zekekelso Posted November 4, 2013 Report Share Posted November 4, 2013 Has anyone heard from Mitt Romney on a possible Boston bid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshi Posted November 4, 2013 Report Share Posted November 4, 2013 Well, you see, there's a difference between a bumbling buffoon & a bumbling crack-smoking buffoon. I have no time at all for Boris, but at least he's stayed on the right side of the law AFAIK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathesgelatin Posted November 4, 2013 Report Share Posted November 4, 2013 Has anyone heard from Mitt Romney on a possible Boston bid He made a statement about it - he supports the idea of a 2014 Boston bid. http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/10/mitt_romney_backs_boston_as_24_olympic_host Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningrings Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 London didn't have Boris Johnson as mayor when we won the bid though. He became mayor three years later. It was Ken Livingstone who pushed for the bid, who persuaded government to back it, who put forward City funds, who helped push forward the complex regneration and the Olympic Park build. Boris Johnson came along later, plonked his Orbit in the middle of it all and smiled for photos. I think a serious and committed Mayor is important in the initial stages. Is it not the elephant in the room that Boris was critical of London's Olympic aspirations, prior to becoming mayor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 He made a statement about it - he supports the idea of a 2014 Boston bid. http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/10/mitt_romney_backs_boston_as_24_olympic_host A little too late for Boston 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathesgelatin Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 A little too late for Boston 2014. Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boston_2024 Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Not sure what the joke is about 2014 but he thinks Boston is the best U.S. option for 2024. I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Of course you would...your name is 'Boston 2024'. Love how Massachusetts loves Romney when he supports an Olympic Bid, but tend to vote against him in an election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Of course you would...your name is 'Boston 2024'. Love how Massachusetts loves Romney when he supports an Olympic Bid, but tend to vote against him in an election. I don't think it that weird that peopel who approve of a person to do one job, but not another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 I don't think it that weird that peopel who approve of a person to do one job, but not another. Just trying to make a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 A Toronto bid is not dead and quite probable. Even with 3 years of this mayor the economy was strong, the streets were clean, crime is low, projects were getting approved and our budget surplus increased under his watch (the only reason he has any support at all). He likely won't last the next few months judging by the public sentiment and the motions being planned by city council. Toronto functions well even with a crappy mayor, it will present itself well even more so in the years to come, before a 2024 bid is due, as our city demographics become more progressive and downtown focused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 Massachusetts is progressive and too accepting for someone whose stance on social issues are so biggoted... he needs to get out of the 1950's. Politics aside, he did wonders in SLC. A bigot? Standing for your religious morals is being a bigot? Look I get everyone has different views on many different topics, but honestly. Anyways back to the olympics he did do great things for SLC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisValentine Posted November 8, 2013 Report Share Posted November 8, 2013 Massachusetts is progressive and too accepting for someone whose stance on social issues are so biggoted... he needs to get out of the 1950's. Politics aside, he did wonders in SLC. It would seem to me that it would be best to not insult your supporters, particularly when the entire endeavor is so precarious. Of course, as a Romney voter, maybe I'm just biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissO Posted November 12, 2013 Report Share Posted November 12, 2013 2 interesting videos : http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/23937767/2013/11/11/prominent-business-leaders-exploring-boston-as-host-of-the-olympics-in-2024?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=9515853#.UoFp3CjETj0.twitter http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/23937767/2013/11/11/prominent-business-leaders-exploring-boston-as-host-of-the-olympics-in-2024?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=9515853#.UoFp3CjETj0.twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Regardless of where an Olympic stadium goes, what is it going to be used for after the games? NFL teams hate track equipped stadiums, so I have a hard time seeing the Patriots agreeing to play there. An association football/soccer team (the Rev) would have the same issue. Boston College seems like the only reasonable user to me (since Harvard probably won't be interested.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamRik Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Regardless of where an Olympic stadium goes, what is it going to be used for after the games? NFL teams hate track equipped stadiums, so I have a hard time seeing the Patriots agreeing to play there. An association football/soccer team (the Rev) would have the same issue. Boston College seems like the only reasonable user to me (since Harvard probably won't be interested.) The Patriots have a the #7 top ranked Stadium they certainly don't want or need a new one, however Robert Kraft and The New England Revolution have been planning on building a stadium EXACTLY like this and have been looking for the right location for quite some time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 The Patriots have a the #7 top ranked Stadium they certainly don't want or need a new one, however Robert Kraft and The New England Revolution have been planning on building a stadium EXACTLY like this and have been looking for the right location for quite some time... They haven't been looking to build a stadium exactly like this since this one has to be equipped with 8 track lanes. Building a stadium for athletics/track would result in a very poor NFL stadium. I don't think any of the NFL stadiums built in the last 40 years has had a track. You would have to redevelop the stadium afterwards to suit the needs of the Patriots. London has done the same thing with their stadium, so it's certainly possible. But it will certainly increase the cost of the stadium, and it is in the best interest of the Patriots to do a football specific stadium from the beginning. So I doubt they will be very cooperative with it unless they get very favorable terms on their lease of the stadium afterwards. If you build a collegiate stadium you probably wouldn't have to rebuild the seating afterwards. While most colleges are moving away from dual purpose stadiums too, there are still quite a few of them out there that have track lanes. Sorry, I thought you wrote Patriots instead of Revolution. However the same thing is true for soccer/association football as American football. West Ham wanted London's Olympic Stadium rebuilt to accomodate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Note - Bob Kraft owns the Patriots. He also owns Gillette Stadium, and much of the land around Gillette, from which he makes tons and tons of money. There is zero chance of the Patriots moving anywhere (despite the fact the Foxborough is an idiotic place for an NFL stadium). Foxborough is an even more idiotic place for a MLS stadium. Karft claims he's trying hard to find someplace for a soccer-specific stadium, but he wants a sweetheart deal (free land, government pays for infrastructure, he gets to buy-up surrounding land and get rich ala Patriots Place). