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....

Not to mention their "undying love" for trifling MSP, lol. And that icon on their current handle is the same one that "k-boy" used when he was on here. Go figure.

I am called Crusader and use a popular Crusader icon (handle?) ... you've really found the smoking gun there.

No love for MSP. I've never been there. I was following a comment left by Sir Rols and all I've said is that MSP would appear to be as good as any US candidate. I try to use up to date information before comment rather than be someone who is a fraud using out of date information. If you have to use out of date information, it shows your argument is really rather weak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're dismissing Minneapolis because we don't see a scenario where they would be able to offer up the winning bid. Even if the big boys like NYC and Chicago and LA all decide not to bid and Minneapolis is the best of the rest, it doesn't mean the USOC is going to offer them up. There are at least a half dozen cities (I'm being generously low with that figure because it's probably a lot more) that can offer more. You're talking about bidding against the likes of Paris and Istanbul and Tokyo and Durban/Cape Town and lots of other cities that can make a compelling case. Even if Minneapolis offers the best chance for a win for the USOC, if they don't think they can compete with the international crowd, the USOC is probably going to tell the city to save their money and sit it out. International reputation is going to count for a lot and unless Minneapolis offers up the best technical bid that's ever been presented, a lesser bid from a city like Chicago or San Francisco is probably going to top Minneapolis. And that's not a knock on MSP.. it's more a reflection of the current state of affairs with the IOC and that's what makes a Minneapolis Olympics all but impossible.

Oh yea, and if you're going to rip Chicago and NYC because they lost, should we remind you (as baron already has) that Minneapolis was going for the USOC nomination in 1996 (a battle of lightweights compared to what 2012 and 2016) and LOST. If they couldn't beat Atlanta whose biggest trump card was Coca-Cola, do you really think they'll be competitive when the field is that much stronger? And yet you're the expert on such things? As much as I've ripped baron in here for some things (especially when it comes to all things Sac-Tah-Reno), his knowledge of Olympic history could probably put the rest of us to shame. Look at the last handful of cities to have (or plan to) hosted the Olympics. All capitals and/or the most prominent city in the country with the exception of Rio. All of the 2020 short-list candidates fall into the same category and look at the 2 cities the IOC rejected. You can't tell me with a straight face that after 2 big name cities like NYC and Chicago that the IOC is going to get offered Minneapolis and say "that's what we're looking for." Those losses were matters of circumstance, just like Atlanta's win in 1996. Besides, how many cities out there have lost only to come back and win? Most notably Rio who failed to make the 2012 shortlst. Or any of the 2020 winners, all of which have finished 3rd or lower at least once in recent memory.

Not every city out there is destined to host an Olympics. Many cities could handle it, but the IOC still has to choose them out of a competition that it takes millions of dollars just to take part in. And I think the USOC seems to have wised up and taken the stance not to throw a city out there in every cycle. I'll stand by my assertion.. if Minneapolis is the most appealing city in the United States for a 2024 Olympics, I sincerely doubt we will see a bid.

Can you tell me where I have said the USOC would offer Minneapolis? I rip Baron not only because of his lazy comments like Changchun being like Cancun but because he tries to ridicule other posters from comments they've at least bothered to look up. He mocks and claims comments are 'hogwash' and yet when confronted with the evidence, doesn't apologise yet tries to open up another line of attack

Link to post
Share on other sites

and again there seems to be this remarkable conclusion that Chicago and New York didn't win because of some anti-American conspiracy.

The fact is, the bids were not that good. Chicago I believe did not top a single catergory in the IOC assessment, whilst NY was 4th in the assessment phase and 4th in the vote. You are 4th for a reason. And the games have moved on considerably since LA and Atlanta in terms of simply being a well known city. Cities cannot just rock up and say pick me because I'm from a big country.

As I have mentioned, I do not claim to remotely know the mind of a single IOC member. What I can say is that the 2nd tier American cities are better known throughout the world compared to any other 2nd tier cities including China. Due to only two potential countries bidding from North America, you look at the Pacific Coast, the MidWest, the East Coast, Texas etc as almost presenting a regional option.

