Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well Olympic venues need to be able to host thousands of people, minimum 6 000 and up to 17 000. Are University venues able to host such massive amount of people? I mean it's gonna need a lot of transformation...

I think you don't know very well USA. You can't compare French University with American University.

Some University stadium are bigger than Stade de France or even bigger than Camp Nou in Barcelona, some Arenas are bigger than Paris Bercy. Sport in american universities is very very important more than everywhere in the world. You can compare some American Football university with major European soccer club.

Boston has some of the most famous University in USA : Harvard, MIT, Boston College... They have very good infrastructures for sport, better than in France. And Usually it's compact, you have everything in the same place.

It will be a dream in France to have this kind of sport infrastructures in a university, and the majority of sports club in France don't have even 50% of this kind of venues.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This thread is now unreadable.

Rendering of the Olympic stadium (stade de France) and the aquatic center. 

Because Baron.

Yeah, I must say Boston does have a solid bid. It is compact and Boston is the undisputed historical capital of the US. It's home to some of the worlds leading universities and research centers and close to major North American population centers like Philadelphia, New York City, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and Quebec. I think Boston will be a dark horse in the race and could possibly give Berlin and Rome a run for their money, but I think in the end Paris will win.


However, it must also be noted that some of the facilities they are proposing will require significant renovations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If America had chosen San Francisco, most here would have acknowledged that if Rome, Berlin and Paris didn't bid, America would have had a good chance. But Boston? They should have chosen San Francisco IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If America had chosen San Francisco, most here would have acknowledged that if Rome, Berlin and Paris didn't bid, America would have had a good chance. But Boston? They should have chosen San Francisco IMO.

USA won with Atlanta, why not with Boston ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If America had chosen San Francisco, most here would have acknowledged that if Rome, Berlin and Paris didn't bid, America would have had a good chance. But Boston? They should have chosen San Francisco IMO.

Disagree. If it had come down to San Francisco v. Paris, SF might've gotten a few more votes than Boston (maybe 3 more) but Paris would still come out ahead. In the end, even though I think the USOC's timing will be wrong; Boston is the better bid this time around for what the city will inherit after the Games.

Also at the end of the day, SF or Boston don't really NEED the Games. SF does fine as a tourist magnet w/o the Olympics and Boston I think does very well as #2 or #3 on the Eastern seaboard even w/o the Olympic Games. If anything, an SOGs will cause a great dislocation for the universities in 2024; altho of course, all of them are cooperating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

USA won with Atlanta, why not with Boston ?

That's a really bad comparison to make. It's not as if because Atlanta won, that means that any city of comparable size in the United States can also win as well.

Think about this.. take this Boston bid and put them in the 1996 field. Do they win? Probably. New York's 2012 bid, would they have won 1996? I think they would have. Chicago's 2016 bid? I think so.

Now look at the reverse. Atlanta's 1996 bid that won that vote.. would that bid have won the 2012 vote against London and Paris? Not a chance. In 2016 against Rio? Possibly, but I wouldn't count on it.

Whether or not these cities win their vote often has more to do with the competition they're up against than the quality and strength of the bid itself. Can Boston win this 2024? Sure they can. But if the other cities bidding can make a stronger case, then Boston has little chance. And I agree in many respects with baron here that whether or not the USOC wins this one is more about who they're up against than the city they put forth.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

you're not acknowledging all the posts from people outside France who'd like to see a Paris Games and think it would be a formidable bid if it proceeded.

:) I'm acknowledging those supports Rob, and believe me, I saw them. I just have a different opinion.

Being a very new British resident (and loving it) I have demonstrations of affection and sympathy everyday, not just about the olympics. Now I'm not sure the French generally deserve it ;) .

I can tell you why. First of all, Boston's bid is extremely compact. More compact than Paris's and any other olympics ever. Second of all , I have noticed that you say Boston will have to build a lot. That really isn't true. Boston's bid depends of existing venues within college campuses, such as Harvard Stadium for hockey.

Good job.

The college venues are world-class. This isn't the French university system we're talking about. :D

:lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I must say Boston does have a solid bid. It is compact and Boston is the undisputed historical capital of the US. It's home to some of the worlds leading universities and research centers and close to major North American population centers like Philadelphia, New York City, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and Quebec. I think Boston will be a dark horse in the race and could possibly give Berlin and Rome a run for their money, but I think in the end Paris will win.

However, it must also be noted that some of the facilities they are proposing will require significant renovations.

This. Sorry to hijack this thread with more Boston talk..

