Jump to content

Sacramento Studies 2022 Winter Olympic Bid


GBModerator

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So from the 6 pages of back and forths since I asked the initial question what I have basically gleaned from all of this is that all of the potential bidders are at the moment sub-par and that it's basically going to head to Salt Lake City seeing that in this field no one can really beat a past host city with everything in place already?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So from the 6 pages of back and forths since I asked the initial question what I have basically gleaned from all of this is that all of the potential bidders are at the moment sub-par and that it's basically going to head to Salt Lake City seeing that in this field no one can really beat a past host city with everything in place already?

Except being such a recent past host is a handicap in itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So from the 6 pages of back and forths since I asked the initial question what I have basically gleaned from all of this is that all of the potential bidders are at the moment sub-par and that it's basically going to head to Salt Lake City seeing that in this field no one can really beat a past host city with everything in place already?

Salt Lake is NOT a sure thing either because they just hosted 10 years ago. That's too soon a return to the same city, esp. when there are other cities that can stage them. Problem with some of the people here is they are LOOKING for the PERFECT bid where there isn't a single mole on the face. Good luck with that.

And Salt Lake had a very problematic arena for Figure Skating (Delta Center)...yet they still won the bid. It doesn't have to be a PERFECT bid because the other bids will also have one or 2 things out of place...technically, geopolitically or whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No bid is perfect, but all the potential US candidates seem quite sub-par. Barring a major influx of capital, which is unlikely in this economic and political climate, I don't see any of them being competitive internationally. That's just the way it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No; you just want a Summer Games sooner. The US winter cities are as competitive as Munich, the only other viable 2022 bid at this time. But its chances are also doubtful. So if all are doubtful, and it's time for North America again -- hey...where does the IOC go? 2022 has to go somewhere!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No; you just want a Summer Games sooner. The US winter cities are as competitive as Munich, the only other viable 2022 bid at this time. But its chances are also doubtful. So if all are doubtful, and it's time for North America again -- hey...where does the IOC go? 2022 has to go somewhere!

Oh please.

Yes I'd like to see SOGs, that doesn't change the deficiencies of the Winter candidates. I've already said I would support Denver if they muster the will, but I doubt they'll win 2022. So do you.

No, I won't support Reno. Sorry. I think it's a mediocre let-down waiting to happen.

As for the rest of 2022 bidders, you can't possibly know who will or won't bid and how strong they'll be. There are enough murmurings coming from Europe that I expect multiple credible bids. It seems unlikely that 2020 will go Europe's way (which also hobbles any US chances at SOGs in the 20s), so I expect em to line up for 2022.

It's nice to say that Reno is the best American candidate and that they'll basically be running unopposed, but that doesn't make it true. Not by a long shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People. Salt Lake was 10 years from this year. it would have been 20 years when 2022 that 1. 2 is yeah there are no perfect bids but what you are looking for is the best situation for the times. and with a field like this with all these joint bids Salt Lake is looking better every moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless, 20 or 24 years is wayyy too soon for a previous host like Salt Lake, no matter how much sense it makes over the likes of Denver or Reno. The IOC would just go somewhere else. The IOC has never willingly chosen a previous host that quickly unless they were forced to do so; i.e. Innsbruck 1976, because Denver rejected those Games. Salt Lake City 2022 or 2026 is a non-starter. Maybe 2042 is a different story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SLC is way too soon. Many of us think LA '84 is too soon to have them bid again, let alone Salt Lake '02 which occured 18 years later.

SLC might be a more viable option after another US city hosts the Winter Games, but they should not be much of a consideration until the 2040's or later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Baron. All those euro bids sound wonderful and in ways to us exotic. But seems like everyone need an American bid to make it exciting if not to take it now or soon. Reno would be fun, and a magnificent environment for games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vancouver, Sochi and PC have all been departures from the classic European Winter playgrounds. I wouldn't call Europe "exotic"-- I would call it variety in comparison to recent hosts.

Paul, I have to ask. Have you ever been to Reno?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... Is too soon for Salt Lake Coty, even for the USA is too soon when countries like Germany, Switzerland hosted the games more than 50 years ago... But i agree that if its a whole european race won't be too exciting as if an Anerican bid is there even if they are the outsiders it will be a more intresting race ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't think 2022 is unwinnable for the US. Difficult, perhaps (depending on the competition), but not unthinkable. I still think SLC is their weakest, almost impossible, shot. Denver or Reno I wouldn't write-off though (and, yes, I HAVE been to Reno).

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the rest of 2022 bidders, you can't possibly know who will or won't bid and how strong they'll be. There are enough murmurings coming from Europe that I expect multiple credible bids. It seems unlikely that 2020 will go Europe's way (which also hobbles any US chances at SOGs in the 20s), so I expect em to line up for 2022.

It's nice to say that Reno is the best American candidate and that they'll basically be running unopposed, but that doesn't make it true. Not by a long shot.

As I explained, all those Euro bids are exaggerated. They have LARGE, GLARING deficiencies that a Reno-Tahoe bid can easily overcome. I wouldn't be intimidated by those so-called Euro bids.

