Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Looks like there's a chance this may start to gain traction.  A couple of weeks ago, there were rumblings that at least 1 US city was showing interest in the Winter Olympics.  Now it appears the USOC is willing to entertain the thought..

USOC expects to discuss possible Winter Olympic bid

So let's see where this goes, but clearly this is beyond the purely hypothetical stage where the highest ranking members from the USOC have publicly acknowledged the possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this in the sports section of my morning newspaper. Says the USOC is looking at Salt Lake, Denver, and Reno as prospective candidates. At first glance, I'd say this is Salt Lake's to lose hands down. The city can do for the WOGs what Los Angeles is going for the SOGs. They have just about all the facilities in place, many would need minor refurbishments as a recent Salt Lake pointed out (the are just over 20 years old). Vivint Smart Arena (hone of the Utah Jazz, formerly the Delta Center) is undergoing a major renovation. The only two venues that would be needed would be a secondary ice hockey arena (Peaks Ice Arena underwent an extensive post games renovation that permanently reduced seating capacity though it could be a training venue). If memory serves me correctly Snowboarding Big Air wasn't on the program in 2002 either. This could easily be held on the state fairgrounds at the Days of 47 Rodeo Arena  or at the Real Salt Lake stadium in nearly Sandy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably Denver will have the best chance(s) for a 2026 / 30 run.  With Summer 2028 going to LA, it's highly unlikely for the USOC to give the next Winter bid to a California site again (even though only mountain events will take place in California slopes and the anchor city will be in Nevada).  So Denver will probably be the best candidate for the USOC for 2026-30 bids.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S. won't get 2026 if any European cities make it to the finish line, but I don't have a lot of confidence in that happening.  If the USOC is serious about this, I think the chances are at least 50-50 that the U.S. will host back-to-back Games in 26-28 or 28-30.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Probably Denver will have the best chance(s) for a 2026 / 30 run.  With Summer 2028 going to LA, it's highly unlikely for the USOC to give the next Winter bid to a California site again (even though only mountain events will take place in California slopes and the anchor city will be in Nevada).  So Denver will probably be the best candidate for the USOC for 2026-30 bids.  

Whaaaaa?! :blink: But what about Denver's thorn about sticking it to the long-memories of the IOC all those years ago! :D

Apart from that, though, SLC seems to be the one most poised as far as sustainability is concerned. This article, which I posted in the general news section, double-winter allocation thread yesterday (& is from two weeks ago), talks about how all of Utah is already pretty much onboard with such an endeavor. Don't know if we can say that about Colorado. And now with this annoucement today, I wonder if the Salt Lake news from a couple of weeks ago was more than just a coincidence.

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45772879&nid=148

What I don't get about the USOC article, though, is when Blackman talks about that it would be "more difficult" to bid for 2026 when L.A. is already slated 2028. I don't see what one has to do with the other at this point, when a). the 2026 bidding process won't start 'til next year anyway, & b). the 2030 edition would be right after L.A. 2028, too. So six of one dozen, half dozen of the other, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SLC (pop: under 200,000) is too small to hold a 2026-30 WOGs.  Can BYU or Univ. of Utah even support new dorms for 4,000?  Whereas Denver (pop: under 700,000) is better poised to host the ice events (bigger arenas, larger population); and Univ. of Colorado should have no problem accepting new dorms for est. 4,000 beds.  Colorado Springs can also be a 2ndary support city (what with the USOC Training Center there).  Park City, Utah, can provide the sliding track.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, stryker said:

I saw this in the sports section of my morning newspaper. Says the USOC is looking at Salt Lake, Denver, and Reno as prospective candidates. At first glance, I'd say this is Salt Lake's to lose hands down. The city can do for the WOGs what Los Angeles is going for the SOGs. They have just about all the facilities in place, many would need minor refurbishments as a recent Salt Lake pointed out (the are just over 20 years old). Vivint Smart Arena (hone of the Utah Jazz, formerly the Delta Center) is undergoing a major renovation. The only two venues that would be needed would be a secondary ice hockey arena (Peaks Ice Arena underwent an extensive post games renovation that permanently reduced seating capacity though it could be a training venue). If memory serves me correctly Snowboarding Big Air wasn't on the program in 2002 either. This could easily be held on the state fairgrounds at the Days of 47 Rodeo Arena  or at the Real Salt Lake stadium in nearly Sandy.

Plus most of the venues in Salt Lake City are still standing and can refurbished and renovated to today's standards including the Olympic and Paralympic Village which they do not need rebuild a new one and the airport will probably be adding new terminals. Plus, the tram has already expanded they'll probably follow the same venue plan like LA did for 2028 but they are not getting 2026 the U.S has better chance of the Winter Games for 2034 having the Games come back just six years after LA hosting them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Yeah, but what are SLC's hotel rooms' numbers v. Denver's, v. Reno-Tahoe's?  I bet it is the lowest of the 3.  

SLC is ski mecca, between the Wasatch front and Park City it's a lot of hotel room and accommodations. And sooooo much easier to get around than Denver and the Rockies. My choice would be Tahoe, just cuz. Salt Lake would be another boring same old (like LA and Europe)....at least Tahoe would feel new.

