Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Rik, this is what we're getting at here. Yes, those are allowed. But name 1 cooperative host city bid that was endorsed by their NOC? You need to find better examples to compare Boston to or else they're not going to gain much traction.

Here's the bottom line and not to speak for the forum here, but I know several others feel the same way.. there are numerous cities out there that could host a successful Olympics, including many in the United States. At the end of the day though, this is a competition. And it's an expensive one merely to participate in. Boston may be able to present themselves as a suitable setting for a Summer Olympics, but all that is going to matter at the end of the day is how they stack up against the competition. Again, I admire your dedication and passion, but forgive us if we don't view Boston as "an amazing opportunity" when there are other cities out there that can easily claim to be equally amazing

Excuse me but I don't need to name you Winning Cities that was not the argument... The Argument was that COOPERATIVE BIDS and STADIUMS NOT LOCATED IN THE SAME STATE! OR the HOST CITY are ALLOWED.. .

Any city that makes it past any round of voting, including the first round has been approved of these stated above, they do not make it to the short list or to a candidate bid without that.. LIKE NEW YORK CITY 3rd RUNNER UP - NEW JERSEY 2012!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse me but I don't need to name you Winning Cities that was not the argument... The Argument was that COOPERATIVE BIDS and STADIUMS NOT LOCATED IN THE SAME STATE! OR the HOST CITY are ALLOWED.. .

That IS the argument, bcuz those "bids" that you're talking about NEVER made to the IOC's voting table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple quick ideas

- New Construction in South Boston where Kraft wanted to build a stadium for the Patriots

- Temporary expansion of Harvard Stadium, which previously held a 400m track (barely).

These are very good ideas. The empty landscape in Wonderland is another option as well. If Boston wants the Games, they will find a spot for the main stadium. I honestly prefer a temporary stadium... no white elephants, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Newbie haha...

Only to communicating with uneducated, contradictory statements that carry no merit or really a response to anything I have said..

I am far from a newbie in this life and I have been reading this attack tactic garbage to every person that has submitted a bid potential... my mistake was joining in

NEW JERSEY 2012!

NEW JERSEY 2012!
NEW JERSEY 2012!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chicago outspread along Lake Michigan... Stadium? the far outer south side of Washington Park (NOT CHICAGO!) would have to build their ENTIRE BID OF VENUES! what was their bid about? The city 2nd to Boston thats hosts all 5 mens and women's major sports.

Ummmm, the south side of Chicago IS actually part of Chicago proper. Washington Park is merely one of the MANY "neighborhoods" WITHIN the City of Chicago. So who's really the 'joke & clueless' one here. Seriously, this isn't the way to win over support for your cause. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That IS the argument, bcuz those "bids" that you're talking about NEVER made to the IOC's voting table.

They Didn't That's crazy since they were Runners up in the Candidate Final Rounds!

Ummmm, the south side of Chicago IS actually part of Chicago proper. Washington Park is merely one of the MANY "neighborhoods" WITHIN the City of Chicago. So who's really the 'joke & clueless' one here. Seriously, this isn't the way to win over support for your cause. :rolleyes:

ok so allowed in Chicago but not in Boston... because your map includes no neighborhoods of Boston Proper ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That IS the argument, bcuz those "bids" that you're talking about NEVER made to the IOC's voting table.

Correct. Early, exploratory, formative stages...such as what you are engaging in now...is NOT considered IOC-approved certification. Prospective cities are merely getting their ducks in a row. You have to get ALL of that in line because once you are presented by your NOC (in our case, the USOC) to the IOC, then you must have all your i's dotted and your t's crossed because your bid will now be weighed and judged vs. the other international finalists. And like any competition, the one who obeyed all the early submission rules will move on to the next stage.

Take a deep breath, Rik. What we are doing here, for you, is playing Devil's Advocate so Boston can come up with a fantastic, waterproof bid that we all can get behind and pull for. That is essentially what we are putting you through here. Take it in that spirit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They Didn't That's crazy since they were Runners up in the Candidate Final Rounds!

ok so allowed in Chicago but not in Boston... because your map includes no neighborhoods of Boston Proper ;-)

and you guys need to keep better track of who said what to who because your throwing facts and **** at me to quotes I did not say :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rio is split into 4 olympic centers Barra, Copacabana, Deodoro, Maracana and multiple further cities like Sao Paulo this is not Rio!... and their entire bid is about what!?... FIFA WORLD CUP

Four clusters that are still WITHIN the City of Rio. Sao Paulo is playing host to soccer & nothing else. We've said repeatedly that Foxboro could do the same.

ok so allowed in Chicago but not in Boston... because your map includes no neighborhoods of Boston Proper ;-)

Ummmm, haven't we talked about South Boston/Dorchester?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. Early, exploratory, formative stages...such as what you are engaging in now...is NOT considered IOC-approved certification. Prospective cities are merely getting their ducks in a row. You have to get ALL of that in line because once you are presented by your NOC (in our case, the USOC) to the IOC, then you must have all your i's dotted and your t's crossed because your bid will now be weighed and judged vs. the other international finalists. And like any competition, the one who obeyed all the early submission rules will move on to the next stage.

