Jump to content

Recommended Posts

How about San Francisco? I've mentioned Philadelphia although their interest level seems to be pretty low at this point. I'm just concerned that the IOC is going to see Los Angeles (after the USOC presented 2 other cities) and say "is this the best you've got?.. a country of your size and scope and you can't give us something new?" I mean, if that's the best the USOC can do is to offer up Los Angeles again, I'm curious to see what they offer up that's going to make them a contender because I don't know that a renovation of the Coliseum is going to do the trick, especially with all the new sports venues that have been built since 1984 without having landed an Olympics prior.

Remember also.. we've got 4 more years before applications have to be submitted for 2024, assuming the USOC is even interested. That's a lot of time for a bid to materialize and for a city to get themselves organized. Like I said, I don't see it being New York and who knows about Chicago, but crazier things have been known to happen. Time will tell.

What about San Francisco? They seem to always face a great deal of bureaucratic red-tape (moreso than New York or Chicago) to ever move forward. That is afterall what completely sank their 2016 proposal. And the IOC really has no room to, more or less, ever mention, "is this the best you've got, you can't give us something NEW", cuz we DID for 2016, & the IOC just shrugged us off.

And no, only offering up a refurbished memorial coliseum ain't gonna cut it, either. Los Angeles will need something more than just that. Like Athensfan, I also think that further transportation upgrades would go a long way. And/or more emphasis on venue upgrading (since even those new ones since '84 are getting outdated as we type about this) & a NEW Olympic Village, not just the old USC dorms scenario. I think that we're all in agreement that a re-hash '84-style plan will not win over the IOC. But make it something worthwhile & I don't see why not.

And yeah, 2024 applications aren't due 'til another 4 years. But even somewhat interested cities for those Games obviously have to start to get the wheels in motion now at every level of government & other interested parties. Since the USOC (if they're interested) will start the call out & domestic bid process in a couple of years. And any bid that's gonna be deemed worthy will have to start the hard work & uphill battle now to come up with a "winnable" bid & not 24 hours before the 2024 application deadline.

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....

If Durban bids in 2024, it would be foolish for any other city on the planet to bid. A ridiculous waste of money and time.

No way.... I really think isnt that easy for Durban... Totonto or some US city can be really strong!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. Y r u such a putz?

Sorry, should I have used some smiley faces to make it more obvious that was sarcasm? First off, and I didn't catch this either.. it's JED York, not Jeff York. But more than that, and I don't know the politics of San Francisco all that well, if York thinks the 49ers are better off in Santa Clara than closer to San Francisco proper, somehow I doubt he gives 2 craps what it means to SF's Olympic aspirations. You think anyone in New York associated with the Jets is upset that them partnering with the Giants has probably killed NYC's Olympic aspirations for the foreseeable future? Football is more important than the Olympics. It's great when they can work together and as much as I've said I've love to see a city build a stadium with the intent of landing an Olympics, if it's not meant to happen, it won't happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, should I have used some smiley faces to make it more obvious that was sarcasm? First off, and I didn't catch this either.. it's JED York, not Jeff York. But more than that, and I don't know the politics of San Francisco all that well, if York thinks the 49ers are better off in Santa Clara than closer to San Francisco proper, somehow I doubt he gives 2 craps what it means to SF's Olympic aspirations. You think anyone in New York associated with the Jets is upset that them partnering with the Giants has probably killed NYC's Olympic aspirations for the foreseeable future? Football is more important than the Olympics. It's great when they can work together and as much as I've said I've love to see a city build a stadium with the intent of landing an Olympics, if it's not meant to happen, it won't happen.

Don't u think I know that? But still I don't have to accept it and if I want to crap on the likes of York and whomever else in the ridiculous professional American sports world, I will do so and I don't need the likes of you either correcting me because I know what I'm doing and don't really need your unsolicited input. I hope u understand that.

Americans love US football. Fine. I hope they get more brain concussions from it. Another stupid sport.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't u think I know that? But still I don't have to accept it and if I want to crap on the likes of York and whomever else in the ridiculous professional American sports world, I will do so and I don't need the likes of you either correcting me because I know what I'm doing and don't really need your unsolicited input. I hope u understand that.

