Jump to content

USA 2024


Athensfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Really? None of those were looking for Summer Olympics 6 years after their Winter winnings. N look how many thought early on that Rome 2020 was going to be a favorite rught before they pulled out.

Definitely would agree within a 10-year time span, but after that, not really. Especially when it comes to countries like Italy & Russia that have large population bases & R a sporting prowess at the Summer Olympics,

You're right in saying that they haven't tried so there's no real way to know. I think the fact that it hasn't happened, however, means that it's less likely to happen if someone (the US) did try. There isn't enough precedent.

I also think one can argue that the Olympics have grown enough that each Games requires undivided attention. That could explain the fact that we haven't seen more Summer bids from Winter hosts. If the US won 2026, I doubt they'd even try to bid for 2032.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be fair about something here.. a lot of nations have submitted a Winter bid immediately followed a Summer bid or vice versa. Obviously many of them fail to make the shortlist, but they're still submitted bids. Heck, China went so far as to submit Harbin AFTER they had just won with Beijing. So to say that the USOC can't do the same (whether or not it's a smart idea can be debated.. and probably will be) doesn't make sense. Haven't we heard that Barcelona is potentially on the map for 2022 with Madrid in the running for 2020? I don't hear talk of that affecting Madrid's bid or "politically undercutting" it. There could be an effect of 1 on the other, but I can't see that stopping the USOC. Certainly they wouldn't expect to win both and I'd think they'd be smart enough to make it clear that a 2024 win would mean they'd immediately pull out of the 2026 race (and probably not even consider bidding again at least for another cycle or 2, unless the circumstances were absolutely ideal).

I don't expect the U.S. to win 2 Olympics within a decade of each other; I've never suggested that. But to say that they won't (or can't) bid for Olympics in adjacent cycles.. I don't buy that. The USOC won Atlanta when they had the Salt Lake vote less than a year away, so I'm not buying this logic that the IOC won't vote for a Summer bid if they know that country bid has a Winter bid right behind it. Or that it would be a mistake for the USOC to look at 2026 if they've committed to 2024. Again, let's agree to disagree on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They certainly CAN bid in consecutive cycles. We disagree as to whether it is WISE to do so. I argue that such a decision will automatically compromise the Summer bid.

Many of my recent posts were aimed at Zeke, who has suggested the IOC is willing to repeat the frequent American hosting that occurred between 1980 and 2002. In particular, I addressed his argument that the US could win both 2024 and 2026 and his argument that the US could win both 2026 and 2032.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, looky here . .

With the Olympic Games that New York lost to London just weeks away, a quiet buzz is building around the potential for another Gotham bid.

The U.S. Olympic Committee and the International Olympic Committee resolved a revenue-sharing dispute in May that helped sink New York’s 2012 bid. On Tuesday, the USOC said it is mulling a submission for the 2024 Summer Games and the 2026 winter installment.

The Big Apple, with its bid experience and upgraded infrastructure, is being mentioned as a top contender for 2024, but Dallas and Chicago are providing tough competition, sources familiar with the process say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really Baron? No interest or excitement? Just "South Africa can kill everything?"

There have been so many posts about how LA is the only viable Summer candidate and yet this is the second or third story that has mentioned Chicago, NYC and Dallas. Whether or not these bids actually materialize that's bona fide buzz that should quell those who say there's too little interest and time for anyone other than LA to bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of LA, don't know what this means in terms of their Olympic aspirations, but it looks like they're inching closer towards building a new football stadium.. NFL will return to L.A. but loose ends remain

I think its only impact on a future LA bid would be as another soccer venue; but certainly NOT as the Olympic stadium. So, conceivably, a future LA bid could have 3 of the 4 soccer venues within the LA downtown nucleus: the Rose Bowl, Home Depot at Carson City and this new site at the City of Industry. So the 4th soccer venue could be either in San Diego or Santa Clara and it would be an entirely CALIFORNIA Olympics, rather than spread out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the biggest USA drought of not hosting any Olympic Games was a 28-year interim between Los Angeles 1932 to Squaw Valley 1960. With the USOC not wanting to bid for 2022, that second-longest length of time is 20 years apart so far, from Salt Lake City 2002. That is tied with that 20-year gap between Squaw Valley 1960 and Lake Placid 1980. Could have been 16 years, if Denver didn't vote not to host the 1976 Winter Olympics. Well, to some people, they say that the USA is "overdue" to host an Olympic Games. To others, it could be viewed as "overdoing it." Remember, the USA is currently the most succcessful nation, in terms of number of medals won overall and for the specific summer version of the Games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

The US would be a fantastic host for 2024 (or any next SOG).

