Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If SLC was to host 2030, it would be for more concerning matters (i.e. no other *credible* bid is on the table for that year), rather than about some anniversary that’s not even theirs to begin with. Even L.A. 2028 isn’t going to be hosting their 100th anniversary in 2032.

The IOC doesn’t generally award Olympics on anniversaries anyway. Just ask Athens’ 1996 bid team that. The only exception lately is Paris 2024. But that had much more to do with other important matters than their centennial anniversary of their last Games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty clear both SLC and the IOC want SLC to be for 2034, 2030 in an emergency.  If the IOC has no other option than to award it to SLC, they have some serious soul searching to do if they want the games to continue.  The pattern has been concerning, and no one has exactly leaped to the front of the line as of yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is no clear cut candidate by next year, the IOC needs to work the lines of literally every country that has snow and is cold, no matter how third world, no matter how despotic (so long as its not China) to see if they want to host.  Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, it wont matter (well, of course it will matter in the sense that it shows a problem with the process, but you take what you can get for the sake of survival).  I would do literally everything possible before hitting the red SLC emergency button, because once you've done that, you might have started the death clock for the winter games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

Its pretty clear both SLC and the IOC want SLC to be for 2034, 2030 in an emergency.  If the IOC has no other option than to award it to SLC, they have some serious soul searching to do if they want the games to continue.  The pattern has been concerning, and no one has exactly leaped to the front of the line as of yet.

3 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

If there is no clear cut candidate by next year, the IOC needs to work the lines of literally every country that has snow and is cold, no matter how third world, no matter how despotic (so long as its not China) to see if they want to host.  Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, it wont matter (well, of course it will matter in the sense that it shows a problem with the process, but you take what you can get for the sake of survival).  I would do literally everything possible before hitting the red SLC emergency button, because once you've done that, you might have started the death clock for the winter games.

SLC would bid tomorrow if they could, but the LA 2028 issue gets in the way which is why the USOPC is suggesting 2034 instead to give them some separation.  So that's the "want" on their side. 

The IOC doesn't have the luxury of thinking about 2034 before they figure out 2030.  They can't play the long game like they have so many times in the past.  A lot of times they could count on cities to persist until they got the Olympics they were seeking.  Think about Paris and Tokyo and PyeongChang and Rio and Beijing (Summer) and Athens among others that put in multiple bids before they had a winner.  That's probably going to happen less and less in the future, especially if the IOC continues on their mantra of wanting fewer losers and if they're going to hand pick cities rather than having a more open bidding process.

That all said, let's not treat Salt Lake as some sort of emergency situation where they need to exhaust every other possible option before they go that route.  You're starting to sound a little nonsensical when you're suggesting the IOC call up anyone and everyone to try and draw them in.  That's much more of an act of desperation than to award an Olympics to literally the safest place they could possibly put it (even if the timing is less than ideal).  Azerbaijan?  Sounds a little ba-kukoo to me! :D

Right now the IOC has a pretty shoddy reputation between awarding the Olympics to totalitarian regimes and a less than transparent selection process that has people questioning what they're doing.  Won't help the cause if their message to the world is "hey, we really need someone to host the Olympics.. any takers?"  The IOC should already be doing some serious soul searching to realize how they got into this mess in the first place.  At this point though, there's 2 Olympics on the calendar in the next year (plus 2 Paralympics), so there's only so much focus they can put on 2030.  If that means the state of affairs in the world - and obviously the pandemic and its fallout is certainly not their fault - means that the best course of action is to award Salt Lake the 2030 Olympics and kick the can down the road another 4 years, that's a much better solution than panicking now when they'll have had to deal with the mess of Tokyo 2020ne and Beijing 2022 rather than when those are both well in the rear view mirror

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

If there is no clear cut candidate by next year, the IOC needs to work the lines of literally every country that has snow and is cold, no matter how third world, no matter how despotic (so long as its not China) to see if they want to host.  Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, it wont matter (well, of course it will matter in the sense that it shows a problem with the process, but you take what you can get for the sake of survival).  

What Quaker said:

17 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

You're starting to sound a little nonsensical when you're suggesting the IOC call up anyone and everyone to try and draw them in.  That's much more of an act of desperation than to award an Olympics to literally the safest place they could possibly put it (even if the timing is less than ideal).  