Americans love US football. Fine. I hope they get more brain concussions from it. Another stupid sport.

That's fine. You're entitled to your point of view, ridiculous as some of us see it. And if I feel like commenting on it, whether I'm being serious or not, that's what I'm gonna do. But again, you being the guy who so often replies to other people's posts with unsolicited input and sarcasm, it's being a little hypocritical of you to tell someone else not to do it. There's the old expression "don't poke the bear." No one ever said "don't poke the baron!" :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine. You're entitled to your point of view, ridiculous as some of us see it. And if I feel like commenting on it, whether I'm being serious or not, that's what I'm gonna do. But again, you being the guy who so often replies to other people's posts with unsolicited input and sarcasm, it's being a little hypocritical of you to tell someone else not to do it. There's the old expression "don't poke the bear." No one ever said "don't poke the baron!" :lol:

Fine. Let's get this place more snide and caustic than ever. Game on. <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing that says a country has to rotate, but there's nothing that says the IOC has to rotate continents either, yet we know how they feel about that. This isn't a mid-size European country with only 1 or more 2 alpha cities we're talking about, this is the United States. If the IOC sees Los Angeles again, they're going to question why no other city in the United States is capable and/or willing to host an Olympics.

Well, Atlanta hosted and New York and Chicago bid, but the IOC rejected them -- so it's not as if LA is the only city capable and/or willing to host. The next American Summer bid must have a very strong identity and a compelling story -- no matter which city steps up to the plate. LA has history (which can be a plus), but they also need to show a vision for the future. I agree that they would have to explain why it's worth returning to LA and how the next chapter will be new and different from the past. I think that LA is up to that challenge and I wouldn't count them out. Remember, they're the only American city (possibly the only city in the world?) with a permanent organization dedicated to bringing the Games back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing about future US bids - I am not sure about a city being willing to try unless we're pretty sure we're going to win. NYC 2012 was an abberation, the bid was pretty good until the wheels came off the stadium plan. Chicago 2016 was almost a sure bet for the last round until relations between the USOC and the IOC soured and... well, we know how that story ended.

My point is the USOC and frankly any US cities have a right to be gunshy, especially given the IOC is much more fond of US dollars that US bids these days.

That bit of cynicism aside, let's look at the future.

I know Baron is practically frothing at the mouth about getting a Reno/Tahoe bid for 2022 and there is a chance for Denver also making a run. Realistically, given Reno/Tahoe has never seriously tried and Denver has not bid since the 1976 abortion, I just don't know how fast a credible bid can be composed in four years. Plus, another WOG in the US? Uh, not exactly feeling it, especially just eight years after Vancouver.

2024... it all depends on South Africa and what US city is interested in stepping up to the plate. I agree with the main board vibe in it being either LA or Chicago, but it depends on if Chicago can be convinced to try again and that is a very big 'maybe' given what a harsh smack down 2016 was. LA is tempting, given what a big sports infrastructure already exists, plus if the new NFL stadium comes to fruition, that could work as a ceremony stadium if they do not want to use the LA Memorial again. Honestly, I do not want to start placing bets until we see how 2020 shakes down (hint hint, it's probably going to be Rome) and we see what the IOC's mood is.

2028... well, if the 8 patten follows, we'll be in Asia for those Games, but assuming 2024 is unsuccessful and/or ends up in Africa, a US bid would not be a terrible idea just to keep gaining experience or raise the profile of a contender, say, Philly, NYC or Minneapolis/St. Paul, along with a established city like LA. Again, we'll just have to see.

2032... this is the worst-case scenario, in terms of how long until the Games come back to the US. By this point, assuming the US has not got a Games, Winter or Summer, we'd be almost a lock unless Toronto spoils the party. At this point, almost any city might be viable.

