Jump to content

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

But anyway, I had a good laugh when Baron claimed SLC would be bottom of a list that included Erzurum. Seriously.

I know, right. Me too! It's called "baronism". :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Now, I've got no idea if a Denver bid would ever fly domestically. It may well be too difficult a sell to get the people of Denver behind it. It may well play better in US domestic circles and the USOC to see SLC's facilities get another spin. But, IF Denver could put forward a solid, reputable and supported bid, I'd be willing to bet it would stand a better chance in the international contest and in the minds of the IOC than SLC again. It maybe even would be enough to edge out competitors like Innsbruck or Lillehammer. Just saying, that at some point, if or when a "new frontier" host can come forward, it would offer some great attraction to the IOC.

Domestic American opinions do not matter because the rest of the country does not contribute any money to building the venues. The state of Colorado is equivalent in population to Ireland but has a weaker economy.  It is smaller and much weaker economically than Norway. And it would have to pay for a Sochi or Pyeongchang level construction binge.

That is why it is so much harder to create new venues for the Olympics in the USA despite its vast size and population. The USA itself does not actually build any stadiums or arenas for the Olympics. It falls entirely on local governments and private benefactors.

Edited by Nacre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would a U.S. candidate fair against the likes of Calgary, Sion, and Innsbruck? Well, the odds are good that the Sion and Innsbruck bids will go down to referendums. The deal for a new Calgary Flames arena just collapsed and despite the mayor's comments about a new arena not being necessary for an Olympic bid, if the city isn't willing to publicly fund a new arena, they aren't going to pony up cash for an Olympics. So I'd say the U.S. is in pretty good shape right now competition wise.

In regards to Denver, it's not just the sliding track that they'd have to use that's far off. There's the ski jump and the need for another large arena. Now here's where, if the IOC were to change rules regarding venue capacities, a Denver bid would be more viable. Drop the demand for two arenas that are a minimum 10,000 capacity for an Olympics. A couple thousand seats less for figure skating or ice hockey isn't going to hurt revenue that much. Use the Pepsi Center for ice hockey and the Denver Coliseum for figure skating and short track. I suggest the coliseum because at 8,500 it is the second largest arena in Colorado for ice events. From there, you have plenty of additional secondary arenas that could be used for ice hockey. I would suggest the Magness Arena at the University of Denver campus as it's literally right on one of the light rail lines rather than the Boradmoor Arena which is in Colorado Springs or the Budweiser Events Center which is out in Loveland. Use the ski jump and sliding track in SLC and perhaps the Utah Oval for speed skating.

Torino was the last WOGs where there was only one 10,000 seat capacity arena (Palasport Olimpico for ice hockey). The Palavela only had 8,500 for figure skating and short track.

Share this post


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

How would a U.S. candidate fair against the likes of Calgary, Sion, and Innsbruck? Well, the odds are good that the Sion and Innsbruck bids will go down to referendums. The deal for a new Calgary Flames arena just collapsed and despite the mayor's comments about a new arena not being necessary for an Olympic bid, if the city isn't willing to publicly fund a new arena, they aren't going to pony up cash for an Olympics. So I'd say the U.S. is in pretty good shape right now competition wise.

In regards to Denver, it's not just the sliding track that they'd have to use that's far off. There's the ski jump and the need for another large arena. Now here's where, if the IOC were to change rules regarding venue capacities, a Denver bid would be more viable. Drop the demand for two arenas that are a minimum 10,000 capacity for an Olympics. A couple thousand seats less for figure skating or ice hockey isn't going to hurt revenue that much. Use the Pepsi Center for ice hockey and the Denver Coliseum for figure skating and short track. I suggest the coliseum because at 8,500 it is the second largest arena in Colorado for ice events. From there, you have plenty of additional secondary arenas that could be used for ice hockey. I would suggest the Magness Arena at the University of Denver campus as it's literally right on one of the light rail lines rather than the Boradmoor Arena which is in Colorado Springs or the Budweiser Events Center which is out in Loveland. Use the ski jump and sliding track in SLC and perhaps the Utah Oval for speed skating.

