Jump to content

USA 2024


Recommended Posts

It's just NOT going to work for the DC area. DC has a different charter than say, LA, Boston or SF. I mean the USOC passed over DC last time. I really find the USOC's present path such a waste of time and effort. And then they still HAVEN'T decided whether to bid or not. How long can they string along the 3 other cities? (LA has the patience to endure for a century.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think DC is just too "red, white and blue." It screams "USA!!!" I don't think the IOC is going to go for that. It's just the wrong image.

The IOC could do Sochi, but would they have gone to Moscow? I really don't think so. It's a similar situation.

Not really, the DC logo features only the colors found on their city flag.

What the US and IOC need/want is a true US bid. Not one like Chicago or New York that seemed limited to those cities, they want a truly national one. Frankly, I don't think any of the four cities we have now are actually approaching the bid in that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really, the DC logo features only the colors found on their city flag.

What the US and IOC need/want is a true US bid. Not one like Chicago or New York that seemed limited to those cities, they want a truly national one. Frankly, I don't think any of the four cities we have now are actually approaching the bid in that way.

I'm not talking about the logo. Who cares about the logo? The city itself is ultra-American and presents a strongly political bent. "Red, white and blue" was metaphorical.

No city can work to build national support until it is officially named the candidate. So obviously none of them is doing that now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how it's possible for the entire country to get behind an Olympics in a host city 2,000 km away for most people. Most people in the USA will never have a chance to take part in the Olympic festivities no matter which city the USOC and IOC choose: it's an inevitable product of the USA being so large and its population concentrated on three coastlines.


The wont just be predjudiced against DC

It's not just the voters, but the experience for the world. DC is a government city. The USA bidding with DC instead of Los Angeles, New York or Chicago would be like Turkey bidding with Ankara instead of Istanbul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the US and IOC need/want is a true US bid. Not one like Chicago or New York that seemed limited to those cities, they want a truly national one. Frankly, I don't think any of the four cities we have now are actually approaching the bid in that way.

So New York and Chicago weren't true US bids. LA, SF, DC, and Boston don't seem like true US bids. Is there a city out there you think would fit the bill?

To Athens point.. it's early in the game for these bidders to figure out how they're going to present themselves to the world. I'm sure that's in the back of everyone's minds as they're having these internal discussions, but it's something they will get dealt with later. Right now, the USOC is trying to figure which of these cities has the best shot of winning. What happens after that city gets chosen isn't at issue right now. That's why trying to look at logos and websites and slogans.. who really gives a crap (other than people here, apparently). It's all window dressing.

It's going to be tough to sell any city as a true US bid. We know Atlanta wasn't that. I don't have any memory of LA '84, so I couldn't tell you what they were about. But it's the nature of a country this large and this spread out and diverse that there isn't a city out there who could host an Olympics that would get felt by the entire country. If that's what you're looking for, it's not going to happen.

Any US bid will sell itself by saying how great the US is. If a voter does like the US, they aren't going to vote for any US bid. The wont just be predjudiced against DC

It has nothing to do with prejudice. It's what we've talked about here that hinders DC.. the structure of government and the like. Although I do find it amusing that we're talking about trying to find a true US bid, but then DC is "too US."

It's not just the voters, but the experience for the world. DC is a government city. The USA bidding with DC instead of Los Angeles, New York or Chicago would be like Turkey bidding with Ankara instead of Istanbul.

Istanbul is also 3 times the size of Ankara and is much more internationally well-known. DC doesn't lack size or recognition (obviously NY and LA and Chicago are 1-2-3, but after that there's less of a gap in the size of the cities.. and I'm talking metro area in case anyone wants to get technical), so that's really not the best example. DC could work as a candidate city, but there are elements that hinder it in comparison to the other options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not talking about the logo. Who cares about the logo? The city itself is ultra-American and presents a strongly political bent. "Red, white and blue" was metaphorical.

No city can work to build national support until it is officially named the candidate. So obviously none of them is doing that now.

NY and LA give me the "USA" feel, not DC. Plus what do you expect from the nations capital? I mean let's be realistic here.