My opinion is that the city that can put together the best technical and legacy proposal with the minimum population requirements should be considered strongly because there is no point in bidding with a well known city, only to have the rest of the world wipe the floor with them because they beat the technically.

At least there are people from the Twin Cities who are showing some support for the idea of their city hosting the games. I was reading that Chicago have already bailed out of 2024 so why are we even mentioning Chicago?

We all have our weak points. Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones....

I agree.

But anyone with a search engine can take 30 seconds and discover comments are either false or massively out of date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and again there seems to be this remarkable conclusion that Chicago and New York didn't win because of some anti-American conspiracy.

The fact is, the bids were not that good. Chicago I believe did not top a single catergory in the IOC assessment, whilst NY was 4th in the assessment phase and 4th in the vote. You are 4th for a reason. And the games have moved on considerably since LA and Atlanta in terms of simply being a well known city. Cities cannot just rock up and say pick me because I'm from a big country.

As I have mentioned, I do not claim to remotely know the mind of a single IOC member. What I can say is that the 2nd tier American cities are better known throughout the world compared to any other 2nd tier cities including China. Due to only two potential countries bidding from North America, you look at the Pacific Coast, the MidWest, the East Coast, Texas etc as almost presenting a regional option.

My opinion is that the city that can put together the best technical and legacy proposal with the minimum population requirements should be considered strongly because there is no point in bidding with a well known city, only to have the rest of the world wipe the floor with them because they beat the technically.

At least there are people from the Twin Cities who are showing some support for the idea of their city hosting the games. I was reading that Chicago have already bailed out of 2024 so why are we even mentioning Chicago?

I agree.

But anyone with a search engine can take 30 seconds and discover comments are either false or massively out of date.

The IOC doesn't like the USOC. They may not admit it, but its true. Regarding Chicago, they may not be interested now, but a lot can happen in 3 years. We could see a 2024 Chicago bid and we may not see a Washington-Baltimore bid. About the olympic city aspect, I think that only world cities should bid. Paris, London, Sydney, Tulsa, Tokyo. Find the odd one out. Now which one do you think would be eliminated first? It's to save the city money and embarrasment. 1996 was an exceptional because none of the cities are major major cities. But since Paris and some African countries seem a bit interested no minor cities have a chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So am I right in assuming that it's just Los Angeles and Minneapolis that have expessed explicit interest in bidding for 2024?

I haven't even seen any indication of it; and it's really not 'official' until the USOC says so because it's ultimately up to them regardless of who is "interested." They know LA can jump into the breach with a 24-hour notice and... Tulsa is just rarin' to go. But so what...at this stage??

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

Crusader, why must you insist that the American bids lost because they were shoddy?

Nobody here is saying NYC and Chicago lost solely due to anti-American sentiment.

For starters, both bids were still too soon for American Games. 2012 was time for Europe. In 2016 the IOC clearly wanted their first South American Games. Geopolitics doomed both bids right out of the gate.

On top of that....

Without a viable stadium plan, NYC deserved to lose. We all agree there. Chicago's technical plan was superb, but the IOC understandably had no confidence in the USOC as partners (revenue deal, inconsistent leadership, Olympic network, etc.) Chicago deserved to lose because they couldn't prove to the IOC that they would be good partners with such a dysfunctional USOC.

Chicago did not deserve to be eliminated first.

And yes, there will always be some anti-American sentiment that chips away at a few votes -- but no one is saying that was the reason for the losses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crusader, why must you insist that the American bids lost because they were shoddy?

Bcuz he's a broken record. He accuses others of not reading his posts, yet he's guilty of doing the same. We've all explained the true losses of those Olympic races, but he's not interested in hearing them.

If the U.S. lost those bids bcuz the bids were "inferior", then how in the world did Rio win, When they were the lowest scoring bid of the 2016 candidates. And even scored lower than Doha in the applicant phase. Go figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am called Crusader and use a popular Crusader icon (handle?) ... you've really found the smoking gun there.

No love for MSP. I've never been there. I was following a comment left by Sir Rols and all I've said is that MSP would appear to be as good as any US candidate. I try to use up to date information before comment rather than be someone who is a fraud using out of date information. If you have to use out of date information, it shows your argument is really rather weak.

