Jump to content

USOC reaching out to US cities for potential 2024 bid


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 276
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't see why a hypothetical "back up" scenario should rule out LA hosting! Olympic hosts don't fail these days; the closest we got recently was Athens and that turned out to be a great Games despit

When you type B followed by a parentheses, the board interprets it as an emoticon. Has happened to me plenty of times before

baron, it's fruitless to argue with him. Unless you can prove him wrong, he must be right! Even though I disagree with this statement.. if the USOC loved the 2026 candidates and saw slim pickings fo

I would like say : USA could offer something new than LA...

I think for te first time I agree with Tulsa. I wouldn't cry if they hosted again, but I'd prefer a new US city way over going back to LA again. Maybe it's a bit personal, too. LA is way down on my list of the faves of US cities I've visited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for te first time I agree with Tulsa. I wouldn't cry if they hosted again, but I'd prefer a new US city way over going back to LA again. Maybe it's a bit personal, too. LA is way down on my list of the faves of US cities I've visited.

LA is EVERYTHING......how can anyone resist.

Hard for visitors who don't know their way around, but that keep tourists away form the best things and places and people.

Dream a little, lifes short, who needs reality all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LA, Hollywood, and the Sunset Strip is something everyone should see: Neon signs and the pretty pretty girls, all dressed so scantily

New York, New York would be my first choice, then LA as mentioned above. But there are lots of great cities in the US..

DC, San Antone and the Liberty Town, Boston and Baton Rouge, Tulsa, Austin, Oklahoma City, Seattle, San Francisco, too

Link to post
Share on other sites

LA is EVERYTHING......how can anyone resist.

Hard for visitors who don't know their way around, but that keep tourists away form the best things and places and people.

Dream a little, lifes short, who needs reality all the time.

It's taste. I've been many, many times - it's the main gateway city for us Aussies. Done Hollywood, been points between Santa Monica to Beverly Hills, the Colloseum ( of course), Disneyland,Long Beach etc etc. I've shown people around myself. I love the US, but I loathe LA. Edited by Sir Rols
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for te first time I agree with Tulsa. I wouldn't cry if they hosted again, but I'd prefer a new US city way over going back to LA again. Maybe it's a bit personal, too. LA is way down on my list of the faves of US cities I've visited.

That's my issue as well. I'm a little too young to have any real memory of L.A. 1984, but I fear that if they're put forward, some of those who vote might be saying "we'd like to see something new from the United States.. I'd rather wait for that than to vote for L.A." I have no doubt Los Angeles would be able to put on another grand Olympics, but much as how Atlanta had to follow up L.A. and present a different story of this country only 12 years after the world had just been here. But again, for a country with so many diverse cities to offer, I could see there being some resistance towards offering L.A. again, not just because of the timespan from 1984.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in two minds about LA. I don't loathe it, I understand it is a challenging city and understand why people wouldn't like it. I find it fascinating. I love the Latino influence and the sheer scale, and parts of the city are actually quite stunning. If the Olympics were to go back to LA in 2024, it would sure make French blood boil.

I think overall, I'd be quite happy to see the 2024 Olympics in the US as long as South Africa and Paris got either 2028 and 2032 thereafter. Ridiculous way to think of it, I know, but I see the US, South Africa and France as being the three countries I want to see host between 2024-32. However I think I'd be only happy with LA, SF, Chicago (now not an option), NYC, DC or Philadelphia and maybe Boston and Seattle as candidates.

Not at all interested in the South; Dallas, Houston, Atlanta or Miami - no matter how capable they prove to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't mind Miami.

2020 an 2024 will be pattern breakers.

2020 goes to Tokyo, the first back-to-back games in Asia and Summer Olympics a mere 12 years apart, which leads to 2024, does it go back to North America for the first time in 28 years or goes it go to Europe and keep the every 3rd game pattern. If it goes to the USA that sets up North America for 2028 and pushes Africa back to 2032. Or 2028 goes to Africa and 2032 to North America which is a huge gap of 36 years. Meaning 2036 likely goes to Europe and having Asia wait 20 years after waiting 12 previosly.

Someone is not going to be happy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's taste. I've been many, many times - it's the main gateway city for us Aussies. Done Hollywood, been points between Santa Monica to Beverly Hills, the Colloseum ( of course), Disneyland,Long Beach etc etc. I've shown people around myself. I love the US, but I loathe LA.

Where do you love best in the US?

I heard a comedian once talking about the rivalry between LA and San Fran, and he said the funny thing about it is no one in LA know's about it.

That's kinda how I take it when people say they hate LA, I have to smile, jump in my car and hope my next meeting is in a direction that I can get an even tan on my face in Feb.

Would like to get to Sydney some day, but I can surf here without worrying bout sharks! Of course in truth ya gotta suit up most of the year unless it's 100 or over, damn cold water all over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 years is just acceptable, I think, for a repeat city. If Los Angeles bids for 2024, I can only think of Moscow (bidding for 2012 after 1980) and Melbourne (bidding for 1996 after 1956) that have cut it that close to the bone. I think in Moscow's instance it was too soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you love best in the US?