I have no problem with hockey setting up entirely in Sacramento. There is no huge crossover between hockey and figure skating fans anyway. A few IOC'ers and reporters might have problems but nothing smart scheduling and a small chopper fleet can't fix. The Hockey federation is just one of the 13 or 14 federations that make up the winter Games. Reno-Tahoe can also argue for stronger legacy issues than either Denver (or Salt Lake).

Denver? They have larger distance problems than Reno-Tahoe; their early rumblings are not encouraging..way underestimating costs (so as not to scare the general populace again?); leaving out the all-important environmentalists on their early committees. Couldn't even organize the first Winter Gay Games in 1986; most important of all...can they muster an 85% public support to make a 2nd bid credible?? As stir.t.s. who seems very familiar with the Denver community attested, the N.I.M.B.Y. movement is alive and well and strong in Denver...which is why they can't or haven't come out with those all-important citizen support polls.

Salt Lake is fine so it's not a one-horse race.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I explained, all those Euro bids are exaggerated. They have LARGE, GLARING deficiencies that a Reno-Tahoe bid can easily overcome. I wouldn't be intimidated by those so-called Euro bids.

Easily overcome? I don't know about that.

At the end of the day, all these bids have their strong points and their weak points. So the IOC is going to have to weigh them all together. I don't think about overcoming deficiencies, more about highlighting your strong points in order to present the most attractive bid. Maybe I'm totally off-base here, but these Olympic bid competitions don't strike me as being like political elections where a part of your campaign is almost always going to be to smear your opponent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Easily overcome? I don't know about that.

At the end of the day, all these bids have their strong points and their weak points. So the IOC is going to have to weigh them all together. I don't think about overcoming deficiencies, more about highlighting your strong points in order to present the most attractive bid. Maybe I'm totally off-base here, but these Olympic bid competitions don't strike me as being like political elections where a part of your campaign is almost always going to be to smear your opponent.

OK...maybe I phrased it a little oddly. But u know what I mean..

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK...maybe I phrased it a little oddly. But u know what I mean..

Yea, and again, this is where they have to find that balance between big, bold, and glamorous versus what's cost effective and sensible for the community. That's a tough job in a good economy, not so easy these days. And not like it isn't an issue for other bidding countries. But that's why it's also on Reno to securing their own financing. The better job they do there, the stronger their bid is. And like we've said about Denver.. they need that in place just to get off the ground. RTWGC/CWGC are in a much better position to explore possibilities like this, so that's going to put then ahead of the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baron, Denver doesn't need 85% public support. Anything in the 70's will do. It is unrealistic for any US bid city to break 80% unless it is a city that has already successfully hosted or it is a ridiculous city bidding like Tulsa. The Americans love the Olympics, but the public is much more skeptical about funding a Games than other countries. I would be surprised if Reno cracked 80% down the home stretch of their bid.

Legacy is a good argument for Reno, but they have to do a lot to prove they can fund these "legacies", as would Denver too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baron, Denver doesn't need 85% public support. Anything in the 70's will do. It is unrealistic for any US bid city to break 80% unless it is a city that has already successfully hosted or it is a ridiculous city bidding like Tulsa. The Americans love the Olympics, but the public is much more skeptical about funding a Games than other countries. I would be surprised if Reno cracked 80% down the home stretch of their bid.

Legacy is a good argument for Reno, but they have to do a lot to prove they can fund these "legacies", as would Denver too.

But Denver and the other counties wanting to host WOG events have to prove to the IOC that they won't be on shaky ground for the anti-Games forces to pull another stunt like 1972 again. It HAPPENED in Denver; they have to overcome that stigma. I know if I were on the IOC, I wouldn't be convinced by anything less than...OK, 80%. Their actions in 1972 proved that they are an unpredictable host city.

Fooled me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm open to supporting either Reno or Denver, but I have a hard time believing 1972 is going to hurt Denver. Times change. Just because the people of a city didn't support an Olympics 40 years ago doesn't mean they won't now. Denver doesn't need 80% support to prove to the IOC it's serious about hosting. The mere entering of a bid is enough evidence they are serious about the Games. Bidding is serious business these days, and winter bids nowadays will cost up to $30-40 million. No one will go through all that trouble and expense to bid for a Games if they aren't serious about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm open to supporting either Reno or Denver, but I have a hard time believing 1972 is going to hurt Denver. Times change. Just because the people of a city didn't support an Olympics 40 years ago doesn't mean they won't now. Denver doesn't need 80% support to prove to the IOC it's serious about hosting. The mere entering of a bid is enough evidence they are serious about the Games. Bidding is serious business these days, and winter bids nowadays will cost up to $30-40 million. No one will go through all that trouble and expense to bid for a Games if they aren't serious about it.

Yes and no. Remember that the process of funding a bid in the United States is different than it is elsewhere. The USOC isn't going to underwrite the costs of the bid, let alone what it costs to actually stage the Games. Therein lies the problem for Denver. It's not so much the public support they need as it is a guaranteed funding source. If they have that, they're fine. Without it (and I don't think they get off the ground otherwise), then yes, 1972 could be an issue. The IOC took a chance on Denver once before and left with egg on their face. They need to know beyond a shadow of a doubt there's no way that could happen again. If that's the case, then 1972. But I still believe there's no bid if that's even a possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...