Yeah, you're right. A 'popular' icon between you & k-boy.

And you did more than just "follow a comment" after Rols posted that link about that kid & his facebook page. You went on (& still R) at great lenght as to Y Minneapolis makes a good candidate. Funny enough, that something K-boy did as well. Go figure.

And there's no reason to be "up-to-date" on a city that's not Olympic caliber TBW. There's no need to waste the time & effort on such a farce.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you tell me where I have said the USOC would offer Minneapolis? I rip Baron not only because of his lazy comments like Changchun being like Cancun but because he tries to ridicule other posters from comments they've at least bothered to look up. He mocks and claims comments are 'hogwash' and yet when confronted with the evidence, doesn't apologise yet tries to open up another line of attack

Your exact line was "I simply think that there are people dismissing MSP without offering any alternative why they think another city could offer any more." To me, that's not a matter of opinion, that's a matter of fact. New York, Chicago, Los Angeles et al.. they all "could offer any more" than Minneapolis. That's a fact. Will they offer more is up for debate which is partly why we have a 231 page thread here. That said, those of us who choose to dismiss Minneapolis do so because we don't think they're electable, even if (again, to use your line), "MSP would appear to be as good as any US candidate" I don't know what list of candidates we're using for that one, but it would take the most supreme of supreme bids from Minneapolis to beat out the likes of the big cities like Los Angeles, and I'm fairly confident we'll see them in the discussion, just like we did for 2016 when they were neck and neck with Chicago for a while.

and again there seems to be this remarkable conclusion that Chicago and New York didn't win because of some anti-American conspiracy.

The fact is, the bids were not that good. Chicago I believe did not top a single catergory in the IOC assessment, whilst NY was 4th in the assessment phase and 4th in the vote. You are 4th for a reason. And the games have moved on considerably since LA and Atlanta in terms of simply being a well known city. Cities cannot just rock up and say pick me because I'm from a big country.

As I have mentioned, I do not claim to remotely know the mind of a single IOC member. What I can say is that the 2nd tier American cities are better known throughout the world compared to any other 2nd tier cities including China. Due to only two potential countries bidding from North America, you look at the Pacific Coast, the MidWest, the East Coast, Texas etc as almost presenting a regional option.

My opinion is that the city that can put together the best technical and legacy proposal with the minimum population requirements should be considered strongly because there is no point in bidding with a well known city, only to have the rest of the world wipe the floor with them because they beat the technically.

At least there are people from the Twin Cities who are showing some support for the idea of their city hosting the games. I was reading that Chicago have already bailed out of 2024 so why are we even mentioning Chicago?

It's not a conspiracy, but there were geo-political factors that contributed to NYC and Chicago losing. It's widely believed that USOC-IOC relations were a big hinderance, especially to Chicago's 2016 bid. Would a stronger technical bid have made the difference? Maybe, but let's remember that Rio had the LOWEST score of the 4 finalists, and yet they still won. Not only won but did it by a huge margin over the competition, in contrast to some past votes which were a lot closer.

Clearly the IOC is showing their preference towards the biggest and the best of world cities they can get (for the most part, not exclusively). So yea, 2nd tier cities in the United States are more well known than 2nd tier cities in other countries. But the USOC wouldn't be going up against them, they're going up against 1st tier cities. The IOC isn't looking for the minimum requirements, except maybe for a South American country or an African country since they've never been there before. If New York and Chicago can't be competitive, why would you expect a Minneapolis to fare any better? Like I said, even if they can offer the best proposal, is that going to be enough to inspire the IOC to want to go there?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have mentioned, I do not claim to remotely know the mind of a single IOC member. What I can say is that the 2nd tier American cities are better known throughout the world compared to any other 2nd tier cities including China. Due to only two potential countries bidding from North America, you look at the Pacific Coast, the MidWest, the East Coast, Texas etc as almost presenting a regional option.

My opinion is that the city that can put together the best technical and legacy proposal with the minimum population requirements should be considered strongly because there is no point in bidding with a well known city, only to have the rest of the world wipe the floor with them because they beat the technically.