Torino was the last WOGs where there was only one 10,000 seat capacity arena (Palasport Olimpico for ice hockey). The Palavela only had 8,500 for figure skating and short track.

If we're talking about arena size, remember also about Salt Lake.. their main arena (whatever the corporate sponsor is now) only holds about 14,000 when set up for figure skating.  The hockey arena is just over 10,000.  And I doubt it's an option to use the arena in Provo since capacity got reduced following the `02 games.  They do of course have the speed skating venue.

For Denver, I'd go with Pepsi Center for figure skating.  Remember that they absolutely need the international ice surface there, so if they're losing seats, better to do it there.  Then maybe try to do what Vancouver did and allow an NHL-sized rink for hockey so they don't have to mess with the Denver Coliseum or Magness.  And much closer than Loveland or Colorado Springs, don't forget 1stBank Center in Broomfield.  They hosting the U.S. curling trials in 2009, so they're already configured for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FYI said:

Yeah, tell that to the Chinese who are also buidling one for 2022. It may not be necessary per se, but even people in Colorado say it's the only way it would work there, cuz shutting down I-70 (the major thoroughfare there) for Olympic specific travel is not feasible. And when you're talking about going from a "big city" to the mountain venues, you're gonna need some sort of reliable & effcient transportation to get there since there will be long distances involved in those type of settings. 

I DON"T need to tell the Chinese.  I'm sure they know that; but they have all these high-speed trains they want to put out.  That's something Denver' can control nor is their problem.  Can't get to the mountains by train?  Funiculars; walk.  How do you think they did it in the WOGs up to Innsbruck 1964??  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, StefanMUC said:

But anyway, I had a good laugh when Baron claimed SLC would be bottom of a list that included Erzurum. Seriously.

Yeah, funny how Melbourne, a competent ex-Olympic host city and  supposedly with many excellent facilities, came in 4th in the 1990 voting for the 1996 Games; and Atlanta winning.  There are other instances too.  I was rolling with laughter on that one!!  :lol:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bids_for_the_1996_Summer_Olympics

Share this post


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

In regards to Denver, it's not just the sliding track that they'd have to use that's far off. There's the ski jump and the need for another large arena. Now here's where, if the IOC were to change rules regarding venue capacities, a Denver bid would be more viable. Drop the demand for two arenas that are a minimum 10,000 capacity for an Olympics. A couple thousand seats less for figure skating or ice hockey isn't going to hurt revenue that much. Use the Pepsi Center for ice hockey and the Denver Coliseum for figure skating and short track. I suggest the coliseum because at 8,500 it is the second largest arena in Colorado for ice events. From there, you have plenty of additional secondary arenas that could be used for ice hockey. I would suggest the Magness Arena at the University of Denver campus as it's literally right on one of the light rail lines rather than the Boradmoor Arena which is in Colorado Springs or the Budweiser Events Center which is out in Loveland. Use the ski jump and sliding track in SLC and perhaps the Utah Oval for speed skating.

So funny!  Like the growing, main city if the Rockies CANNOT line up new stadia in about a dozen years whereas the outdated, lopsided Delta Center of SLC will put it in good stead for another bid?  :lol:  Such a funny thought, huh??  

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


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

So funny!  Like the growing, main city if the Rockies CANNOT line up new stadia in about a dozen years whereas the outdated, lopsided Delta Center of SLC will put it in good stead for another bid?  :lol:  Such a funny thought, huh??  

It is not a question of can vs cannot but of will vs will not. Colorado could host the Winter Olympics. But assuming a 50/50 private/public partnership do they really want to spend $4 billion in public money to host the Olympics? Especially in a state that does not want more development and where many people despise the New Yorkers who make pilgrimages to Aspen and buy hobby ranches outside Denver.