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Like Nacre it depends on how Boston will utilize the games. We know Philly is out, Chicago is not participating, and Boston vs DC vs LA seems to be the likely run, so out of all these cities who do you all think will develop the best plan? My bets are on LA rumors point that the current LA river revitalization project will be combined with a 2024 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamRik Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Like Nacre it depends on how Boston will utilize the games. We know Philly is out, Chicago is not participating, and Boston vs DC vs LA seems to be the likely run, so out of all these cities who do you all think will develop the best plan? My bets are on LA rumors point that the current LA river revitalization project will be combined with a 2024 games. DC seems to be far and away the most organized and serious, if LA won it would be just because they're LA and have had the games before but LA is not the LA it once was like people still have trapped in their heads... I think if Boston would actually work together as they really have since appointing their community it could be quite an amazing and dynamic bid, before it was just pipe dreams and arguments now it seems to be realistic teamwork, we have the means of building anything we need for these games and are the most innovative city in the country our largest obstacle is creating believers everyone can post 100 times about stadium, stadium, stadium but we have more creative, innovative minds in this city than anywhere.. It would benefit the committee to utilize those minds rather than create their own And our next 10 years of approved transportation overhauls & upgrades proves what we can accomplish, and the projects we have completed while the rest of the country was in recession does as well, Boston was the only city to not halt or cancel projects during that time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 and Boston vs DC vs LA seems to be the likely run, Uhmmm...Dallas is a serious runner in this...and probably has the most viable Athletics stadium plan after LA. It'll all depend on whether RSA presents Durban. And if Durban runs, then it doesn't matter which US city is viable or not. They'll have to wait another 2 rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Like Nacre it depends on how Boston will utilize the games. We know Philly is out, Chicago is not participating, and Boston vs DC vs LA seems to be the likely run, so out of all these cities who do you all think will develop the best plan? My bets are on LA rumors point that the current LA river revitalization project will be combined with a 2024 games. Where is everyone getting that DC is the most organized and serious? Maybe someone could come along with a plan for the RFK Stadium site, but the fact that it's DC means it's a bureaucratic nightmare waiting to happen, so I don't know how easily they'll get off the ground. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't remember seeing where Philly is out. As noted, don't discount Dallas. I know a lot of people here are saying it's too much like Atlanta and the USOC will shy away from them, but they have more of a stadium plan in place than any other city out there, save maybe for Los Angeles. That alone will make the USOC want to listen. Then there's Boston. I'm having trouble getting a read on them based on what I've seen here. I know there's an effort to put some sort of bid together, but it still seems like it's progressing very slowly and right now seems more like a theory than a physical concept. And you're right, we can post 100 times about the stadium, but eventually, that part of this needs to become a reality. Even if Boston does have the most creative minds out there, it takes more than a vision to put together an Olympic bid. At some point, probably sooner rather than later, it needs to be more than a vision and a lot of people need to be on board for the effort. That's the challenge that faces Boston. To say nothing of the fact of who they'd be up against, but domestically and internationally. Note - Bob Kraft owns the Patriots. He also owns Gillette Stadium, and much of the land around Gillette, from which he makes tons and tons of money. There is zero chance of the Patriots moving anywhere (despite the fact the Foxborough is an idiotic place for an NFL stadium). Foxborough is an even more idiotic place for a MLS stadium. Karft claims he's trying hard to find someplace for a soccer-specific stadium, but he wants a sweetheart deal (free land, government pays for infrastructure, he gets to buy-up surrounding land and get rich ala Patriots Place). Maybe it is, but at least it's less idiotic than Hartford. And that was real close to happening before Kraft decided to keep the team in Foxborough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Dallas the "small" problem of pursuading the local and state legistalture to pony up $billions to bring in a bunch of fereigners who play sissy sports (i.e. not football). With Congression controll over Washington DC, and the current disfunction in Congress, there's no way they can put forth a coherent bid. Boston will have the support it needs... just a matter of whether they are large enough to be credible. Finally, there is LA. LA could bid and could win. But to they have the people who place who will push forward and make it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamRik Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Dallas the "small" problem of pursuading the local and state legistalture to pony up $billions to bring in a bunch of fereigners who play sissy sports (i.e. not football). With Congression controll over Washington DC, and the current disfunction in Congress, there's no way they can put forth a coherent bid. Boston will have the support it needs... just a matter of whether they are large enough to be credible. Finally, there is LA. LA could bid and could win. But to they have the people who place who will push forward and make it happen. until people on our bid committee say things like: "I wouldnt let my family go to the Sochi Winter Olympics" http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/01/ex_bpd_commish_attack_on_sochi_olympics_almost_impossible_to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphacarter Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 Not sure if this has been posted, or if anyone has seen it, but here's the link to DC's site. http://dc2024.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.