Harvard and MIT are famous universities, no question. But they are not big time sports schools. Boston College is the biggest school when it comes to sports, but a lot of its venues are smaller compared to other universities it competes with. So comparing Boston to Paris, then yes Boston has a lot of facilities, although they're still relying on a lot of temporary infrastructure. Whereas, say, San Francisco might have offered a less compact plan, but they have much larger facilities for use than Boston is offering.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This. Sorry to hijack this thread with more Boston talk..

Harvard and MIT are famous universities, no question. But they are not big time sports schools. Boston College is the biggest school when it comes to sports, but a lot of its venues are smaller compared to other universities it competes with. So comparing Boston to Paris, then yes Boston has a lot of facilities, although they're still relying on a lot of temporary infrastructure. Whereas, say, San Francisco might have offered a less compact plan, but they have much larger facilities for use than Boston is offering.

Completely agree.

My one worry is that it appears the Paris venue plan will largely be outside of the city. To me that does not come across well because I would like to personally see events by the Eiffel Tower or maybe by the Louvre. Paris has so many beautiful sights and it seems like the venue plan they have is not acknowledging them. And not to sound like a devils advocate, but if Boston's plan does a better job at using their beautiful buildings and sites along with better showcasing American culture to make a more exciting games atmosphere than Paris could have some strong competition.

Paris can not just walk into this bid race acting like they are going to win. They need to go in humble, but ready to whoop butt. To do that they need a strong technical bid and a good narrative. I the Hebdo attacks have given them a narrative of national unity and spreading friendship and love around the world, but their venue plan is lacking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree.

My one worry is that it appears the Paris venue plan will largely be outside of the city. To me that does not come across well because I would like to personally see events by the Eiffel Tower or maybe by the Louvre. Paris has so many beautiful sights and it seems like the venue plan they have is not acknowledging them. And not to sound like a devils advocate, but if Boston's plan does a better job at using their beautiful buildings and sites along with better showcasing American culture to make a more exciting games atmosphere than Paris could have some strong competition.

Paris can not just walk into this bid race acting like they are going to win. They need to go in humble, but ready to whoop butt. To do that they need a strong technical bid and a good narrative. I the Hebdo attacks have given them a narrative of national unity and spreading friendship and love around the world, but their venue plan is lacking.

Appart from golf, cycling, BMX, rowing, kayak and of course football and sailing, most of the venues will be within Paris. It's basically the velodrome, the golf course, and the nautic site for rowing and conoeing that are outside Paris. That's only 3 venues. And by 2024, they will have built metro lines that connect quickly these sites to Paris. Also, this important to remind that Paris IS a small city. It's 15 times smaller than London.

And they have planned to use the garden of Versailles for shooting, cycling and perhaps equestrian, the Grand Palais for fencing, the Champs de Mars (Tour Eiffel) for beachvolley, the Trocadero for marathon and triathlon, the Invalides for the archery, and the marathon will go trough the major city's sights.The bid is really taking into consideration all the iconic places that could be used for the Games.

Also, a second major stadium (82 000 seats) will be inaugurated close to Paris (about 23 km from Paris) in 2020. So it's quite an advantage to have two stadiums with minimum capacity 80 000. They may plan to do like Rio and have the ceremonies in one and athletics in the other one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this idea of "compact" gets over-played here sometimes. The issue for me is accessibility. How easy is it to get around? Where are the venues in relation to hotels and restaurants and other things that visitors will be checking out. That's the key to a successful venue plan.

I was in Paris for the first time 2 summers ago (on the final day of the Tour de France no less, so there were a lot of people in town). Being from New York and someone who doesn't own a car, I appreciate a city with an extensive subway system where it's relatively easy to get around. In that regard, Boston's compactness only helps them so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree.

My one worry is that it appears the Paris venue plan will largely be outside of the city. To me that does not come across well because I would like to personally see events by the Eiffel Tower or maybe by the Louvre. Paris has so many beautiful sights and it seems like the venue plan they have is not acknowledging them. And not to sound like a devils advocate, but if Boston's plan does a better job at using their beautiful buildings and sites along with better showcasing American culture to make a more exciting games atmosphere than Paris could have some strong competition.

Paris can not just walk into this bid race acting like they are going to win. They need to go in humble, but ready to whoop butt. To do that they need a strong technical bid and a good narrative. I the Hebdo attacks have given them a narrative of national unity and spreading friendship and love around the world, but their venue plan is lacking.

What you called city in North America is different meaning than in France. With the north american definition all the venues from Paris will be in Paris. With the french definition a lot will be outside Paris. It's just a problem of definition. In fact the venues remain compact and close each other but less than Boston Plan.

