Jump to content

USA 2024


Recommended Posts

Kazan Arena actually does not have a permanent roof. The roof covering the pool is temporary and was built specifically for the FINA Worlds at a cost of over $10 million. It will be removed after the championships.

I was referring to the roof covering the stands. Not the temporary ceiling over the pool. I know that's temporary, but the rest of the roof is a feature found with most European stadiums. Not so much here which is why what they did in Kazan wouldn't really work most places here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now in the U.S. there's a toxic environment when it comes to public spending, on anything much less an Olympics. If the IOC is serious about making the Olympics more cost effective then they're going to have to get used to the concept of making an Olympics fit the city, not the city fitting the Olympics. Easier said than done. For starters, the IOC is encouraging the use of existing venues then they need to understand that some of those venues are likely to be further out much like Tokyo using Saitama Arena for basketball. For example, Toronto builds a velodrome for the Pan Ams nearly 40 miles away. Toronto should insist on that being the venue for track cycling. It makes no sense to build another one. Regarding temporary venues, the Kazan Arena for the world championships has been discussed. It's a good option but $10 million for a temporary roof? If FINA and IOC want something like that for an Olympics, then the federation should have to fork over the money themselves. Same goes for an outdoor velodrome or speed skating oval. As for cutting sports, get rid of the ones that require venues that usually end up as white elephants and are expensive to construct. For the summer games, that's track cycling and slalom canoeing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now in the U.S. there's a toxic environment when it comes to public spending, on anything much less an Olympics. If the IOC is serious about making the Olympics more cost effective then they're going to have to get used to the concept of making an Olympics fit the city, not the city fitting the Olympics. Easier said than done. For starters, the IOC is encouraging the use of existing venues then they need to understand that some of those venues are likely to be further out much like Tokyo using Saitama Arena for basketball. For example, Toronto builds a velodrome for the Pan Ams nearly 40 miles away. Toronto should insist on that being the venue for track cycling. It makes no sense to build another one. Regarding temporary venues, the Kazan Arena for the world championships has been discussed. It's a good option but $10 million for a temporary roof? If FINA and IOC want something like that for an Olympics, then the federation should have to fork over the money themselves. Same goes for an outdoor velodrome or speed skating oval. As for cutting sports, get rid of the ones that require venues that usually end up as white elephants and are expensive to construct. For the summer games, that's track cycling and slalom canoeing.

Right now in the U.S. there's a toxic environment when it comes to public spending, on anything much less an Olympics. If the IOC is serious about making the Olympics more cost effective then they're going to have to get used to the concept of making an Olympics fit the city, not the city fitting the Olympics. Easier said than done. For starters, the IOC is encouraging the use of existing venues then they need to understand that some of those venues are likely to be further out much like Tokyo using Saitama Arena for basketball. For example, Toronto builds a velodrome for the Pan Ams nearly 40 miles away. Toronto should insist on that being the venue for track cycling. It makes no sense to build another one. Regarding temporary venues, the Kazan Arena for the world championships has been discussed. It's a good option but $10 million for a temporary roof? If FINA and IOC want something like that for an Olympics, then the federation should have to fork over the money themselves. Same goes for an outdoor velodrome or speed skating oval. As for cutting sports, get rid of the ones that require venues that usually end up as white elephants and are expensive to construct. For the summer games, that's track cycling and slalom canoeing.

I agree with all your points, especially the idea that you fit the Olympics to the city, not the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter if it was still Boston or L.A., I never envisioned the IOC choosing either one of them over Paris anyway. So the USOC (& L.A.) should prepare themselves in making at least a couple of attempts if need be. The only thing I say that they could hope for at this point is if Paris (some reason or another) change their mind about the whole thing (even though that seems quite unlikely at this point).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The USOC might want to consider sticking to one city for at least two attempts.

Hindsight is 2020 but we all know if Chicago persisted it may have snared 2020

The way American cities go about is almost always a "now or never" scenario. Except for LA, of course, which is always ready.

I think this is because a lot can happen in 7 years, which is comes to political will, infrastructure needs, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After dealing with the USOC and IOC once, no US city seems to want to go agan

Except for L.A. They seem all willing to play by the IOC's rules.

Either that or they just don't realize what they're getting into because they think they can repeat 1984 (aside from the part where, ya know, other cities are actually competing against them). I think this goes back to what we've discussed here before that maybe LA simply is destined to be the next US Summer Olympic host because no other city in the country wants it like they do. Granted, we're talking about sloppy seconds so far as the 2024 race is concerned and that wasn't likely headed here anyway.

The way American cities go about is almost always a "now or never" scenario. Except for LA, of course, which is always ready.