Bottom line... 2024 is possible depending on moods and bids, but I would feel much more comfortable with an established bidder, either LA or Chicago, than if something new popped up. If not 2024, it could be a while.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus, another WOG in the US? Uh, not exactly feeling it, especially just eight years after Vancouver.

uhmmmm...Montreal 1976...Lake Placid 1980...Los Angeles 1984...Calgary 1988...Atlanta 1996...Salt Lake 2002...Vancouver 2010.

The WOGs can only whip around 3 regions on earth. It'll also be the FIRST Games of a brand-new IOC-NBC package!!

I'm sure you can do the math... :blink:

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

2032... this is the worst-case scenario, in terms of how long until the Games come back to the US. By this point, assuming the US has not got a Games, Winter or Summer, we'd be almost a lock unless Toronto spoils the party. At this point, almost any city might be viable.

Not possible. If your 2024 (Africa) and 2028 (Asia) scenario pans out, there is no way that 2032 will be in the US. The Europeans are not going to sit out 3 rounds. 2032 will then be back in Europe. Earliest possibility for the US is '36, and there I think Toronto will spoil our party, which puts the US in the '40s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Baron is practically frothing at the mouth about getting a Reno/Tahoe bid for 2022 and there is a chance for Denver also making a run. Realistically, given Reno/Tahoe has never seriously tried and Denver has not bid since the 1976 abortion, I just don't know how fast a credible bid can be composed in four years. Plus, another WOG in the US? Uh, not exactly feeling it, especially just eight years after Vancouver.

Not to split hairs here matt, but 2 things there.. 1) 2022 would be 12 years after Vancouver, not 8 (which I agree would be a much tougher sell, although it's happened before), and 2) Reno/Tahoe has been seriously trying to decades now, they've just never won the USOC nomination. It's certainly not for a lack of trying.

That all said, I think we all continue to make presumptions about several Olympics down the line will play out. The 2022 Winter Olympics could easily go to either Europe or the United States. 2024 probably has Africa written all over it IF they put forth a good enough bid. But then 2028.. I refuse to buy into the idea that the "8's" pattern makes 2028 destined for Asia, especially when they'll have hosted a Summer Olympics more recently than North America. Assuming Europe gets 2020 (not a guarantee as we know), then they can all pull for Africa 2024 and jump right back in the race for 2028, at which point you have Europe, Asia, and probably North America all in the running.

So if you want to project ahead, it's easy to come up with scenarios where the US is going to miss out for the next 20-30 years. But it's almost as easy to to come up with a scenario whereby the United States wins 2024. If the USOC has a good bid, Africa decides they're not interested, and the IOC's well of NBC money starts to dry up, it's very conceivable we could be looking at a Summer Olympics in the 20's. And failing that, 2022 or 2026 could very easily land here as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all very well to posit scenarios for the next few decades or beyond, but really, the likelihood that it will all turn out so neat and predictable is low IMO. All it takes is the high probability that one link in the chain goes differently, and all such neat forecasting is out the window. When I first came here, the notion that we'd get a London 2012-Rio 2016 sequence would have seemed highly unlikely, and just six months ago, it was still a matter of strong faith in many that South Africa already had 2020 sewn up. Each race is a whole new different dynamic, and even during a race the dynamics can change from week to week. The US may, or may not, host anytime in the next two decades, but it would be foolish to write of its chances for a hosting before the 2040s already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, some clarity: the vote for 2022 will be in four years time, making the "8 years since Vancouver" I was talking about. And the problem with Reno/Tahoe is I just have not been taking US WOG bids seriously because of Vancouver. I could be wrong and I'd be more than happy to reconsider as we get closer, but no matter what US city gets the nod if they do bid, they got a huge sentimental favorite ahead of them in Munich. So we'll just have to see.

What makes all this prognosticating so tricky is a.) we don't know what Africa is thinking for 2024 and b.) we don't know how seriously the IOC buys into the '8's cycle for Asia. Say whatever you will about closeness, but it is an interesting pattern that regardless of the decade, since 1988, we've been going to Asia.

