FYI Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well, somebody is lying then. Either Doctroff or insidethegames. The latter is usually a pretty reliable source, soo.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 So it looks like the USOC is finally going to bring down the axe on Boston this coming Monday. I thought the decision would come later in August to give Boston some time to get poll numbers up following the debate. As the article suggests though, if Boston gets dropped as expected, does the USOC try to get Los Angeles in the race or is it too late? http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1028936/exclusive-usoc-set-to-make-decision-on-boston-2024-on-monday-with-los-angeles-ready-to-step-in I hope not. WHY do they have to throw in a repeat city like LA when 2024 is Paris' to lose? I mean, can't they see that? I am sure, Probst will be seeing the futility of the USOC passing up 2022 when he goes to Lima for the 2022 vote and probably gets a pulse of who the more certain 2024 bidders will be. If I were them, I would save LA for when Durban won't be running. If RSA skips 2028 (and will shoot for 2032), then run LA. If not, wait for 2032 for LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarpedReality Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well, somebody is lying then. Either Doctroff or insidethegames. The latter is usually a pretty reliable source, soo.. Insidethegames only says the USOC is meeting to make a decision. It very well could be that they will meet on Monday and affirm that Boston remains their choice. It seems like lunacy to act before the Brattle Group has finished their report for Gov. Baker next month. The deadline isn't until September so there is no need for the USOC to rush. Forget about LA, a bid from them makes no sense against Paris, Hamburg and the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 If the info is true, what a jerk: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2015/05/22/mayor-marty-walsh-cousin-boston-2024-dorchester/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryker Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Doctoroff confidently stated "Boston is our city" on Thursday. I think the USOC will continue the Boston bid. Turning Boston's bid around (no matter how impossible that may be) is the only way the USOC can save face. Doctoroff's comments are akin to an NFL owner asked by the media about the future of an embattled head coach. They always come out and "pledge full support" only to fire the coach at season's end. Boston won't make it to Lima. Either the USOC pulls the plug now or they get humiliated at a referendum vote next year. It's pick your poison at this point. Why not do it now and save time and money. Baron I agree with you regarding L.A. Why throw in a bid in a race that's practically Europe's to lose, let alone against Paris? IMO the wise decision would be to drop Boston, sit out 2024, and prep Los Angeles for 2028 with the plan that if a 2028 bid was unsuccessful that Los Angeles would automatically be the U.S. candidate in 2032. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Perhaps. However, this is a reflection of the fact that Boston 2024 is the most transparent bid in history. Before even first official IOC deadline, we are discussing financial details of Widett Circle's development and examining insurance packages. This is a precedent that will guide future bids; will another city be able to stand up to such scrutiny? Also, Boston 2024 is the first US bid since the turn of the century that has not given any indication that they would not sign an unconditional financial guarantee with the IOC. Well, the transparency obviously isn't working. For every good the Olympics brings, there will be a bad to oppose it. And the transparency will make it harder to hide the bad. That leaves both sides with plenty of ammo to destroy each other in an endless loop. Maybe the Boston team is focusing too much on the economics and logistics the Olympics will cause, and not enough on the sentiment, unity, and celebration that the Olympics will bring to Boston. Like this GB article says, Boston doesn't seem to want to do this for the athletes, sports or the experience. The whole thing seems like an excuse for the organizers to get another project into their portfolio, and not an Olympics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 I have a hard time believing the LA taxpayers would be excited to pick up the cost for an Olympics where they were considered 2nd choice to Boston... And which Boston taxpayers weren't willing to pay a dime for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Doctoroff confidently stated "Boston is our city" on Thursday. I think the USOC will continue the Boston bid. You mean like when Thomas Bach said "we still have six cities interested in the 2022 Winter Games", when Switzerland & Germany failed to put forward their expected bids? And now we have two of the most dismal choices left. Insidethegames only says the USOC is meeting to make a decision. It very well could be that they will meet on Monday and affirm that Boston remains their choice. It seems like lunacy to act before the Brattle Group has finished their report for Gov. Baker next month. The deadline isn't until September so there is no need for the USOC to rush. We were just down this road last month, though, at the last USOC meeting on precisely this very same topic: to continue or not continue with Boston. So why another meeting so soon on the very same thing, when exactly, enough time still hasn't passed for some of these hurdles. So yes, if they want to remain with Boston, this meeting seems to me premature anyway, I'd say, if "Boston is our city". But if not, then in fact there really isn't enough time if the USOC does want to proceed in another direction & just cut their losses at this point. Start working on that now for the next go around. Forget about LA, a bid from them makes no sense against Paris, Hamburg and the rest. That's right, it doesn't. I've said all along that 2024 is not going to be the U.S.' if a strong European field emerged, & that is indeed what's happening here now, especially with Paris. The only way I wouda seen a chance was if it was a solid New York candidacy, but that wasn't in the cards this time around. Though, I still believe that L.A. was the best choice to be the 2024 U.S. nominee TBW, for all the reasons that we've discussed this on these forums ad nauseum over the past couple of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 I just want to be in-the-face of those Board Members who insisted on going for 2024 instead of 2022! SUCH IDIOTS!