Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I believe the word some of us were using around here that some media types referred to was that the USOC was "trolling" for candidates. Obviously they didn't think all 35 cities would be interested, but for them, they wanted to cast a wide net and perhaps be somewhat inclusionary since this wasn't an open bid process like it was in the past. Yes, there were some cities that had no business being on there (I would point to ones like Rochester and the T-word before I would bring up the likes of Las Vegas and Phoenix, not that Las Vegas thinks they need an invitation to bid.. Las Vegas Submits Rogue Bid To Host The 2020 Olympics).

So yea, Oakland didn't make the cut. You can cite the population or the lack of previous interest (more on that in a sec), but if the USOC thought there was anything there they could work with, they could have included them. But since previous San Francisco efforts have included the entire Bay Area, Oakland hasn't unilaterally shown interest in a bid (why should they when San Francisco is right next door), so it's a moot point. I've made the same argument before about San Diego (who did get an invitation and did express an interest in their own bid) that they're too close to Los Angeles to make a serious push for an Olympics. As much as SD and LA are distinct entities, try selling that to an international organization such as the IOC. So it is with San Fran and Oakland and they are very much a part of the same metro area. It would be foolish for Oakland to try and take the lead when San Francisco has the much better brand. Likewise, any effort by San Francisco is going to utilize Oakland because of its proximity, and I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.

Is that necessarily a negative though? The transportation links are there between the 2, so that could still be a positive. I don't think the IOC would get that caught up in labels in that regard. It's not like Sydney or London (I'm sure there are other examples) had their centers of attention necessarily in the city center. Like baron said, you can still center the bid around San Francisco and all that is attractive about it while still using place like Oakland to make the whole thing a little more sensible for the area.

It wouldn't surprise me if the USOC invited 35 candidate cities just to drum up some publicity across the country about a potential 2024 bid. Each of those 35 cities (especially the smaller ones with no chance) probably had one or two stories in the local papers or on the local evening news about being invited to bid for the Olympics. I would be shocked if anyone within the USOC saw Rochester or Jacksonville as a realistic candidate city.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 220
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

See Tony, this is an example of what pisses everybody off about you. It's just so rich and hypocritical from Young Master "I don't care what you think, it's my opinion and I'm allowed to say it again

Don't stress guys. At least we only have to deal with a daily 20 minute Tony troll fest. It's much better than the way it used to be when we had to listen to this little arsehole all day.

"T" is for Tony and Troll.

Maybe the calls can be somewhat linked to the Coliseum City? Drum up enough support, public convinces the Raiders to stay and the plan moves forward?

Yeah but we live in San Francisco the coliseum is miles away and SF could care less if the Raiders or A's stay

Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if the USOC invited 35 candidate cities just to drum up some publicity across the country about a potential 2024 bid. Each of those 35 cities (especially the smaller ones with no chance) probably had one or two stories in the local papers or on the local evening news about being invited to bid for the Olympics. I would be shocked if anyone within the USOC saw Rochester or Jacksonville as a realistic candidate city.

They were just trying to be diplomatic. They've made it clear through the process that they can (and will) cut cities off at any time. If that weren't the case, there would probably still be more than 4 cities in the running. So as much as we were all scratching our heads when that initial list came out, kudos to the USOC for at least not allowing all comers to plead their case if they are deemed to be not worthy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, what sports should San Francisco remove in its 2024 bid?

1. Athletics - no stadium. Sound enough.

2. Basketball -- too sweaty. Will cause slippage; high insurance premiums.

3. Judo, Taekwando, wrestling, boxing, field hockey, handball, weightlifting -- nobody (or at least I) watches those. So wasted sports.

After that, it should be an exciting and manageable slate of sports!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found SF2024's website -- but not much there in terms of probable venue assignments.

http://sf2024.org/

Just spoke with them and it looks like they won't gear up big time until the USOC knows where it's going. The Dec 16 USOC event was called a 'low-key' event. In other words, they don't want outsiders attending.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

Found SF2024's website -- but not much there in terms of probable venue assignments.

http://sf2024.org/

Just spoke with them and it looks like they won't gear up big time until the USOC knows where it's going. The Dec 16 USOC event was called a 'low-key' event. In other words, they don't want outsiders attending.

