Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 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....

That would be in Sports that most of the world does not participate in ...... and you are talking about events held over an entire season. The MLS is a minor sport in the USA

I am talking of focused multi sport events held within a 2 week period involving a range of different discipline.

And I hardly think experience of holding certain events which by 2024 will be over 28years in the past is the same as holding a multisport athletic/swimming/rowing etc etc etc event within the last 10years

It doesn't matter if most of the world plays those sports or not (and most of the world DOES play basketball). It's the organizational experience that matters. Operating venues, moving crowds, streamlining operations -- the US has that in spades.

We've got world-class marathons, tennis tournaments, golf tournaments, international invitationals in gymnastics, swimming, track and countless other events including plenty of world championships in a wide range of sports.

Exactly how many two-week multi-sport international events are there? It is so irrelevant that the US hasn't hosted a PanAm Games recently -- that's really all you can be referring to. (if we had hosted Olympics more recently we would have no case for 2024). Anyway, LA will be hosting the Special Olympics in 2015.

You're just never going to convince anyone that the US isn't one of the best (if not THE best) sports organizing nation in the world. And Canada is certainly not superior.

Yes, Canada could stage Summer Games, but it is not more qualified than the US. Yes, Toronto could conceivably beat an American bid, but not in 2024 -- the geopolitics are too strong.

What was the 2016 bid timeline for the internal nomination like?

The USOC has already stated they probably won't have an internal bid process, but will simply anoint a city. I think this is the right move. I suppose that could happen at any time and even very close to the bid deadline.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're just never going to convince anyone that the US isn't one of the best (if not THE best) sports organizing nation in the world. And Canada is certainly not superior.

The USOC has already stated they probably won't have an internal bid process, but will simply anoint a city. I think this is the right move. I suppose that could happen at any time and even very close to the bid deadline.

No one is disputing that at all, but what is being disputed is the use of ridiculous adjectives.

Interesting to say the least. How if three want to bid who decides and what. I wasn't here for 2016 or 2012 bid race so I don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the 2016 bid timeline for the internal nomination like?

Aug 2006 - start of the homestretch for the 3 finalists: LA, CHicago and SF

Nov 2006 - SF had to drop out because the 49er stadium deal imploded

April 2007 - Chicago picked over LA & officially entered into the 2016 race; start of 2+ year int'l campaign

October 2009 - selection by IOC of Rio in Copenhagen, Denmark

Link to post
Share on other sites

How if three want to bid who decides and what. I wasn't here for 2016 or 2012 bid race so I don't know.

As for the selection process, they have said there won't be an open domestic race. The USOC board will probably make the decision privately themselves. I suspect they're banking on the idea that one clear candidate (maybe two) is likely to distance itself from the rest and therefore there's no point in stringing everyone along through a lengthy bid process. They'll talk only to those cities they feel can be competitive.

I'm betting the five-person exploratory committee has two tasks: evaluation of potential American candidate cities and evaluation of geopolitical climate and likely competition.

Regarding the evaluation of potential American candidate cities, these are the questions I would be asking:

1.) do they have the leadership?

2.) can they get the money?

3.) do they have the venues and/or space/infrastructure?

4.) do they understand the IOC's values and can they deliver on them?

5.) will they be good partners with the USOC?

The exploratory committee's second task is evaluating the geopolitical climate and likely competition. They have to gather as much data as possible to guess who will bid for which Games and decide whether the strongest American candidates have a fighting chance. I am betting the USOC would prefer to bid for 2024, but is keeping the 2026 option open in case they conclude 2024 is unwinnable. After the exploratory committee researches everything carefully, they will report back to the board. The board will determine whether they're targeting 2024 or 2026 or neither. Here are the possible outcomes:

1.) There is one or more strong American candidate for 2024. Committee determines US has a shot at winning 2024. Bids for 2024.

2.) There is one or more strong American candidate for 2024. Committee determines international opposition is insurmountable. No bid for 2024.

3.) There are no strong American candidates for 2024. No bid for 2024.

4.) Having rejected a 2024 bid, the committee sees one or more strong American candidates for 2026. Committee determines US has a shot at winning 2026. Bid for 2026.

5.) Having rejected a 2024 bid, the committee sees one or more strong American candidates for 2026. Committee determines US has a shot at winning 2026, but decides it is more important for the US to host Summer Games -- even if that means waiting another cycle or two. No bid for 2024 or 2026.