I'm not talking about national support I'm talking about how the cities can talk about the idea that the games will inspire the US to be united, pick up sport and a healthy lifestyle, and fall in love with games. Obviously that will come later on in the games, but I think the USOC is also looking for the city that can sell that the best.

Any US bid will sell itself by saying how great the US is. If a voter does like the US, they aren't going to vote for any US bid. The wont just be predjudiced against DC

Any bid in general will talk about how great their city or country is. It is called marketing.

I don't see how it's possible for the entire country to get behind an Olympics in a host city 2,000 km away for most people. Most people in the USA will never have a chance to take part in the Olympic festivities no matter which city the USOC and IOC choose: it's an inevitable product of the USA being so large and its population concentrated on three coastlines.

It's not just the voters, but the experience for the world. DC is a government city. The USA bidding with DC instead of Los Angeles, New York or Chicago would be like Turkey bidding with Ankara instead of Istanbul.

It is not necessarily the city they need to back or feel connected to, but the idea of having the games in the US. Having a torch run that touches as much of the US as possible. Selling the idea of having the games in the US and showcasing to the world that we can still do great things.

DC is the capital of the worlds most influential nation. While NYC and LA much be larger in scope, DC's role and influence both internationally and domestically can not be overlooked.

So New York and Chicago weren't true US bids. LA, SF, DC, and Boston don't seem like true US bids. Is there a city out there you think would fit the bill?

New York's and Chicago's bid were way too focused on those cities. I understand that they are trying to sell the city, but they also need to sell the nation. Chicago and New York failed in this regard. I think any major city in the US could do this, but it all depends on how they sell the bid.

To Athens point.. it's early in the game for these bidders to figure out how they're going to present themselves to the world. I'm sure that's in the back of everyone's minds as they're having these internal discussions, but it's something they will get dealt with later. Right now, the USOC is trying to figure which of these cities has the best shot of winning. What happens after that city gets chosen isn't at issue right now. That's why trying to look at logos and websites and slogans.. who really gives a crap (other than people here, apparently). It's all window dressing.

It's going to be tough to sell any city as a true US bid. We know Atlanta wasn't that. I don't have any memory of LA '84, so I couldn't tell you what they were about. But it's the nature of a country this large and this spread out and diverse that there isn't a city out there who could host an Olympics that would get felt by the entire country. If that's what you're looking for, it's not going to happen.

You are very correct in all of this. I think that is the biggest problem with US games and why most people do not remember many of them. I think LA was a great exception to this because it seems to be the games that everyone remembers, but I have no idea why. I think part of it was the strong 'USA' pride going around at the time. Atlanta really failed in this regard, even the terrorist attack did not help them. Even Atlantians have forgotten about the event, in fact I was surprised to find out they did it when I started researching the games.

The next US bid and games needs to sell the nation on the idea of the games. I think the games can have a much greater outreach now days then before. Social Media is such an untapped territory for the games.

It has nothing to do with prejudice. It's what we've talked about here that hinders DC.. the structure of government and the like. Although I do find it amusing that we're talking about trying to find a true US bid, but then DC is "too US."

Well I think the political capital status makes it that way. I mean the view from the stadium shots would be the Capital then Washington Monument. You really can not get any more of an 'American' shot like that then the Golden Gate Bridge and Statue of Liberty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No U.S. bid could ever really be a true national effort. There's too much partisanship, bickering & division for that ever to be the case. Not to mention how diverse this country is in the first place, that some group or another will always feel like they're left out.

It's not that Chicago 2016 "failed" at such an attempt, they couldn't have done that even if they wanted to anyway. But moreso the bi-partisanship of the media, & leaving it to the republicans as saying "Obama's adoptive hometown" whenever the Olympic bid was mentioned. That doesn't leave much room for American "unity".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are very correct in all of this. I think that is the biggest problem with US games and why most people do not remember many of them. I think LA was a great exception to this because it seems to be the games that everyone remembers, but I have no idea why. I think part of it was the strong 'USA' pride going around at the time. Atlanta really failed in this regard, even the terrorist attack did not help them. Even Atlantians have forgotten about the event, in fact I was surprised to find out they did it when I started researching the games.