My order of preference

Tahoe/Reno

Denver

SLC (this one obviously makes the most sense for an organization in decline)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Yeah, but what are SLC's hotel rooms' numbers v. Denver's, v. Reno-Tahoe's?  I bet it is the lowest of the 3.  

I'm not sure of the number of hotel rooms in Salt Lake but I would have to think it's gone up since 2002. Regarding Denver, given the dire straits the IOC is in with the WOGs, I highly doubt that the memories of 1976 will be a factor (Denver would've won in a landslide in the 2022 race). Denver as well as Reno would have lots to do on the infrastructure side. Denver only has one indoor arena with greater 10,000 capacity with the Pepsi Center. The have a number of secondary arenas that could be used none are more than 8,500 (Denver Coliseum). Then there's the sliding track and ski jump. The U.S. has no need for an additional one of either in the western half of the country. So they could use the ones at Salt Lake. That's certainly feasible but is it necessary when you have a candidate that has everything close by?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paul said:

SLC is ski mecca, between the Wasatch front and Park City it's a lot of hotel room and accommodations. And sooooo much easier to get around than Denver and the Rockies. My choice would be Tahoe, just cuz. Salt Lake would be another boring same old (like LA and Europe)....at least Tahoe would feel new.

My order of preference

Tahoe/Reno

Denver

SLC (this one obviously makes the most sense for an organization in decline)

I was a big Reno/Tahoe booster, but with 2028 going back to LA, that's now a minus for the Reno-Tahoe bid.  SLC is been there/done that.  And Denver is the right size for a city to host the latter 2020's WOGs.  SLC is too small.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SLC is "too small"?! :wacko: Well then, I guess we can forget all about Innsbruck & especially Sion, too! But I bet that the IOC would jump on either one at a moments notice, though. SLC's *metro* population is more than 1.1 million, so I doubt that hotel space is an issue there, especially when considering that it's a winter sports hub.

Yeah, I agree however, that SLC would be a "been-there, done-that", but considering how dire straights the IOC is in these days, I don't think that they'd protest too much when considering the alternatives could be no one or some despot somewhere. They did afterall, just annoint been-there, done-that L.A. for a third time in an unprecedented manner (well, at least in 100 years anyway). So I wouldn't automatically disqualify SLC just bcuz of that.

And considering the Olympic bidding landscape these days, I'm not so sure that Denver would be such a shoo-in anyway, due to the amount of more work that they'd have to do in comparison to SL (cuz they ain't building no high-speed rail to the mountains just for the Olympics. Colorado ain't China), so I could imagine Denver becoming another Boston but for the winter side. And I'm sure that the USOC wouldn't want to take any chance in going down that road again. Unless of course, they're glutton for punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you'll have the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing again at the Opening, only some 28 or 34 years later?? :wacko:  Surely, the vast land of 320 million (by then) can offer something new??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, that's why the "vast land" will have something "new" come 2028, no? ^_^

And of course, I totally forgot that bidding candidates are solely plucked by what might be in the ceremonies. :P

But totally interesting your total 360 on Denver nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Probably Denver will have the best chance(s) for a 2026 / 30 run.  With Summer 2028 going to LA, it's highly unlikely for the USOC to give the next Winter bid to a California site again (even though only mountain events will take place in California slopes and the anchor city will be in Nevada).  So Denver will probably be the best candidate for the USOC for 2026-30 bids.  

Who are you and what have you done with baron?!!?!?!!!  Have you forgotten all the years you were telling us Denver has no shot because everyone will remember 1976?!

Denver has the city element of the bid in very solid shape, perhaps even a little better than Salt Lake, but the mountain component is lacking and that's where they could get tripped up.  For all the minutiae about 1976 (which I will continue to say is meaningless crap when it comes to a future bid, especially with the situation the IOC could be in), I agree somewhat with FYI that there are elements of Boston's bid that did them in which could be a problem for Denver.  Not so much the opposition, but I have a feeling they'd need to get certain government agencies involved and once they're weighing in on the bid, it could become a mess when it comes to necessary infrastructure to pull it off.  The key failure of Boston's bid was a lack of organization and once they opened it up to the city and the state to offer their input, it was tough to tell who was running the show.  That much more than potential opposition is what I'd worry about with Denver.

20 hours ago, FYI said:

What I don't get about the USOC article, though, is when Blackman talks about that it would be "more difficult" to bid for 2026 when L.A. is already slated 2028. I don't see what one has to do with the other at this point, when a). the 2026 bidding process won't start 'til next year anyway, & b). the 2030 edition would be right after L.A. 2028, too. So six of one dozen, half dozen of the other, really.

2 things.. 1.) If they decided they want to bid for 2030, that can probably wait a little, as opposed to a 2026 bid which needs to start much sooner.  2.) The US is fully capable of holding both events in the same year, but might not be the best strategy to bid for a 2026 Olympics when the World Cup may be in North America that year as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Who are you and what have you done with baron?!!?!?!!!  Have you forgotten all the years you were telling us Denver has no shot because everyone will remember 1976?!