The just need to know the Atlanta days are gone and aren't coming back soon. It's not gonna be Minneapolis, Dallas or Seattle. You need to have a good bid, but you also have to an iconic city, a "sexy" city something with a huge appeal. A city which symbolizes america for people around the world.

It isn't Manchester or Birmingham now, it won't be Brasilia or Belem in four years & won't be Fukuoka, Bursa or Valencia in 8 years.

The US can win this easily, they just have to realize the world and the IOC changed and they need LA, NY, Washington or maybe San Francisco to win this. Dallas could be the first to go, NY or LA could win on the second or third ballot easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i'm not as much aware as some of our members on the USOC way of picking a city, but i think first the cities have to bid for the USOC nomination.

So bacically if NY or LA don't want to do it...

Now should both of them decide to go for it and be in contention it will depend on the bid and the vision of the city i think, but you can't really predict who will win for sure between those two, can you?

By the way, to the Us members, does the USOC sometimes suggests to a city to bid or push them a little, unofficialy or not or do they keep it 100% neutral?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with basically every premise in the original post.

1. I don't think the Olympics are in any jeopardy in the US. I think as long as we continue to excel at them and as long as the rest of the world covets them, there will be sufficient interest here. The things you mention as being threats are actually working the Olympics favor... the world is shrinking dramatically. For all the stereotypes about Americans being disinterested in the rest of the globe, that's never been less true than it is today. Travel is getting cheaper, the internet and TV are evolving to make covering events on the other side of the world much easier. If the Olympics movement dies in the US, it will because it's dying everywhere else.

2. While I agree that Summer Games are the prestige event, I think most Americans would think an Olympics is an Olympics. The fact is, the Winter Olympics generate significant interest here and I think if we were hosting one, people would be fine with waiting another decade to host another regardless of which season those Olympics were in. It's also, obviously, a lot easier (and cheaper) to win a Winter Games... I seriously question what the hell the IOC would do without the US hosting them once every other decade, it's not like there are really ANY new frontiers there and there are only two or three viable hosts in Canada. So I'm not even sure they could hold hosting a Winter Games against us, unless they want to have consecutive Games in Europe frequently (the just might, but the TV money in the US would dry up very, very quickly).

3. I think the biggest issue, if we accept that there is one, facing the Olympics in the US going forward is one of access. I imagine you're broadly in agreement there. I think people want a.) better start times on TV and b.) increased ability to attend the games. The thing is, though, I don't think either of those things necessarily rely on the US itself hosting. Any Western Hemisphere games will produce live events in primetime in the US. And, to be blunt, I don't know that most Americans wouldn't consider a Toronto Summer Olympics to be that different than one taking place in the US anyway. I know this is bound to be shouted down but let's be totally honest here: do Americans really think of Canadians as "foreigners" or of Canada as a foreign country? Toronto is a lot easier to get to for many in the most populous parts of America than, say, Los Angeles. I know this is an international sports site so obviously we're going to be more sensitive to the macro issues like nationality, but the physical and cultural gap is so small that I'm not sure a Toronto games wouldn't look and feel like a home event for Team USA or that it wouldn't get absurd TV ratings.

