Jump to content

LA84 or BAR92


Recommended Posts

Well we all know what happened from 1970 to 1980 in the Olympic Movement, and then in 1984 LA hosted a pretty successful games, followed by Seoul which was not the greatest, then followed by Barcerlona in 1992. So my question is in your opinion which games (LA84 or BAR92) propelled the Olympic Movement to what it is today?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there's a little patriotism thrown in here: but I would think it would be LA.  The Olympic Games were on the brink of extinction.  After Montreal and Moscow, nobody else wanted them.  

However, LA, with no funding from the Calif and Federal govt's (well, that's not true --eventually the state and the Feds threw in their share of the security costs but LA planned with private security guards), set up a wonderful model of how a privately-funded Games could be staged.  And even with 15 or so important guests not showing up, they still staged the most financially successful Olympic Games so far.  (And that those guests did not show up, did NOT dampen the party in anyway.  The competition was still wonderful and Southern California basked in a golden glow that summer 21 years ago.)

8 years later, the world was a different place in 1992.  Barcelona was not the home of a superpower so it had an easier time.  But the template for an efficient, self-paying Games was already established, and Barcelona and succeeding hosts built on that.  

But if Los Angeles had been another Montreal, there might have been no Barcelona 1992 nor any Olympic Games today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting question - one I had never thought about before.

Los Angeles definitely redefined the games after the problems with the "Four M's" as I call them (Mexico City, Munich, Montreal and Moscow).  A sinking ship (the Olympic movement) suddenly became alive again and layed the cornerstone for future fierce competitions such as the 2012 race. For those who are old enough to remember, prior to Los Angeles the games were looked upon as *ho hum.*

Then Seoul happened and they made a profit and they were run well but there really wasn't as much excitement as there was in L.A.

Then Barcelona came along and further defined and raised the bar.  A former industrial town in a nation that is not wealthy suddenly became one of the shining jewels of Europe. By taking the L.A. example but also redoing itself, Barcelona is now one of the most popular tourist attractions in Europe, thanks pretty much to hosting the games. If I remember correctly, when Seville hosted the Expo shortly after the Olympics there was much more interest and tourist than anticipated - thanks largely to the interest generated by the Barcelona games in Spain.    

L.A. laid the groundwork for on how to run an Olympics but Barcelona defined what an Olympics can do to create excitement in a city area that previously was not a major tourist attraction.  And let's face it - the Olympics have pretty much become an ad campaign to hopefully generate tourist dollars in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, when Seville hosted the Expo shortly after the Olympics there was much more interest and tourist than anticipated

Sorry to correct you slightly, LA.  But the Expo 92 was concurrent with the Summer Olympics; it ran from April to like, the 1st week in October.  We first visited Seville (my first Expo) and then flew to Barcelona for the Games.

Spain really took a HUGE gamble in hosting both a world-class Expo (it was wonderful) and a great Games in the Old Falangist's home town.  The Columbus Quintennial that year, served as the theme for Spain's blow-out parties.  

1992 was also the last time in history that the same nation hosted both a World Exposition and a Summer Olympics in the same year, since St. Louis 1904.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very remote that this will happen, baron, but NYC is trying to make the "St. Louis 1904" scenario come to life. Of course, we don't know how the current 2012 Games bid for the city is going to go in the end. However, the 2012 World's Fair bid is still in the air, especially when the USA itself decided to throw its BIE membership into the trash can.

As for the topic at hand, I think both of them have to some degrees made the IOC look great to the general public. LA because I think it started the IOC sponsorship program that is now a must for the Games to succeed financially. Also, for Barcelona 1992 (with Albertville 1992 to some extent), it was the first Games in the post-Cold War and post-apartheid time period.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, for Barcelona 1992 (with Albertville 1992 to some extent), it was the first Games in the post-Cold War and post-apartheid time period.