I think this is because a lot can happen in 7 years, which is comes to political will, infrastructure needs, etc.

7 years? More than a decade given the lead time you need to the vote. NYC 2012 is the perfect example. That Olympics was timed perfectly for them. Not so much for the IOC, of course. And the aftermath of that bid is that several of the infrastructure projects spurred on by that bid have occurred anyway. But it's tough to ask a city and an organizing group to present a grand plan for an event 10 years into the future that hinges on a vote that doesn't occur until a few years later which, if you don't win it, you're left with nothing. Tough to ask people and a city to invest themselves for something like that. And it's not necessarily a fear of losing that would sway them away from it in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this goes back to what we've discussed here before that maybe LA simply is destined to be the next US Summer Olympic host because no other city in the country wants it like they do.

Yeah, but there was always that one staunch former member (who made a very brief cameo appearance a couple of weeks ago), who would always very aggressively counter the general assertion on that one.

I think most of us here who have followed these things for quite a while (at least most of the U.S. members anyway), pretty much had a good inclination of how this was likely to come pass, considering what the Olympics really takes these days & how pretty big losses would make previous U.S. bidding cities just look the other way now. Los Angeles never seems to get dissuaded no matter what. Even back in the 60's & 70's they just kept going & going until finally winning 1984 by default.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but there was always that one staunch former member (who made a very brief cameo appearance a couple of weeks ago), who would always very aggressively counter the general assertion on that one.

I think most of us here who have followed these things for quite a while (at least most of the U.S. members anyway), pretty much had a good inclination of how this was likely to come pass, considering what the Olympics really takes these days & how pretty big losses would make previous U.S. bidding cities just look the other way now. Los Angeles never seems to get dissuaded no matter what. Even back in the 60's & 70's they just kept going & going until finally winning 1984 by default.

This is an interesting approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about it, the US is 1 out of only 3 countries to ever host the modern SOG in multiples cities. Countries like Japan and England tried bidding with second tier cities and failed but sending their Alpha cities for repeat performances managed to be successful. I'd say only Canada, Spain and China could join the list of multiple host cities in the near future but primarily because they have bigger cities than the ones that have already hosted.

Despite America's wealth of capable cities, and Atlanta being that test subject, the Olympics of this generation have become too big and extravagant for those smaller cities to cope with the expenses and needs for new stadiums and infrastructure to accommodate such a short term event especially without federal backing. Until New York and Chicago gets it's act together, I think it's safe to say that LA is the Olympic city of this country the same way London, Tokyo and Paris is for their respective countries. I would've imagined NY to have been that city, ironically the city's most famous landmark carries a torch, but in typical NY fashion, I guess the city is just too busy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about it, the US is 1 out of only 3 countries to ever host the modern SOG in multiples cities. Countries like Japan and England tried bidding with second tier cities and failed but sending their Alpha cities for repeat performances managed to be successful. I'd say only Canada, Spain and China could join the list of multiple host cities in the near future but primarily because they have bigger cities than the ones that have already hosted.

Despite America's wealth of capable cities, and Atlanta being that test subject, the Olympics of this generation have become too big and extravagant for those smaller cities to cope with the expenses and needs for new stadiums and infrastructure to accommodate such a short term event especially without federal backing. Until New York and Chicago gets it's act together, I think it's safe to say that LA is the Olympic city of this country the same way London, Tokyo and Paris is for their respective countries. I would've imagined NY to have been that city, ironically the city's most famous landmark carries a torch, but in typical NY fashion, I guess the city is just too busy.

When you think about it, the US is 1 out of only 3 countries to ever host the modern SOG in multiples cities. Countries like Japan and England tried bidding with second tier cities and failed but sending their Alpha cities for repeat performances managed to be successful. I'd say only Canada, Spain and China could join the list of multiple host cities in the near future but primarily because they have bigger cities than the ones that have already hosted.

Despite America's wealth of capable cities, and Atlanta being that test subject, the Olympics of this generation have become too big and extravagant for those smaller cities to cope with the expenses and needs for new stadiums and infrastructure to accommodate such a short term event especially without federal backing. Until New York and Chicago gets it's act together, I think it's safe to say that LA is the Olympic city of this country the same way London, Tokyo and Paris is for their respective countries. I would've imagined NY to have been that city, ironically the city's most famous landmark carries a torch, but in typical NY fashion, I guess the city is just too busy.

Canada?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think about it, the US is 1 out of only 3 countries to ever host the modern SOG in multiples cities. Countries like Japan and England tried bidding with second tier cities and failed but sending their Alpha cities for repeat performances managed to be successful. I'd say only Canada, Spain and China could join the list of multiple host cities in the near future but primarily because they have bigger cities than the ones that have already hosted.

