GoNutz Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Does anyone think the US has a real shot with any bid? I feel like this is flushing $50 million (yeah it's private money so no big loss) down the drain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarpedReality Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Storrow Drive has a corner section that could hold...hell a damn live site. The Hatch Shell is a damn good place to watch an outdoor concert. Converting it into an Olympic venue is another story. All the events that can conceivably fit inside the Hatch (Fencing, Table Tennis, Weightlifting, Judo, Tae Kwon Do, etc) seem to have found a better home in a preexisting location. Look, I'm with you when you claim disappointment that the Esplanade can't host an Olympic event. However, it seems like the planets cannot be aligned properly. Rowing would beautiful on the Charles, but the Charles cannot support Olympic rowing. Beach Volleyball would be beautiful, but would necessitate closing Storrow Drive and/or demolishing the Hatch Shell. The Hatch Shell could host one of the smaller events, but it would be cheaper to use preexisting facilities nearby. Nevertheless, having events at Franklin Park and Boston Common would be absolutely gorgeous. Locating the village right alongside Dorchester Bay will provide stunning views of the harbor. A Boston Olympics would be a beautiful, but is it beautiful enough to convince the IOC to vote against Paris or Durban? We'll have to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Keep in mind you also have security issues with many locations. You want events where the athletes will be outdoors to be at least somewhat isolatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisValentine Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 As a longtime Boston resident (well, now I live just outside), I have to agree that it would be nice to see something on the Esplanade, but that its just not practical. Anytime they do anything at all there, it is a logistical nightmare. The Olympics... its just not practical. It'd probably be easier to just float a barge out onto the river nearby and hold something on that. So, thats not particularly practical, either. My only concern with the bid layout is that I really think they're underutilizing the Beacon Park train yard redevelopment. I'm guessing they're worried about getting that all sorted out in time, but I can't help but think that the current proposed location for the Stadium (Widdett circle) is worse from almost every angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 My only concern with the bid layout is that I really think they're underutilizing the Beacon Park train yard redevelopment. I'm guessing they're worried about getting that all sorted out in time, but I can't help but think that the current proposed location for the Stadium (Widdett circle) is worse from almost every angle. I'm too lazy to dig it up now; but wasn't the Olympic Stadium plan part of some other office/commercial development (which I thought was really strong) rather the stand-alone scheme at Widett Circle? And does the Widett Circle plan even allow for a warm-up track? Or is that item dispensable now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted January 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The Hatch Shell is a damn good place to watch an outdoor concert. Converting it into an Olympic venue is another story. All the events that can conceivably fit inside the Hatch (Fencing, Table Tennis, Weightlifting, Judo, Tae Kwon Do, etc) seem to have found a better home in a preexisting location. Look, I'm with you when you claim disappointment that the Esplanade can't host an Olympic event. However, it seems like the planets cannot be aligned properly. Rowing would beautiful on the Charles, but the Charles cannot support Olympic rowing. Beach Volleyball would be beautiful, but would necessitate closing Storrow Drive and/or demolishing the Hatch Shell. The Hatch Shell could host one of the smaller events, but it would be cheaper to use preexisting facilities nearby. Nevertheless, having events at Franklin Park and Boston Common would be absolutely gorgeous. Locating the village right alongside Dorchester Bay will provide stunning views of the harbor. A Boston Olympics would be a beautiful, but is it beautiful enough to convince the IOC to vote against Paris or Durban? We'll have to wait and see. I was thinking Beach Volleyball would be better on the actual beach and have some other venues in Marina Park, is this doable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarpedReality Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I don't know what you mean by Marina Park. I know that in the early stages, there was discussion about holding beach volleyball at Revere Beach, but I don't know why it was dropped. Maybe it was considered too remote from the stadium. There are also decent beaches in Southie, and I don't know why they were rejected. Having Fort Independence in the backdrop would certainly have been pretty cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phandrosis Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I love it when people educate themselves before writing newspaper articles If Boston stays in the race, it will have 32 months to convince the IOC that it is a more worthy host than a handful of other cities from around the world. Thus far, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Istanbul, Hamburg, Johannesburg, Durbin, St. Petersburg, Doha, Budapest and Melbourne have thrown their hats in the ring. Oh wait, I didn't know all those cities sent in bids already? http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/12/the-olympic-bid-is-terrible-news-for-boston-s-pocketbooks.