Vrysxy Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 Seattle would be nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikarus360 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 And this is news becaaaaaause? We already knew years ago this bid was doomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan in Montréal Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 This could open a door for Toronto. Their very successful PanAms have shown the IOC that the city is capable of pulling it together, overcoming transportation issues, and organizing a Games where venues were built along the lines of what the IOC is looking for in future bids -- sustainable and affordable, and an openness to venues which are not all in one location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phandrosis Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 The USOC could still return to the original 35, and there were some that went to the top 10 that we never knew about. Here's the list: Phoenix San Jose, Calif. Los Angeles Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Denver Washington, DC Jacksonville, Fla. Orlando, Fla. Miami Atlanta Chicago Indianapolis Baltimore Detroit Minneapolis St. Louis Las Vegas New York Boston Rochester Charlotte, N.C. Columbus, Ohio Tulsa, Okla. Portland, Ore. Philadelphia Pittsburgh Memphis Nashville and Davidson County Austin, Tex. Dallas Houston San Antonio Seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 ^Bcuz there were still some people that were in complete denial. ^ And this is news becaaaaaause? We already knew years ago this bid was doomed. The USOC could still return to the original 35, and there were some that went to the top 10 that we never knew about. Here's the list: Phoenix San Jose, Calif. Los Angeles Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Denver Washington, DC Jacksonville, Fla. Orlando, Fla. Miami Atlanta Chicago Indianapolis Baltimore Detroit Minneapolis St. Louis Las Vegas New York Boston Rochester Charlotte, N.C. Columbus, Ohio Tulsa, Okla. Portland, Ore. Philadelphia Pittsburgh Memphis Nashville and Davidson County Austin, Tex. Dallas Houston San Antonio Seattle And why would they do that, when they already determined the other 31 cities not to be up to snuff. It's clear, that Los Angeles was in the best position possible to undertake this from the get go. But the USOC was more afraid of repeat aspect of L.A. to choose them over Boston. *Not to be up to snuff more than a year ago. And surely those cities have by now have dismantled any form of committees, studies, & work force to simply just pick all that up now this late in the game. It's Los Angeles or nothing at this point if the USOC still desires to continue with this 2024 quest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 Plus it would be too time consuming for the USOC to start over. It took months for them to dwindle down the list of 30 into a list of 4. There's only, like, 7 weeks left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illustrado Posted July 27, 2015 Report Share Posted July 27, 2015 just give it to LA. you know you have to. it has more of a story than other us city. london had the 3 time hosting the olympics, why not LA ( or paris) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Or just sit this one out. I mean, Paris will probably win it anyway -- so why bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Exactly, Paris will just win this anyway, it's in the bag, are you listening Hamburg? Istanbul? London? Budapest? Rome? You know who to campaign against during the bid process... P.S. Muslim, Jewish, Indian delegates, your partner has a headscarf? You want them to be able to attend an olympic city without being discriminated against? You know who to campaign against during the bid process... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 I remember the same kind of facetious remarks against Beijing back in 2001. Enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Doesn't mean it's not worth a shot now If you don't contend, you will never win, fatalism is for losers. Unless it's proven impossible, we're still contenders. Judging by the reactions of some supporters of at least one other candidate city it seems other believes as unlikely as it may be, Toronto is respectable competition. There's no cockiness here, I full grasp that we are the underdogs here, Paris is the clear favourite, by far. Logically so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 You're right. So the USOC should put forth L.A. so theirs another North American entrant. Like you said, if you don't contend, you'll never win. But I still bet that both North American cities will go home empty handed. And that's as an American saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 I can't speak for LA as I'm not very familiar with the civic discourse down there, but up here I think $50 million for a quality city branding and visioning exercise for our sports/pedestrian and waterfront infrastructure would do wonders to develop local civic pride. The Pan Am games have been a godsend for galvanizing people around here, some of the littlest aspects of the bid such as planning for fireworks from the CN Tower (never been done before, we might do it every year now for Canada Day) and the new Toronto sign at city hall (which cost very little, but clicked with tourists big time) and many other little things have changed the vibe down here. An Olympic bid, whether successful or a failure would be just the kicker for a city finally coming to it's own as Canada's premiere city (something that was still debatable till about 10 years ago). So yeah, we very well may go home empty handed, but I think the bid will still serve us even if we lose. Though I'm cautiously optimistic we'll be contenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 I think it's worth noting that both times that Los Angeles hosted, there we're elected as host city, they were awarded the games on the technicality that they were the only city in the world to place a bid. In fact, of the three cities in the US to host the Olympics, Atlanta is the only one to actually be elected as the host. I wish Chicago was interested in bidding. I think aside from LA, Chicago is the only city in the US that has what it takes to host the games. Maybe my hometown of Indianapolis should try. After all they are the amateur sports capital of the world... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 This could open a door for Toronto. Their very successful PanAms have shown the IOC that the city is capable of pulling it together, overcoming transportation issues, and organizing a Games where venues were built along the lines of what the IOC is looking for in future bids -- sustainable and affordable, and an openness to venues which are not all in one location. Toronto didn't need the Pan Ams to show the IOC. Pretty sure everybody already felt that Tornoto could host a very respectible games. What the games did is get the people of Toronto excitied. Excitied enough to pay for a SOG? I'm not sure. But more excited than before. What Toronto needs to do is answer two quesions 1. Why does Toronto want to host? 2. Why should the IOC want to choose Toronto? This is where Boston failed spectacularly. I think the best we came up with were: 1. Because it will make my construction company a lot of money. 2. **** you, we're Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jawnbc Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Toronto didn't need the Pan Ams to show the IOC. Pretty sure everybody already felt that Tornoto could host a very respectible games. What the games did is get the people of Toronto excitied. Excitied enough to pay for a SOG? I'm not sure. But more excited than before. What Toronto needs to do is answer two quesions 1. Why does Toronto want to host? 2. Why should the IOC want to choose Toronto? This is where Boston failed spectacularly. I think the best we came up with were: 1. Because it will make my construction company a lot of money. 2. **** you, we're Boston. Toronto didn't need the Pan Ams to show the IOC. Pretty sure everybody already felt that Tornoto could host a very respectible games. What the games did is get the people of Toronto excitied. Excitied enough to pay for a SOG? I'm not sure. But more excited than before. What Toronto needs to do is answer two quesions 1. Why does Toronto want to host? 2. Why should the IOC want to choose Toronto? Exactly right! And the answers are subliminal answers in italics 1. We want to welcome the youth of the world to celebrate elite sport we're the New York of Canada and it would be os-some if someone picked us for something before New York 2. We are a diverse, multicultural, cohesive community that is uniquely positioned to welcome the world we aren't quite as diverse as London, but we have fewer ghettos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger87 Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Exactly, Paris will just win this anyway, it's in the bag, are you listening Hamburg? Istanbul? London? Budapest? Rome? You know who to campaign against during the bid process... P.S. Muslim, Jewish, Indian delegates, your partner has a headscarf? You want them to be able to attend an olympic city without being discriminated against? You know who to campaign against during the bid process... Please, this is so desperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 @jawnbc Thats it!!! TORONTO 2024 We arent quite as diverse as London but we have fewer ghettos (drops mike walks off stage). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Exactly right! And the answers are subliminal answers in italics 1. We want to welcome the youth of the world to celebrate elite sport we're the New York of Canada and it would be os-some if someone picked us for something before New York 2. We are a diverse, multicultural, cohesive community that is uniquely positioned to welcome the world we aren't quite as diverse as London, but we have fewer ghettos Aren't as diverse as London? I disagree, Toronto is the most multicultural and multiethnic city in the world, bar none. London is 45% White British and 60% white The largest ethnic group in Toronto is only 12% of the population and it's less than 50% white, everyone ethnicity is a minority here. Infact, we have the 2nd largest immigration proportion of the population of any major city in the world (Miami is 1st, though far less diverse ethnically) with 50% of the population being immigrants and 80% being first generation immigrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Full disclosure: I've lived in London, Paris and North America (Canada & USA) and am intimately familiar with London. I love the place, it has left an impression on my heart and my soul (as has Paris) and I consider it the most globalized and worldly city on the planet (sorry New York and Hong Kong!) but it doesn't have the diversity of Toronto, nor does it do diversity as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Shocker right here. Honestly they should have ended this crap a month ago...or FFS gone with LA from November. If we bid let's go back to LA, it will still be a respectable foot to put forth and a great way to prep for bids in 2028 or 2032. Toronto didn't need the Pan Ams to show the IOC. Pretty sure everybody already felt that Tornoto could host a very respectible games. What the games did is get the people of Toronto excitied. Excitied enough to pay for a SOG? I'm not sure. But more excited than before. What Toronto needs to do is answer two quesions 1. Why does Toronto want to host? 2. Why should the IOC want to choose Toronto? This is where Boston failed spectacularly. I think the best we came up with were: 1. Because it will make my construction company a lot of money. 