Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Thank you for ending a numbers fued. It really was starting to get out of control. Enough with the Semantics. Its unessasary and a complete waste of breath and typing by both of you. Your not adding anything new to the conversation. -___-

Rikk, This is all well and good and i agree that there would be alot of interest and support behind a games in Boston but Chris is correct. The logistics of such a feat are on a Scale that Boston has not ever dealt with before.This isn't a "Lets go guys" and we have the games. Look back at NYC 2012's bid book and the cracks were seen from page one. The point that you have to remember is that in this state it's the people majority that will have a major impact. You and I may want such an Event but where will a 3 Billion dollar, big dig like construction leave residents of Brockton, New Bedford, Hyannis, Boxford, Beverly, North Adams and the many other municipalities and locales throught the state that may only feel minor tremors of growth. It's convincing those people that a Multinational Sporting Event would spring board the region into prosperity. This is no easy task. Add onto Enviormental implications that Massachusetts adds to the bill, massive infrastructure challenges and you have a Logistical challenge. A doable challenge but a challenge non-the-less.

The Exploratory committeee will of course go through no doubt about it. But as this gains momentum and speed the people of this state are going to make their own decison in the future about if this is the right direction that Boston and Massachusetts wants to go in. Consider These facts into the equation before even the first pylon of an olympic stadium is put in place.

I will say that it would be in Deval Patricks best intentions to link this Idea with his goals of improving and expanding public infastructure across the state and introduce this as a great way to not only bolster and spark economic growth but growth for the state as a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Boston, Massachusetts is taking the first big steps towards looking into the feasibility of a Summer Games bid for the earliest year 2024. On Thursday, January 10, 2013, the MA State Senate file a Re

Oslo was an abortion - Boston is a miscarriage.

We prefer "Masshole" to "total douche".

Well, it still remains to be seen if Rio is not going to be able to deliver on their promises. Everyone was disaster for Athens 2004, but those turned out just fine. So in that sense, the article isn't that well-balanced. Not to mention, that Europe (A true & tired continent) is very likely to be in the 2024 bidding picture.



*everyone was expecting disaster for Athens 2004, but those Games turned out just fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it still remains to be seen if Rio is not going to be able to deliver on their promises. Everyone was disaster for Athens 2004, but those turned out just fine. So in that sense, the article isn't that well-balanced. Not to mention, that Europe (A true & tired continent) is very likely to be in the 2024 bidding picture.

*everyone was expecting disaster for Athens 2004, but those Games turned out just fine.

And there were plenty of people anxious over Beijing 2008 as well, not because of the readiness of the venues, but how China would present themselves to the world. Them and Athens are hardly aberrations in terms of nervousness over Olympic hosts. You prepare for 6-7 years, then get 1 shot to put on a 2 1/2 week event that the entire world is watching. So it's understandable that even the best prepared hosts will be questioned in the immediate lead-up to the Olympics

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally good...still don't like reading stuff like this from the US press though...

"a first-round defeat that came as an insult to President Obama, who personally lobbied for his hometown. For those of us involved in that pitch, the entire process seemed like a fix-up date without a phone call back."

If that's the case the IOC was in a no win situation. The President of the US, the the Queen of Spain, the President of Brazil, or the PM of Japan was going to leave "insulted".

Yes, I know context and the shock means the US and Chicagoans felt raw about this, but describing it as an insult to Obama is going too far as if the US was the only country to send their leader to lobby for them.

Edited by RobH
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the feeling that the other heads of state shouldn't be under-appreciated, but realistically the president of the United States has more power and responsibility than any of the others. I'm not convinced the news of Obama's trip to Copenhagen WAS deliberately murky and delayed. I think he may have simply been busy enough that his attendance was genuinely uncertain until late in the game. I do not want to sound disrespectful, but it was extraordinarily momentous for an American president to grace the IOC with his presence. It was a sacrifice. It did feel like a bit of a slap in the face to Obama -- particularly because Chicago was favored to be a finalist and was unceremoniously dumped first instead. Being a relatively new president at the time and the first black president, I can see why the White House would feel the whole experience was distasteful and harmful to Obama's presidential image. The same factors were not coming into play for any of the other heads of state.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought, and said at the time that the whole Obama melodrama leading up to the vote was counter-productive and Obama was on a hiding to nothing whether he went or not.

Remember the climate of the time. Blair and Putin had just been pronounced the star turns that tipped things London's and Sochi's way. To the point that coming up to the Copenhagen vote the IOC were getting some negative comments about their propensity to let star political personalities sway their voting. So much was being made about the importance of having your Head of State at the final presentations, but it really at the time would have suited their image more therefore to make a clear gesture that they weren't really star-struck by the political elite.