At least there are people from the Twin Cities who are showing some support for the idea of their city hosting the games. I was reading that Chicago have already bailed out of 2024 so why are we even mentioning Chicago?

The thing is Minneapolis is not even 2nd-tier. It's 3rd-tier. Second tier U.S. cities R Washington DC, Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia & even Atlanta, Miami & Boston eclipse Minneapolis.

And really, how do you for a "fact" (to use your line) that a Minneapolis bid wouldn't be "wiped on the floor by the rest of the world" like any other? Let's take your other darling city Toronto - how did their technically superior bid work out for 'em for 2008? Again, how could even Minneapolis, according to you, compete with such a force such as Toronto??

And having one kid with a facebook page with some followings is hardly what I would call leaps & bounds of support.

*how do you KNOW for a "fact"..

Link to post
Share on other sites

So am I right in assuming that it's just Los Angeles and Minneapolis that have expessed explicit interest in bidding for 2024?

Los Angeles city members have expressed some interest. But as far as Minneapolis is concerned, that article on here is about some kid starting a facebook with some followings. Nothing official or of interest from city officials over there. You can find similar facebook pages for several cities out there like Boston, Dallas & Phoenix, doesn't mean that city officials R interested in the least.

As a matter of fact, I posted this article from last summer, that Minneapolis has no intentions on an Olympic bid when other international press mentioned them as a possible contender for 2020, with other U.S. cities mentioned as well:

http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/124710533.html?refer=y

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get too far off topic here, but we all found it curious that right around the time Kernowboy disappeared from these boards, Blacksheep showed up. And then right around the time Blacksheep got changed to "Been banned, so I'm gone" is just about when Crusader showed up. Interesting, isn't it. Just sayin'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Los Angeles city members have expressed some interest. But as far as Minneapolis is concerned, that article on here is about some kid starting a facebook with some followings. Nothing official or of interest from city officials over there. You can find similar facebook pages for several cities out there like Boston, Dallas & Phoenix, doesn't mean that city officials R interested in the least.

As a matter of fact, I posted this article from last summer, that Minneapolis has no intentions on an Olympic bid when other international press mentioned them as a possible contender for 2020, with other U.S. cities mentioned as well:

http://www.startribu...33.html?refer=y

That was the weird thing with them. I remember a couple of times seeing an article from a couple of of the local TV stations that it seemed like they were just passing along from the AP because it mentioned Minneapolis. You'd think if there were actual bid efforts there, it would have been a more extensive report.

I know it's a point of contention here sometimes, but it's worth saying.. we don't know who is really interested. Probably not helping matters that the USOC hasn't committed to fielding a 2024 bid. Either way, for MSP, I would hardly call this.. http://www.minneapolis2024.com/ as evidence there is much going on there towards an Olympic bid

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the weird thing with them. I remember a couple of times seeing an article from a couple of of the local TV stations that it seemed like they were just passing along from the AP because it mentioned Minneapolis. You'd think if there were actual bid efforts there, it would have been a more extensive report.

Exactly. N remember how many pages we contributed to this very thread on those ambiguous, to say the least, AP reports.

Not to get too far off topic here, but we all found it curious that right around the time Kernowboy disappeared from these boards, Blacksheep showed up. And then right around the time Blacksheep got changed to "Been banned, so I'm gone" is just about when Crusader showed up. Interesting, isn't it. Just sayin'

Yep.

I know it's a point of contention here sometimes, but it's worth saying.. we don't know who is really interested. Probably not helping matters that the USOC hasn't committed to fielding a 2024 bid. Either way, for MSP, I would hardly call this.. http://www.minneapolis2024.com/ as evidence there is much going on there towards an Olympic bid

It probably belongs to that kid with his facebook page, or some other geek like him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crusader, why must you insist that the American bids lost because they were shoddy?

Nobody here is saying NYC and Chicago lost solely due to anti-American sentiment.

For starters, both bids were still too soon for American Games. 2012 was time for Europe. In 2016 the IOC clearly wanted their first South American Games. Geopolitics doomed both bids right out of the gate.

On top of that....

