Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GBModerator

San Diego Submits 2024 Summer Games Bid Proposal

Recommended Posts

Like every other team, the Chargers want public money for their new stadium. So far, no luck

But if they put a track option into their design and convince people they have a shot at the Olympics???

Do they have a shot? Probably not. But if no strong city bids, who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't heard SD say anything about an "austerity budget."

I'd say that Mudds "estimate of $4 Billion" to host the Games qualifies it as such. Even Oslo 2022 proposes more for a winter Games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I know their main stadium will be Qualcomm Stadium, a temporary track will be installed for the games. On the left side of the stadium the Athletes village will be constructed and on the right a new Aquatics Center. They are only constructing four new venues and San Diego has 22 of them already constructed, however massive renovations and upgrades will be given to the other 22.

@FYI, Chicago proposed 3 billion, when we all know that 12-15 billion would have been the final price tag. I think we have all been around to know that proposed budgets are just lies to get the public on board and always spiral out of control when given the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Sorry for double post) @quaker, San Diego is considering building 2 large scale stadiums of you look on their venue plan.

So they are. Stupid venue plan then. They can't get 1 stadium built for the Chargers when they really need it. How exactly do they justify 2 stadiums? Not happening.

From what I know their main stadium will be Qualcomm Stadium, a temporary track will be installed for the games. On the left side of the stadium the Athletes village will be constructed and on the right a new Aquatics Center. They are only constructing four new venues and San Diego has 22 of them already constructed, however massive renovations and upgrades will be given to the other 22.

@FYI, Chicago proposed 3 billion, when we all know that 12-15 billion would have been the final price tag. I think we have all been around to know that proposed budgets are just lies to get the public on board and always spiral out of control when given the games.

How do you install a temporary track into a stadium like that? That they think that plan is going to work with the Athletics Stadium, aquatic stadium and the village all on that site in addition to a stadium downtown, they're nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The venue plan on the map is laughable.

For example the velodrome at Balboa Park is a 333m concrete track while Olympic velodromes must be 250m. Maybe they think the cycling federation won't notice?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they are. Stupid venue plan then. They can't get 1 stadium built for the Chargers when they really need it. How exactly do they justify 2 stadiums? .

Exactly, but they most likely aren't going to deal with this because I doubt they will get the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I know their main stadium will be Qualcomm Stadium, a temporary track will be installed for the games. On the left side of the stadium the Athletes village will be constructed and on the right a new Aquatics Center. They are only constructing four new venues and San Diego has 22 of them already constructed, however massive renovations and upgrades will be given to the other 22.

@FYI, Chicago proposed 3 billion, when we all know that 12-15 billion would have been the final price tag. I think we have all been around to know that proposed budgets are just lies to get the public on board and always spiral out of control when given the games.

No. That is NOT what they are proposing. Stop making stuff up.

They have no plans to add a track to Qualcomm (which is basically impossible anyway). They're talking about two new stadiums -- one for athletics and one for soccer. The latter could be used as an NFL stadium, but not the former. Both stadia are part of the 20% of missing/non -existent venues. Both are big ticket items that would need a lot of prime real estate. It doesn't sound like they have a clear idea of where either one would be built or how they would be funded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. I think we have all been around to know that proposed budgets are just lies to get the public on board and always spiral out of control when given the games.

I would never submit a bid proposal with anything less than a $60 billion budget!! B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure they are working out all the kinks. Were being too judgmental about the venue plan which really is not that bad.

Apart from the venues that no city would have to build (IE sailing, golf, etc) it IS pretty awful.

But why did they put up a website and declare they are bidding before they did research into what is required to host the games. How much time does it take to do an internet search for the ICF's required velodrome length? It is pretty clear that this is a bid based on a desire for prestige rather than San Diego having the required venues and infrastructure to host. And unlike Russia, San Diego doesn't have the money to spend their way past any problems encountered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Athens the main guy behind this said that they wanted to build a temporary track in Qualcomm, his words not mine.

That's completely false. I am not "behind this." I never said that they wanted to build a track in Qualcomm. YOU said that. I said the OPPOSITE.

Your reading comprehension truly sucks.

See the following proof:

No. That is NOT what they are proposing. Stop making stuff up.

They have no plans to add a track to Qualcomm (which is basically impossible anyway). They're talking about two new stadiums -- one for athletics and one for soccer. The latter could be used as an NFL stadium, but not the former. Both stadia are part of the 20% of missing/non -existent venues. Both are big ticket items that would need a lot of prime real estate. It doesn't sound like they have a clear idea of where either one would be built or how they would be funded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Athens the main guy behind this said that they wanted to build a temporary track in Qualcomm, his words not mine.