I think you are being deliberately obtuse for the fun of arguing, especially in light of the fact that you have previously said that the IOC would never even consider a future bid from Denver.

Edited by Nacre
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think you are being deliberately obtuse for the fun of arguing, especially in light of the fact that you have previously said that the IOC would never even consider a future bid from Denver.

See previous reply to FYI.  Things have changed -- and my views have changed accordingly.  So sue me.  

Share this post


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

How do you think they did it in the WOGs up to Innsbruck 1964??  

IDK - Why don't you tell us, since you were obviously around back then to know! Cuz that was WAYYYY before my time, baron! :lol::P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Nacre said:

It is not a question of can vs cannot but of will vs will not. Colorado could host the Winter Olympics. But assuming a 50/50 private/public partnership do they really want to spend $4 billion in public money to host the Olympics? Especially in a state that does not want more development and where many people despise the New Yorkers who make pilgrimages to Aspen and buy hobby ranches outside Denver.

Precisely, but this is what are pal (& a couple of others) here don't get (or don't want to get in his case). The total will of the people has to be there in order for it to work. And right now, that will (& pragmatism) is readily more in tune in Utah than it is in Colorado.

34 minutes ago, Nacre said:

I think you are being deliberately obtuse for the fun of arguing, especially in light of the fact that you have previously said that the IOC would never even consider a future bid from Denver.

It's that 'baronism' working overtime again! :lol:

Share this post


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

I DON"T need to tell the Chinese.  I'm sure they know that; but they have all these high-speed trains they want to put out. That's something Denver can control nor is their problem.

I was being facetious. :-/

1 hour ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Can't get to the mountains by train?  Funiculars; walk.  How do you think they did it in the WOGs up to Innsbruck 1964??  

So you suggest to "walk" from Denver to the mountains?! :wacko: Back then, you probably could walk when EVERYTHING was clustered together. But that's NOT the case anymore. Not in the 21st Century modern Winter Olympic era where the Winter Games have grown ten-fold since Innsbruck 1964, that it requires two main clusters. Even since Lillehammer 1994 the Winter Olympics have grown to nearly twice as large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FYI said:

I was being facetious. :-/

So you suggest to "walk" from Denver to the mountains?! :wacko: Back then, you probably could walk when EVERYTHING was clustered together. But that's NOT the case anymore. Not in the 21st Century modern Winter Olympic era where the Winter Games have grown ten-fold since Innsbruck 1964, that it requires two main clusters. Even since Lillehammer 1994 the Winter Olympics have grown to nearly twice as large.

OK, for real western color, how about covered wagons and pony trails?  But seriously, why NOT old-fashioned trains?  What's wrong with those?  Where is it in the Olympic Charter that they have to be bullet trains?? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FYI said:

IDK - Why don't you tell us, since you were obviously around back then to know! Cuz that was WAYYYY before my time, baron! 

yeah, sure -- but not everyone of you youn' ones get invited backstage to the IOC Museum.  :P   But what a corny and crude comment; something far below and what I did not expect from you.  

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vivint Smart Home Arena (formerly the Delta Center) is putting the finishing touches on a $125 million renovation. It will be more than capable for a possible SLC Olympics. The Maverik Center is also due for a renovation. I'm aware the Pikes Peak Arena underwent a renovation after the Olympics which reduced capacity so it's not a viable option for a future SLC bid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This conversation finally got this longtime Colorado resident to stop lurking...

If Denver decides to put forth a bid, there are certainly going to be a number of different challenges to overcome, but I wanted to highlight a couple more recent developments that may help alleviate some of the current constraints being discussed in this thread.