We'll just have to see. We got a LONG way to go, ya know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, some clarity: the vote for 2022 will be in four years time, making the "8 years since Vancouver" I was talking about. And the problem with Reno/Tahoe is I just have not been taking US WOG bids seriously because of Vancouver. I could be wrong and I'd be more than happy to reconsider as we get closer, but no matter what US city gets the nod if they do bid, they got a huge sentimental favorite ahead of them in Munich. So we'll just have to see.

What makes all this prognosticating so tricky is a.) we don't know what Africa is thinking for 2024 and b.) we don't know how seriously the IOC buys into the '8's cycle for Asia. Say whatever you will about closeness, but it is an interesting pattern that regardless of the decade, since 1988, we've been going to Asia.

We'll just have to see. We got a LONG way to go, ya know.

Salt Lake City 2002, Vancouver won in 2003. Your argument is moot.

The knowns:

Rome, Madrid, Istanbul, Tokyo, Doha and Baku are bidding for the 2020 Olympics

The USOC wants an Olympics, whether summer or winter, it doesn't matter, their interests are set

Switzerland, Austria, Norway and Sweden want to go after the 2022 Winter Olympics

Almaty and Kazakhstan are going to seriously mount a bid in the near future, whether 2022 or 2026.

Russia really wants a Summer Games, St. Petersburg and Moscow are both preparing/thinking of bidding

China really wants a Summer Games, Shanghai to be accurate.

South Africa is taking a wait-and-see approach. Some sources have them not wanting to bid until after a successful Commonwealth Games in 2022, putting a potential games until 2032. Others (and the SA's NOC want to bid for 2024).

Germany and France are thinking about multiple bids, ranging from the youth Olympics to 2022, 2024 and 2028.

And then we get into the questions:

If any of the 2020 losers (especially Tokyo) bid again,

Do the Europeans have enough strength/will to get the games into or out-of Europe depending on which agenda wins out,

How does Samaranch's death play into the support of Madrid?

So we factor in all this and what do we get:

?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salt Lake City 2002, Vancouver won in 2003. Your argument is moot.

The knowns:

Rome, Madrid, Istanbul, Tokyo, Doha and Baku are bidding for the 2020 Olympics

The USOC wants an Olympics, whether summer or winter, it doesn't matter, their interests are set

Switzerland, Austria, Norway and Sweden want to go after the 2022 Winter Olympics

Almaty and Kazakhstan are going to seriously mount a bid in the near future, whether 2022 or 2026.

Russia really wants a Summer Games, St. Petersburg and Moscow are both preparing/thinking of bidding

China really wants a Summer Games, Shanghai to be accurate.

South Africa is taking a wait-and-see approach. Some sources have them not wanting to bid until after a successful Commonwealth Games in 2022, putting a potential games until 2032. Others (and the SA's NOC want to bid for 2024).

Germany and France are thinking about multiple bids, ranging from the youth Olympics to 2022, 2024 and 2028.

And then we get into the questions:

If any of the 2020 losers (especially Tokyo) bid again,

Do the Europeans have enough strength/will to get the games into or out-of Europe depending on which agenda wins out,

How does Samaranch's death play into the support of Madrid?

So we factor in all this and what do we get:

?

So therefore, the only certainty I see is that, if South Africa bids in 2024 (and I assume they will, with the CWG as a practice--and they'd have half the O Athletes' Village there ready for 2024; and the gov't Pretoria putting the SASOC off just for one cycle with the understanding that they would back up a 2024 run--so I'd assume 2024 will be more of a go than not for RSA), then everything falls into place and Continental Rotation still rules.

2022 will be the big IF. Should it go to Europe in which case 2020-Europe and then 2022-Europe again, or with a new NBC-IOC contract to be negotiated and take effect in 2022, should the IOC get more US$ for that by giving 2022 to the US; and have Europe wait for 2026, or not? It might be some $250 million difference for the IOC to give 2022 to the US rather than to Europe. Does that amount mean that much to the IOC then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2022 will be the big IF. Should it go to Europe in which case 2020-Europe and then 2022-Europe again, or with a new NBC-IOC contract to be negotiated and take effect in 2022, should the IOC get more US$ for that by giving 2022 to the US; and have Europe wait for 2026, or not? It might be some $250 million difference for the IOC to give 2022 to the US rather than to Europe. Does that amount mean that much to the IOC then?