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 ^Even Wikipedia's more accurate than that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 It's not the first time, nor will it be the last, when newspaper articles just throw out names of cities from the a$s! And this one couldn't even spell Durban right. Such 'journalism'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted January 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I don't know what you mean by Marina Park. I know that in the early stages, there was discussion about holding beach volleyball at Revere Beach, but I don't know why it was dropped. Maybe it was considered too remote from the stadium. There are also decent beaches in Southie, and I don't know why they were rejected. Having Fort Independence in the backdrop would certainly have been pretty cool. Sorry...Marine Park and the beach that surrounds and connects to Pleasure Bay and Old Harbor. Also along the Old Harbor is what appears to be a massive park called Joe Moakley Park (giving it is right next to the Athletes Village I'm thinking this will be for them). And looking at the map it would be about a 9-11 minute drive and a 51-54 minute walk from the stadium to Marine Park which could host maybe a Velodrome? There appears to be a skating ring already there so a velodrome could be a permanent legacy venue for the area. And I guess I was talking about the beaches in Southie, it would be nice to see some stuff there. I know I quote Chicago's bid a lot (I think it was the best submitted by the USOC so far). Are you familiar with it? If I remember correctly Lincoln park was to host a few events with minimal disruption to the park aside from the Tennis venues there. Here is a picture I dug out from the bid book: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquaman617 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Lincoln Park in Chicago is much wider than Boston's Esplanade. The Esplanade is simply too narrow to host any events (maybe 300 feet at its widest). Another problem with the Esplanade is access: Storrow Drive, a major traffic artery, runs along its length and in order to access the Esplanade, there are only three or four narrow footbridges over Storrow. I know a temporary crossing could be built, but that would raise security concerns (hundreds of pedestrians crossing over an open road - I hate to say it, but talk about a soft target). In order to hold the July 4th fireworks, Storrow is closed down for the day. That can't be done for several weeks to accommodate an event or two. I would prefer a beach volleyball venue somewhere near UMass Boston's campus - perhaps L Street Beach or somewhere like that. It would also be about a 10 minute walk from the main stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Sorry...Marine Park and the beach that surrounds and connects to Pleasure Bay and Old Harbor. Also along the Old Harbor is what appears to be a massive park called Joe Moakley Park (giving it is right next to the Athletes Village I'm thinking this will be for them). Joe Moakley is not "massive", nor could you fit a beach volleyball stadium on the beach there. Even if somehow you could, why would that spot be better than what the organizers choose? What do they know that you don't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted January 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Lincoln Park in Chicago is much wider than Boston's Esplanade. The Esplanade is simply too narrow to host any events (maybe 300 feet at its widest). Another problem with the Esplanade is access: Storrow Drive, a major traffic artery, runs along its length and in order to access the Esplanade, there are only three or four narrow footbridges over Storrow. I know a temporary crossing could be built, but that would raise security concerns (hundreds of pedestrians crossing over an open road - I hate to say it, but talk about a soft target). In order to hold the July 4th fireworks, Storrow is closed down for the day. That can't be done for several weeks to accommodate an event or two. I would prefer a beach volleyball venue somewhere near UMass Boston's campus - perhaps L Street Beach or somewhere like that. It would also be about a 10 minute walk from the main stadium. I was talking about Marine Park. Joe Moakley is not "massive", nor could you fit a beach volleyball stadium on the beach there. Even if somehow you could, why would that spot be better than what the organizers choose? What do they know that you don't? Once again, I said that given its proximity to the Athletes Village it will most likely be for the Athletes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 #ResurrectingOldThreads Found this article on the WSJ: http://www.wsj.com/articles/usoc-drops-boston-olympics-bid-1438024640 Mr. Blackmun said Monday the USOC would provide an update on its plans for a 2024 bid next month. Also, LA apparently has 70%+ support, so yeah (*totally* not trying to one up Boston here... hehe). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphamale86 Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Um... Could we talk about something? What exactly did the selection process for the USOC actually entail? I mean I feel like local Government support should have been one of the initial issues covered prior to choosing a winner. For the Governor of MASS to say I can't sign my support unless I have more info, is an embarrassing blow to the USOC more so that the actual withdrawal of Boston. What were you all doing this past year. All that drama of of 35 cities down to 20, down to 10, down to 4, did no one ask hey can you pay for this, do your constituents even want this? Basic questions. These events in Boston to me come across like no one in Boston wanted the games in the first place except probably 1 guy. I feel like a bid process should not be a behind closed doors affair. Bring back the public domestic bid process of yesteryear I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshi Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Sit it out, & get LA ready for a battle with TO for 2028. Or go for the winters in 2026, the US would have those sewn up if they went for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarpedReality Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Um... Could we talk about something? What exactly did the selection process for the USOC actually entail? I mean I feel like local Government support should have been one of the initial issues covered prior to choosing a winner. For the Governor of MASS to say I can't sign my support unless I have more info, is an embarrassing blow to the USOC more so that the actual withdrawal of Boston. What were you all doing this past year. All that drama of of 35 cities down to 20, down to 10, down to 4, did no one ask hey can you pay for this, do your constituents even want this? Basic questions. These events in Boston to me come across like no one in Boston wanted the games in the first place except probably 1 guy. I feel like a bid process should not be a behind closed doors affair. Bring back the public domestic bid process of yesteryear I say. Deval Patrick was governor during the selection process and he supported the bid 100%. Marty Walsh supported the bid as well. Baker had this all dropped on his lap on the day he was inaugurated in January. I dunno if the USOC reached out to him (or Martha Coakley) before making their decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Apparently, there have been informal meetings between LA and the UOC since Boston's withdrawal: http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1029008/usoc-open-discussions-with-los-angeles-over-bid-for-2024-olympics-and-paralympics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Deval Patrick was governor during the selection process and he supported the bid 100%. Then he was set to take a high paying job with Boston 2024 once out of office. Quite possibly the dumbest of many dumb decisions. The optics were just unbelievably bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphamale86 Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 I can't get on the Bad Wagon for 2028 just yet. I feel like the 2020 cycle not to mention the 2022 winter fiasco is an example of Hindsight in it's best form. Some countries bid to win, others bid to gain momentum for future bids. the USA bids to win. They are not like Spain, South Korea and Japan that knew in the earlier cycles that they were long shots but patient enough to keep trying with the same cities to eventually build a reputation. The USA's attitude is either you want Chicago now or else it's not going through the process again. With that said in 2020, if word on the street is that Rome is going to run away with the bid and you know your profit sharing deal is only now stabilizing, you aren't going to waste your energy bidding, with the dust still settling from Chicago's loss but who could foresee Rome crashing out right before the deadline. Had the USA or Toronto Bid then I am actually quite sure they would have beaten Tokyo Istanbul and Madrid. 2022 even more so! Let's be real most of the early favorites were Scandinavian countries that hadn't hosted in years. Who really in their right mind at the USOC was going to say lets put millions of dollars into a bid that we aren't going to win, when we're up against these juggernauts of the Winter Olympic Movement especially when we hosted more recently than them. Furthermore knowing it's a Summer games we actually want. No one could foresee that all of these Favorites would have dropped out of the race leaving it completely devoid of any credible candidate. Yes it's easy to say it now that we should have bid but back then, if you have an "I'm only bidding to win" mentality then I was not going to compete against Oslo and Stockholm. I say all of this to show we cannot say lets skip 2024 in order to focus on 2028 because we don't know who is still going to be in the race by bidding time and even more so who is going to bid for 2028. I think it's almost safe to say that if Australia and South Africa jump in the race for 2028 that the US can watch their hopes dashed yet again almost immediately. So I say compete now against the field that you know instead of waiting and preparing for a field that you don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usa2024olympics Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 LA, SF 2024 possible???? I certainly hope not http://tw.nbcsports.com/UiP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 LA, SF 2024 possible???? I certainly hope not http://tw.nbcsports.com/UiP If this is true, we wait another Boston mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastien A. Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 LA, SF 2024 possible???? I certainly hope not http://tw.nbcsports.com/UiP Wow, is the Usoc making fun of people? ^^ It's certainly just talks, but their choices/ideas leave me confused. At this point it seems obvious that it's Los Angeles or nothing... maybe not in their minds... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 On the bright side, a joint bid between the cities would fast track the California High Speed Rail Project Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.