The first is the $1.1 billion redevelopment of Denver's National Western Center complex starting next year. There's a lot going on with this project that doesn't necessarily tie directly into an Olympic Bid, but later phases of the project call for a new 10,000 seat arena to replace the Denver Coliseum, and the intent is for it to be capable of hosting hockey and ice events, and presumably could be used for the Olympics.

denver-mockup.jpg

Source: Denver Post (latest article on the project)

Regarding a train to the mountains, if Winter Park is used for any events, remember the Ski Train already operates directly between Downtown Denver's Union Station and the resort. Obviously this isn't high-speed given the age, incline, curves, and numerous tunnels along the route, but it does offer an alternative to roadways and can offer a more predictable schedule for transportation for athletes and visitors. 

colorail-photo-by-darrell-arndt-3*750xx3

Source: Denver Business Journal

There's many more issues that would also need to be worked out, and as already mentioned, chief among them will be what additional public funds are needed, and then convincing voters. As a huge fan of the Olympics, I'd love to see them in Colorado eventually, but there's going to be a sizable portion of the population who may feel they're not worth the increased exposure and hassle.  If Denver/Colorado pursue a bid, they're going to want to rely primarily on using existing facilities, and private funds and sponsorships. Colorado, and Denver especially, is not shy about raising taxes for infrastructure projects, but the rub will be convincing everyone of the long-term benefits and ensuring it's not something only intended to show off for a couple weeks during the games.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Farlo said:

This conversation finally got this longtime Colorado resident to stop lurking...

If Denver decides to put forth a bid, there are certainly going to be a number of different challenges to overcome, but I wanted to highlight a couple more recent developments that may help alleviate some of the current constraints being discussed in this thread.

The first is the $1.1 billion redevelopment of Denver's National Western Center complex starting next year. There's a lot going on with this project that doesn't necessarily tie directly into an Olympic Bid, but later phases of the project call for a new 10,000 seat arena to replace the Denver Coliseum, and the intent is for it to be capable of hosting hockey and ice events, and presumably could be used for the Olympics.

Regarding a train to the mountains, if Winter Park is used for any events, remember the Ski Train already operates directly between Downtown Denver's Union Station and the resort. Obviously this isn't high-speed given the age, incline, curves, and numerous tunnels along the route, but it does offer an alternative to roadways and can offer a more predictable schedule for transportation for athletes and visitors. 

There's many more issues that would also need to be worked out, and as already mentioned, chief among them will be what additional public funds are needed, and then convincing voters. As a huge fan of the Olympics, I'd love to see them in Colorado eventually, but there's going to be a sizable portion of the population who may feel they're not worth the increased exposure and hassle.  If Denver/Colorado pursue a bid, they're going to want to rely primarily on using existing facilities, and private funds and sponsorships. Colorado, and Denver especially, is not shy about raising taxes for infrastructure projects, but the rub will be convincing everyone of the long-term benefits and ensuring it's not something only intended to show off for a couple weeks during the games.

Curious about something here.. what is it about increased exposure that you think Coloradans will balk at?  I know that was one of the hang-ups back in the 70s and rejecting federal funding was just a convenient excuse where the real problem for many people in Colorado (aside from a poorly organized plan) was that they didn't want the world to descend upon Colorado which at the time was far less developed than it is now.  Of course, it wasn't long before that development happened anyway, which perhaps would have benefited from the push an Olympics would have given it.  Even the opponents of the Olympics that killed Denver's efforts acknowledged that after the fact.

Fast forward 45 years.  Denver and Colorado are a lot different than they were back then.  Would there still be opposition to an Olympic effort as there was in the 70s?  Without question.  It's the money that's going to be the issue though, as you alluded to.  The only way Denver could and should bid for an Olympics is if they can do so responsibly.  And you're right, that's absolutely the rub.  Far easier said than done to make that work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Farlo said:

The first is the $1.1 billion redevelopment of Denver's National Western Center complex starting next year. There's a lot going on with this project that doesn't necessarily tie directly into an Olympic Bid, but later phases of the project call for a new 10,000 seat arena to replace the Denver Coliseum, and the intent is for it to be capable of hosting hockey and ice events, and presumably could be used for the Olympics.

. . .