On Obama's side, he was the world's and America's new glamour boy, and he was trying to set his mark. He was right in the midst of the whole Obamacare battles, and the Republicans were showing the first signs they weren't ever going to give him an easy ride in his term. It was quite understandable he first announced Michelle would be his stand-in at Copenhagen. Appropriate, even, IMO. The Healthcare battle was surely the more important battle on his mind.

The trouble was, of course, that not going also gave the opponents another good stick to beat him with. Left him open to criticism he should be out there fighting for the USA's interests on the world stage while much of the globe was still infatuated with him. And it was his "home" town, sorta, that was going for the gold. And it was also becoming clear Rio was riding the momentum. I'm sure the Chicago bid team deep down realised that but hoped, and on the expectation that Chicago could still be in striking distance, that the President could do another Blair/Putin Hail Mary pass.

Whatever affected the final politics of the vote, which we debate still constantly, Obama was only ever going to come out of it good if he delivered victory. And I don't think, as I said earlier, he was ever the asset in thatvrespect the end that the US team hoped he'd be, with the IOC under pressure to make a point otherwise - especially as the whole media circus about "Will he go or won't he?" was really putting the notion of their vanity even more increasingly in the spotlight. Rio was also an attractive grand gesture Open for them. Thus the outcome for him was more likely likely to be negative with a likely loss. If he hadn't gone he would have been blamed for not doing his all for the bid and the USA, but by going and Chicago losing he left himself open to the accusation he was a dud at the influence game and allowed to be delivered a snub and a slap in the face to the POTUS and the US.

Let me know when the conversation about the guy in the White House is done and the discussion about Boston hosting the Olympics can resume.

You'll have to get used to the fact that the threads here take a lot of organic twists and turns. It'll get back on-topic eventually. Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

But they (the Scands) made it up to him by awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize a month later. So I don't think BO shud've felt insulted.

But that made absolutely ZERO sense. It actually worked against him more than it helped him because he was widely seen as totally undeserving.

I do agree that Obama was in a no-win situation. Fly to Copenhagen and risk embarrassment (which turned out to be far worse than anyone would've predicted beforehand). Or don't go to Copenhagen and risk being branded unsupportive and perhaps arrogant. He was in a tough spot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally good...still don't like reading stuff like this from the US press though...

"a first-round defeat that came as an insult to President Obama, who personally lobbied for his hometown. For those of us involved in that pitch, the entire process seemed like a fix-up date without a phone call back."

If that's the case the IOC was in a no win situation. The President of the US, the the Queen of Spain, the President of Brazil, or the PM of Japan was going to leave "insulted".

Yes, I know context and the shock means the US and Chicagoans felt raw about this, but describing it as an insult to Obama is going too far as if the US was the only country to send their leader to lobby for them.

We've been down this road before, particular in the days, & even months, after the 2016 vote. And sorry, but it gets quite tiring when many of us can/could be just as guilty of these same type of circumstances.

Chicago was viewed as one of the favorites for the 2016 Games. Perhaps still not winning, but wasn't viewed as to being dumped first, either. Geopolitically, Madrid was handicapped not only bcuz of Barcelona 1992, but bcuz of London 2012 as well. Same with Tokyo. Beijing, at the time of the vote, had just hosted the 2008 Games the year before, so it was still considered a little too early for Asia again. And then you had North America that hadn't hosted a Summer Games since 1996. Not exactly apples to apples here.

I've said this before & I'll say it again, but how would've London & the U.K. reacted if the IOC dumped London in the first-round, when it was highly speculated that they'd be in the 2012 final with Paris? If the whole FIFA bid thing was anything to go by, I'm sure the British press & people would've came out just as critical; "the IOC slaps Blair & the U.K. in the face, etc, etc, etc". It's also not that much different when many Munich supporters came out so frustrated after the 2018 vote & felt "humiliated" by the IOC. So let's be a little more fair & a little less bias about this, shall we.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know the circumstances around the FIFA vote were so unusual and so stinking with corruption that the anger wasn't just around England going out first. The repercussions of those botched elections are still being felt today with FIFA unsure whether their World Cup in 2022 will be in the Summer or Winter. A third of the ExCo ended up suspended or accused of bribery in that election for Christ's sake! Every losing bid had the right to go for the jugular after that process.

And I didn't say our press would be any better than yours had London 2012 lost in the first round, so that's a bit of a strawman on your part. No doubt similar things would've been said. Wouldn't make them right though.

I have said, and did say above, that I have sympathy with the context and the circumstances around Chicago's loss. I supported Chicago 2016 - not as passionately as many others and at least partly because I didn't want to see Brazil hosting two events in the space of two years. But I don't regard Chicago's loss as an "insult" to anyone, anymore than any other city losing would have been.

