Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GBModerator

A New York City Olympic Games Considered

Recommended Posts

Then you won't mind one more I assume?

Just want to emphasize that the article says *nothing*. Even some of those who don't want to give it too much importance want to give it some importance. It doesn't even deserve that.

It does. It's talk. Discussion. Chatter. Buzz. Whatever you want to call it. There seems to be SOME interest, no matter how small it is.

But we're not even finished with 2020 let alone beginning the discussion for 2024. Speculation is all there will be.

I swear, in my 7 years here, GB has never been this annoying.

Edited by nykfan845

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I swear, in my 7 years here, GB has never been this annoying.

Tell me about it. This is why I don't post as much now. I am tired of the constant grumbling over frivolous and redundant topics, and people knit picking any little thing you say. I know you will get that on a forum no matter what, but it seems like it has increased with intensity this past year.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just want to emphasize that the article says *nothing*. Even some of those who don't want to give it too much importance want to give it some importance. It doesn't even deserve that.

Yes, thank you, I couldn't agree with this more. This hardly qualifies as buzz for a New York Olympics bid. The fact we now have a 6 page thread as a result isn't exactly a sign of anything other than that the folks here on GB eat this stuff up because any mention of an Olympics bid from any city is interesting. But until someone in New York reads this article and says "you know what, I should get behind an NYC Olympic bid effort," then there is no buzz here and it shouldn't be treated as such

It does. It's talk. Discussion. Chatter. Buzz. Whatever you want to call it. There seems to be SOME interest, no matter how small it is.

That's just it though.. the article is not saying there's interest. The article is basically asking the question "I wonder if there is interest?" and from what he writes, it sounds like the answer is not really. He mentioned a few names of people that could become involved with a bid effort, but no one who seems to be actively participating towards consummating a bid. If that were the case, there would absolutely be buzz. But I'm looking at this article and I don't see discussion or chatter or buzz from anyone other than the author. Yea there's interest, but from him. Until someone else picks up on that, I continue to question any interest. If you see it differently, fine. But I'm with zeke on this one.. let's not get too excited over an article like this with little to no substance behind it just because we're looking for any indication whatsoever of a city like New York being interested in the Olympics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the love of . . .

It's 2012. The host city will be chosen in 5 years! It's ALL speculation. We know this. We've been through this time and time again.

There is little substance of course. But the that there is even the smallest of chatter from the likes of former bid officials is something to be made of, I believe. Whether that means that USA is looking seriously at 2024 or not, who isn't saying anything, the problems with bidding again, etc.

Edited by nykfan845
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But the that there is even the smallest of chatter from the likes of former bid officials is something to be made of, I believe. Whether that means that USA is looking seriously at 2024 or not, who isn't saying anything, the problems with bidding again, etc.

I don't mean to be negative here. But I do think you are reading too much into it. The reason there is chatter from a former bid official is that a reporter called him up and asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is little substance of course. But the that there is even the smallest of chatter from the likes of former bid officials is something to be made of, I believe. Whether that means that USA is looking seriously at 2024 or not, who isn't saying anything, the problems with bidding again, etc.

I'm still with zeke on this one and I'm not trying to be negative either. All I'm saying is that this isn't a report of NYC Olympic buzz. This is merely people being asked questions about the Olympics and answering them. If I thought any of them had 2024 on their minds before the reporter talked to them, it would be a different story. Yes, we are extremely early in the process. And who knows, maybe these questions and this article will lead to someone having the desire to pursue bid efforts. I just wouldn't make too much of this because it doesn't read like anyone has given too much serious thought to it other than the guy reporting on it. I mean, I could have called up these same individuals, asked them about 2024, and published it somewhere. That's all that happened here, nothing more.

We all know there's a long time for this to play out. Forget for a second all talk of technical merit of a bid and public support and funding and all the aspects that go into a bid, let alone the USOC's intentions for 2024. In order for an NYC 2024 bid to get off the ground, someone has to come out and say "we're doing this" or at the very least "we're interested in doing this." Not simply answering a reporters question and saying "yea, that sounds interesting" having not given it an ounce of thought before or after. When (if) that happens, then we have discussion/chatter/buzz. But we're not there yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still with zeke on this one and I'm not trying to be negative either. All I'm saying is that this isn't a report of NYC Olympic buzz. This is merely people being asked questions about the Olympics and answering them. If I thought any of them had 2024 on their minds before the reporter talked to them, it would be a different story. Yes, we are extremely early in the process. And who knows, maybe these questions and this article will lead to someone having the desire to pursue bid efforts. I just wouldn't make too much of this because it doesn't read like anyone has given too much serious thought to it other than the guy reporting on it. I mean, I could have called up these same individuals, asked them about 2024, and published it somewhere. That's all that happened here, nothing more.

