Jump to content

2022: A troubling scenario


Recommended Posts

Reno is a non-starter for any serious person. (Read: not Baron.) Denver doesn't have the political will, and won't want to pay for the infrastructure improvements unless they pass a marijuana tax to pay for them, and I'm not sure how the IOC will view the marijuana issue. Salt Lake City would be a PR problem for the IOC even if they accepted going back to a recent host. Seattle is even warmer than Vancouver (Vancouver's climate = London, Seattle's climate = Paris) and the suitable ski venues are all in protected forests. And Seattle is even more libertarian than Denver, with voluntary euthanasia and a semi-socialist income policy (minimum wage more than double the national average) in addition to legal marijuana.

Ironically Boston would be the logical winter games bid for the USA, but Boston's heretofore disastrous bid for 2024 kills any chance of a bid for 2026.

Still fail to see how Boston is a logical Winter Games host, even aside from all that's gone down in the past few months with the 2024 bid.

The thing with the USOC is will they jump into a bid if it might affect their prospects of landing a Summer Olympics. That might be enough to keep them out of the running.

If they were to jump in though, what's the issue with Salt Lake? A PR problem? Pretty sure the IOC has enough PR problems at this point that if Salt Lake was offered to them, they'd say yes faster than Usain Bolt can run 100 meters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 666
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I wish Dick Pound was IOC President, instead of Bach.

Giving 2022 to Beijing while Oslo was still in would have meant IOC committing suicide in public. It would never have happened. Never. The IOC loves when hosts splash it out for them, but after Sochi

Reno is a non-starter for any serious person. (Read: not Baron.) Denver doesn't have the political will, and won't want to pay for the infrastructure improvements unless they pass a marijuana tax to pay for them, and I'm not sure how the IOC will view the marijuana issue. Salt Lake City would be a PR problem for the IOC even if they accepted going back to a recent host. Seattle is even warmer than Vancouver (Vancouver's climate = London, Seattle's climate = Paris) and the suitable ski venues are all in protected forests. And Seattle is even more libertarian than Denver, with voluntary euthanasia and a semi-socialist income policy (minimum wage more than double the national average) in addition to legal marijuana.

Ironically Boston would be the logical winter games bid for the USA, but Boston's heretofore disastrous bid for 2024 kills any chance of a bid for 2026.

Your justification for eliminating all other bids except for Boston as a WOG host is ridiculous, considering the only benefit that Boston even has is that its side, but its biggest disadvantage that will have their asses handed to them at the voting is the distance from Boston to the outdoor event venues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still fail to see how Boston is a logical Winter Games host, even aside from all that's gone down in the past few months with the 2024 bid.

Boston's sporting needs line up fairly well with the winter games and awfully with the summer games. For example there's no use for an 80,000 capacity stadium, but MIT could use a new 16,000 capacity stadium that could hust the (long track) speed skating. The winter games only require only large arena in the form of the Garden, and the remainder would work for the city's collegiate arenas. Meanwhile for the summer games Boston would need to build an 12,000 capacity arena for basketball and an 9,000 capacity arena for volleyball to be competitive. They could use the sliding track in New York.

It is a longish distance to the mountains from Boston, but if the IOC is really desperate to find another winter host outside of Asia, I think they would overlook that if Boston were bidding against Beijing or Almaty for 2026.

If they were to jump in though, what's the issue with Salt Lake? A PR problem? Pretty sure the IOC has enough PR problems at this point that if Salt Lake was offered to them, they'd say yes faster than Usain Bolt can run 100 meters.

I don't think they would. I think the IOC would take Boston over Beijing for 2022, but would take Beijing over Salt Lake City. When Denver pulled out at the last minute it made Denver look bad. When it came out that Salt Lake City had bribed the IOC (or rather parts of the IOC) it made the IOC look bad. That's why I think -even though Denver caused them more problems than Utah- I think they would be quicker to forgive Denver.

The media would portray Denver 2026 and the city rectifying its earlier mistake. The media would portray Salt Lake City 2026 as the IOC returning to the scene of a crime out of desperation.

Do forgive me (I don't know much about the distances in the area) but how far is New York City itself from useable mountains? Olympic hockey or skating in Madison Square Garden would be pretty iconic.

