Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If Boston cam put up an Olympic stadium for 2024, then the USOC should make a quid pro quo pact with the South African OC that Durban will not bid until 2028, so a US bid can go for 2024. But a Durban 2028 will get the full, wholehearted support of the USOC!

And I think the USOC needs to try and organise and commit to ONE city for at least TWO bid cycles. Try and get some kind of commitment that the 2024 city will go on to bid for 2028. A US Olympic bid holds a lot of weight - and isn't turned down lightly (look at the fallout from Chicago) - if Chicago had gone up for 2020, I feel quite certain it may have taken it out over Tokyo.

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".

And I think the USOC needs to try and organise and commit to ONE city for at least TWO bid cycles. Try and get some kind of commitment that the 2024 city will go on to bid for 2028. A US Olympic bid holds a lot of weight - and isn't turned down lightly (look at the fallout from Chicago) - if Chicago had gone up for 2020, I feel quite certain it may have taken it out over Tokyo.

I'd take that idea a step further. Sit out 2024. Bid for 2028 with the expectation that the city will be the candidate in 2032 which is realistically the next best shot for an Olympics in the U.S. Tokyo's win set back the U.S. a full bid cycle. 2024 likely goes to Europe or South Africa. Even if South Africa sits out 2024 I cannot see the IOC going three consecutive bid cycles without a summer games in Europe. If Durban is in the 2024 race, even if they lose, they'd be the odds on favorite for 2028.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, for a long time I've felt 2032 was really the best time for the US, but I'm starting to reconsider.

There's a subjective quality to the sequence of hosts. There's a certain "feel" that the IOC maintains in creating variety and balance. After two successive Games in Asia, I think there will be a strong feeling of "WEST! We need to go west!" The US is about as western as you can get.

2022 will be in Europe. Back to back Europe after back to back Asia when North America has been waiting 28 years? I'm not saying it can't happen (clearly, it can), but it doesn't feel quite right.

Africa bidding for 2024 is a bigger obstacle. If Africa comes up with a good bid, they will win. But if the US offers a bid that is of the same high quality as Chicago and Africa sits the race out or falls short, I think the US can win -- irrespective of what the Europeans do.

There was a time 2024 still seemed far-fetched to me, but I'm starting to think it is possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, for a long time I've felt 2032 was really the best time for the US, but I'm starting to reconsider.

There's a subjective quality to the sequence of hosts. There's a certain "feel" that the IOC maintains in creating variety and balance. After two successive Games in Asia, I think there will be a strong feeling of "WEST! We need to go west!" The US is about as western as you can get.

2022 will be in Europe. Back to back Europe after back to back Asia when North America has been waiting 28 years? I'm not saying it can't happen (clearly, it can), but it doesn't feel quite right.

Africa bidding for 2024 is a bigger obstacle. If Africa comes up with a good bid, they will win. But if the US offers a bid that is of the same high quality as Chicago and Africa sits the race out or falls short, I think the US can win -- irrespective of what the Europeans do.

There was a time 2024 still seemed far-fetched to me, but I'm starting to think it is possible.

And with Durban/SA seemingly focused on the Commonwealth Games for the next few years, 2024 seems even more possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should be the first US city to bid or host to the Youth Olympics now personally.... especially since DC is more on the ball in a month than Boston in over a year...
Just Sayin' Pick it up or Give it up... it can be done no doubt but not with the wrong people, or being secretive, sticking to your word and working with the community is more important than 1,000 posts a day on Twitter.
In fact the hosts that win their bids are usually the countries that post less but with bigger and better meaningful announcements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After watching Sydney's opening ceremony's again I really want Los Angeles to host again and this time incorporate some western flair!

You re-watched it too??? Wasn't that National Anthem something???!!! I loved it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, for a long time I've felt 2032 was really the best time for the US, but I'm starting to reconsider.

There's a subjective quality to the sequence of hosts. There's a certain "feel" that the IOC maintains in creating variety and balance. After two successive Games in Asia, I think there will be a strong feeling of "WEST! We need to go west!" The US is about as western as you can get.