We've discussed this before.. NBC set a somewhat bad precedent with the latest deal that seemed to have no regard for where the Olympics might be or what that might do for their bottom line. When they did the 2010-2012 deal, they did that one knowing there would be a good chance of at least 1 Olympics in North America, either Vancouver 2010 or NYC 2012. Obviously the IOC had little regard for the 2016 host city in terms of its implications on NBC's bottom line (I know there were other factors involved and that Rio is still in a US-friendly timezone) and there was little chance any of the 4 Olympics in the 2014-2020 deal would land in North America.

I've been saying for awhile that the IOC probably won't take notice until their well of NBC money dries up. For better or worse, we're probably at least 5 years or so from finding out that'll be true. If the IOC sees a $250 million difference in coming to the United States for 2022, I think it would mean plenty to them. But the problem is that we probably won't see that scenario play out until after the host city is selected. We know IOC can be and probably will be motivated by money, the question remains will they see it in front of their face to the point it affects their decision-making.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Geopolitics affect any race, but in recent races the Americans have been their own worst enemy. The biggest issue facing a possible American bid for 2024 is not who else may or may not jump into the race. The biggest question is the quality of the bid itself and the quality of the USOC's relationship with the IOC and the IF's.

You cannot wait until there's no legitimate competition to bid for the Games. All you can do is manage the elements that are within your control as well as is humanly possible. Based on recent bids, there's plenty of room for improvement in that area. If one studies the recent failed American bids, the failures can be pretty easily explained without even looking at the strengths of the competing bids.

NYC 2012 -- Too close to recent American hostings. Stadium debacle. Ever-changing USOC leadership. Revenue deal.

Chicago 2016 -- Still too close to recent American hostings. USOC leadership problems. Lack of revenue agreement. Total lack of tact and consideration in navigating IOC relations.

For 2024 the USOC will have a good amount of distance from previous American Games. The USOC seems to be doing a great job of reforming itself and I'm impressed with Blackmun's commitment to righting the ship. A new revenue deal will almost certainly be in place 4 years from now. The USOC is working hard to rekindle healthy relationship with the IOC.

I really think that 2024 is a legitimate possibility. So is 2028. The USOC just has to commit to their course of action. If they're willing to wait 2-6 years longer, I believe they can get Summer Games. I do not see any reason why they should feel compelled to "settle" for Winter Games -- unless they genuinely believe that hosting Winter Games would be preferrable for some reason. Personally, I'd be surprised if this was the case.

When all is said and done, we can analyze the possible continental rotation patterns until the cows come home, but those patterns alone will not decide the races. There are too many variables in play to predict 4 or 5 cycles into the future. All the USOC can do is focus on those issues that they can control. I firmly believe this strategy will pay off sooner rather than later.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Geopolitics affect any race, but in recent races the Americans have been their own worst enemy. The biggest issue facing a possible American bid for 2024 is not who else may or may not jump into the race. The biggest question is the quality of the bid itself and the quality of the USOC's relationship with the IOC and the IF's.

You cannot wait until there's no legitimate competition to bid for the Games. All you can do is manage the elements that are within your control as well as is humanly possible. Based on recent bids, there's plenty of room for improvement in that area. If one studies the recent failed American bids, the failures can be pretty easily explained without even looking at the strengths of the competing bids.

NYC 2012 -- Too close to recent American hostings. Stadium debacle. Ever-changing USOC leadership. Revenue deal.

Chicago 2016 -- Still too close to recent American hostings. USOC leadership problems. Lack of revenue agreement. Total lack of tact and consideration in navigating IOC relations.

In hindsight, yes. But at the time of choosing 2012 and 2016, we all thought plenty of time had passed to come back to the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny that you compare "Toronto" to the entire entire US. :lol: Please post more in the Toronto thread, I'd love to see great pictures that explore the "character" of Toronto.