I heard a comedian once talking about the rivalry between LA and San Fran, and he said the funny thing about it is no one in LA know's about it.

That's kinda how I take it when people say they hate LA, I have to smile, jump in my car and hope my next meeting is in a direction that I can get an even tan on my face in Feb.

Would like to get to Sydney some day, but I can surf here without worrying bout sharks! Of course in truth ya gotta suit up most of the year unless it's 100 or over, damn cold water all over.

Instances of shark attacks are considerably low, given the extent to which Sydney's beachs (both harbour and ocean) are utilised. Many of the harbour beaches have nets as a precaution. Remember, there have only been approx. 200 shark related fatalities across Australia since European records began well over 200 years ago. It's less than one per year, and IIRC there has not been a fatal shark attack in Sydney for literally decades.

I'd be more worried about the flimsy old Boeing 747 United Airlines will fly you over the Pacific on than any sharks here.

As for the rivalry - it seems natural there would be one between SF and LA. Within Australia there is a strong one between Sydney and Melbourne. I'm a proud former Melburnian, happily living in Sydney, so I'm quite polarised by it - or indifferent. They say it is only Melburnians who partake in the rivalry, although Sydneysiders tend to get into it too. I like it, Australia is a country of some 22 million far from the rest of the Western world and we have two of the most amazing cities, both of which have staged the Olympics. Not bad, I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However, I hope LA will not bit, it's a terrible time to worry about an Olympic games preparation, things are not in order at the moment and it'd be a huge distraction and improve little to nothing. I think LA adn NY may be too busy

Instances of shark attacks are considerably low, given the extent to which Sydney's beachs (both harbour and ocean) are utilised. Many of the harbour beaches have nets as a precaution. Remember, there have only been approx. 200 shark related fatalities across Australia since European records began well over 200 years ago. It's less than one per year, and IIRC there has not been a fatal shark attack in Sydney for literally decades.

I'd be more worried about the flimsy old Boeing 747 United Airlines will fly you over the Pacific on than any sharks here.

As for the rivalry - it seems natural there would be one between SF and LA. Within Australia there is a strong one between Sydney and Melbourne. I'm a proud former Melburnian, happily living in Sydney, so I'm quite polarised by it - or indifferent. They say it is only Melburnians who partake in the rivalry, although Sydneysiders tend to get into it too. I like it, Australia is a country of some 22 million far from the rest of the Western world and we have two of the most amazing cities, both of which have staged the Olympics. Not bad, I think.

It's certainly a fantastical place, and I'd LOVE being about to live in such a metropolis but so secluded form the rest of the planet. A very special place indeed.

Not REALLY every worried about sharks anywhere but I've evcountered many in warm waters and it's always a bit jarring! Always a bit sketchy feeling when there are shark nets (hong kong). I keep saying I want a matte black knife and holster to strap to my thigh just in case, and why not it'd come in handy and I'd feel prepared!

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 years is just acceptable, I think, for a repeat city. If Los Angeles bids for 2024, I can only think of Moscow (bidding for 2012 after 1980) and Melbourne (bidding for 1996 after 1956) that have cut it that close to the bone. I think in Moscow's instance it was too soon.

You think Los Angeles will be the 2nd city to host a 3rd Olympic Games. The first being London. Mind you London hadn't hosted since 1948. I doubt it

Edit: I didn't mean it to come off as you "definitely think" LA will host a 3rd games...I was just saying it in general to your statement that the 40 year gap between 1984 and 2024

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is with London (or Paris should they win one, as is likely, in the future), they're the only cities in their respective, high profile, countries that could host a games. The US, as gets shown in how many threads and pages it inspires here, has any number of cities, of varying degree of attraction or world profile, that could reasonably aspire to the games. Why should a country that already has hosted more games than any other, and can expect to host more in the future, keep offering up the same city? And why should the rest of the world be excited by the prospect of being offered the same city when the US has many other attractive locations to offer?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the withdrawal of Chicago and indifference of NYC - perhaps Los Angeles may very well be the second city to host the OG three times - it would also make the LA Coliseum an extremely important piece of Olympic history - being not just the only venue to serve as Main Stadium twice, but three times (it would be ridiculous if LA hosted and didn't use it). I'd say it could be a contender for World Heritage status, and one of the most important Olympic sites outside Greece.

I tend to agree with Sir Rols, though. Given the variety of amazing US cities, that are relatively capable, LA should be a last resort (as it has been in the past).



... and I suddenly have quite a strong feeling (not good, but not bad), that LA might actually be destined to host the Olympics three times. Given Tokyo's strong position for 2020, can you imagine the handover ceremony from Tokyo 2020 to Los Angeles 2024. Kinda like Olympic history coming back and eating itself in the wrong order.

Edited by runningrings
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for starters, these "other attractive locations" have to be interested to begin with. And then it's still subjective, bcuz what's attractive to some, may still not be attractive to others.