Right now the IOC has a pretty shoddy reputation between awarding the Olympics to totalitarian regimes and a less than transparent selection process that has people questioning what they're doing.  Won't help the cause if their message to the world is "hey, we really need someone to host the Olympics.. any takers?"  The IOC should already be doing some serious soul searching to realize how they got into this mess in the first place.  

And I’d further add, tell “give the Winter Olympics to any despot available for the sake of survival” to all the politicians & athletes from all over, who have publicly come out against Beijing 2022 & that “the IOC must move the 2022 Olympics to a location that ‘respects’ freedom & human rights”. And that “the IOC must really think twice before awarding Games to authoritarian regimes so that the athletes themselves can focus on their training & competitions, & not about worrying about boycotts, or whether or not they’ll make their own determinations of attending controversial Games”. 

Your logic there goes against those views, to say the least. To use an analogy of yours in the FIFA thread, that’s like taking the ugliest guy or girl to the school prom cause all the studs or beauty queens didn’t want to go with you. Total desperation shouldn’t be an excuse to make even more foolish choices. That’s what has gotten the IOC into trouble ITFP. And if that makes the IOC use the SLC emergency button on this one, so be it. That’s what it’s there for TBW, isn’t it.

27 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Azerbaijan?  Sounds a little ba-kukoo to me! :D

Right?! :wacko::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the most important thing to come to terms with is that the summer and winter games are completely different beasts with different problem sets and different requirement sets.  Technically, they always have been, but it is now an absolute chasm.  The summer games still have enough cities to pull from.  Even if there isnt a London, Paris, Los Angeles, or Madrid...........so long as there's a Budapest, Istanbul, or St. Petersburg, they are gonna be okay.  Though I think we are all aware if it wasnt for 2028 complications SLC would probably be locked signed and delivered for 2030, no one questions that.  

Respect/disrespect for the "long game" I guess is a personal difference, no sense in getting hung up there.  I see considerable organizational value in triaging things in advance, thats how I go about my life.  But I also understand thats not for everyone. Everyone is different, and thats fine.  But you get it to SLC in 2030 and you've managed to compromise with sponsors and corporate deals.  Great.  Now 2034 is the year of "awww crap......now what".  Thats slightly problematic for me because, I see the Olympics as an event every 4 years.  I know a lot of time can be bought to make a compelling case for 2038 if I've tied down 2030 and 2034.  There is a lot more time to go back into a warm room and try and figure things out for 2038 than for 2034, it puts you in the hot seat a lot quicker.  It also gives you more case studies looking at games to see what worked and what did not, and how to improve the process.  

Making a phone call might be unbecoming to them, it might be a tad humiliating from their POV, but so long as that phone call is kept under wraps and cordial, what is the harm in going that route?  It might not be the route of "prestige and dignity", but it is the route of getting things done.  If my relationship was on the rocks, and it was a girl I liked, and the only chance to get back together with her was that she wanted a phone call to tell her how pretty she was, I would do it.  By calling up Tblisi, Almaty, Erzurum, none of those are ideal, but the Olympic movement is not going to collapse with one of them hosting it.  It WILL collapse if NONE of them hosts it.  If a phone call behind the scenes gets it done, get it done, dignity and tradition be damned.  

The winter games, there isnt even the luxury of a tiered system.  The criteria is:  Do you exist?  Do you want to host the winter games?  Very much a different dynamic.  There is no more HGTV dynamic of three homes, all are nice, but none that have all the options you want.  The IOC can no longer say "oh no.......a blue bathroom, thats a deal breaker for me". Now the criteria is, you buy the house if it has running water because thats the 2021 real estate market, and in this case........that is the market of the winter olympics IMO.  Maybe im more of a pessimist I guess.

Absolutely said Azerbaijan tongue in cheek, but I completely understand given how hard to tell what is real and what is not anymore.  Shouldn't have included them when I was trying to make a sincere point.

All that said, I hope they can get off the sponsorship hang ups and get SLC the 2030 games.  I really do hope that.  Thats a day trip for me and I'd be there in a second.  Or if we get an 11th hour Italy-like bid, Ill take that too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

If my relationship was on the rocks, and it was a girl I liked, and the only chance to get back together with her was that she wanted a phone call to tell her how pretty she was, I would do it.  By calling up Tblisi, Almaty, Erzurum, none of those are ideal, but the Olympic movement is not going to collapse with one of them hosting it.  It WILL collapse if NONE of them hosts it.  If a phone call behind the scenes gets it done, get it done, dignity and tradition be damned.  