Take a deep breath, Rik. What we are doing here, for you, is playing Devil's Advocate so Boston can come up with a fantastic, waterproof bid that we all can get behind and pull for. That is essentially what we are putting you through here. Take it in that spirit.

I'll say it again... your doing nothing for me. I am not part of this committee... much deeper...

have a great night. I'm DONE

Four clusters that are still WITHIN the City of Rio. Sao Paulo is playing host to soccer & nothing else. We've said repeatedly that Foxboro could do the same.

Ummmm, haven't we talked about South Boston/Dorchester?

Those are Villages :-) Not Greater Boston ummm haven't we talked about that!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not when these documents never made it to the IOC TBW. What's so hard to comprehend about this,

So according to you, all the things that are printed in bid documents, delivered to the IOC are lies, incorrect and not accepted.. Got it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. Early, exploratory, formative stages...such as what you are engaging in now...is NOT considered IOC-approved certification. Prospective cities are merely getting their ducks in a row. You have to get ALL of that in line because once you are presented by your NOC (in our case, the USOC) to the IOC, then you must have all your i's dotted and your t's crossed because your bid will now be weighed and judged vs. the other international finalists. And like any competition, the one who obeyed all the early submission rules will move on to the next stage.

Take a deep breath, Rik. What we are doing here, for you, is playing Devil's Advocate so Boston can come up with a fantastic, waterproof bid that we all can get behind and pull for. That is essentially what we are putting you through here. Take it in that spirit.

And I have already been through a successful international bid process, I am not here for your coaching.... Especially when it lacks any comprehension of viable information relayed back to you in whats considered a 2 way conversation :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll say it again... your doing nothing for me. I am not part of this committee... much deeper...

Well then, I can outsmack & trash-talk if u want...but from the looks of it...u are so not worth my time. Oh yea, TeamRik -- team of one. Gotcha.

And I have already been through a successful international bid process, I am not here for your coaching.... Especially when it lacks any comprehension of viable information relayed back to you in whats considered a 2 way conversation :-)

Sure could've fooled me. Well,more power 2 u, all-knowing 1.

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They Didn't That's crazy since they were Runners up in the Candidate Final Rounds!

No they weren't. They weren't even 'runner's up' in the USOC rounds. Washington/Baltimore & Tampa/Orlando 2012 never got selected to be the USOC candidate for 2012. It was New York City.

Paris bid separate northern and western clusters - London took trashy hamlets and created a new city called lower key valley for the centerpeace of its bid. That is not London proper!

And those example are still only 6 miles from their respective city centers, UNLIKE Gillette Stadium to Boston, a far-flung 20+ miles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse me but I don't need to name you Winning Cities that was not the argument... The Argument was that COOPERATIVE BIDS and STADIUMS NOT LOCATED IN THE SAME STATE! OR the HOST CITY are ALLOWED.. .

Any city that makes it past any round of voting, including the first round has been approved of these stated above, they do not make it to the short list or to a candidate bid without that.. LIKE NEW YORK CITY 3rd RUNNER UP - NEW JERSEY 2012!

I never said they weren't, but when was 1 of them successful.

Why don't you take a breath and calm down and stop shouting. Some of us here, particularly baron, are trying to calmly explain to you the flaws in your logic. And yes, you have lots of flaws in your logic. If you want us to have a rational discussion, maybe your introduction to this board shouldn't have been to compare the Olympics to the Gay Games. Nor should you have posited that Fenway Park could host the Ceremonies or that Gillette Stadium was ever under consideration to host the Super Bowl. Those statements are FALSE, so excuse us for trying to point these things out to you and have you jump on us as people who don't know what we're talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not when these documents never made it to the IOC TBW. What's so hard to comprehend about this,

INSANE... HOW CAN A VOTED ON CANDIDATE CITY THAT PLACES IN A RUNNER UP POSITION AFTER THREE ROUNDS OF BALLOTED ELECTIONS NOT HAVE BID DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE IOC... YOUR INSANE!

I HAVE ONLY SAID IT 10 TIMES! ...

NEW YORK CITY - THIRD RUNNER UP - 2012

ACTUAL LOCATION NEW JERSEY!