Denver has the city element of the bid in very solid shape, perhaps even a little better than Salt Lake, but the mountain component is lacking and that's where they could get tripped up.  For all the minutiae about 1976 (which I will continue to say is meaningless crap when it comes to a future bid, especially with the situation the IOC could be in), I agree somewhat with FYI that there are elements of Boston's bid that did them in which could be a problem for Denver.  Not so much the opposition, but I have a feeling they'd need to get certain government agencies involved and once they're weighing in on the bid, it could become a mess when it comes to necessary infrastructure to pull it off.  The key failure of Boston's bid was a lack of organization and once they opened it up to the city and the state to offer their input, it was tough to tell who was running the show.  That much more than potential opposition is what I'd worry about with Denver.

2 things.. 1.) If they decided they want to bid for 2030, that can probably wait a little, as opposed to a 2026 bid which needs to start much sooner.  2.) The US is fully capable of holding both events in the same year, but might not be the best strategy to bid for a 2026 Olympics when the World Cup may be in North America that year as well.

Baron's evil twin here.  The old Baron, after his visit to Lausanne, where they dined him with a free tip-clip @ the gift shop, has now turned over to the Dark Side (i.e., Denver)!! B)

I don't know how true the report was, but of the prospective set of next US WOG wanna-bees, Denver, it was reported sent some 80 people to scope Vancouver out in 2010.  That's an even larger number of people than what Atlanta sent to Barcelona AFTER Atlanta had gotten the Games in 1990; and they were checking out actual Barcelona operations ni 1992.  The Atlanta contingent during the '92 Games supposedly numbered no more than 60.  (Of course, Denver to Vancouver is a lot cheaper than Atlanta to Barcelona is, regardless of what time of year.)  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

So, you'll have the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing again at the Opening, only some 28 or 34 years later?? :wacko:  Surely, the vast land of 320 million (by then) can offer something new??

What do you propose? Forcing some other city to bid against its will?

Denver, upstate New York, Boston, Seattle, Portland, et al would need to build too much and all have logistical issues. Salt Lake City is way closer to the ski resorts than Denver (which is not even in the Rocky mountains) and it already has most of the required infrastructure in place.

Edited by Nacre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Huh?  How did I even intimate that??  :blink:

"Surely, the vast land of 320 million (by then) can offer something new??"

People in Denver are still very anti-development and frustrated with the traffic, higher real estate prices, etc that come with growth.

http://www.aspentimes.com/news/i-70-traffic-changes-how-coloradans-live-play/

No new cities want to spend large sums of money on bobsledding tracks and speed skating rinks. It is Utah or bust for the USA and the Winter Olympics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nacre said:

No new cities want to spend large sums of money on bobsledding tracks and speed skating rinks. It is Utah or bust for the USA and the Winter Olympics.

 

No, Silly,   Denver can still be the anchor city and use the bobsledding tracks in Park City.  As a matter of fact, Park City is almost midway between R-T and Denver, should those 2 be the finalist cities.  Per the Agenda 2020 tenets, it should be perfectly OK for either bid to attach the Park City track as part of its bid.  Why should the candidacy of SLC be determined solely because of the proximity of the Park City track to it?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

No, Silly,   Denver can still be the anchor city and use the bobsledding tracks in Park City.  As a matter of fact, Park City is almost midway between R-T and Denver, should those 2 be the finalist cities.  Per the Agenda 2020 tenets, it should be perfectly OK for either bid to attach the Park City track as part of its bid.  Why should the candidacy of SLC be determined solely because of the proximity of the Park City track to it?  

Logistics. It is an eight hour drive from Denver to Park City. Is it reasonable to ask people to drive sixteen hours in one day to make a day trip from Denver out to Utah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nacre said:

Logistics. It is an eight hour drive from Denver to Park City. Is it reasonable to ask people to drive sixteen hours in one day to make a day trip from Denver out to Utah?

Uhmmm... heard of flying?  A separate village?  Certain quarters even suggested that PC 2018 use Nagano or Sapporo's bobsled tracks for next winter; and the IOC did NOT block that suggestion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, bcuz flying doesn't add to the logistics or an extra village add to the cost. That's mostly the reason why PC didn't want to use Japan's sled tracks. Not to mention, the one in Alpensia had already started construction anyway when that "suggestion" was brought up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Uhmmm... heard of flying?

It is still over four hours each way flying. (30 minutes to Denver airport, 90 minutes waiting for your flight, 80 minutes flying, and 50 minutes driving to Park City.) And that's if there's a flight at the exact moment you want one.

It is a pain going between Vancouver and Whistler. Enough to make my friends at UBC prefer Mt Seymour when I lived there. But a two hour drive each way is still doable in a day trip. Four and a quarter hours each way flying is not.

Edited by Nacre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone remind me how far Åre is from Stockholm?  How'd that work out for them, if we're going to cite what Agenda 2020 says is "perfectly OK"

Share this post


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...