Jump to content

USA 2024


Recommended Posts

Even going by this list that you posted, Boston is still in the "Alpha" category, unlike Dallas. I'd find Boston mich more intriguing for an Olympics. Rich in history, a well-known, eclectic city by international standards, & in a part of the country that's never hosted a Summer Olympics before.

Dallas would just seem, meh. I'd be concerned that they'd be another city that would include pick-up trucks as part of their opening ceremony, &/or some rodeo action. I wonder how many IOC members (& dignitaries) can relate to that. Yeehaw!

I wouldn't argue with any of that. In terms of narrative and history, Boston is a far more intriguing option than Dallas, perhaps even moreso than Los Angeles. But.. Dallas has something resembling a plan. Yes, I know it's far from an ideal location. At least it's something though. Is Boston going to be able to put together a plan that might entice the IOC? I don't see that coming together in a city like Boston. I find it hard to imagine then being able to offer up all that's necessary to host a Summer Olympics. It's probably moot anyway since LA is in the mix and has the upper hand on both, but if we were talking simply about a head to head battle of Boston versus Dallas, that's a closer battle than it would first seem. Boston's alpha status only means so much until they have to put up the goods. Dallas may or may not have it either, but in terms of which city is more likely to put together a more coherent plan, I'm still expecting more from Dallas than from Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think DC could offer up a good narrative, and it has the history to boot. Its the nation's capitol boasting some of the nation's most historic architecture , beautiful park space, its a region of america the olympics have ever been to, the area surrounding rfk stadium could be perfect for a mixed use redevelopment, and the olympics could spur on needed transportation infrastructure much like LA. It also seems like they've been working up a plan for a while now, so they're not a total pipedream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies if this got brought up already, but since someone mentioned DC, here's a report from a couple of weeks ago courtesy of the CBS affiliate in Baltimore..

Baltimore-D.C. Area Bid To Host 2024 Olympics Closer To Reality

Seems a little overly optimistic if you ask me. Since this comes from a Baltimore source, tough to tell how involved they are in this, but if we're looking at another Washington-Baltimore bid, I don't know that I like their odds. To say nothing of the system of government in place in DC that would probably make the Olympics a tough, if not impossible sell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Americans by and large are morons, especially when it comes to geography. So I wouldn't go off that. Or off what people say in this forum, the place where we're told that Kazakhstan is culturally European. No offense to rings, but that's a misconception about Georgia versus Texas, but I'd like to think that a voting member of the IOC is going to be smarter than that and not fall into a trap of making comparisons like that. Granted, this is the IOC where there were members who thought Atlanta was Atlantic City, so perhaps they're not that smart either.

Smarter? As a university educated, well travelled non-American, I'd say my perspective could be pretty reflective of the potential feelings of voting IOC members. The correlations I drew between Atlanta and Dallas (nothing to do with the cultural difference between GA and TX) weren't incorrect - they are wealthy, postmodern American cities of a similar size and profile. This similarity COULD cause Dallas difficulty as it doesn't have the brand of SF, LA, DC, NYC or Boston to fall back on.

Here is another way of putting my point - of all the potential US candidates for 2024, Dallas is the most like Atlanta.

I also get that there was nothing fundamentally wrong with Atlanta as a city, or indeed its Olympics - but most discourses surrounding it has been largely negative since 1990. Whether this characterisation of Atlanta or 1996 is fair or accurate or not, it exists, and is potentially in the mind of the IOC voting block.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smarter? As a university educated, well travelled non-American, I'd say my perspective could be pretty reflective of the potential feelings of voting IOC members. The correlations I drew between Atlanta and Dallas (nothing to do with the cultural difference between GA and TX) weren't incorrect - they are wealthy, postmodern American cities of a similar size and profile. This similarity COULD cause Dallas difficulty as it doesn't have the brand of SF, LA, DC, NYC or Boston to fall back on.

Here is another way of putting my point - of all the potential US candidates for 2024, Dallas is the most like Atlanta.

I also get that there was nothing fundamentally wrong with Atlanta as a city, or indeed its Olympics - but most discourses surrounding it has been largely negative since 1990. Whether this characterisation of Atlanta or 1996 is fair or accurate or not, it exists, and is potentially in the mind of the IOC voting block.