No, they're are building are knocking dw

Athens the main guy behind this said that they wanted to build a temporary track in Qualcomm, his words not mine.

No, they're are building are knocking down Qualcomm and building a temporary stadium for the games and then building a new downtown stadium for chargers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think San Francisco would have a better chance then San Diego, even though San Francisco wouldn't have much chance. I stick by my prediction that America's best bet is Los Angeles, seeing as though New York City and Chicago aren't interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Athens the main guy behind this said that they wanted to build a temporary track in Qualcomm, his words not mine.

Do you have a link or a quote that you could point us to? Because that doesn't sound right. Why would San Diego put athletics in a 60-year-old stadium the city and the number one tenant are desperate to replace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed We have more venues in SF but we have the big venue problem amd traffic I would all be for an LA bid

New York City would be a good place for a Summer Olympic Games though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York City would be a good place for a Summer Olympic Games though.

Only if there's a plan that works. The 2012 was okay at best, and that's before the stadium plan blew up on them. I think it's possible someone could come along and come up with something involving Flushing Meadows, but it'll take a person (or a group of people) with that vision to make it work. Until that happens, only in theory, if even that, could NYC be considered a good place for a Summer Olympics. Prestige and international recognition isn't even to do the trick. They learned that the hard way 9 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have a link or a quote that you could point us to? Because that doesn't sound right. Why would San Diego put athletics in a 60-year-old stadium the city and the number one tenant are desperate to replace?

Bernham is just wrong. I never said that. There is no link or quote because it is untrue.

Bernham, you ought to apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York City would be a good place for a Summer Olympic Games though.

My dad was born there I don't really know the NY plan but I just don't feel the olympics there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernham is just wrong. I never said that. There is no link or quote because it is untrue.

Bernham, you ought to apologize.

He's not saying you said that. He was saying that Vincent Mudd (or someone else with the San Diego EC) said that. Either way, doesn't sound right to me, that's why I'm asking him to show us a link or a quote where someone said that. If he can't do that than yes, he owes us an apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have a link or a quote that you could point us to? Because that doesn't sound right. Why would San Diego put athletics in a 60-year-old stadium the city and the number one tenant are desperate to replace?

Bernham is just wrong. I never said that. There is no link or quote because it is untrue.

Bernham, you ought to apologize.

Athens I don't know what the hell your talking about because I never said that you said that.

Here is a link to the interview where the main guy behind the bid talked about having a temporary track, also I posted a link to the picture used in the article of the Athletes village. http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/Nov/09/olympic-gold-san-diego-throws-its-name-in-the/

So Athens maybe next time before you say I have no proof or that I'm lying remember that I only post credible information with sources that back it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a link to the interview where the main guy behind the bid talked about having a temporary track, also I posted a link to the picture used in the article of the Athletes village. http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/Nov/09/olympic-gold-san-diego-throws-its-name-in-the/

So Athens maybe next time before you say I have no proof or that I'm lying remember that I only post credible information with sources that back it up.

I say again.. show me where he talks about putting a temporary track in Qualcomm? If you're referring to what he said in the comments section, Mudd said "Venue 1-track and field, opening and closing ceremony, possibly football with modifications. This venue can be engineered to even be temporary." Don't see where in there he implies that they could put a track in an existing venue. Actually, he's talking very specifically about the venues that San Diego DOESN'T have, not modifications to an existing venue.

This article is also from November. Anything more recent than that since there has been a lot of mentions of San Diego in the past week along with some new information that has accompanied the news.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read:

Athens the main guy behind this said that they wanted to build a temporary track in Qualcomm, his words not mine.

That article you cited is totally out of date and doesn't agree with the recent proposed venues.

Read: http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/02/19/fact-check-san-diegos-phantom-olympic-venues/


I say again.. show me where he talks about putting a temporary track in Qualcomm? If you're referring to what he said in the comments section, Mudd said "Venue 1-track and field, opening and closing ceremony, possibly football with modifications. This venue can be engineered to even be temporary." Don't see where in there he implies that they could put a track in an existing venue. Actually, he's talking very specifically about the venues that San Diego DOESN'T have, not modifications to an existing venue.

This article is also from November. Anything more recent than that since there has been a lot of mentions of San Diego in the past week along with some new information that has accompanied the news.

Exactly.

Bernham, when you say you "only post credible information with sources to back it up" that's a joke.

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...