We all know there's a long time for this to play out. Forget for a second all talk of technical merit of a bid and public support and funding and all the aspects that go into a bid, let alone the USOC's intentions for 2024. In order for an NYC 2024 bid to get off the ground, someone has to come out and say "we're doing this" or at the very least "we're interested in doing this." Not simply answering a reporters question and saying "yea, that sounds interesting" having not given it an ounce of thought before or after. When (if) that happens, then we have discussion/chatter/buzz. But we're not there yet.

I'm not sure anyone is debating the main points.

But we're just arguing semantics at this point (what is buzz, chatter, etc.) and I can't be bothered. We go through these articles every bidding cycle. It's nothing new or revelatory.

Edited by nykfan845

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I saw THE SCOTTSBORO BOYS in San Fran yesterday. Terrific, masterful show!! Best show I've seen in the last 2 years. Cannot recommend it highly enough. I was verklempft at the end!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless if it's bid interest buzz or bust I'm curious if Flushing Meadows area is a viable Olympic park, can there be a London Type stadium developed there and would major development make any sense in that area?

Was it part of the last bid in a significant way other than tennis?

Is it too removed from Manhattan to be what people want in a games in The City?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure anyone is debating the main points.

But we're just arguing semantics at this point (what is buzz, chatter, etc.) and I can't be bothered. We go through these articles every bidding cycle. It's nothing new or revelatory.

I know, I almost feel bad going down that road. I think more than anything is that the title of the Daily News article was almost a little misleading. Probably should have had a question mark on the end of it rather than presenting it as a statement. It's almost the type of thing where I'd like to have asked the reporter a couple of follow-ups. You know what the cool this is though? In about 2 1/2 weeks, I don't think anyone is going to give a crap about 2024 for a little while, which will be sweet.

Regardless if it's bid interest buzz or bust I'm curious if Flushing Meadows area is a viable Olympic park, can there be a London Type stadium developed there and would major development make any sense in that area?

Was it part of the last bid in a significant way other than tennis?

Is it too removed from Manhattan to be what people want in a games in The City?

I don't think it's a terrible idea, I'm just not sure how to make it work in terms of legacy. Remember, the final plan for the 2012 bid was to build a new stadium for the Mets where Citi Field currently stands and then convert it a la Centennial Olympic Stadium/Turner Field. I don't think the proximity to the city would be a huge issue. Recent bids haven't always had that main hub of action in the city center. Part of the problem though is that the city (as well as the Mets) already have plans to build and rehabilitate the area in and around Willets Point, and that's already in the planning stages. It could hurt 2024 bid efforts because if there are plans for that area, it may eliminate an option for the main stadium and a village. So while it's a viable option now, it may not still be in 5 years come election time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here is saying that this story is concrete proof of anything and none of us are arguing that there will definitely be a New York bid. It is one of several stories that have come out since the revenue deal mentioning NYC, Chicago and Dallas for 2024. All of them were very short on specifics.

If some people choose to regard the story as meaningless and unworthy of their time -- fine. But there's no point in losing your cool with those of us who are simply using this story as a springboard to discuss what a hypothetical NYC bid might look like.

I feel like there are several of you (esp. Zeke and Quaker) who are upset with those of us who don't want to completely dismiss the story the way you have. It's your right to dismiss it. It's our right to imagine the possibilities.

If someone were saying that New York were off to the races perhaps I can understand challenging them, but nobody's saying that.

Not everyone shares your opinion that the story is 100% meaningless and unworthy of conversation. Just accept that and move on to a thread that you consider more deserving of your attention.

And by the way, all bids start with unsubstantiated rumors.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who are simply using this story as a springboard to discuss what a hypothetical NYC bid might look like.

You want to use it as a springboard to discuss what a hypothetical NYC bid might look like, that's a great conversation.

I feel like there are several of you (esp. Zeke and Quaker) who are upset with those of us who don't want to completely dismiss the story the way you have. It's your right to dismiss it. It's our right to imagine the possibilities.

Imagine all the possibilities you want. That's cool. I love dreaming about the Olympics in NYC. But don't overstate what the artcle says. If you do, people might just point out the article doesn't say what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And by the way, all bids start with unsubstantiated rumors.....

Often these rumors are intentionally started by bid organizers themselves as a way to measure public response without having to go public and risk bad political repercussions.

Something to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often these rumors are intentionally started by bid organizers themselves as a way to measure public response without having to go public and risk bad political repercussions.

Something to think about.

Thanks for that.

It's hard to imagine that any reporter would write a story that is 100% fiction. Even though no sources were named, they had to get this information from somewhere other than their own imagination.

I can see why people would want to test the waters before making the commitment of going on record.