6.) Having rejected a 2024 bid, the committee sees no strong American candidates for 2026. No bid for 2024 or 2026.

If they elect to pursue either Summer or Winter Games, I suspect they'll have a pretty good idea of which city will be the candidate -- even if they don't announce it for months or even years. The exploratory committee and the board may conclude that there are two strong candidates for either '24 or '26 and they may conduct further research and interviews internally to choose between those two, but they won't open up a public bid process and invite all comers because they know that so few have a shot at winning.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^I doubt that Tulsa will still get the message N will go rogue, ala Vegas lol.

N going by your scenario, that would mean for example. that if the USOC is maybe thinking winter, hypothetically, SLC would be DOA. A mere twenty-four years for a repeat host is a no-go, so Y waste any time with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^I doubt that Tulsa will still get the message N will go rogue, ala Vegas lol.

N going by your scenario, that would mean for example. that if the USOC is maybe thinking winter, hypothetically, SLC would be DOA. A mere twenty-four years for a repeat host is a no-go, so Y waste any time with them.

Right. Here's hoping NOBODY pulls a Vegas ever again. That was appalling!

I think SLC should be DOA. The advantage of not having an open domestic race is that the USOC doesn't have to pretend or play nice. If they think SLC is DOA, they can axe it immediately without explanation or any political fallout.

Of course my scenario is just a hypothesis. Only the USOC knows how they will actually approach this, but I think its a sensible rough outline....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Here's hoping NOBODY pulls a Vegas ever again. That was appalling!

Hiya. Long time first time.

I LOVED the Vegas stunt! That was the most fun we've had in this whole 2020 race. Rogue bids?!! Bring 'em on!! Spice things up!! These Olympic bids can get way too serious.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya. Long time first time.

I LOVED the Vegas stunt! That was the most fun we've had in this whole 2020 race. Rogue bids?!! Bring 'em on!! Spice things up!! These Olympic bids can get way too serious.

100+ degree weather, no venues already existing, and in the middle of nowhere. I'll take my chances with SanFran instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vegas hosted the first MineCon quite successfully.

[sarcasm]Yes, and hosting a Minecraft convention really qualifies a city to host the Olympics[/sarcasm]

There's a line from the movie Ocean's Eleven (the remake, not the original) that I think sums up Las Vegas's Olympic aspirations..

"You guys are pros. The best. I'm sure you can make it out of the casino. Of course, lest we forget, once you're out the front door, you're still in the middle of the f***ing desert!"

Can we please table the idea that Las Vegas, this country's largest tourist trap and money pit, is a suitable host for an Olympic Games? Let alone that they embarrassed the heck out of themselves but trying to submit a bid without the USOC's approval last year. Kinda hard to take them seriously at this point because of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[sarcasm]Can we please table the idea that Las Vegas, this country's largest tourist trap and money pit, is a suitable host for an Olympic Games?

Nope. What are the Olympic game if not a tourist trap and money pit? And while a Vegas Olympics is darn unlikely, its not so unlikely it's not worth thinking about. Unlikely cities have won the Olympics before.

Vegas has huge capacity to host the Olympic tourists. It has oodles of 5* hotels/restaurants/shopping for the IOC members, their families and other VIPS's. It has space to build. It has the need for a stadium and some of the venues.

On the flip side, it's got a weather problem. So, as I said, unlikely. No reason to not discuss longshots here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vegas doesn't even have a pro league team unlike the other contenders (Chicago, New York, San Francisco).

I'd argue that's one of the *advantages* Vegas has. Unlike those cities, Vegas *needs* to build sports/area infrastructure. Building a new stadium makes a lot more sense in Vegas than in New York.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue that's one of the *advantages* Vegas has. Unlike those cities, Vegas *needs* to build sports/area infrastructure. Building a new stadium makes a lot more sense in Vegas than in New York.