I'd prefer a Summer Olympics, too, just because it's been so long. But the truth is, I don't think if we end up with 2026 instead that it would be THAT big a deal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off.....we should be watching the NYC Olympic games right now. The anti-American sentiment that Jacques Rogge has displayed over the course of his presidency swayed the vote away from NY. If the IOC wanted Sexy, Iconic then the Olympic games should be in NY not London, which has hosted the games a few times. Let us not forget that it was the LA games that saved the modern Olympic movement. It is not hard to see Americans loose interest in the Olympics, as the amount of American Medals declines so will will our desire to watch the games. The USA could host the Olympics in both 2022 and 2036 the could host in both 2022 and 2032 if they really wanted, just like they could force the IOC to reinstate Baseball and Basketball and eliminate this stupid rule limiting the number of sports and events in the olympics...it all comes down to Money...US does not get 2022 or 2024 games...USOC works with Americas Corporate Sponsors and asks them to withhold money...let us see how fast the games are back in America. The IOC may not like this but American money is very important to the Olympic movement and without it...well...let see cities around the world make money on the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off.....we should be watching the NYC Olympic games right now. The anti-American sentiment that Jacques Rogge has displayed over the course of his presidency swayed the vote away from NY.

BS! The NYC bid killed itself when its stadium proposal sank itself at the last moment. No way it could have won then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd prefer NYC to an L.A for a 3rd. Even though it has been nearly 30 years still are newer cities to go too. However i don't think 2024 will be the time for US. If Paris does bid i think they will have an edge 100 years since france hosted a summer games. Frequently make top 10 and have had many past bids. 1992, 2008, 2012. Am aware US will most probably bid but think it is France who will get 2024. 2028 for US for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS! The NYC bid killed itself when its stadium proposal sank itself at the last moment. No way it could have won then.

Indeed. Even if the Queens/Flushing location was more ideal (due to location of the athlete's village), I guess the IOC just didn't want to see another Centennial Stadium like travesty in Citi Field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYC should have proposed it's stadium at the same site, perhaps in reclaimed land, but certainly not with a retractable roof. which of course Madison Square Garden didn't like very much.

.

R u talking about the original Westside Stadium for the Jets? That was never a stadium with a retractable roof. And neither was the last-minute replacement, the Mets stadium in Flushing. None of the major main Olympic stadia proposals in recent US bids came with a retractable roof. Where did u get this idea? That's a new one. As far as memory serves, Montreal was the only Olympic stadium w/in the last 50 years that actually came with a retractable roof feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYC should have proposed it's stadium at the same site, perhaps in reclaimed land, but certainly not with a retractable roof. which of course Madison Square Garden didn't like very much.

Perhaps for 2024...

Roof or no roof, MSQ was not going to be ok with a huge stadium right next door. The stadium should have always been proposed for Queens at Flushing Meadows with a Mets post-Games legacy. We might have gotten away with 3rd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I came back from London with little hope for a US summer games anytime soon (and only slim hopes for a WOG).

All the host cities seem to have both passion and plans. They haven't just agreed to host; they really, really want to host. And they all honestly seem to believe in their visions of using the Olympics to transform their city/county. The IOC loves that. They are going to want to hear *why* somebody wants the Olympics. It's got to be more than, "well, you really should host a games in the US since we provide so much of the money."

In order to host, we need somebody with a grand vision for a US games. Who is that going to be?

Of course, a city needs more than a vision. They need to be technially strong as well. As long as there are potenal host cities with both, I don't see us winning. Our best shot will be waiting for a cycle when there isn't a compelling competing bid.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't anything new. The IOC has always wanted to know why someone wants to host the Olympics. Or in better words, "what can x-city do for the Olympics", & not what the Olympics could do for x-city.

There's already been countless discussions here in this very thread, that the next U.S. bid (in particular, a summer bid), is going to have to come up with a great story to sell (like London & Rio did), along with a compelling component, & needless to say, the technical foundation to get it off the ground TBW.

We already know the same old; "well, we already have all the venues in place already" pitch; (i.e. Los Angeles), isn't going to get the winning votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS! The NYC bid killed itself when its stadium proposal sank itself at the last moment. No way it could have won then.

I agree. NYC didn't deserve 2012 and it was too soon for the US anyway.

As for LA, I really think its way too soon to dismiss them as the been-there-done-that option. LA is a very different city than it was in the 80's. If the crux of their campaign is "we have all the venues" then of course they will lose. I believe LA can develop a compelling story that focuses on transportation, the environment and youth programs. Let's wait and see what's offered...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...