MADE IT TO THE SHORT LIST

MADE IT TO THE CANDIDATE LIST

MADE IT THROUGH THE EVALUATION PROCESS IN 4th PLACE RIO 8TH PLACE LONDON 3RD

SUBMITTED CANDIDICY APPLICATIONS!

MADE IT TO FINAL ROUND OF VOTING LONDON 1ST PARIS 2ND MADRID 3RD NYC 4TH MOSCOW 5TH RIO DID NOT MAKE THE FINAL ROUND!

THAT IS THE COMPLETE BID PROCESS NEWS FLASH!

NYC 2012 in YOUR rules EQUALS NEW JERSEY 2012!!!

and Again all their Venues that are the same age and size to Bostons are Viable to you but not in Bostons Case got it!

No they weren't. They weren't even 'runner's up' in the USOC rounds. Washington/Baltimore & Tampa/Orlando 2012 never got selected to be the USOC candidate for 2012. It was New York City.

And those example are still only 6 miles from their respective city centers, UNLIKE Gillette Stadium to Boston, a far-flung 20+ miles.

I WAS TALKING ABOUT NYC!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

So when NYC Bid for 2012 and was the 3rd runner up there concept was not to have SEVERAL OLYMPIC CLUSTERS SPREAD OUT in Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn and East RUTHERFORD NEW JERSEY where guess what kids THE OLYMPIC STADIUM would have been in NEW JERSEY.. Meadowlands, Flushing Meadows!? NOT NICE PLACES and NOT CLOSE

You are INCORRECT. New York's 2012 original stadium plan was to be located on the West-side of Manhattan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

INSANE... HOW CAN A VOTED ON CANDIDATE CITY THAT PLACES IN A RUNNER UP POSITION AFTER THREE ROUNDS OF BALLOTED ELECTIONS NOT HAVE BID DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE IOC... YOUR INSANE!

I WAS TALKING ABOUT NYC!!!

FYI was referring to your dual city bids that never made it to the IOC. I think that was pretty clear. You were the one who brought up New York and now seem to think writing in all caps will help make your point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So its ok for them to use Boroughs but not Boston... and it's ok for them to use old existing and comprable arenas but we are not so they get madison square gardens but we cant use boston garden... they can use the then OLD Yankee Stadium but we cant use Fenway Park... they can use GIANTS STADIUM 10 miles WEST of NYC and in a DIFFERENT STATE but we cant use Gillette Stadium..

No one is saying that you can't use existing infrastructure, but 10 miles is still MUCH closer than 20+ miles for the Main stadium, like Gillette stadium is to Boston. And a city also can't use a stadium that will only accommodate half of what a typical SUMMER Olympic stadium seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and you guys need to keep better track of who said what to who because your throwing facts and **** at me to quotes I did not say :-)

Yet u hang around. There must be something we're doing (right) to cause that?? :blink:

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

You are INCORRECT. New York's 2012 original stadium plan was to be located on the West-side of Manhattan.

No Actually that was Scrapped EARLY ON in THE BID! Check Again... And the Point was it's in 5 different Burroughs AND ANOTHER STATE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Actually that was Scrapped EARLY ON in THE BID! Check Again... And the Point was it's in 5 different Burroughs AND ANOTHER STATE!

No actually, the West Side stadium was only scrapped about a month before the actual vote. It was then a huge last-minute scramble to work out an alternative.

Political opponents of New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, notably the contenders for the Democratic mayoral nomination, used the Stadium issue as a symbol that he was a billionaire who was out of touch with the needs of average New Yorkers. Cablevision spent over $30 million on negative advertising and political lobbying and even generated a competing proposal for development of the Stadium site. However, the Stadium was strongly supported by Bloomberg, who insisted that there was no alternate site for the Olympic Stadium and the project needed to be approved before the International Olympic Committee selected the Host City on July 6, 2005. Finally, on June 6, 2005, the Public Authorities Control Board rejected New York State's $300 million contribution for the project, eliminating the possibility that an Olympic Stadium on that site would be fully approved before the IOC's vote.

The City, working with NYC2012, quickly developed a backup plan, which called for a new ballpark for the New York Mets in Queens in the parking lot of Shea Stadium – later named Citi Field – to be completed for the 2009 baseball season; it was announced on June 12, 2005. The plan would be to use the stadium for the 2012 Olympics while the Mets would play at Yankee Stadium in The Bronx for the 2012 season.

Wikipedia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it wasn't. Get your facts straight. The New York 2012 Olympic bid plan called for a new stadium on Manhattan's west side that would've been the new home for the Giants/Jets after the Olympics. Then, a month before the final IOC 2012 vote, that New York stadium deal fell through & was a HUGE blow to the bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×