Edited by paul
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny that you compare "Toronto" to the entire entire US. :lol: Please post more in the Toronto thread, I'd love to see great pictures that explore the "character" of Toronto.

Actually I am not comparing all of the USA to Toronto. Its pretty obvious Toronto will be the bid from Canada for the Summer Olympics. While the USA has plenty of options. I can't say it will be Toronto VS New York, cuz that is not known. So I am almost forced to say the "USA BID".

Link to post
Share on other sites

In hindsight, yes. But at the time of choosing 2012 and 2016, we all thought plenty of time had passed to come back to the US.

Agreed. Vancouver was considered as a hindrance to New York's bid, but anyone who remembers that bid race knows that New York sunk themselves. If they had presented the top pitch to the IOC, I think they would have been happy to come to New York, even right after Vancouver. Wasn't meant to be though.

Then for 2016, we all know what an effect the USOC-IOC relations played, in spite of Chicago putting up a good bid. Considering there had been a Summer Olympics more recently in Europe and in Asia than in North America, I don't think "recent American hostings" played that much of a factor, especially that Spain had hosted in 1992 and Japan had hosted Winter 1998. The fact that it didn't come down to Chicago and Rio as the final 2 probably speaks to the outside factors (i.e. relations between the USOC and IOC) moreso than the geopolitics of coming to North America again.

That all said, I agree with Athensfan's sentiments that the best course of action for the USOC is to work on their relationships with the IOC and then come up with a gameplan and stick with it. It's discouraging to have seen the USOC go after 2012 and 2016 and then decide not to try for 2020. That's never really happened before. Of course we know why so you can't entirely fault the USOC for picking that, but eventually they're going to regroup and try again hopefully having learned from their mistakes. If they want to go for Winter 2022, I'd like to hope they'll stay the course and try for 2026 if they lose. Ditto if they're committed to a summer bid with 2024. While it'll probably be easier to land a Winter Olympics if they are looking at either, don't count out the United States for 2024 (especially if not RSA) or 2028. I refuse to believe that North America has to wait their turn for another 2 or 3 (or more) cycles having not hosted a Summer Olympics since 1996.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In hindsight, yes. But at the time of choosing 2012 and 2016, we all thought plenty of time had passed to come back to the US.

I don't know who all thought "plenty of time had passed," but I was never among them. People on these boards are constantly writing "hindsight is 20/20," but in this case I don't think it applies.

I never took NYC seriously -- even early on. Although I love Chicago and firmly believe they are BY FAR the best city to host the next American Games, I always questioned the 2016 time frame and just hoped I was wrong about it.

Here's why the "hindsight" doesn't apply:

The USA hosted an unprecedented 4 Games in just 22 years. Atlanta staged the most mediocre Games in recent memory and Salt Lake was tarnished by the bribery scandal. After adding all those factors together I never thought it was likely that the IOC would return to the US as soon as 2012 or 2016.

The good news for 2024 is that it removes at least one of the major objections to American Games -- excessively frequent hosting. There will be much less guessing about "maybe it's too soon, maybe it's not." By 2024 I think those "maybes" could disappear from the conversation completely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said this before, but I think the U.S. has a better chance at winning 2024 than a lot of people think. If Europe wins 2020 and 2022, which is very plausible, then there are unlikely to be many European cities in the race for 2024 (Paris can try, but they won't win). That means the field will probably include a South African city, an Asian city, a Middle Eastern city (maybe), and one or more North American cities. If it becomes evident that the South African bid is not capable of hosting the Games, then the next best option could be a strong U.S. bid. Of course, Toronto could be another option, but I think the IOC would go with a strong New York or Chicago bid over Toronto. I'm not convinced that a Durban bid is going to be viable and can easily see a situation similar to the Athens 1996 bid.

I have no problem with the USOC bidding for 2022 if they have a strong bid. The U.S. is unlikely to win against a strong European field, and it would be good to bid in preparation for 2024. If the U.S. loses 2024, then they'll have a tough decision to make, as I think 2026 would almost certainly go to the U.S. if they want it.

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

×
×
  • Create New...