Jump to content

USOC Forms Committee To Study Possible Olympic Bid


GBModerator

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

They've said it will not be an open domestic process like it was in the past. It's a "don't call us, we'll call you" situation instead.

Well, it will be a 2-way street. If there is no interest on one side, NOTHING's going to happen. It'll all be a matter of mutual discussion and partnership.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And what a potential Mitt Rommery? ;)

Perhaps he can prove that he can chair a bid from the start (or at least as El Presidente, support it). He can speak Franch with foreign relations in relation to the bid.

They may understand him more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They just need to find a city with a local government and a population that is totally in the tank for hosting the Olympics. But it will be interesting to see if they can't encourage one of the big U.S. cities to submit a bid. Dallas might end up the winner. I will not give up hope on both Boston and Philadelphia. I admit that there are couple places I'm not a fan of that might be considered to bid, but what matters is bringing the Olympics to the United States and if one of these places can put together a serious bid that can win then it'll get my vote!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not bid till Obama is out of office.

I know we covered this in another thread, but again, why does that make a difference? And since the USOC has tabled any bidding up until the 2024 Olympics, that means the next vote the USOC could possibly be involved with would occur after the next presidential term.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of addressing the pointless provocation above.....

I will say that no other country in the world has so many cities that are legitimate candidates to host the Games.

Chicago

LA

NYC

San Francisco

Philadelphia

Washington DC

Miami

Dallas

And people still argue about the more questionable Houston, Minneapolis, Boston, Atlanta as well as other less likely contenders.

That unofficial shortlist of 8 cities cannot be matched by any other country. Why some feel the need to lengthen the list and crusade for the merits of other cities baffles me. Most countries have one -- maybe two cities that can realistically host Summer Games. Perhaps three if you really push it. The US has at least EIGHT cities that can reasonably hope to host the Games. That's phenomenal. If we cycled through all eight cities with skimpy 20 year gaps in between, we would have American host cities through 2164.

Do we really need to argue about adding other cities to the mix? Isn't 8 MORE than enough?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of addressing the pointless provocation above.....

I will say that no other country in the world has so many cities that are legitimate candidates to host the Games.

Chicago

LA

NYC

San Francisco

Philadelphia

Washington DC

Miami

Dallas

And people still argue about the more questionable Houston, Minneapolis, Boston, Atlanta as well as other less likely contenders.

I think the debate is which cities ARE in that top set? A case can be made for Houston - soon to be the third largest city in the US and more reflective of the current melting-pot make-up of the US than Chicago is. Similarly, Boston could be argued to outclass Dallas or Philadelphia. On the other hand, one can argue that an SF should never been in the list as the probability of some activist citizens pulling a Denver '76 is just too high.

Instead of addressing the pointless provocation above.....

Given the posting behavior, which seems to mirror that of Kernowboy and Blacksheep, I expect s/he will soon be instructed to no longer grace us with her/his presence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Canis, I'm not so sure about your Houston v. Chicago demographic comparison. Does it really matter if the host city's demographics mirror those of the whole nation? Chicago is incredibly diverse with a large Latino and Muslim population. It still feels like a very cosmopolitan, multi-cultural city. I haven't been too Houston, so I'm not qualified to compare, but it's hard for me to imagine Houston feeling more diverse than Chicago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the debate is which cities ARE in that top set? A case can be made for Houston - soon to be the third largest city in the US and more reflective of the current melting-pot make-up of the US than Chicago is. Similarly, Boston could be argued to outclass Dallas or Philadelphia. On the other hand, one can argue that an SF should never been in the list as the probability of some activist citizens pulling a Denver '76 is just too high.

Clearly SF has the type of population and mindset that there could be serious opposition to an Olympics, but the city has also had would could amount to 2 dry runs through the bid process. Certainly when big money is involved it could be a different story, but I can't envision in the age of social media seeing the type of uprising that took down Denver 1976. Either way, I don't think that factor, even though it's notable, I don't think it means SF can't be on the list.

And as for Houston, the population of the city proper may rival Chicago, but the metro area population is still well behind. It would be like counting San Francisco based only on their population and not taking into account the entire Bay Area. I think Houston could make a case, but the weather there makes them a tough sell. They've built 3 climate-controlled stadiums there for a reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, one can argue that an SF should never been in the list as the probability of some activist citizens pulling a Denver '76 is just too high.

I don't think so in that regard. The USOC likes San Francisco, despite their past Gay Games acrimony, because (and I agree) it's America's most 'European-feel' city and that makes it an easy sell to the Euro-centric IOC.