I think you would like to see more venues in historical building ! The majority are Museum and you can't close the museum for SoG. But some famous place will be use like Castle of Versailles, Eiffel Tower, Grand Palais etc.

I imagine people would like see all the events in Historical place :D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree.

My one worry is that it appears the Paris venue plan will largely be outside of the city. To me that does not come across well because I would like to personally see events by the Eiffel Tower or maybe by the Louvre. Paris has so many beautiful sights and it seems like the venue plan they have is not acknowledging them. And not to sound like a devils advocate, but if Boston's plan does a better job at using their beautiful buildings and sites along with better showcasing American culture to make a more exciting games atmosphere than Paris could have some strong competition.

Paris can not just walk into this bid race acting like they are going to win. They need to go in humble, but ready to whoop butt. To do that they need a strong technical bid and a good narrative. I the Hebdo attacks have given them a narrative of national unity and spreading friendship and love around the world, but their venue plan is lacking.

If Paris bids wholeheartedly against say an ultra-compact Boston bid, the "compactness" or "expansiveness" issue WON'T amount to a hill of, to use a pun, beans. The nub of the issue is to award the Games to a city which will be "great" for the Olympic brand. Rio anyone? Once you get the alpha-class cities (Rome, Berlin, Paris) in there; they have the built-in momentum. "B"oston, unfortunately, is just a B+ city; and with Rome and Paris and a 12-year absence from Euro soil, then poor Boston will just be baked beans.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you why. First of all, Boston's bid is extremely compact. More compact than Paris's and any other olympics ever. Second of all , I have noticed that you say Boston will have to build a lot. That really isn't true. Boston's bid depends of existing venues within college campuses, such as Harvard Stadium for hockey.

'That really isn't true' on both counts there. For starters, you should go & read the lastest article that someone posted in the Boston thread on how the bid wants to expand some of the venues throughout Massachusetts. Secondly, being "compact" isn't necessarily as strong an attribute & some here like to make it out to be. It all depends on all the other factors involved & the compactness is nearly seen as the cherry on top. For 2016, the most spread-out venue concept won the day. So I wouldn't get to caught up in this whole compact business.

And lastly, it seems you haven't been following the same Boston bid that the rest of us have if you think that Boston doesn't have a lot to build. They still have to build the Olympic stadium (even a temporary one still costs money), a velodrome, an aquatics center & a BMX track (many KEY venues there). Even the ones being used on the college campuses still have to be renovated. And all of that still costs money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If America had chosen San Francisco, most here would have acknowledged that if Rome, Berlin and Paris didn't bid, America would have had a good chance. But Boston? They should have chosen San Francisco IMO.

Obviously San Francisco's plan wasn't up to snuff. Otherwise, the USOC would've chosen it.

USA won with Atlanta, why not with Boston ?

Did Atlanta have to deal with the possible strong likes like Paris, Berlin, Rome & perhaps South Africa? No they didn't. But Boston very well just could here. That's the BIG difference between those two.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My one worry is that it appears the Paris venue plan will largely be outside of the city. To me that does not come across well because I would like to personally see events by the Eiffel Tower or maybe by the Louvre. Paris has so many beautiful sights and it seems like the venue plan they have is not acknowledging them. And not to sound like a devils advocate, but if Boston's plan does a better job at using their beautiful buildings and sites along with better showcasing American culture to make a more exciting games atmosphere than Paris could have some strong competition.

How do even know this when Paris hasn't even RELEASED anything about how their bid plan will even look like?! They're still contemplating this whole thing! And like I just mentioned to someone else, go look at the Boston thread. Looks like Boston wants to farm out some other venues now. And also, this "compact" deal that some of you are getting into is being drum up way to much. That aspect alone does not win you a bid. Again, just look at Rio 2016 for the exact opposite of "compact".

Paris can not just walk into this bid race acting like they are going to win. They need to go in humble, but ready to whoop butt. To do that they need a strong technical bid and a good narrative. I the Hebdo attacks have given them a narrative of national unity and spreading friendship and love around the world, but their venue plan is lacking.