It is 460 km from New York City to Lake Placid, or 290 miles.

Your justification for eliminating all other bids except for Boston as a WOG host is ridiculous, considering the only benefit that Boston even has is that its side, but its biggest disadvantage that will have their asses handed to them at the voting is the distance from Boston to the outdoor event venues.

It's very possible that the IOC wouldn't pick them for that reason. But with the exception of Salt Lake City the reasons I disqualify the other cities are on the city's side.

1) Reno doesn't want to build a ton of white elephant venues. Portland and Albuquerque fit in here too.

2) Denver doesn't want to foot the bill for the IOC.

3) Seattle isn't going to tear down parts of a national forest to expand ski resorts even if we could host with free money.

What's really important is that the cities in question make good decisions for themselves. A winter games in Boston would work for Boston. If the IOC doesn't want Boston due to the distance then the city only risks losing the bidding race.

Edited by Nacre
Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston's sporting needs line up fairly well with the winter games and awfully with the summer games. For example there's no use for an 80,000 capacity stadium, but MIT could use a new 16,000 capacity stadium that could hust the (long track) speed skating. The winter games only require only large arena in the form of the Garden, and the remainder would work for the city's collegiate arenas. Meanwhile for the summer games Boston would need to build an 12,000 capacity arena for basketball and an 9,000 capacity arena for volleyball to be competitive. They could use the sliding track in New York.

It is a longish distance to the mountains from Boston, but if the IOC is really desperate to find another winter host outside of Asia, I think they would overlook that if Boston were bidding against Beijing or Almaty for 2026.

Eh. Still a lot of questions before you even get to the mountain side of things. Where are you holding the ceremonies? Alumni Stadium? May or may not be the best venue. The next largest arena in the Boston arena I believe is Conte Forum. Capacity for hockey is just under 8,000. Even for a Winter Olympics, that's a little bit on the smallish side. If they're building a brand new speed skating venue, will it be indoors or outdoors? If it's the former, that doesn't help MIT so much. So add all that to the distance from the mountains and it doesn't line up well at all. And you're also jumping to the step where Boston has already been selected as the USOC's pick. Again, everything that's happening with 2024 notwithstanding, I don't think they'd so easily win that domestic battle against the likes of a Salt Lake or a Denver.

I don't think they would. I think the IOC would take Boston over Beijing for 2022, but would take Beijing over Salt Lake City. When Denver pulled out at the last minute it made Denver look bad. When it came out that Salt Lake City had bribed the IOC (or rather parts of the IOC) it made the IOC look bad. That's why I think -even though Denver caused them more problems than Utah- I think they would be quicker to forgive Denver.

The media would portray Denver 2026 and the city rectifying its earlier mistake. The media would portray Salt Lake City 2026 as the IOC returning to the scene of a crime out of desperation.

Right now the IOC is in a somewhat desperate situation. I don't think Boston vs. Salt Lake would be the difference in them choosing Beijing or not. You're right Salt Lake being something of a return to the scene of the crime, but given how those games played out, there's not necessarily a stigma attached IMO to the point that if they were desperate, they wouldn't choose Salt Lake, particularly in an age of Agenda 2020 where Salt Lake would need minimal improvements to host the Olympics, and by then, might desire to build a new arena for the Jazz as their current arena is one of the older ones in the NBA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh. Still a lot of questions before you even get to the mountain side of things. Where are you holding the ceremonies? Alumni Stadium? May or may not be the best venue. The next largest arena in the Boston arena I believe is Conte Forum. Capacity for hockey is just under 8,000. Even for a Winter Olympics, that's a little bit on the smallish side. If they're building a brand new speed skating venue, will it be indoors or outdoors? If it's the former, that doesn't help MIT so much.

They would need to build one new temporary arena and a new stadium for MIT with a temporary roof, as well as building a (temporary?) roof over the stands at Fenway Park for the ceremonies. They could do all of that for less than the cost of the athletics stadium alone.

And you're also jumping to the step where Boston has already been selected as the USOC's pick. Again, everything that's happening with 2024 notwithstanding, I don't think they'd so easily win that domestic battle against the likes of a Salt Lake or a Denver.