Despite America's wealth of capable cities, and Atlanta being that test subject, the Olympics of this generation have become too big and extravagant for those smaller cities to cope with the expenses and needs for new stadiums and infrastructure to accommodate such a short term event especially without federal backing. Until New York and Chicago gets it's act together, I think it's safe to say that LA is the Olympic city of this country the same way London, Tokyo and Paris is for their respective countries. I would've imagined NY to have been that city, ironically the city's most famous landmark carries a torch, but in typical NY fashion, I guess the city is just too busy.

Countries like England and Japan and France have 1 major city that is bigger than all the others making the 2nd biggest city in those respective countries pale in comparison. I know many French, especially those living outside of Paris, dislike the view that France is about Paris and nothing else. But if we're talking about a Summer Olympics, where else in France would be suited to represent the country?

As for the United States, and I say this as a life-long New Yorker.. putting together a plan to bid for an Olympics is no easy task. That goes without saying. NYC had such a plan a decade ago. They went with it and lost. And after that, the collective attitude was "we tried, let's move on to something else." In the years afterwards, several of the infrastructure projects suggested by the Olympics went forward. 2 new baseball stadiums, a football stadium, 2 new arenas, and a major renovation of the 3rd all took place. That's what's important for sports in NYC. Not trying to pursue and Olympic dream after billions were spent on sporting venues that may or may not benefit an Olympic bid.

Again, as we've said, if the sum total of all this is that Los Angeles is the city best suited to bid for an Olympics in this country, even if maybe that changes down the line, so be it. I know in an ideal world, other big cities like NYC and Chicago would be out there and yes, in many ways Atlanta screwed things up for them, but that's not the reality of the situation. For better or worse, maybe it's a good thing that the USOC has come to that realization and is now prepared to bid with the city that probably should have been selected all along. And that's hardly Monday morning quarterback from us after we said for months, if not years, that LA should have been the choice, not Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one does have to admire LA for it's can do attitude, resilience, and positive outlook....while other cities seem to be quick to recoil if things don't go their way fast, LA just keeps movin on and smiling confidently all the way into another bid and what can be. probably why I live here. B).......that and the most convenient hub to all the best NA skiing and nature...oh and the perfect weather.

would be so cool to see a DC Olympics (if your gonna go American why not really go all the way), and of course Chicago (glorious everything, urban, nature, parks, water, art and architecture, amazing hospitality/people, exciting city, acceesable BIG city.........NYC I'm busy enough in NY..sounds like a distraction.....San Diego would be gorgeous but maybe too small, San Fran gorgeous but infected with more bums and filth than ever....clean up your act SF before the world realizes what's happened to you.

Edited by paul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

, San Fran gorgeous but infected with more bums and filth than ever....clean up your act SF before the world realizes what's happened to you.

It really makes me sad that San Francisco takes its being named after St. Francis of A-sissy too seriously and this whole Sanctuary haven (for bums, derelicts and anarchists) too seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....I just don't think it's helping lift those folks.......the "problem" has been getting progressively worse and more obvious for years. The system and good intentions are not working.....however; the international crowd and tourists don't seems to mind.....I'm from SF so it's a bit depressing for the city and often just damn annoying trying to go about ones day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..just happened to come across this:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150813/us--urine-repelling_walls-a9261e5cbe.html

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) Public urination has gotten so bad in San Francisco that the city has painted nine walls with a repellant paint that makes pee spray back on the offender.

It's the latest effort to address a chronic problem in a city where the public works director calls himself Mr. Clean: Walls are coated with a clear, liquid repellant material that goes on much like paint. Hit with urine, it splashes back on a person's shoes and pants.

...more at link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^lmfao

Countries like England and Japan and France have 1 major city that is bigger than all the others making the 2nd biggest city in those respective countries pale in comparison.

Actually, Japan's second city, Osaka, is a far more respectable choice than Manchester or Lyon or Marseille. Osaka overshadows any of those by miles. Osaka's metropolitan population is equal that to New York City.

I'd liken them to the second cities of Russia (St. Petersburg) & Italy (Milan). Cities that have been touted as good Summer Olympic alternatives besides the primary city in those respective countries that have already hosted.

Unfortunately for Osaka, they got sideswiped by the IOC (much like Chicago did), so that the real Asian darling Beijing, was positioned nicely for the 2008 Olympics. And now we have Tokyo 2020, so they'll have to wait for a very, very long time to come now, if they decide to try & tackle it again by then.

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...