Of course none of that means that NYC (or any other American city for that matter) will ultimately bid for 2024. It could be construed as a flicker of hope for those that choose to do so -- certainly more than no story at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^That's all fine N dandy. But I'd still be very interested to know where the "reporter" gets the info that Chicago N Dallas R giving New York "good competition".

It's one thing to speculate about the potentials of a New York bid in this article, but when it starts throwing out names of other places without anymore as much as a simple mentioning of them, it makes me skeptical of the story N just goes to that old saying; "don't believe everything that you read".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^That's all fine N dandy. But I'd still be very interested to know where the "reporter" gets the info that Chicago N Dallas R giving New York "good competition".

It's one thing to speculate about the potentials of a New York bid in this article, but when it starts throwing out names of other places without anymore as much as a simple mentioning of them, it makes me skeptical of the story N just goes to that old saying; "don't believe everything that you read".

So all outta thin air, huh?

I think the Olympic Stadium can be built in Randall's Island. Maybe renovate the Icahn Stadium.

That's been floated as a possibility, but space is extremely tight and there's a major problem with ingress and egress -- not to mention the fact that the natural, park-like setting (one of the few in New York) would be destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Olympic Stadium can be built in Randall's Island. Maybe renovate the Icahn Stadium.

omg that's a really good idea. it would be a little tight, but who cares. i love randall's island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems i'm a bit late to this argument ha.

I hadn't heard anything of a Dallas games, i don't go out looking for research but this helped me know there are a few cities interested in 2024. I would love a US games but only really in NYC or Chicago. Past bidders, well known cities. Honestly don't know about Dallas or Philadelphia.

If Toronto goes up and bids and Paris does and possibly Africa and then some i think to say the least 2024 will be a very compelling bid process

I live in Dallas and we don't have the facilities to host the Olympic games, and I don't mean the sporting facilities only. Plus it would not be "just Dallas" as it would also have to include the surrounding cities. In order to host the football (soccer) matches, two stadiums would have to be in use, one in Dallas proper (the Cotton Bowl), and the other one (Cowboys Stadium) in Arlington, which is in neighboring Tarrant County, with a third, much smaller soccer stadium, FC Dallas Stadium in Frisco, which is in neighboring Collin County or even on the campuses of SMU (Dallas), TCU (Fort Worth) and North Texas (Denton). Plus the ceremonies would have to take place at Cowboys Stadium.

The Indoor sports require multiple indoor facilities. American Airlines Center is a given. There are smaller, newer arenas in Frisco and Allen (which is also in Collin County) as well as the extremely old Fair Park Arena, the extremely old Dallas Convention Center Arena, the extremely old Tarrant County Convention Center as well as the arenas of the local colleges.

There would also be no place for track and field or the Olympic Village. There would also be serious issues regarding hotels for families of the athletes, international broadcasters and other essential personnel. Dallas will want those people to stay in the hotels downtown, which causes travel issues when they have to go to Arlington or Fort Worth for events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Dallas and we don't have the facilities to host the Olympic games, and I don't mean the sporting facilities only. Plus it would not be "just Dallas" as it would also have to include the surrounding cities. In order to host the football (soccer) matches, two stadiums would have to be in use, one in Dallas proper (the Cotton Bowl), and the other one (Cowboys Stadium) in Arlington, which is in neighboring Tarrant County, with a third, much smaller soccer stadium, FC Dallas Stadium in Frisco, which is in neighboring Collin County or even on the campuses of SMU (Dallas), TCU (Fort Worth) and North Texas (Denton). Plus the ceremonies would have to take place at Cowboys Stadium.

The Indoor sports require multiple indoor facilities. American Airlines Center is a given. There are smaller, newer arenas in Frisco and Allen (which is also in Collin County) as well as the extremely old Fair Park Arena, the extremely old Dallas Convention Center Arena, the extremely old Tarrant County Convention Center as well as the arenas of the local colleges.

There would also be no place for track and field or the Olympic Village. There would also be serious issues regarding hotels for families of the athletes, international broadcasters and other essential personnel. Dallas will want those people to stay in the hotels downtown, which causes travel issues when they have to go to Arlington or Fort Worth for events.

I wouldn't underestimate a Dallas bid as far as sports facilities go. As someome who also lives in Big D, I'm a bit biased towards wanting to see an Olympics here, but I think the problems for any Dallas bid are transportation issues as well a city council that bickers more often than a feuding couple. You're probably familiar with the long delayed Trinity River Project that has been in development for what seems like eons now.