Anyway, better not derail this topic any further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like there needs to be a lot more persauding if this is going to even get off the ground...The Mayor has labelled the idea as "far fetched"

http://www.insidethegames.biz/olympics/summer-olympics/2024/1013198-boston-bid-for-2024-olympics-far-fetched-claims-city-mayor

"I think it's far-fetched," Merino told Boston radio station WBUR.

"I'd also be concerned about the cost of it and what it costs to taxpayers of the city of Boston.

"Just to apply, to be considered costs $6-8 million (£4 million/€4.5 million-£5 million/€6 million) - not refundable either.

"So that's $6-8 million that was used of public funds to apply for consideration for the Olympics."

"At this time, I think it's a far-fetched idea, and just wish that I knew about it before it was in the paper," said Merino.

"Especially in these economic times, with what's happening in Washington today and what could possibly happen in the state, I need every penny I have to make sure we continue the services to the people of Boston,

"I just don't know where we could create that massive land in our city or in the surrounding cities."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well those are some pretty damning quotes from the mayor, especially the "wish that I knew about it before it was in the paper" line. I hope Eric Reddy knows what he's up against here, because it's now his job to spend the next few months trying to impress the mayor of the city of Boston that he's not out of his mind. And again, as I brought up when this topic first appeared.. this is an exploratory committee. Even that it was formed out of state legislation (for what that's worth), if you can't sell the mayor on the idea, it's probably not going to get very far. It sounds like that's not going to stop Reddy in his efforts and I applaud him for that, but this is starting to look more like a pipe dream than anything, at least in the short term.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well those are some pretty damning quotes from the mayor, especially the "wish that I knew about it before it was in the paper" line. I hope Eric Reddy knows what he's up against here, because it's now his job to spend the next few months trying to impress the mayor of the city of Boston that he's not out of his mind. And again, as I brought up when this topic first appeared.. this is an exploratory committee. Even that it was formed out of state legislation (for what that's worth), if you can't sell the mayor on the idea, it's probably not going to get very far. It sounds like that's not going to stop Reddy in his efforts and I applaud him for that, but this is starting to look more like a pipe dream than anything, at least in the short term.

What I don't get is that Mumble's statement that he didn't hear about it until it was in the paper means that he was less informed than private citizens. The information was certainly out there, and there was a committee designated by the State House quite awhile ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't get is that Mumble's statement that he didn't hear about it until it was in the paper means that he was less informed than private citizens. The information was certainly out there, and there was a committee designated by the State House quite awhile ago.

Yes, "a commission to study the feasibility of hosting the Summer Olympics", as it was pointed out in the first post of this thread. I'm sure Merino was aware of that. But then he reads an article in the Globe (which I hear was an above-the-fold page A1 headline) that says "It expects to win the mayor’s approval soon, following a promising meeting with City Hall officials Monday, said committee chairman Eric Reddy of West Boylston." I don't know if maybe something got lost in translation, but perhaps that is what he is referring to and is upset by the fact that someone on the committee reported to the press that he's expecting to get the mayor's approval when perhaps that isn't necessarily the case.

And then I see this from the Herald...

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/03/boston_olympics_idea_torched

The mayor’s spokeswoman also downplayed a City Hall sit-down this week with Eric Reddy, organizer of the Boston Olympic Exploratory Committee. Dot Joyce said Reddy’s group had a single meeting at the city’s Office of Travel Tourism and Special Events.

“It’s a far-fetched idea, but the city meets with thousands of people every day that have ideas and some work out and some don’t,” Joyce said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting news, to say the least. But I can understand the mayor's sentiments for taking on such a huge undertaking. Dallas mayor seems to also have similar views but is a bit more positive on the idea. Seems like a bid is far from certain in either case,

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so is the Boston idea finally dead now as well?

I don't think it's dead in the water, but obviously this is a signal from the top telling the committee to not waste their time and energy. I'm sure Eric Reddy is taking this news as a personal challenge to try and convince Merino to entertain the idea of a Boston Olympics, but I don't think he's going to be able to come up with the goods to make that happen.

To FYI's point.. Matt Wood and his Dallas committee are in a very similar situation. They too have to convince their mayor and the rest of the powers that be that their quest for an Olympics is a worthwhile one. The difference with them is that they've been at this for months, if not years. So when the mayor of Dallas receives his letter from the USOC, I'm betting he's long since been aware of what the Dallas committee has done. They're much further along in the game than the Boston folks who apparently only officially came together back in January. The higher-ups in Dallas may very well look at the committees proposals and decide they're not interested. But as the old saying goes, "chance favors the prepared mind." And right now, the folks working on this in Dallas seem like they're a lot more prepared than their counterparts in Boston.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...