baron-pierreIV Posted February 19, 2015 Report Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) But how will that proposal be viewed by the IOC voters? In that regard, Boston is taking a risk. Oh, the IOC rank and file will have to follow suit. Otherwise, if results prove otherwise, it would show that their organization is just another FIFA. I am hopeful though that the ideas put forward by Agenda 2020 will bear fruition because it's essentially the same body that will vote on the results. I think like say, the US Congress, the leaders who pushed through Agenda 2020 will be able to whip the less involved ones into shape and make the reforms mean something. The secret will be convincing the IOC that the biggest "white-elephant"-seeming new infrastructure and venues really will have a realistic raison d'etre. For example, Boston will have to explain why building a temporary $400 million Olympic Stadium is the way to go vs. renovating Harvard's stadium -- and that this is in response to the IOC's "needs." And then, that response, in the IOC voter's mind, will be weighed against, say, Paris' (hypothetically) est. $85 million renovation for their Stade de France. On that point of course, Boston is sunk. But that's the USOC's choice and timing. Edited February 19, 2015 by baron-pierreIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.