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 I just want to be in-the-face of those Board Members who insisted on going for 2024 instead of 2022! SUCH IDIOTS!! Lmfao! Yeah, Reno would've been the HOT favorite at this Friday's vote, wouldn't it! :-D I have a hard time believing the LA taxpayers would be excited to pick up the cost for an Olympics where they were considered 2nd choice to Boston... And which Boston taxpayers weren't willing to pay a dime for. I have a hard time believing iconoclowns. :-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BR2028 Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Lmfao! Yeah, Reno would've been the HOT favorite at this Friday's vote, wouldn't it! :-D Reno wouldn't have even made it to Friday, it would be Denver or SLC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Reno wouldn't have even made it to Friday, it would be Denver or SLC. And you know this becuz??????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 And you know this becuz??????????? Who exactly do you think would pay for a Reno WOG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 I have a hard time believing the LA taxpayers would be excited to pick up the cost for an Olympics where they were considered 2nd choice to Boston... And which Boston taxpayers weren't willing to pay a dime for. I'm r In regards to the unknown support in LA: Just as London saw greater support in rehosting the Olympics after the 2012 games, the people of LA could potentially offer the same rush of support after hosting the Special Olympics this week (even though the planning and organization was pretty chaotic). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 ^Ignore the first part (including the quote). I hate typing on mobile -.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BR2028 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 Who exactly do you think would pay for a Reno WOG? Oh you know all Americans would recognize their patriotic and humanitarian duty and allow the government to raise taxes to fund the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 Mark Bisson @MBisson_ATR Boston mayor says "You'll have to ask the USOC" when asked if this was end of bid. Won't sign taxpayer guarantee #Boston2024 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryker Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 Mark Bisson @MBisson_ATR Boston mayor says "You'll have to ask the USOC" when asked if this was end of bid. Won't sign taxpayer guarantee #Boston2024 I don't see how it can go on. What this does is give the USOC a chance to save face and drop Boston but claim it lacked support from local leaders (Walsh and Baker). Essentially it allows the USOC to blame Boston for this debacle which the USOC is responsible for ever since they chose the city in the first place. I imagine this would also allow Scott Blackmun to keep his job when he should be given a pink slip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaBadger Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 I don't see how it can go on. What this does is give the USOC a chance to save face and drop Boston but claim it lacked support from local leaders (Walsh and Baker). Essentially it allows the USOC to blame Boston for this debacle which the USOC is responsible for ever since they chose the city in the first place. I imagine this would also allow Scott Blackmun to keep his job when he should be given a pink slip. I disagree that this will in any way excuse USOC for their bungled decision to anoint Boston as their candidate without fully working out the obvious political and public support obstacles such a bid faced. Even now, USOC is setting themselves up to be accused of unreasonably pressuring the Massachusetts governor and Boston mayor on support and funding commitments, which will allow those figures cover to blame USOC for making unreasonable demands, much the way the Oslo 2022 organizers were able to point to supposedly unreasonable demands of the IOC when they backed out of their bid. The Boston bid team can be blamed for many things. But this debacle was not unpredictable and USOC deserves the lion's share of the responsibility for the fallout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarpedReality Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 I don't see how it can go on. It won't. Within 24 hours we'll hear that the USOC has decided not to bid for the 2024 games. It is a sad day for the Olympic movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JO2024 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 So Boston's mayor just said "NO, I won't sign this"? Is it the same mayor as the one who got Boston to candidate for an US 2024 bid? Or is it a different one? Real question here, I'm not being sarcastic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 It won't. Within 24 hours we'll hear that the USOC has decided not to bid for the 2024 games. It is a sad day for the Olympic movement. I wouldn't be too sure about that. It looks like the IOC has been "quietly" telling the USOC that Los Angeles would be the better option afterall. I'm sure anything at this point, even if it's 'been there, done that L.A.', would be better than nothing so it doesn't become "a sad day for the Olympic movement". The IOC surely doesn't want any resemblance of the 2022 race whatsoever. And to still have an American bid in the 2024 race would be nothing but beneficial to Bach & his cronies. I'm sure Bach must be on the phone with Blackmun right at this very moment telling him to get L.A. on the horn ASAP! It wouldn't be good for the USOC to totally pull out now anyway, after they've been painstakenly trying to mend relations with the IOC for the past six years. To bail out now would be a big slap in the face for both organizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 ...perhaps they both need a slap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JO2024 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 And yet, I still think it would be best for the USOC. So they could come back as definite frontrunner for 2028. Though it's never too late for LA to go for it, Toronto is just about to do it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 And yet, I still think it would be best for the USOC. So they could come back as definite frontrunner for 2028. Though it's never too late for LA to go for it, Toronto is just about to do it.... And this is why the USOC should also stick L.A. in there, so Toronto doesn't become the sole North American entrant. Part of their reasoning & changing their mind to bid is bcuz Boston is likely to faulter. So why not put a big wrench in their train of thought anyway. ...perhaps they both need a slap. Well, that's a whole other topic, isn't it lmfao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.