2022 will be in Europe. Back to back Europe after back to back Asia when North America has been waiting 28 years? I'm not saying it can't happen (clearly, it can), but it doesn't feel quite right.

You really think the Eurocentric IOC will view like that, though? That's just too optimistic, IMHO. They'll look at it more that it means Europe would go without Summer Games for the time ever for 16 years than they would that "hey, North America hasn't hosted for 28 years, so we need to give a charity Games". I don't see how first back-to-back Asian Games & Europe 2022 will make the IOC say "we need to go as far west as we can for 2024". Collectively, I can't see the IOC viewing it that way whatsoever.

Africa bidding for 2024 is a bigger obstacle. If Africa comes up with a good bid, they will win. But if the US offers a bid that is of the same high quality as Chicago and Africa sits the race out or falls short, I think the US can win -- irrespective of what the Europeans do.

There was a time 2024 still seemed far-fetched to me, but I'm starting to think it is possible.

Remember that old-fogie Oswald, though, saying that Chicago's 2016 bid wasn't exactly of 'high-quality' a couple of months ago. And besides, Chicago is out for 2024 anyway, & it looks like what the USOC will have to chose from as a candidate if they decide to go for it is Los Angeles, Boston or Dallas. Anyone of these three cities would have to come up with a stellar bid in order to be competitive, & even then IDK how well any of them would perform against a possible viable South African bid &/or a couple of solid, traditional European bids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You really think the Eurocentric IOC will view like that, though? That's just too optimistic, IMHO. They'll look at it more that it means Europe would go without Summer Games for the time ever for 16 years than they would that "hey, North America hasn't hosted for 28 years, so we need to give a charity Games". I don't see how first back-to-back Asian Games & Europe 2022 will make the IOC say "we need to go as far west as we can for 2024". Collectively, I can't see the IOC viewing it that way whatsoever.

Remember that old-fogie Oswald, though, saying that Chicago's 2016 bid wasn't exactly of 'high-quality' a couple of months ago. And besides, Chicago is out for 2024 anyway, & it looks like what the USOC will have to chose from as a candidate if they decide to go for it is Los Angeles, Boston or Dallas. Anyone of these three cities would have to come up with a stellar bid in order to be competitive, & even then IDK how well any of them would perform against a possible viable South African bid &/or a couple of solid, traditional European bids.

For starters, I don't think the IOC will ever award anyone "charity Games" and I don't think that's what American Olympics would be -- not in the least. I do think the IOC tries to maintain a feeling of global balance and, while I recognize the math of historical European Olympics, there is a first time for everything. Case in point: 2018 and 2020 being in Asia. Particularly with 2022 headed for Europe, I think there is a good chance that it could "feel" right to the IOC to come to North America in 2024. There's nothing quantitative or concrete about that assertion. IOC voting is generally quite subjective.

It's been clear for some time that Chicago isn't bidding. Not sure why you repeated that. I argued that an American bid of Chicago's quality could have a chance. As I posted in another thread after Oswald's recent comments, both he and Rogge as well as others highly praised the technical quality of Chicago's bid in 2009. I wouldn't necessarily take Oswald's more recent comments at face value. I believe that Chicago's bid was the finest bid the US has ever offered from a technical standpoint. The key idea here is that a solid bid would be essential for 2024. Something half-baked like NYC 2012 or an unexciting C-list city won't work.

Also, there's no need to take such an antagonistic tone. I said that it's clearly quite possible Europe will end up with both 2022 and 2024 (though Rome, Paris and Berlin all look dubious at this point). I also noted the strength of an African bid (which is looking increasingly unlikely, due to CWG aspirations). I am not making a prediction here . I'm just saying I think an American bid could be more viable than I previously thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, for a long time I've felt 2032 was really the best time for the US, but I'm starting to reconsider.

There's a subjective quality to the sequence of hosts. There's a certain "feel" that the IOC maintains in creating variety and balance. After two successive Games in Asia, I think there will be a strong feeling of "WEST! We need to go west!" The US is about as western as you can get.