well, that was just the luck of the draw.  Barcelona/Albertville had nothing to do with the change in the world order.  So you can't give the 1992 hosts credit for something they did not cause.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's true. Could anyone have predicted that both 1992 Games will have those changes in the political world coming to them? However, being a first-time host nation, Spain was pretty much going all-out to make the Barcelona Games successful. Until 2008 arrives, Spain was the last new nation to host its first Games ever.
Link to post
Share on other sites
for me its also Los Angeles 1984 that propelled the Olympics to where it is now. had LA not happend or had it failed it have to agree that we will not be seeing any more Olympics.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If I remember correctly, when Seville hosted the Expo shortly after the Olympics there was much more interest and tourist than anticipated

Sorry to correct you slightly, LA.  But the Expo 92 was concurrent with the Summer Olympics; it ran from April to like, the 1st week in October.  We first visited Seville (my first Expo) and then flew to Barcelona for the Games.

Spain really took a HUGE gamble in hosting both a world-class Expo (it was wonderful) and a great Games in the Old Falangist's home town.  The Columbus Quintennial that year, served as the theme for Spain's blow-out parties.  

1992 was also the last time in history that the same nation hosted both a World Exposition and a Summer Olympics in the same year, since St. Louis 1904.

you can also add B that in 1992 Madrid was named European Culture of Capital as well so its safe to say that Spain really went all out that year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If I remember correctly, when Seville hosted the Expo shortly after the Olympics there was much more interest and tourist than anticipated

Sorry to correct you slightly, LA.  But the Expo 92 was concurrent with the Summer Olympics; it ran from April to like, the 1st week in October.  We first visited Seville (my first Expo) and then flew to Barcelona for the Games.

Spain really took a HUGE gamble in hosting both a world-class Expo (it was wonderful) and a great Games in the Old Falangist's home town.  The Columbus Quintennial that year, served as the theme for Spain's blow-out parties.  

1992 was also the last time in history that the same nation hosted both a World Exposition and a Summer Olympics in the same year, since St. Louis 1904.

you can also add B that in 1992 Madrid was named European Culture of Capital as well so its safe to say that Spain really went all out that year.

what i mean is European Capital of Culture which is known as European Cities of Culture until last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"A former industrial town 'in a nation that is not wealthy' suddenly became one of the shining jewels of Europe."

That's like saying Italy or the U.K. is not wealthy. Depends on what one's definition on "wealthy" is (i.e. USA).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but 15-20 years before the Barcelona Olympics, Spain was still ruled by Franco and was one of the least progressive nations in Western Europe.  That changed with Franco's death and Spain blossomed.

1992 was also a big year for the European Union and the EU flag and anthem were very prominent in Barcelona.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ryan04
i think LA84 put the Olympic Movment back on track and then Barcelona kept it going after Souel, if not for 1984 i think the Olympics would have slowly started to faded away like the World's Fair did
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, LA 1984 may have started, as a trial, for making the Olympic Games "favorable" then, after the troubles of the 1970s to me. Once LA 1984 was complete, the IOC tweaked the "whole system" toward the dual Games of 1988. It can be disputed big time here, but it seems that Calgary and Seoul got lucky in the end and then spread to the other Games after that.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well we all know what happened from 1970 to 1980 in the Olympic Movement, and then in 1984 LA hosted a pretty successful games, followed by Seoul which was not the greatest, then followed by Barcerlona in 1992. So my question is in your opinion which games (LA84 or BAR92) propelled the Olympic Movement to what it is today?

Interesting question, and I think the key point of your post Faster is preconditioned on what the games are today. If we look at the Summer Olympics as experienced in 1996/2000/2004 then the growing influence of private and professional corporate financing, as developed by Ueberroth and the LA84 team, certainly is the strongest legacy of 1984. All the points made about how the LA games effectively saved the Olympics are all true, in the sense of how there was only one other bidding city (Tehran) and that drpped out anyway, leaving the IOC no where else to go.

However, Barcelona 92 is the more relevant and strongest 'precedent' games for the current IOC's model for summer games because:

1) Professional athletes were merged into the competition in Barcelona far more than in 84 (e.g. the Dream Team in basketball, tennis players like Boris Becker and Jennifer Capriati, cyclists like Jens Fiedler). And as seen in Atlanta, Sydney and Athens numerous professional sportsmen and women are automatically drawn to participate in the Olympics, unlike in Los Angeles. LA84 in many ways were the last 'amateur' summer Olympics.