Cities shouldn't care about this. Boston should do what works best for Boston, not the USOC.

Edited by Nacre
Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot see Boston as a Winter Olympics host. First of all, they would need a second 10,000 seat plus arena. TD Garden could host either ice hockey or figure skating and short track. Both figure skating and ice hockey require 10,000 plus seats. A secondary ice hockey arena plus a curling venue wouldn't be a problem as they could use existing ones at Boston College and Boston University. A temporary arena? Well its easy to say it worked for London but, London never found a reuse for it and it's likely Boston wouldn't either. This whole "temporary stadium/temporary arena" concept is still very much up in the air. MIT has no need for a 16,000 seat stadium. Killington would be a spectacular venue for the alpine events but would the USOC really invest in another ski jump and sliding track in the Northeast? Highly unlikely, although one of the few pluses to a Boston winter bid or any winter bid in the Northeast would be bringing the ski jump and sliding track at Lake Placid up to date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They would need to build one new temporary arena and a new stadium for MIT with a temporary roof, as well as building a (temporary?) roof over the stands at Fenway Park for the ceremonies. They could do all of that for less than the cost of the athletics stadium alone.

Cities shouldn't care about this. Boston should do what works best for Boston, not the USOC.

So I'm seeing the word temporary there 3 times. And you want to hold the ceremonies at Fenway Park? Not sure how well that would go over with the IOC. It sounds like the best selling point for a Boston Winter Olympics is that it wouldn't be as big a boondoggle as a Boston Summer Olympics. Not exactly a ringing endorsement there.

You are correct on your last point. Boston should do what works best for Boston. A Winter Olympic bid does not make sense for Boston. And nothing that has happened in the past few months needed to contribute to that sentiment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm seeing the word temporary there 3 times. And you want to hold the ceremonies at Fenway Park? Not sure how well that would go over with the IOC. It sounds like the best selling point for a Boston Winter Olympics is that it wouldn't be as big a boondoggle as a Boston Summer Olympics. Not exactly a ringing endorsement there.

One temporary venue and two temporary roofs is not too bad, and the shape of a baseball stadium is actually quite decent for ceremonies. Simply convert the pitchers mound into a stage.

The selling point for a Boston Winter Olympics is that the region could invest in infrastructure that benefits the city. Upgrading the stadiums and arenas of Harvard, Boston College and MIT makes sense for the city.

For the snow events the Northeast has a huge population base and it makes sense for the USOC and the various sports to look into upgrading the sporting venues of the area with or without another winter games in the area. The sliding track at Lake Placid needs some modernization, a new ski jumping center in New England would help develop athletes from New England and Connecticut, developing one of the ski resorts would attract more skiers to New England, etc.

Spending money on white elephants is bad. Spending money on things that will receive heavy use can be good. A winter games would not merely avoid wasting money, it would invest money in industries and assets that are important to the city and the region.

MIT has no need for a 16,000 seat stadium.

The skating "ovals" are usually only about 8,000 in capacity, so they wouldn't really need it to be 16,000 capacity. My point is that Boston has no logical use for a big athletics stadium while MIT's stadium could be upgraded to serve as a speed skating venue.

The key issue is that temporary stands and amenities are different from a completely new stadium or having to rebuilt a structure completely. Removing some seats and modular shops and bathrooms is comparatively easy if the foundation and superstructure remain behind.

Compare the difficulty of rebuilding London's Olympic Stadium to the relative ease of converting the aquatics center and velodrome by simply removing wings of seating. A permanent sports facility with temporary seating for the games has proven to be very viable.

Edited by Nacre
Link to post
Share on other sites

One temporary venue and two temporary roofs is not too bad, and the shape of a baseball stadium is actually quite decent for ceremonies. Simply convert the pitchers mound into a stage.

The selling point for a Boston Winter Olympics is that the region could invest in infrastructure that benefits the city. Upgrading the stadiums and arenas of Harvard, Boston College and MIT makes sense for the city.

For the snow events the Northeast has a huge population base and it makes sense for the USOC and the various sports to look into upgrading the sporting venues of the area with or without another winter games in the area. The sliding track at Lake Placid needs some modernization, a new ski jumping center in New England would help develop athletes from New England and Connecticut, developing one of the ski resorts would attract more skiers to New England, etc.