2022 will be in Europe. Back to back Europe after back to back Asia when North America has been waiting 28 years? I'm not saying it can't happen (clearly, it can), but it doesn't feel quite right.

Africa bidding for 2024 is a bigger obstacle. If Africa comes up with a good bid, they will win. But if the US offers a bid that is of the same high quality as Chicago and Africa sits the race out or falls short, I think the US can win -- irrespective of what the Europeans do.

There was a time 2024 still seemed far-fetched to me, but I'm starting to think it is possible.

The only thing with that though.. the Olympics are going "West" for 2016. The Summer Olympics will not have been "Central" since 2012, and depending where the 2022 Olympics land, it's very possible it will have been more than a decade without any Olympics in more traditional Western Europe. That might be all the West they need.

As usual, and this goes without saying at this point.. the key question is can the USOC come up with a compelling candidate. Without that, the rest of this discussion is moot. Even with a compelling candidate, 2024 doesn't seem like it's lined up well for the United States. When you think about it.. a lot of us believe that 2016 was too early for the United States to land another Olympics. So it seems like odd logic to say that just 8 years later is now the time for the IOC to return to this country. And with all due respect to our friends north of the border, I don't see Toronto fitting that bill either.

All it's going to take is 1 compelling candidate from Europe to enter the fray and I'll have doubts about the USOC's chances in the race. Obviously we're still at the point where everything is 'if' but, all things considered, I don't think this one is going to set up well for the USOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For starters, I don't think the IOC will ever award anyone "charity Games" and I don't think that's what American Olympics would be -- not in the least.

I meant that figuratively, not literally. So not sure why you took it that way.

I do think the IOC tries to maintain a feeling of global balance and, while I recognize the math of historical European Olympics, there is a first time for everything. Case in point: 2018 and 2020 being in Asia.

This is looking at it a bit black & white, though. Of course there's a first time for everything, but's if the circumstances present themselves in the first place. Let's keep in mind that Asia 2018/2020 happened bcuz the IOC was not comfortable enough with the other two 2020 options. Had the IOC have a couple of other solid European options for 2020, (or they had felt good enough to go with Istanbul), we'd very likely have yet another European Summer Games only eight years after London 2012.

It's been clear for some time that Chicago isn't bidding. Not sure why you repeated that. I argued that an American bid of Chicago's quality could have a chance. As I posted in another thread after Oswald's recent comments, both he and Rogge as well as others highly praised the technical quality of Chicago's bid in 2009. I wouldn't necessarily take Oswald's more recent comments at face value. I believe that Chicago's bid was the finest bid the US has ever offered from a technical standpoint. The key idea here is that a solid bid would be essential for 2024. Something half-baked like NYC 2012 or an unexciting C-list city won't work.

But why take any comment from any IOC member at face value then, including the ones from 2009. I think the more recent Oswald comment is more in tune on how some within the IOC still feel about the U.S. I argee that Chicago's 2016 was good on a technical standpoint, but that's not really what I think is the crux of the matter where the IOC is concerned about this.

Also, there's no need to take such an antagonistic tone. I said that it's clearly quite possible Europe will end up with both 2022 and 2024 (though Rome, Paris and Berlin all look dubious at this point). I also noted the strength of an African bid (which is looking increasingly unlikely, due to CWG aspirations). I am not making a prediction here . I'm just saying I think an American bid could be more viable than I previously thought.

Who's taking an antagonistic tone. I merely asked why you're changing your view as far as a U.S. 2024 bid is concerned, since I don't necessarily agree with that assertion. Not too much from when you challenge others POV.

Yeah, South Africa may still be dubious, as well as maybe a European bid or two. But not all of those are going to be abscent from 2024. And like I said earlier, considering the USOC's only credible options are likely only going to be Los Angeles, Boston & Dallas, anyone of those are going to have to produce one heck of a bid if they're gonna have any chance of wooing the IOC to come back here when they're gonna be lacking in other compeling areas.

.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should be the first US city to bid or host to the Youth Olympics now personally.... especially since DC is more on the ball in a month than Boston in over a year...

Just Sayin' Pick it up or Give it up... it can be done no doubt but not with the wrong people, or being secretive, sticking to your word and working with the community is more important than 1,000 posts a day on Twitter.