And what makes you think that Paris is just "going to walk in there & think that they'll win"?! Of course they need a narrative & a sound plan. You're just being silly there. The same could be of Boston or any bid city for that matter. And for someone who was so appalled about Boston's choice by the USOC, you're sure doing a full 180 now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And a Rome/Paris-no Europe-for 12-year mindset vs. a NEW American city again bid, who do you think the old-timer IOC voters will swing to? They know the pain of a much-stung city like Paris sticking its neck out once more (maybe the last time for a very long time for another 50 years) vs. okey-another-new-American-kid-on-the-block. (I mean they have so many cities they want to present, that if we reject only their 12th largest city -- maybe they'll come back with New York or Chicago next time...) -- who do you think the core of the older European voters would go for? I mean the resort 2022 cities dropped out, there's a 12-year Euro drought, the crazy Americans can't decide which city they want (and they were crazy enough to also pass up on 2022 which they could've had for a song), do you think we should pass on Paris (or Rome again)? I mean, this is a no-brainer. :blink:

Edited by baron-pierreIV
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, this is a no-brainer. :blink:

Well, yeah. Boston can't beat enthusiastic bids from Paris/Rome/Berlin. Boston would beat bids from the Baku's of Europe. And it gets real interesting if it's Boston vs Hamburg/Budapest/etc.

I don't see anyone from Asia or Latin America stepping in. Probably not Australia. And the odds of a strong bid coming out of Africa grow weaker every day. So it's likly to be Boston vs Europe. Now we just wait to see who from Europe bids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do even know this when Paris hasn't even RELEASED anything about how their bid plan will even look like?! They're still contemplating this whole thing! And like I just mentioned to someone else, go look at the Boston thread. Looks like Boston wants to farm out some other venues now. And also, this "compact" deal that some of you are getting into is being drum up way to much. That aspect alone does not win you a bid. Again, just look at Rio 2016 for the exact opposite of "compact".

And what makes you think that Paris is just "going to walk in there & think that they'll win"?! Of course they need a narrative & a sound plan. You're just being silly there. The same could be of Boston or any bid city for that matter. And for someone who was so appalled about Boston's choice by the USOC, you're sure doing a full 180 now.

Someone posted a venue plan a few pages back.

What you called city in North America is different meaning than in France. With the north american definition all the venues from Paris will be in Paris. With the french definition a lot will be outside Paris. It's just a problem of definition. In fact the venues remain compact and close each other but less than Boston Plan.

I think you would like to see more venues in historical building ! The majority are Museum and you can't close the museum for SoG. But some famous place will be use like Castle of Versailles, Eiffel Tower, Grand Palais etc.

I imagine people would like see all the events in Historical place :D.

Would the Tulieries Gardens be a plausible location for say archery or something small like that?

I think this idea of "compact" gets over-played here sometimes. The issue for me is accessibility. How easy is it to get around? Where are the venues in relation to hotels and restaurants and other things that visitors will be checking out. That's the key to a successful venue plan.

I was in Paris for the first time 2 summers ago (on the final day of the Tour de France no less, so there were a lot of people in town). Being from New York and someone who doesn't own a car, I appreciate a city with an extensive subway system where it's relatively easy to get around. In that regard, Boston's compactness only helps them so much.

I would agree with this. It is all about how easily guests can get around in the city and I think Paris has a natural advantage there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone posted a venue plan a few pages back.

Oh, & is that something *official* posted by that "someone"? I don't see how it can be when Paris hasn't even confirmed that their bidding, much less have a 2024 venue plan already in place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, & is that something *official* posted by that "someone"? I don't see how it can be when Paris hasn't even confirmed that their bidding, much less have a 2024 venue plan already in place.

That "someone" was me, and this was based on the summary of the feasibility report which detailed the possible venues for a bid. And to be fair, it's a lot like Paris 2012 but adding all the new venues that were built or will be before 2024. There won't be any surprise regarding the venues for a bid since it' obvious what could be used.

Obviously, this is based on all the existing and soon-to-be venues. There will be temporary venues, but that of course we don't know anything yet. However, since they consider using the Parc des Expositions de la porte de Versailles for a bunch of sports like they did in London with the ExCeL, and since a project of an aquatic center has been discussed since 2005 and is about to become a reality, there's almost no venues that need to be built. Oh sorry yes there is, a field hockey venue. That's it. The only thing will be to set seats and stuff for outside venues at the iconic landmarks. I would hardly consider that as a "temporary venue".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the Tulieries Gardens be a plausible location for say archery or something small like that?

Probably not. There's not enough space inbetween the trees, fountains and such I believe. The report suggests to use the Invalides esplanade for Archery and it would look great as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That "someone" was me, and this was based on the summary of the feasibility report which detailed the possible venues for a bid. And to be fair, it's a lot like Paris 2012 but adding all the new venues that were built or will be before 2024. There won't be any surprise regarding the venues for a bid since it' obvious what could be used.

Thanks for the clarification. Even by looking at that map, all the key events proposed there are still well within the immediate Paris area. So I don't see how anyone can say that the plan is 'lacking'.

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...