2) Security issues were reinvigorated by the threat of ETA-sponsored terrorism, and whilst LA84 had security concerns these were nowhere near as high nor was the response as developed as it was for Barcelona.

3) Whether by accident or not, Barcelona provided the first summer games context for over 16 years where boycotts weren't an issue; LA84 was blighted horribly by the Eastern Bloc boycott, and for all it's other claims to being a forerunner to todays games in this aspect particularly LA84 was mired in the same politics of its immediate predecessors.

4) The cooperation between national/regional/local governments with corporate sponsors at Barcelona was a far more integrated mix, resulting in similar models of organising committee operations in Sydney and Athens (to varying degrees of success). Whilst Atlanta drew on more government support than LA84, ultimately like all American summer and winter games the organisational model is just as much private as it is public; hence as long as the Olympics go to non-American venues then you will always see a Barcelona-style organisation committee.

5) The concept of a games legacy, both with public infrastructure as well as the actual venues, is an important part of all Olympics now; and LA84, with its stress on existing venues (e.g. the Colosseum) and temporary structures, couldn't claim to set the same example that Barcelona did. Yes, Montjuic was remodelled a la the LA Colosseum, but when you compare the permanent venues such as the Barcelona aquatic centre (Piscenes Bernardo Piconell), the  Sports Hall (Palau d'Esports Sant Jordi) with the pre-existing or temporary venues for LA84, then look at Sydney Olympic Park or the OAKA in Athens, you can see where summer Olympics have recently drawn their infrastructure models from.

So, whilst I agree with the proposition that the LA84 games paved the way for the success of latter Olympics, the actual games which has propelled the Olympic movement into what they are today is Barcelona. And lets not forget, the wily old Falangist had so much at stake in Barcelona, and it was there and then that he was able to marry so much of the agenda he had for the IOC with his own preferred host city.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, but 15-20 years before the Barcelona Olympics, Spain was still ruled by Franco and was one of the least progressive nations in Western Europe.  That changed with Franco's death and Spain blossomed.

1992 was also a big year for the European Union and the EU flag and anthem were very prominent in Barcelona.

Sorry, but in the 1950s and 1960s the growth of Spanish economy was the third in the world beacuse of the number of companies that came to Spain in that time. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but in the 1950s and 1960s the growth of Spanish economy was the third in the world beacuse of the number of companies that came to Spain in that time. :)

...due to the blossoming of the tourist trade, or other factors too?

Because I know in those years, the pioneers of today's package holidays started to come along.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Also, for Barcelona 1992 (with Albertville 1992 to some extent), it was the first Games in the post-Cold War and post-apartheid time period.

well, that was just the luck of the draw.  Barcelona/Albertville had nothing to do with the change in the world order.  So you can't give the 1992 hosts credit for something they did not cause.

See, I don't see that as a good thing...

I am a firm believer that "rivalry" makes an event what it is...

I mean..just a few off the top of my head

1936: Jesse Owens winning in Hitler's backyard

1972: USA-USSR Basketball Final

1980: The Miracle on Ice

1994: Nancy v. Tonya

-Everyone vs. the doped up Eastern Bloc Women

Nancy vs. Tonya was the HIGHEST rated televised sporting event in Olympic History..period....Heck, it's Top 10 All Time for anything in the US. It basically turned Figure Skating into a major moneymaking sport.

Now, you know what....if I'm not there..there's nothing really to draw me in anymore. Except for watching Michelle Kwan choke, and some quality hockey. But little Bonnie Blair isn't kicking the doping Eastern Chick's butt anymore. There's no chance at another "Miracle"......some of the luster has left...and it was because of the USSR's Collapse.

As for the rest of the debate......I think it's pretty much LA.....I'd also argue that Seoul's was the first city to cash in on it's Olympic benefits.....Not Barcelona....

Barcelona, Lillehammer, Atlanta, and Sydney have all pretty much cashed too...But LA allowed that to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...