Like I said though.. this is still the IOC where a member confused Atlanta with Atlantic City. So you have to wonder how much these IOC members really know about these cities when they should be more well-versed.

Okay, so Dallas's economic profile is similar to that of Atlanta. So what? If there are cultural differences (and there are.. culturally the 2 are very distinct), then what does the IOC's impression of Atlanta have to do with anything. Part of the issue of Atlanta was the crass over-commercialization that came largely from having Coca-Cola based there. Is that going to be a concern with Dallas? I doubt it.

I get the logic that says that Dallas lacks the international profile of the serious alpha cities and that's a mark against them. I just think it's being over-stated how Dallas is going to be associated with Atlanta, as if the Dallas experience is going to be like the Atlanta experience, and that fact will hurt them. Let's agree to disagree on this one

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dallas would just seem, meh. I'd be concerned that they'd be another city that would include pick-up trucks as part of their opening ceremony, &/or some rodeo action. I wonder how many IOC members (& dignitaries) can relate to that. Yeehaw!

My guess would be a lot of them..

Stage: Rodeo '88 At Olympic Festival

Rodeo to be featured at Salt Lake City Olympics

Wrapping Up The "Olympic" Rodeo Campaign

So yea, Dallas probably shouldn't include rodeo action as a part of their Opening Ceremony.. it would be very unoriginal of them :D:P:D:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USOC Trims List of Cities for 2024 Olympic Bid

The U.S. Olympic Committee has pared down its list of possible host cities for the 2024 Olympics and expects to decide whether to bid in the next six or seven months.

After the board's quarterly meeting Tuesday, chairman Larry Probst said the USOC was contacting cities that had expressed interest in a possible bid but declined to say which cities were still in the running.

Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston and Washington were among those receiving serious consideration.

Chicago was the most recent U.S. city to bid for the Olympics, finishing last in voting for the 2016 Games.

Probst said before the USOC commits to a bid, members want to see what changes the International Olympic Committee makes to the selection process at meetings later this year.

AP

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/usoc-trims-list-cities-2024-olympic-bid-24076801

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, I think this non-news story is strange. Secrecy on this point seems odd.

Agree...This report looks like a recycle item. There is no firm stand made by the USOC and it's all entirely speculative. I'd be taking this more seriously from next January.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, I think this non-news story is strange. Secrecy on this point seems odd.

The only point that seems to ring true is that they're saying they're taking the week to contact all the cities as to their status. So I get that from the standpoint of not making a public proclamation before they've individually talked to people in the candidate cities. Which makes me wonder if A.) the USOC will announce which cities made the cut in the next week or so and/or B.) if they don't, how long before someone reports on it.

Agree...This report looks like a recycle item. There is no firm stand made by the USOC and it's all entirely speculative. I'd be taking this more seriously from next January.

It's not a recycle item. The USOC has made their decision. They're just choosing not to make that information public (who knows when they will). But yes, anyone who claims to know what the cities are at this point either have inside info and/or are speculating and don't know for sure. We'll have some info a lot sooner than January, that I'm sure of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Dallas and Atlanta are different. But they are not very different compared to San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, etc. Maybe it makes me un-American, but I really want the next US Olympic host to break down international stereotypes of Americans rather than reinforce them. Los Angeles and Dallas would not do that.

A city/region that is in the center of attention for 2 weeks will always reinforce stereotypes. A host city will usually be viewed as a representation of the host nation, so stereotypes of said city/region will eventually be integrated of what people will picture the games. Even if, let's say, Boston gets the games, would that not reinforce new stereotypes? Would Boston also reinforce or show stereotypes that would worsen the image even more? Every city is not perfect, every city has stereotypes, and having a city that would represent all of America would be impossible. Things change. LA could be a mini US one day, or maybe not. Based on your specifications, Tulsa might as well be the most perfect host. it's plan would be so spread out, you might as well take a road trip all around the entire could of the USofA. You'll get see all the little stereotypes each city has to offer :P:D:lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A city/region that is in the center of attention for 2 weeks will always reinforce stereotypes. A host city will usually be viewed as a representation of the host nation, so stereotypes of said city/region will eventually be integrated of what people will picture the games.

