cycles with different cities.

I don't see the USA getting a summer games until 2028.

Looking at the cities - Dallas, LA etc - they would likely be up against Paris, and you can bet a lot of the IOC will have a soft spot for Paris rather than a US city.

Likewise, if one of the big European players come in for 2022, I don't see a Winter Games in the US until 2026

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh?

So the 3rd ranked South African city, which is not even an Alpha or a Beta city, has a better chance than a world famous global city, with a history of hosting numerous international events including athletics, and will by 2017 have almost all of the venues in place, including velodrome, acquatics centre, tennis centre with sliding roof, alongside a main stadium already shown to be capable of hosting world class athletics events and which will have been updated for Euro 2016.

...... South Africa will win one day but they need to bid more than once every 4/5 cycles with different cities.

I don't see the USA getting a summer games until 2028.

Looking at the cities - Dallas, LA etc - they would likely be up against Paris, and you can bet a lot of the IOC will have a soft spot for Paris rather than a US city.

Likewise, if one of the big European players come in for 2022, I don't see a Winter Games in the US until 2026

I have learned it's not all about Beta Gamma Alpha, Rio is in same category as my city Brisbane doesnt mean diddly squat, Africa is a new region ready for the olympics, they got 3rd for 2004 which was a while ago and the olympics are looking for newer regions instead of going to same old places Sydney, Beijing, Rio, Probably Istanbul, Pyeongchang.

Rio only bid twice in 2004 and 2012 and didnt make the shortlist both times yet not only made shortlist in 2016 but won the games.

I do partially agree Paris has presented very good bids for both 2008 and 2012 And has been show through evaluation scores and there 3rd and 2nd placing. However as we have seen with Doha twice now it is not just about evaluation scores. Paris doesn't have many negatives same with Tokyo for 2020 and Madrid and Tokyo had for 2016 however what Rio had, what Pyeongchang had (as well as determination) what Istanbul has and what Durban/Cape town will have is the new region

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 2020 still has a massive influence. If 2020 goes to Tokyo then there is no way the IOC will not give 24 to Europe.

2) Expect all of Europe, Africa and Asia to host before the next North American games

3) Chicago and NYC will not bid again. Those ships have sailed. Expect LA, SF and a host of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 2020 still has a massive influence. If 2020 goes to Tokyo then there is no way the IOC will not give 24 to Europe.

2) Expect all of Europe, Africa and Asia to host before the next North American games

3) Chicago and NYC will not bid again. Those ships have sailed. Expect LA, SF and a host of others.

2) You might have a point if the USA wins a Winter Games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) 2020 still has a massive influence. If 2020 goes to Tokyo then there is no way the IOC will not give 24 to Europe.

2) Expect all of Europe, Africa and Asia to host before the next North American games

3) Chicago and NYC will not bid again. Those ships have sailed. Expect LA, SF and a host of others.

Intoronto has a point. If the US does not bid for Winter Games, they might squeeze in earlier. Otherwise, your scenario predicts the next US SOGs in 2032.

I'm starting to understand why some see Istanbul as most advantageous to US Games.

Incidentally, I'm not a 2024 die-hard. I just feel strongly that Summer Games should be the priority. I would rather see SOGs in 2028 or 2032 than wait until the 40's or 50's because of an intervening WOG. Summer athletes get virtually no benefit from hosting Winter Games. They are the ones who need the bump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't "expect" anyone to come forward at this time other than Los Angeles. N maybe Dallas, Houston or Philadelphia. San Francisco is always a bureaucratic mess to expect anything coming from them. Pretty much the same for Boston, too. N anyone else besides these wouldn't be worthwhile anyway.

N it's also interesting that the only cities to have jumped at this news about a new revenue-deal R the Winter 2022 cities wanting to place a bid. It'd be interesting to C if the USOC makes any statements anytime soon one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if the USOC makes any statements anytime soon one way or the other.

well, there is a USOC Board meeting in SF in June...so they could say something before they get busy with sending off the athletes to London in late July...or maybe after the Games. But they'll have to get going if they want to get positioned for the 2022 race. And I'm sure Reno-Tahoe and never-denver have been in informal discussions with the USOC all this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...