Regarding a train to the mountains, if Winter Park is used for any events, remember the Ski Train already operates directly between Downtown Denver's Union Station and the resort. Obviously this isn't high-speed given the age, incline, curves, and numerous tunnels along the route, but it does offer an alternative to roadways and can offer a more predictable schedule for transportation for athletes and visitors.

Welcome to the forum!

Unfortunately the minimum seating capacity needed for both figure skating and ice hockey arenas is 12,000. If the new arena were just a bit larger it would work, though.

I had never considered that Denver could use a ski area other than Vail. Winter Park does actually have enough vertical drop for the mens alpine skiing in the Olympics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gangneung Ice Hockey Arena is only holds 10,000 so unless the IOC changed requirements then a replacement for the Denver Coliseum should be fine.

I spent a summer in Aurora, Colorado a few years back and I remember hearing bits about a revitalization of the National Western Center. Nothing was concrete they were just discussing plans. Great to see it come to fruition. Are there plans for widening I-70? From my understanding, this is something that often comes every ski season given the bumper to bumper traffic from Denver to the mountains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Curious about something here.. what is it about increased exposure that you think Coloradans will balk at?  I know that was one of the hang-ups back in the 70s and rejecting federal funding was just a convenient excuse where the real problem for many people in Colorado (aside from a poorly organized plan) was that they didn't want the world to descend upon Colorado which at the time was far less developed than it is now.  Of course, it wasn't long before that development happened anyway, which perhaps would have benefited from the push an Olympics would have given it.  Even the opponents of the Olympics that killed Denver's efforts acknowledged that after the fact.

Fast forward 45 years.  Denver and Colorado are a lot different than they were back then.  Would there still be opposition to an Olympic effort as there was in the 70s?  Without question.  It's the money that's going to be the issue though, as you alluded to.  The only way Denver could and should bid for an Olympics is if they can do so responsibly.  And you're right, that's absolutely the rub.  Far easier said than done to make that work.

I think it's a lot of the reasons you mentioned -- more people potentially descending on the state. Colorado has been among the fastest growing states for the past several decades and people like to complain about newcomers bringing more congestion, environmental impacts, or rising home prices (while probably discounting their personal contribution to each of these issues). 

Colorado and Denver are great places, but they have plenty of competition in the US, let alone internationally, for winter events, quality of life, beautiful mountains, etc. It's hard for me to imagine a winter games suddenly and dramatically leading to a lot more growth -- it's already happening. You can also put me in the camp that sees a winter games as a reason to enhance infrastructure deficits or to get ahead of the growth that's already coming this way. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Innsbruck is out. Sion has yet to get government approval. Salt Lake, Denver, or even Reno looks likely now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World Cup 2026 would preclude WOG 2026 for the US.  So, Calgary (which is not tabbed as a Canadian WC host city) might get 2026;  the US is better poised for 2030.  

Edited by baron-pierreIV

Share this post


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

World Cup 2026 would preclude WOG 2026 for the US.  So, Calgary (which is not tabbed as a Canadian WC host city) might get 2026;  the US is better poised for 2030.  

Why? They are not even considering Salt Lake City as a World Cup host city, and nothing new should have to be built for either event.

Edited by Nacre

Share this post


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

Why? They are not even considering Salt Lake City as a World Cup host city, and nothing new should have to be built for either event.

#1 - How do you know it will be Salt Lake?  Where is that written?

#2 -  Look at IOC documents.  

Share this post


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

#1 - How do you know it will be Salt Lake?  Where is that written?

#2 -  Look at IOC documents.  

Even if some other city and state wanted to spend $5 billion on the winter Olympics I don't believe the suddenly cost conscious IOC would let them. Even if Reno came forward offering to build everything with private money that is not the kind of bid the Olympics need right now.

As for the IOC's rules, those will instantly go out the window if SLC is the only bidder. There is no practical reason that a winter games in Utah would be hurt by a World Cup in the rest of the country many months later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×