SF is a fairly compact city. As a matter of fact, the upcoming weekend of October 6 and 7 will see one of the largest crowds to come into the city. http://www.sfgate.co...nts-3882483.php

Within SF limits alone, there are just 39,000+ hotel rooms (of all classes) that can be easily made available for an Olympics. There are another 20,000 in the surrounding cities (Palo Alto, San Mateo, Oakland, San Jose, Berkeley) where other potential venues may be located. So the lodging infrastructure is already there and can probably be locked up 5 years in advance.

Where Chicago, NY, Philly, Dallas, Houston, etc. will be sweltering in July and August, SF offers the coolest climate in the US for that period. What did Mark Twain say? The coldest winter he spent was a summer in San Francisco.

Yes, if SF can only get a stadium going, all the rest can line up. A temporary stadium is an option as it was in London. Who knows? Maybe if Ellison wins next year's America's Cup, he might be motivated to go for the bigger prize.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so in that regard. The USOC likes San Francisco, despite their past Gay Games acrimony, because (and I agree) it's America's most 'European-feel' city and that makes it an easy sell to the Euro-centric IOC.

I don't disagree that the IOC likes SF - I can certainly imagine they would. My point is that the city is one of militant earth-muffins. Remember this is the city where a homeless guy managed to legally block the construction of bicycle lanes.

Clearly SF has the type of population and mindset that there could be serious opposition to an Olympics, but the city has also had would could amount to 2 dry runs through the bid process. Certainly when big money is involved it could be a different story, but I can't envision in the age of social media seeing the type of uprising that took down Denver 1976. ...

... I think Houston could make a case, but the weather there makes them a tough sell. They've built 3 climate-controlled stadiums there for a reason.

I think Social Media makes it even worse. Take Chicagoans, a citizenry that normally falls in line behind the political machine. Despite that, Chicago had some of the weakest citizen support for a bid of any city. At the time, twitter wasn't even mainstream. Imagine the protests and sit-ins a small "Chicagoans for Rio" could manage today? They'd be a real threat to the games.

Now take that to the militant earth muffins of SF. If they mobilize, the Games will be dead quicker than you can say "76".

On Houston - yea, good point on the weather - would be like hosting in Hong Kong or Singapore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now take that to the militant earth muffins of SF. If they mobilize, the Games will be dead quicker than you can say "76".

Not really. I was surprised that the SF 2012 and 2016 efforts got as far as they did. Hey, this and next year, SF is hosting another rich man's sport, the America's Cup. And the homeless and malcontent sectors have said not a peep about it. If the city power elite want something, they can get it and send those homeless somewhere else. Or part of whatever VIllage there will be the homeless can inherit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree that the IOC likes SF - I can certainly imagine they would. My point is that the city is one of militant earth-muffins. Remember this is the city where a homeless guy managed to legally block the construction of bicycle lanes.

I think Social Media makes it even worse. Take Chicagoans, a citizenry that normally falls in line behind the political machine. Despite that, Chicago had some of the weakest citizen support for a bid of any city. At the time, twitter wasn't even mainstream. Imagine the protests and sit-ins a small "Chicagoans for Rio" could manage today? They'd be a real threat to the games.

Now take that to the militant earth muffins of SF. If they mobilize, the Games will be dead quicker than you can say "76".

On Houston - yea, good point on the weather - would be like hosting in Hong Kong or Singapore.

I just like reading the phrase "militant earth muffins"...... :)

BTW, it looks like the crusades have subsided -- at least for the moment......

Hallelujah.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the posse worked!

I saw some of his comments before he got tossed. You guys did the right thing, he needed to go. Anyways, re: San Francisco...

First off, I also love the phrase "militant Earth muffins." Goes right up there with the South Park episode ripping them to shreds. I wouldn't count SF out based solely on their citizenry. They still have the matter of new stadia for the 49ers and Raiders. I know that's what derailed an Olympic bid once before, but if they can find a way to make that work (which it probably won't, especially if the 49ers remained committed to moving to Santa Clara), I think they'll be able to drum up some public support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for almost a week, I was in the New York City area for my cousin's wedding. Without thinking about it, she and her friends started to talk a possible bid for another Olympic Games for the city. It was not a big discussion about the issue, but considering that she is a specialized internalist doctor, she is potentially seeing the idea of having specialized venues for the Olympic Games as a good idea for the city.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely no US city is going to successfully bid for the Olympics all the while that there's effectively zero US public interest in the Paralympics. The Paras are a lot more than just a contractual obligation after London and there's no way that the IOC/IPC are going to risk empty stadia, which is what they'll get anywhere in the US in 2024 if the media hasn't started covering the games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...