The next US bid and games needs to sell the nation on the idea of the games. I think the games can have a much greater outreach now days then before. Social Media is such an untapped territory for the games.

Again, I don't really have any personal recollections of `84 and didn't really start following the Olympics really seriously until the early 90s, but here's my take of what I recall through history and what I've read..

What's the 1 thing that more people know about Lake Placid 1980 than anything? The Miracle on Ice, our big victory over the mighty Soviets at a time of some political instability in this country. What do many people remember about `84 in LA? The Soviet-led boycott. I've talked to people who say their interest in the Olympics has waned over the years because we don't have that big rival on both a political and sporting level. China isn't quite what the Soviets used to be and it's been brought up a lot that many of the sports we're good at (i.e. track & field, swimming) aren't necessarily where the Chinese are strongest.

So I think that's part of what changed from `84 to `96. US athletes dominated the LA games like never before because of the absence of all the Eastern bloc nations, but at least it spoke to the type of nationalism that helped give us the Miracle on Ice. 12 years later, it was another Olympics that had to present itself differently (so it was all about the American south, not as much the whole nation) and you didn't have those rivalries anymore.

Spinning it forward, I remember watching the presentation by Doctoroff and the NYC folks back in 2005. I couldn't have been more unimpressed. They could barely sell New York, let alone the nation. As a couple of people have said, I think it's going to be difficult, if not impossible, to get the entire nation behind an Olympics. There's too many people and too many fragmented interests in this country for it to happen. To use another example.. we had the Super Bowl here in the NYC area this past February. There were a lot of NFL folks who said the event was different because it wasn't felt throughout the whole city like it would be in, say, Indianapolis. My response to that was that the NYC area is so big, there's simply no way for an event of that magnitude to touch everyone in town.

So too is it with an American-hosted Olympics. If the Games are in Los Angeles, the most I'm going to get as a New Yorker is maybe some extra TV coverage and/or some group get-togethers to take in the action from afar. You really can't sell everyone that the Olympics are going to be a part of their experience when the most they're going to see is what's covered on television.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really feel all that patriotic when thinking about a DC bid. In fact, I think most americans wouldn't feel all that patriotic about DC because of the huge political connotation.

The problem isn't whether or not "Americans would feel patriotic." The problem is negative international perception due to what you have quite rightly identified as "the huge political connotation." That is what I meant by "red, white and blue."

I think it's the 84 baby grands coming out and playing all together. Never before attempted and never rivalled as well.

Meh. It was nice, but it wasn't mind-blowing. At the time, the rocket man was mind-blowing. The card stunt and balloon release were the iconic visual images of those ceremonies. I'd rank all three ahead of the pianos / Rhapsody in Blue. Among other things, that segment was confined to the peristyle and wasn't terribly visible for most spectators. And despite the bedazzled "dancers" languishing over their pianos, it was static and inactive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I don't really have any personal recollections of `84 and didn't really start following the Olympics really seriously until the early 90s, but here's my take of what I recall through history and what I've read..

What's the 1 thing that more people know about Lake Placid 1980 than anything? The Miracle on Ice, our big victory over the mighty Soviets at a time of some political instability in this country. What do many people remember about `84 in LA? The Soviet-led boycott. I've talked to people who say their interest in the Olympics has waned over the years because we don't have that big rival on both a political and sporting level. China isn't quite what the Soviets used to be and it's been brought up a lot that many of the sports we're good at (i.e. track & field, swimming) aren't necessarily where the Chinese are strongest.

So I think that's part of what changed from `84 to `96. US athletes dominated the LA games like never before because of the absence of all the Eastern bloc nations, but at least it spoke to the type of nationalism that helped give us the Miracle on Ice. 12 years later, it was another Olympics that had to present itself differently (so it was all about the American south, not as much the whole nation) and you didn't have those rivalries anymore.