Without a viable stadium plan, NYC deserved to lose. We all agree there. Chicago's technical plan was superb, but the IOC understandably had no confidence in the USOC as partners (revenue deal, inconsistent leadership, Olympic network, etc.) Chicago deserved to lose because they couldn't prove to the IOC that they would be good partners with such a dysfunctional USOC.

Chicago did not deserve to be eliminated first.

And yes, there will always be some anti-American sentiment that chips away at a few votes -- but no one is saying that was the reason for the losses.

With the Athens games as recently as 2004, I am not sure people could say it was Europe's turn again in 2012 especially in place of North America irrespective of where the Winter games that occured. Chicago deserved to go out first because despite Rogge's public praise the main stadium which is often iconic of a games was a bit of a fudge.

Not to get too far off topic here, but we all found it curious that right around the time Kernowboy disappeared from these boards, Blacksheep showed up. And then right around the time Blacksheep got changed to "Been banned, so I'm gone" is just about when Crusader showed up. Interesting, isn't it. Just sayin'

If someone is banned how can they log on again? Its not the same as leaving voluntary. And surely if someone is banned there are easy ways for people to stop them logging back on again? I am an editor on a football board. It is easy technology to ban someone and keep them banned.

Yeah, you're right. A 'popular' icon between you & k-boy.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?num=10&hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=879&bih=476&q=templar+knight+icon&oq=templar+knight+icon&gs_l=img.12...1212.5782.0.7874.19.11.0.8.6.0.238.1599.2j7j2.11.0...0.0...1ac.1.49zfzsBo_Cg

Page 12

The thing is Minneapolis is not even 2nd-tier. It's 3rd-tier. Second tier U.S. cities R Washington DC, Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia & even Atlanta, Miami & Boston eclipse Minneapolis.

And really, how do you for a "fact" (to use your line) that a Minneapolis bid wouldn't be "wiped on the floor by the rest of the world" like any other? Let's take your other darling city Toronto - how did their technically superior bid work out for 'em for 2008? Again, how could even Minneapolis, according to you, compete with such a force such as Toronto??

And having one kid with a facebook page with some followings is hardly what I would call leaps & bounds of support.

*how do you KNOW for a "fact"..

when/where has Toronto ever been a darling city for me? When I have ever described Toronto as a force?

You do exaggerate to such an extent that whatever point you are trying to make is completely lost

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Athens games as recently as 2004, I am not sure people could say it was Europe's turn again in 2012 especially in place of North America irrespective of where the Winter games that occured. Chicago deserved to go out first because despite Rogge's public praise the main stadium which is often iconic of a games was a bit of a fudge.

What were the IOC's options in 2012? 4 European cities and 1 from North America in the country that had hosted in 1996 and 1984. Vancouver 2010 I don't think had much of an impact. It may not have been time for Europe, but the only alternative wasn't exactly what they were probably looking for either. And then 2016.. I'm of the same opinion as you about the stadium, that it was a little bit of a cop out and left me unimpressed with their bid. But if Rogge praised it (unless you think he was BS'ing, and that's certainly always possible with him), then what does that have to do with Chicago deserving to go out first?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. N remember how many pages we contributed to this very thread on those ambiguous, to say the least, AP reports.

Yep.

It probably belongs to that kid with his facebook page, or some other geek like him.

I think the issue was originally looked at by a group called 'the Starting Line Foundation' in 2005 who seem to do research for the House Legislature in Minnesota. They also did work around a transit/transport proposal for a new Vikings Stadium

What ever the relationship is it is published by the House Legislature. The details on the bottom of the pdfs produced are

Robert Jacobs

Starting Line Foundation

9101 Nantwick Ridge

Brooklyn Park, MN 55443

763 425-7007

rjacobs@teamcreative.com

Very interesting. That's EXACTLY what Blacksheep did when someone asked him about his icon. Pointed you to Google for the image he picked. Very coincidental, isn't it.

How do most people find icons?

How did you find your icon?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And there's no reason to be "up-to-date" on a city that's not Olympic caliber TBW. There's no need to waste the time & effort on such a farce.

And yet the second anything positive is posted about Minneapolis, you are there to take a cheap shot. Stop being such a hypocrite. No wonder more people have you on "ignore" around here than anyone else! <_<

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...