By stereotype I mean the stereotyping of Americans rather than the host city. Choosing Dallas as a host would reinforce the view that America is Texas. (Just like the American stereotype that Germans are lederhosen wearing Bavarians.) Choosing New York, San Francisco or Boston would achieve the opposite effect.

I'm not saying that as a slam on Texas. But anyone who thinks that a Dallas Olympics wouldn't be a PR nightmare for our country is naive. The global media is hyper critical of Olympic host cities. Remember that at one point some people in the media were calling Vancouver 2010 the worst winter games ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By stereotype I mean the stereotyping of Americans rather than the host city. Choosing Dallas as a host would reinforce the view that America is Texas. (Just like the American stereotype that Germans are lederhosen wearing Bavarians.) Choosing New York, San Francisco or Boston would achieve the opposite effect.

I'm not saying that as a slam on Texas. But anyone who thinks that a Dallas Olympics wouldn't be a PR nightmare for our country is naive. The global media is hyper critical of Olympic host cities. Remember that at one point some people in the media were calling Vancouver 2010 the worst winter games ever.

Why would it have the opposite effect? NYC and San Fran and Boston don't come with stereotypes that would be reinforced with an Olympics?

So yea, the media is hyper-critical of Olympic hosts. Meaning you're going to have problems like that everywhere. Considering some of the PR nightmares the IOC has had to deal with, dealing with Texas is hardly the most difficult thing they'll have had to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Why would it have the opposite effect? NYC and San Fran and Boston don't come with stereotypes that would be reinforced with an Olympics?"

They do, of course, but their stereotypes are largely positive - or, they're at least contrary to the dominant image of the US abroad. NYC: global city, Broadway, skyscrapers, Times Square. San Francisco: the Golden Gate, the Bay, great food, cable cars. Boston: History, Harvard, charming, European feeling. All of them would offer a very strong counter-narrative about the US than the word has gotten over the past 20 years. If Dallas was the host, the easy narrative by the foreign media will Big Hair, Big Jesus, Big Trucks, Big Guns, Big Arrogance. Is it fair? Probably not. Is it likely? Absolutely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Why would it have the opposite effect? NYC and San Fran and Boston don't come with stereotypes that would be reinforced with an Olympics?"

They do, of course, but their stereotypes are largely positive - or, they're at least contrary to the dominant image of the US abroad. NYC: global city, Broadway, skyscrapers, Times Square. San Francisco: the Golden Gate, the Bay, great food, cable cars. Boston: History, Harvard, charming, European feeling. All of them would offer a very strong counter-narrative about the US than the word has gotten over the past 20 years. If Dallas was the host, the easy narrative by the foreign media will Big Hair, Big Jesus, Big Trucks, Big Guns, Big Arrogance. Is it fair? Probably not. Is it likely? Absolutely.

Haha, well put...It's also an image thing and when it comes to world opinion the first three cities would be absolute gems, the last will just be ridiculed...But then, wasn't Atlanta? Yet still hosted the Olympics.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, well put...It's also an image thing and when it comes to world opinion the first three cities would be absolute gems, the last will just be ridiculed...But then, wasn't Atlanta? Yet still hosted the Olympics.

Atlanta was an anomaly that has given second and third tier US cities a sense of entitlement. The choice, whilst irritating to many, made sense at the time. Even with the IOC's current worries, I can't see Dallas getting lucky like southern counterpart did in 1990.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Why would it have the opposite effect? NYC and San Fran and Boston don't come with stereotypes that would be reinforced with an Olympics?"

They do, of course, but their stereotypes are largely positive - or, they're at least contrary to the dominant image of the US abroad. NYC: global city, Broadway, skyscrapers, Times Square. San Francisco: the Golden Gate, the Bay, great food, cable cars. Boston: History, Harvard, charming, European feeling. All of them would offer a very strong counter-narrative about the US than the word has gotten over the past 20 years. If Dallas was the host, the easy narrative by the foreign media will Big Hair, Big Jesus, Big Trucks, Big Guns, Big Arrogance. Is it fair? Probably not. Is it likely? Absolutely.