In fact the hosts that win their bids are usually the countries that post less but with bigger and better meaningful announcements.

I think Boston would be an absolutely ideal location for the Youth Olympics. However.. is that the USOC's vision? Because at the end of the day, they decide what the COUNTRY bids for.

And that you said it.. I don't know what's going on in Boston, but this thread started back in January with the introduction of a bill to study the possibility of an Olympics in Boston. Here we are, nearly 10 months later, and only now has that bill (which is simply to form a committee to study the feasibility) been passed and this is being worked out. So yea, I think your assessment is correct and the folks running the show on this one need to get into gear if they want to convince the USOC that Boston should be their candidate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the only compelling bid for 2024 by the US is LA. On to other bidding countries Canada and the US are the only ones that have shown complete intrest, Paris seems uninterested and Rome just called it a quits and South Africa looks like it's out. If Munich gets 2022 then Berlin is out so whats left? Madrid 2024? I think that 2024 could be against LA and Toronto.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rome hasn't called it quits. The mayor of Milan said that Rome shouldn't bid bcuz he wants his city to bid instead. And there's also Istanbul, which if South Africa sits out, would be good for their chances. And Munich 2022 is still up in the air until the results of their referendum next week, which could put a wrench in their spokes for the whole thing. Then we could see talk starting over Berlin or Hamburg 2024.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rome hasn't called it quits. The mayor of Milan said that Rome shouldn't bid bcuz he wants his city to bid instead. And there's also Istanbul, which if South Africa sits out, would be good for their chances. And Munich 2022 is still up in the air until the results of their referendum next week, which could put a wrench in their spokes for the whole thing. Then we could see talk starting over Berlin or Hamburg 2024.

Agreed.

Also, Rome isn't dead yet people. It was just an antagonism from Milan. There's still open from Rome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing with that though.. the Olympics are going "West" for 2016. The Summer Olympics will not have been "Central" since 2012, and depending where the 2022 Olympics land, it's very possible it will have been more than a decade without any Olympics in more traditional Western Europe. That might be all the West they need.

It is even more pronounced when you consider some old school Europeans don't consider Britain to be 'real' Europe.

In that way, a Paris Games would be first 'real' Western European Olympics since Barcelona, and before that, Munich.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the IOC view on the US a swipe at them after the revenue battle, a retaliation against all the American drug scandals in sport, or do they just not think that it's been long enough since 96/02?

Anyway, I still say that of the viable US candidates at the moment, I'm sure any of them are capable of hosting an Olympics but I still say that LA is the only one with the 'X factor' needed to win a bid. Say it's Boston v Toronto. Toronto would be favourite, it's bigger, would have the experience of 2015, & if the IOC members think that way, it would kick the US out of SOG bidding for a long time. But, if it's Toronto v LA, LA would surely do it. Also, if it's 2024 we're talking about, if Toronto stages a spectacular, Rio-esque Pan Am, it would surely give the city a huge amount of desire & momentum just before the bid process starts. The IOC may want N America in 2024, but they don't have to go back to the US if they don't want to. (All of this is assuming Durban don't go for 2024, & that the IOC may not want Europe again in 2024)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Edited by RobH
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last polls I saw had his popularity going up the past few days.

Keep in mind London has a baffoon for a mayor, and he was one of the better things about the 2012 games.

First Boris Johnson wasn't the major in 2005 -It was Livingstone- so the comparaison is nill. Livingstone was a man with clear prestige and legitimacy and his determination helps a lot with the triumph of London -Like Rob said. And as we saw in the last races, the committed politicians (As mayors and chiefs of State/Government) make a big difference in these races: Tony Blair vs. Jacques Chirac / Ken Livingstone vs. Bertrand Delanoi; Lula Da Silva and Eduardo Paes, Shinzo Abe and Naoki Inose

If Rob Ford returns as a mayor in the next future, it will be the biggest obstacle of the race. The legitimacy of Toronto bid will be on rocks and the scepticism around the political sphere will be remarkable to change the vote.

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...