Spending money on white elephants is bad. Spending money on things that will receive heavy use can be good. A winter games would not merely avoid wasting money, it would invest money in industries and assets that are important to the city and the region.

We're talking about Fenway Park. That's about as oddly shaped a baseball stadium as there is. Little bit more difficult than removing the pitchers mound (which is relatively easily, as many baseball stadium have done, particularly for hockey)

I believe you said earlier that Boston should do what works for Boston, not the USOC. So what's it to them if this makes sense to the USOC? And if you're spreading venues all over the Northeast from Boston to Lake Placid, that's not going to work. It ceases to make sense for either side.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep talking about this white elephant scenario, yet you avoid another SLC games just because of the whole history of the scandal. They have everything in place there with only a few upgrades required, and by the time the next bid for the WOG rolls around it'll be almost 20 years since that scandal occurred. You know people do forgive and forget, if they didn't Japan and Germany would have never seen another Olympic games again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston's "problems are with mountain events, not ceremonies or indoor events.

In 2002 hockey was split between a 2,500 and 10,000 seat arena, and ceremonies in an uncovered 45,000 seat college football stadium.

If you want to find faults, ask how the heck you are getting people to killington, and where you are putting all the non alpine snow/sled events

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston's "problems are with mountain events, not ceremonies or indoor events.

In 2002 hockey was split between a 2,500 and 10,000 seat arena, and ceremonies in an uncovered 45,000 seat college football stadium.

If you want to find faults, ask how the heck you are getting people to killington, and where you are putting all the non alpine snow/sled events

Actually the smaller arena was upgraded to have over 8k capacity seating.

And while an outdoor OC/CC stadium during snow season isn't that much of an issue, the insane blizzards and storms Boston faced this past winter may give the IOC, as well as the USOC, a second thought to a Boston bid. Remember when officials deemed Harbin "too cold" to be a viable candidate for an Olympic bid? Certainly the same will be said about Boston being "too snowy."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I've noticed this for a while and, while it's not a bad thing, I've noticed through several social medias that Beijing 2022 is on, they are holding a lot of events based around their bid, meaning they're spending a good amount of money on bid promotion while Almaty 2022 seems pretty relaxed and is strolling along with their, "Keeping It Real" slogan. I remember that Agenda 2020 was trying to stop so much spending on bids, so just in my opinion and I know they have to advertise the bid I get that but if Beijing fully supported the Agenda, even if it isn't meant to apply to this bidding process more so to the next, they wouldn't be holding so many promotional events for the bid. I mean I read somewhere that approval was like 99% so it's not like they need to get the public hyped up (if they even have a choice ;) ).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Blatter to skip Olympic meetings in Malaysia next week

ZURICH (AP) - FIFA President Sepp Blatter will not travel to Malaysia next week for an IOC meeting where the host city of the 2022 Winter Olympics will be chosen.

Blatter, who has been an IOC member for 16 years, usually attends the annual Olympic meeting but has curbed his travel since an American investigation into FIFA corruption was revealed in May.

A letter was sent last week notifying the IOC that Blatter would not go to Kuala Lumpur, FIFA official Walter Gagg told The Associated Press on Monday.

Since May, Blatter has skipped FIFA tournaments in New Zealand and Canada which have extradition treaties with the United States.

"FIFA was not stuck because the president was not moving," Blatter quipped Monday at a news conference after his executive committee chose Feb. 26 for the presidential election to replace him.

Blatter will travel to Russia this week for the 2018 World Cup qualifying draw being made Saturday in St. Petersburg.

FIFA will still be well represented at the Olympic meetings.

Gagg, who accompanies Blatter on IOC business, said he will join FIFA senior vice president Issa Hayatou at the meetings. Hayatou, of Cameroon, is another long-time IOC member.

Two others combine membership of the IOC and the FIFA executive committee: Sheikh Ahmad al-Fahad al-Sabah of Kuwait and Lydia Nsekera of Burundi.

The IOC session will be held from July 31 to Aug. 3. The vote on the 2022 host city will be held July 31, with Beijing and Almaty, Kazakhstan, as the candidates.

AP

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_307134/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=UuTF9XgQ

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...