I see.. so we're going to emphasize the good qualities about NYC and San Fran and Boston while highlighting the bad qualities of Dallas. Yea, that seems like a fair fight. And LOL about Times Square. That may attract tourists and perhaps that'll be a selling point for the IOC, but as a native New Yorker, I generally avoid that place like the plague. Having been there during Super Bowl week this year, I cringe to think about what they might do for an Olympics. NYC has their negatives as well and we've seen that firsthand with large events hosted here. The transportation debacles of the Super Bowl would absolutely reflect poorly on a future Olympic bid, I'm sorry to say.

Haha, well put...It's also an image thing and when it comes to world opinion the first three cities would be absolute gems, the last will just be ridiculed...But then, wasn't Atlanta? Yet still hosted the Olympics.

Atlanta was an anomaly that has given second and third tier US cities a sense of entitlement. The choice, whilst irritating to many, made sense at the time. Even with the IOC's current worries, I can't see Dallas getting lucky like southern counterpart did in 1990.

As we know, Atlanta got lucky. RIght place at the right time. And the cities they were up against domestically for `96 included the likes of Cleveland and Minneapolis. So that race was devoid of big players. If Atlanta loses, do they come back for 2000? Tough to tell, but I've said in the alternate timeline thread where we project what happens if Athens gets 1996, my prediction is that New York would get 2008. Don't need to go into the explanation here, but eventually those bigger cities would have entered the fold. Doesn't mean the 2nd and 3rd tier cities wouldn't have entered the running in the future if not for Atlanta's win, even though the last 2 U.S. candidates have been New York and Chicago, and possibly Los Angeles is next. You're right.. Dallas isn't likely to get lucky, but the reason for that is because there are larger cities the USOC is likely to put forward. It's not because a 2nd tier city won before and therefore it's less likely to happen again.

1 thing about Boston in comparison to Dallas.. no doubt they have a certain charm and history that would appeal to the IOC in comparison to the brash Texans who don't have as strong a card to play. But, this is still the IOC we're talking about. Charming intimate Boston might not have the substance that an "everything is bigger in Texas" bid can put up.

Again, remember that we got big into LA because they offered up a plan. I know a couple of you still think I'm crazy to think this, but I find it hard to imagine a solid plan coming together in Boston. I can more easily see one coming together in Dallas, even though it will be hindered by the fact that it's in Dallas and not a more appealing locale.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Houston is already the 4th biggest city in the US. Population isn't holding Houston and Dallas back. Both of them have numerous issues with mass transportation, climate, venue locations, etc.

Houston!...Now there's a city that would be a great host! Should be considered!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I see.. so we're going to emphasize the good qualities about NYC and San Fran and Boston while highlighting the bad qualities of Dallas. Yea, that seems like a fair fight. And LOL about Times Square. That may attract tourists and perhaps that'll be a selling point for the IOC, but as a native New Yorker, I generally avoid that place like the plague. Having been there during Super Bowl week this year, I cringe to think about what they might do for an Olympics. NYC has their negatives as well and we've seen that firsthand with large events hosted here. The transportation debacles of the Super Bowl would absolutely reflect poorly on a future Olympic bid, I'm sorry to say."

I wasn't talking about fairness, I was talking about what the easy narrative would be for the international media that would be covering a Games in any of those cities. I'm from NYC (and now live in Boston), so I know the negatives of both those cities all too well. But what I'm saying is, yes, the foreign media will focus almost exclusively on Dallas' negatives: car dependence, open carry gun laws, megachurches, its lack of history and charm, JR Ewing-like businessmen (a complete fiction, of course), strip malls, interstates, McMansions... To the foreign media, Dallas will epitomize everything that the world dislikes about the US - conspicuous consumption, wasteful with resources, guns, bravado, ignorant of anything outside the US, and that will be the image projected around the world. Could they do the same with NYC, San Francisco or Boston - absolutely, but those cities' negatives are not nearly as damning to their overall reputation or as difficult to overcome as Dallas'. Again, I didn't say it was fair.

And let's be honest, while you deride Times Square (I happen to agree), the media coverage around the Games often looks like and serves as a long tourist advertisement for the host city and host country. If the US wants positive media on that front, I cannot see how Dallas is even close to the other three.

I am not talking about the merits of any of the cities' bids or their transportation or security plans. I'm simply talking about what image of each the media will project. Dallas' would overwhelmingly reinforce negative stereotypes, IMO.

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...