Spinning it forward, I remember watching the presentation by Doctoroff and the NYC folks back in 2005. I couldn't have been more unimpressed. They could barely sell New York, let alone the nation. As a couple of people have said, I think it's going to be difficult, if not impossible, to get the entire nation behind an Olympics. There's too many people and too many fragmented interests in this country for it to happen. To use another example.. we had the Super Bowl here in the NYC area this past February. There were a lot of NFL folks who said the event was different because it wasn't felt throughout the whole city like it would be in, say, Indianapolis. My response to that was that the NYC area is so big, there's simply no way for an event of that magnitude to touch everyone in town.

So too is it with an American-hosted Olympics. If the Games are in Los Angeles, the most I'm going to get as a New Yorker is maybe some extra TV coverage and/or some group get-togethers to take in the action from afar. You really can't sell everyone that the Olympics are going to be a part of their experience when the most they're going to see is what's covered on television.

What I'm thinking is using social media and various other things to make the 2024 games the nations games.

Maybe a social media campaign to 'pass the torch' during the torch relay or something like that during the bid race. Celebrate Olympic Day as a nation with events in major US cities as a way to promote the bid.

During the presentation expand on this with footage from cities and landscapes from the whole nation; ala Sydney 2000. Maybe have a group of people in the big four (NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston) holding up signs or something like that saying we back the bid. Things that make it look like the nation is on board and selling both the city and country.

I would say have live sites in major US cities too during the games, but that would be a little more complex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh. It was nice, but it wasn't mind-blowing. At the time, the rocket man was mind-blowing. The card stunt and balloon release were the iconic visual images of those ceremonies. I'd rank all three ahead of the pianos / Rhapsody in Blue. Among other things, that segment was confined to the peristyle and wasn't terribly visible for most spectators. And despite the bedazzled "dancers" languishing over their pianos, it was static and inactive.

Nah, Disneyland did rocket man almost thirty years earlier. Most people remember the spaceship the most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Istanbul is also 3 times the size of Ankara and is much more internationally well-known. DC doesn't lack size or recognition (obviously NY and LA and Chicago are 1-2-3, but after that there's less of a gap in the size of the cities.. and I'm talking metro area in case anyone wants to get technical), so that's really not the best example. DC could work as a candidate city, but there are elements that hinder it in comparison to the other options.

It's obviously not a perfect comparison. But Ankara is Turkey's 2nd largest city, is the capital of the country and is big enough to host the Olympics. In fact it's basically the same size as Washington (5.8 million vs 5.0 million), with New York similarly being three times the size of DC. And despite Ankara being technically capable of hosting Turkey never considered switching to Ankara despite Istanbul being voted down twice before their last attempt.

I don't think Washington should be disqualified from bidding. But there are a lot of subtle problems with a "government town" bidding even in the domestic stage.

DC is the capital of the worlds most influential nation. While NYC and LA much be larger in scope, DC's role and influence both internationally and domestically can not be overlooked.

The problem is that the rest of the world associates Washington DC with the stuff they hate about America. Specifically the actions of our national government. The very design of the city itself is intended to scream "empire."

Contrast that with Los Angeles, which people associate with Hollywood. Or San Francisco, which is the hub of Asian immigration into the USA and arguably the greatest technology center in the world. Or Boston, which was one of the three original big cities in the USA, ground zero of the American Revolution and a center of European immigration to North America.

I'm sure there's a compelling narrative they can use to sell the IOC on coming to Washington DC. But I personally can't see what it would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, it was static and inactive.

Huh. I swear those were the very exact words which describe something that happened by a fake Greek 'lake' 20 years later.

And here's another attempt at the piano grandiosity thing copied for the SuperBowl just 4 years later -- except they only brought out 72 pianos this time.

Now, if only Sochi had brought out 100 multi-colored, glowing concert grands, swirling in mid-air and expending fireworks as they played Handel's WaterWorks music, then that would simply have been grand!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, Disneyland did rocket man almost thirty years earlier. Most people remember the spaceship the most.

The Rocketman also appeared in a James Bond film a few years earlier and the stunt was a last-minute replacement when the older, original Sam the Eagle conked out a few days before the Opening. When the stunt was repeated at the 25th Anniversary dinner, God, it was sooooooooo loud AND ear-blasting that I wondered why they even did it in 1984.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...