I don't see anything on the site except for a 404 problem. What did their logo look like?

Nevermind, it is working now. Reading through their stuff...

Well it looks like the Olympic Stadium will go on the land in Brisbane across from Candlestick Park.

And here is their logo:

logo.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's still the PRE-selection phase. They (USOC) hasn't even decided whether to go into the Applicant phase. So why spend much on a mark that may not even happen?

Perhaps the dedication they show will bode well in the eyes of the IOC to go forward with a US bid, even if at the end San Francisco doesn't get chosen as the US bid. Sure San Francisco will be heartbroken, but thanks for the added inspiration for the 3rd+ time!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the dedication they show will bode well in the eyes of the IOC to go forward with a US bid, even if at the end San Francisco doesn't get chosen as the US bid. Sure San Francisco will be heartbroken, but thanks for the added inspiration for the 3rd+ time!

How do you know SF will be heart-broken? Or only SF? Latin, the point is it is too premature to spend much on a logo becuz the USOC isn't even sure of proceeding; each city only has 25% chance of being chosen; and you can put put a VERY good logo which the Bid COmmittee will be licensing in order to raise funds -- but if they then switch to a lesser quality logo on being chosen to be the Official Applicant, then the value of the first good logo will have been wasted. So actually, SF is playing it best; and LA's good logo may even go to waste.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you know SF will be heart-broken? Or only SF? Latin, the point is it is too premature to spend much on a logo becuz the USOC isn't even sure of proceeding; each city only has 25% chance of being chosen; and you can put put a VERY good logo which the Bid COmmittee will be licensing in order to raise funds -- but if they then switch to a lesser quality logo on being chosen to be the Official Applicant, then the value of the first good logo will have been wasted. So actually, SF is playing it best; and LA's good logo may even go to waste.

Yeah, kinda like Boston and D.C. they had great first logos and their new ones suck.

Still can't access the SF site...

here is a link: http://sf2024.org/

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just realized that if SF 2024's budgeted just $350 mil for a temporary Olympic stadium, it's probably going to be a rectangular one rather than a roundish bowl. I know some here will start hyperventilating at the idea; but I think it's going to be nice to see a right-angled arena rather than the usual curved bowls. So, kinda like Sao Paulo's Corinthians Stadium for the 2014 opener or like the one below -- but no roof. It will be interesting.

suncorp_1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just realized that if SF 2024's budgeted just $350 mil for a temporary Olympic stadium, it's probably going to be a rectangular one rather than a roundish bowl. I know some here will start hyperventilating at the idea; but I think it's going to be nice to see a right-angled arena rather than the usual curved bowls. So, kinda like Sao Paulo's Corinthians Stadium for the 2014 opener or like the one below -- but no roof. It will be interesting.

suncorp_1.jpg

Oh God I hope not...I guess it would not be too bad, but it still would be rather bad. I would prefer a bowl and I think most others would too. New York had a rectangular stadium and look at what that got them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh God I hope not...I guess it would not be too bad, but it still would be rather bad. I would prefer a bowl and I think most others would too. New York had a rectangular stadium and look at what that got them.

That's where the cost-cutting will be -- no curved tiers. Besides, it's only going to be there for a year, if that. Corner seats will be very affordable.

New York's bid did NOT lose becuz of a rectangular arena. The whole deal in that part of town collapsed. Anyway, I'd be very surprised if the USOC goes forward with SF. There's going to be a very strong anti- groundswell in the Bay Area...not unless the organizers can somehow hire all those restless anarchists into the COJO???

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's where the cost-cutting will be -- no curved tiers. Besides, it's only going to be there for a year, if that. Corner seats will be very affordable.

New York's bid did NOT lose becuz of a rectangular arena. The whole deal in that part of town collapsed. Anyway, I'd be very surprised if the USOC goes forward with SF. There's going to be a very strong anti- groundswell in the Bay Area...not unless the organizers can somehow hire all those restless anarchists into the COJO???

I know, I know. I just always got the vibe that the rectangular arena was off putting for the IOC, especially compared to the much more round and stable plans coming from Europe.

I would not be too surprised if the USOC went with San Francisco, Versailles likes Versailles.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...