At the risk of being blunt here again.. that's 1 of the stupider things I've heard here in a while. What does Vegas *need* sports infrastructure for if there aren't teams playing there? There's a reason they don't have an MLB team and are relegated to having only a triple-A team. There's a reason they don't have an NFL team probably won't for the foreseeable future. NBA and NHL? Doubtful. They have 1 D-1 school playing there and occasionally get teams in leagues like the XFL and UFL. You're not going to draw sports teams to come play in Vegas, so what's the point of having that infrastructure there? *A* stadium or a couple of arenas, maybe. Certainly nothing on the scale of what is needed for the Olympics. That infrastructure is useful in a city like New York because it would be useful there. Not so much in Las Vegas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Olympics in Las Vegas = lots of white elephants. Again, not an issue in a city like New York. The old "if you build it, they will come" line isn't going to fly with a Vegas Olympics. We can discuss it if you want, but it's not even remotely close to a sane idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of being blunt here again.. that's 1 of the stupider things I've heard here in a while. What does Vegas *need* sports infrastructure for if there aren't teams playing there?

For the teams that will go there in the future of course.

After LA, Vegas is one of the most likely cities to add a top-tier sports team over the next 10-20 years. The main reason Vegas doesn't have top-tier team now is that it was a much smaller city when the current franchises were being established. That and league hostility to gambling.

But Vegas could sign a deal tomorrow to move the Jaguars to town.... and incorporate the Olympics into the design of the stadium they would need.

I think you underestimate how much venue-adaptable infrastructure Vegas already has. It doesn't have an world-class aqua-center or a velodrome.... but then again, who does? It doesn't have an 80,000+ seat Track and Field Stadium (again, who does?) but it is more likely to need to build a stadium in the next 10-20 years than Chicago, New York or San Fransisco.

What Vegas does have is tons of flexible convention space and mid-sized arenas... and it will soon have at least one larger arena. I'm 100% serious in thinking they are in as good of shape - if not better - than anyplace other than LA venue wise.

Vegas has many problems. Weather being the biggest. But venues/legacy are no worse than anyplace else (nobody needs a velodrome or Olympic-sized aqua-center.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue that's one of the *advantages* Vegas has. Unlike those cities, Vegas *needs* to build sports/area infrastructure. Building a new stadium makes a lot more sense in Vegas than in New York.

There are talks of building a soccer stadium in NYC, next to citi field and national tennis center.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the teams that will go there in the future of course.

After LA, Vegas is one of the most likely cities to add a top-tier sports team over the next 10-20 years. The main reason Vegas doesn't have top-tier team now is that it was a much smaller city when the current franchises were being established. That and league hostility to gambling.

What teams, though? The NFL has been trying for 2 decades to put a team in Los Angeles and there still isn't one there. MLB would require a climate-controlled stadium similar to what they have in Phoenix or else they don't have a shot at all. Las Vegas needs a bigger and more steady population base before they would even get an NBA or NHL team, much less NFL or MLB. You can't build a season ticket base from tourists coming into town.. that's what Vegas doesn't have any major league sports teams and won't anytime in the near future. The NFL wants no part of Vegas, so I think it's foolish to assume all they need is to build a stadium to bring the Jaguars there.

I think you underestimate how much venue-adaptable infrastructure Vegas already has. It doesn't have an world-class aqua-center or a velodrome.... but then again, who does? It doesn't have an 80,000+ seat Track and Field Stadium (again, who does?) but it is more likely to need to build a stadium in the next 10-20 years than Chicago, New York or San Fransisco.

What Vegas does have is tons of flexible convention space and mid-sized arenas... and it will soon have at least one larger arena. I'm 100% serious in thinking they are in as good of shape - if not better - than anyplace other than LA venue wise.

So you're saying that Las Vegas, a city with no NFL team, needs to build a stadium more than San Francisco, a city with not 1, but 2 NFL teams that are desperately trying to get out of their current stadiums? If San Francisco (hypothetically speaking, I know it's not as simple as this as we saw with their 2012 and 2016 bids) were to build an 80,000+ track & field stadium, they'd have something they could do with it. They have tenants to fill it. What does Las Vegas have to use those facilities? Convention space is certainly not an issue, and yes, they do have some smaller arenas. Even still, it's not like there's much of a sporting culture there, and I don't think the IOC is going to want to artificially create one until there's more than a mid-major college and a minor league baseball team as the city's most prominent sports entities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, Vegas hosted the NBA All-Star game once. Needless to say, I think they have the money, experience, and know-how to get a PROPER bid done. As for you little "white elephant" problem, simply tear the stadiums down afterwards and convert the land to parks/hotels/casinos.

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

×
×
  • Create New...