Facilities wise, you have have Fair Park which in addition to the Fair Park Coliseum you also have exhibition halls that could serve as temporary venues in Centennial Hall, the Fair Park Automotive Building, and perhaps the Food/Fiber Pavilion. I don't think you could use Cowboys Stadium as the site of the ceremonies. It is Arlington and I believe since it's outside Dallas city limits that would violate the Olympic Charter. You could build the Olympic Village at Fair Park simply by rezoning the surrounding area which would also remove a much needed eyesore. If the Trinity River Project ever gets done, you'd have the Texas Horse Park for equestrian as well as a whitewater park. SMU could be the site of a much needed new aquatic center for the school and you have planned renovations for Moody Coliseum in the works as well. For athletics, you could build a temporary stadium along the likes of what London has done and scale it down afterwards to a smaller 20,000 seat stadium to be used by DISD high school football, an important legacy when you consider many of the district's football stadiums are in bad shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randall's Island is a great space. Roghly half the size of Olympic Park in London... so you can't build a whole "compact village" there. But you can build a main stadium and another venue or two..

It suffers the big problem most sites in NYC have... there is already stuff there... parks, a pschy ward, industrial stuff. There's a also an unmovable highly going right down the middle of it you can't get rid of.

Then there are the transporation problems. If you could get the $billions to finish the 2nd Ave subway you've got a chance at a decent plan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't underestimate a Dallas bid as far as sports facilities go. As someome who also lives in Big D, I'm a bit biased towards wanting to see an Olympics here, but I think the problems for any Dallas bid are transportation issues as well a city council that bickers more often than a feuding couple. You're probably familiar with the long delayed Trinity River Project that has been in development for what seems like eons now.

Facilities wise, you have have Fair Park which in addition to the Fair Park Coliseum you also have exhibition halls that could serve as temporary venues in Centennial Hall, the Fair Park Automotive Building, and perhaps the Food/Fiber Pavilion. I don't think you could use Cowboys Stadium as the site of the ceremonies. It is Arlington and I believe since it's outside Dallas city limits that would violate the Olympic Charter. You could build the Olympic Village at Fair Park simply by rezoning the surrounding area which would also remove a much needed eyesore. If the Trinity River Project ever gets done, you'd have the Texas Horse Park for equestrian as well as a whitewater park. SMU could be the site of a much needed new aquatic center for the school and you have planned renovations for Moody Coliseum in the works as well. For athletics, you could build a temporary stadium along the likes of what London has done and scale it down afterwards to a smaller 20,000 seat stadium to be used by DISD high school football, an important legacy when you consider many of the district's football stadiums are in bad shape.

A revitalization of the Trinity River Project wold be the only way it could work. The odds of that happening though are slim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should demolish the UN compound and put the Olympic Village and Stadium in there.

The UN is undergoing a multi-billion dollar renovation, so that can't happen.

Icahn Stadium is an interesting option, but I have no clue how that would work logistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If some people choose to regard the story as meaningless and unworthy of their time -- fine. But there's no point in losing your cool with those of us who are simply using this story as a springboard to discuss what a hypothetical NYC bid might look like.

I feel like there are several of you (esp. Zeke and Quaker) who are upset with those of us who don't want to completely dismiss the story the way you have. It's your right to dismiss it. It's our right to imagine the possibilities.

I'm not trying dismiss the story and I don't think that's what zeke is doing either. And I'm not upset at any of you, I just think your assessment of the significance of the article is a little off-base. All we're saying is to take this story with a grain of salt, not because any of it is inaccurate reporting, but that it seems less based in actual observation (i.e. I heard person X and the head of corporation Y talking about an NY Olympic bid) and more about him asking the questions for the sake of asking questions. The article is more "is a New York Olympics being considered?" than any sort of indication that's what's actually happening. The story is not meaningless, but the take-away, IMHO, from it shouldn't necessarily be that there are rumblings of any sort of bid planning short of this 1 interested reporter.

That said, if this opens up the lines of discussion, whether it's us here or anyone else in NYC who could actuall get the ball rolling, I'm all for that. I'm certainly not trying to suppress talk of a bid and it's an interesting theory that someone would write a story like this to get a dialogue going. That's where it has to start and who knows, maybe this reporter has performed some sort of inception and someone will take a cue from it to begin those discussions and start thinking about putting together a bid.

I think the Olympic Stadium can be built in Randall's Island. Maybe renovate the Icahn Stadium.

Don't think that'll work. There's a reason Icahn Stadium only seats 5,000 and its predecessor I believe was only around 20,000. As noted, there's only 1 bus line that serves the island and the only way to get there is the 1 bridge that also serves tons of commuters from 3 boroughs. That would be a traffic nightmare to end all traffic nightmares. Plus you also have the Amtrak lines which can't be moved either, so really the amount of useable space there is already a lot less than it seems. Maybe they could put 1 smaller venue there, but that's about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...