Case in point, supposedly Dallas is very interested in bidding, but already, there are many critics here saying that "the U.S. can do better". While Dallas wouldn't necessarily be my first pick, I'd certainly wouldn't write them off so quickly. I at least wanna see what the have to offer. And at least it's a better option than the like of Minneapolis, Las Vegas or gasp, Tulsa!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the withdrawal of Chicago and indifference of NYC - perhaps Los Angeles may very well be the second city to host the OG three times - it would also make the LA Coliseum an extremely important piece of Olympic history - being not just the only venue to serve as Main Stadium twice, but three times (it would be ridiculous if LA hosted and didn't use it). I'd say it could be a contender for World Heritage status, and one of the most important Olympic sites outside Greece.

I tend to agree with Sir Rols, though. Given the variety of amazing US cities, that are relatively capable, LA should be a last resort (as it has been in the past).

... and I suddenly have quite a strong feeling (not good, but not bad), that LA might actually be destined to host the Olympics three times. Given Tokyo's strong position for 2020, can you imagine the handover ceremony from Tokyo 2020 to Los Angeles 2024. Kinda like Olympic history coming back and eating itself in the wrong order.

I'm confused. You just said that LA should be a last resort but think the city is destined to host a 3rd games?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be more worried about the flimsy old Boeing 747 United Airlines will fly you over the Pacific on than any sharks here.

.

Thanks mate, I'm literally at the gate right now waiting to board one of those flimsy old United 747s. And yes, I agree, the United trans-Pacific fleet might well be older than many posters here!

Well, for starters, these "other attractive locations" have to be interested to begin with. And then it's still subjective, bcuz what's attractive to some, may still not be attractive to others.

Case in point, supposedly Dallas is very interested in bidding, but already, there are many critics here saying that "the U.S. can do better". While Dallas wouldn't necessarily be my first pick, I'd certainly wouldn't write them off so quickly. I at least wanna see what the have to offer. And at least it's a better option than the like of Minneapolis, Las Vegas or gasp, Tulsa!

Sure, you need one of the other attractive locations to be interested. But by the same token the US shouldn't be surprised or insulted if the rest of the world fails to see the attraction or get interested at the prospect of going back to the US's "old standby". Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for starters, these "other attractive locations" have to be interested to begin with. And then it's still subjective, bcuz what's attractive to some, may still not be attractive to others.

Case in point, supposedly Dallas is very interested in bidding, but already, there are many critics here saying that "the U.S. can do better". While Dallas wouldn't necessarily be my first pick, I'd certainly wouldn't write them off so quickly. I at least wanna see what the have to offer. And at least it's a better option than the like of Minneapolis, Las Vegas or gasp, Tulsa!

Ahh, the age old debate here.. the line of thinking that says it has to be 1 of the major major cities and nothing else will suffice versus knowing those cities may not be interested and looking towards the next group of cities (which is another debate as to what cities that is). The mindset I think the USOC has to take now is to look at their options, good or bad, and know they have no choice but to work with what's in front of them. Less we forget, Los Angeles was the runner-up to Chicago for the domestic bid to 2016. So if they jump into the race, they immediately become a formidable opponent. But I don't think the USOC is done for if they don't get Los Angeles or New York or San Francisco (Chicago of course, already being out). IMO there are certainly better cities out there to host an Olympics than Dallas, but that still may be the best option that's available to the USOC. Whether they deem that good enough to bid with if that is the result.. that remains to be seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused. You just said that LA should be a last resort but think the city is destined to host a 3rd games?

There is a difference between my gut feeling and what I'd actually like.

Ideally, I'd like NYC or Chicago in 2024. However, as I mentioned in my post, in the past few days I can't shake the feeling that it might actually end up being LA again. I have no justification for it, it is just a feeling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But I don't think the USOC is done for if they don't get Los Angeles or New York or San Francisco (Chicago of course, already being out). IMO there are certainly better cities out there to host an Olympics than Dallas, but that still may be the best option that's available to the USOC. Whether they deem that good enough to bid with if that is the result.. that remains to be seen.

Okay, so outta the 35 cities the USOC sent their letters to, only about 10 really have the capacity to be looked at seriously. I'll split those 10 into three categories.

Group A - (the Top-their) New York, Chicago, San Francisco & Los Angeles,

Group B - (the Mid-tier) Dallas, Houston & Philadelphia.

Group C - (the Lower-tier) Boston, Miami & DC.

Out of those 10, it appears that maybe half, at most, could raise their hand, & only one of those from the Group A category. I'd say that the cities in both Groups B&C could make a case, but only if their plans are significant enough to be compelling. Anything less than these cities & without at least a very good project, is not worth even considering.

Sure, you need one of the other attractive locations to be interested. But by the same token the US shouldn't be surprised or insulted if the rest of the world fails to see the attraction or get interested at the prospect of going back to the US's "old standby".

I wasn't necessarily talking about Los Angeles. There could be other good, capable options, besides the big-4, is what I was trying to get at.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chicago's charm and power seems to have taken hold more in the past couple years here. I remember a lot more negative Chicago comments before (not just from Brazilians), now always considered close to par with NY and BETTER than LA to most.

Maybe Chicagos international profile was raised after all. Imagine if they woudl bid again.....how exciting.

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...