2. **** you, we're Boston. Bingo. Toronto has always been known as a city capable, I think the Pan Am's just strengthened their credentials and made the city itself excited. Though, if it makes no sense for LA or another US city to bid then why should Toronto waste its time either? Aren't as diverse as London? I disagree, Toronto is the most multicultural and multiethnic city in the world, bar none. London is 45% White British and 60% white The largest ethnic group in Toronto is only 12% of the population and it's less than 50% white, everyone ethnicity is a minority here. Infact, we have the 2nd largest immigration proportion of the population of any major city in the world (Miami is 1st, though far less diverse ethnically) with 50% of the population being immigrants and 80% being first generation immigrants. Toronto being oh so multicultural didn't help them beat Atlanta in 1991 or Beijing in 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 Shocker right here. Honestly they should have ended this crap a month ago...or FFS gone with LA from November. If we bid let's go back to LA, it will still be a respectable foot to put forth and a great way to prep for bids in 2028 or 2032. Bingo. Toronto has always been known as a city capable, I think the Pan Am's just strengthened their credentials and made the city itself excited. Though, if it makes no sense for LA or another US city to bid then why should Toronto waste its time either? Toronto being oh so multicultural didn't help them beat Atlanta in 1991 or Beijing in 2001. What does that have to do with anything i posted? I didn't state that our multiculturalism was going to clinch us anything, I was referring to a statement above that claimed we were less multicultural than London. If anything, I've been stating Toronto is a clear underdog and Paris and Rome are clear favourites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.bernham Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 For 2024 I think Toronto and Paris would be front runners if LA does not bid...if LA does bid then I think it's Paris V. LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bythebay Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 The USOC squandered their opportunity when they chose Boston! I saw this coming right from the very start. It gave Paris the chance to gauge their competition, after seeing two tier cities like Boston and Hamburg joining a lukewarm Rome bid, Paris knew they had this in the bag and chose to dive in. I'm not implying that Paris would've stayed out if LA was originally chosen but Paris and the French OC was very noncommital until they knew what they were up against because after 3 failed attempts, you don't come back unless you're certain you're going to win and LA was the only one that would've posed a major hurdle from the beginning. LA can always throw the "been there done that" card right back at Paris (and London and Tokyo, not to mention Beijing if they win). Now Paris has the advantage and momentum, the USOC is in disarray, picking LA as a back up candidate will have to play catch up and just looks like the USOC trying to save face to the IOC, and now opinions have been formed and the damage is done. I don't think LA or any other American city will have a good chance of winning 2024 at this point but I still think LA is the US best option. LA's ability to come up with a viable bid was never a concern, LA knows they have the Olympic blueprint any other bid city wish they had. As I said before, LA has the backstory that can carry the emotional aspect of a bid (a huge factor for Rio), a lot of major infrastructure and redevelopment projects already in the works that can align with the Olympics and be portrayed as a "catalyst" for them if the IOC really wants to lay claim on helping build shiny new stuff. Certainly white elephants will not be an issue since LA is the quintessential Olympic ready city, with loads and loads of newer venues already constructed (and more to come) so this will look far different than '84. Traffic will not be an issue as well, anyone who thinks it will can look up carmaggedon. I think a 2024 bid for LA will basically be a warm up bid for 2028. LA won't be like NY or Chicago that will take the rejection badly, they will bounce back and try again as they have been on the domestic front time and time again. I don't see a South African bid as a major contender then. Rio being a huge eye opener and caused enough headaches for the "new frontier" backers to last a generation. I think the biggest challenge a US 2028 bid may come from Toronto should Paris get 2024 (just give it to them!). I think we've come to the point that mega cities are the only ones capable of hosting an event of this magnitude without requiring an enormous amount of new infrastructure and that's why you've seen tried and tested cities like London and Tokyo succeeding as repeat hosts and most NOC's wising up and putting their best and biggest cities forward. This ain't the 90's or early 00's where second or third tier cities like Atlanta were the norm and had a respectable chance of winning. The scale of the Olympics have multiplied since then so I don't understand what the USOC was thinking when choosing Boston. I've never been there, it seems like a very charming city, but it obviously doesn't have the capacity to accomodate an Olympics without major new construction throughout the region and that's what scared residents if they were to be on the hook. The Big Dig was big enough! The USOC at this point should only consider the 4 cities that can handle and stand against all the other mega cities from any country and they are NY, Chicago, SF and LA. I would put an asterisk on SF though because it might just be Boston 2.0 XL. If none of the four are up to task, then sit it out, basically any other city would be a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usa2024olympics Posted July 28, 2015 Report Share Posted July 28, 2015 LA has already expressed their interest for 2024 again. LA's mayor has already shown that they're up for the task again. http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-boston-olympic-committee-ends-support-20150727-story.html "I continue to believe that Los Angeles is the ideal Olympic city, I would be happy to engage in discussions with the USOC about how to present the strongest and most fiscally responsible bid on behalf of our city and nation."- Mayor Garcetti. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.