NO, the Winter Olympics will not “collapse” if none of those places hosts it. That’s just being hyperbolic now. It would, however, make it for another controversial Games, which is the last thing the IOC needs right now. Erzurum (& most likely Tbilisi, too) in particular, need A LOT of infrastructure to pull it off (much like Barcelona would need to do, which you discounted in another thread precisely for that same reason). It’s what got the IOC into trouble with Sochi to begin with. I’m sure that’s not a look that the IOC wants; another overblown-budget Winter Olympics in a less-than democratic place. That would surely get more cities lining up to host. 

40 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

The winter games, there isn’t even the luxury of a tiered system.  The criteria is:  Do you exist?  Do you want to host the winter games?  Very much a different dynamic.  There is no more HGTV dynamic of three homes, all are nice, but none that have all the options you want.  The IOC can no longer say "oh no.......a blue bathroom, thats a deal breaker for me". Now the criteria is, you buy the house if it has running water because thats the 2021 real estate market, and in this case........that is the market of the winter olympics IMO.  Maybe im more of a pessimist I guess.

LOL, you & your analogies. But like real estate, the Olympics are also about: “location, location, location!” A house can have EVERYTHING that one could possibly want (or at least mostly of what one wants), but if it’s location is totally somewhere where you don’t want to be, then that house means absolutely nothing. It’s the same with the Olympics. A bid can offer most of the things the IOC is looking for. But if the bids location is not where the IOC wants to particularly be, then that bid also means nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, iceman530 said:

I think the most important thing to come to terms with is that the summer and winter games are completely different beasts with different problem sets and different requirement sets.  Technically, they always have been, but it is now an absolute chasm.  The summer games still have enough cities to pull from.  Even if there isnt a London, Paris, Los Angeles, or Madrid...........so long as there's a Budapest, Istanbul, or St. Petersburg, they are gonna be okay.  Though I think we are all aware if it wasnt for 2028 complications SLC would probably be locked signed and delivered for 2030, no one questions that.  

It's not that cut and dry.  Because if it wasn't for those complications, SLC probably would have bid for 2026 and potentially scared off the competition in the process.  We've had discussions here for years about how the USOPC would strategize their approach to bidding.  The fundamental question here was often whether or not the USOPC wanted to prioritize a Summer bid or a Winter bid in the event they couldn't do both at the same time as they did in the 90s.  Well, we have our answer to that question.

No doubt the Winter Olympics require a more specialized bid plan that fewer cities can offer up.  But look at what's happening with 2032 that the IOC has already hand-picked a city.  Somehow I doubt they'd be doing that if they have multiple cities to choose from.  And what rings true for both the Summer and Winter Olympics is that it's not just "so long as there's city X, they're fine".. they need the right city to bid and not the wrong city.  Because we've seen more than a couple of wrong cities in recent times and the ripple effects that it tends to have.

10 hours ago, iceman530 said:

Respect/disrespect for the "long game" I guess is a personal difference, no sense in getting hung up there.  I see considerable organizational value in triaging things in advance, thats how I go about my life.  But I also understand thats not for everyone. Everyone is different, and thats fine.  But you get it to SLC in 2030 and you've managed to compromise with sponsors and corporate deals.  Great.  Now 2034 is the year of "awww crap......now what".  Thats slightly problematic for me because, I see the Olympics as an event every 4 years.  I know a lot of time can be bought to make a compelling case for 2038 if I've tied down 2030 and 2034.  There is a lot more time to go back into a warm room and try and figure things out for 2038 than for 2034, it puts you in the hot seat a lot quicker.  It also gives you more case studies looking at games to see what worked and what did not, and how to improve the process.  

What exactly do you mean by "I see the Olympics as an event every 4 years"?   Not sure what the context is there.  Not sure how you're trying to apply your life experience here, but it's easy for us in the peanut gallery to think 2 or 3 Olympics down the road.  The IOC doesn't have that luxury.  The only Winter Olympics that matters now is 2030.  Once that's settled, then and only then can they start thinking about 2034.  And after they have a 2034 host, then they look at who might have a case for 2038.  

There has been a steady decrease in the number of bid cities, particularly on the Winter side.  2022 was a disaster (in hindsight, the USOPC should have jumped all over that one, handed them Salt Lake on a silver platter, and it would have been plenty of separation before LA 2028).  2026 was nearly a disaster.  Hard to figure what 2030 is yet, but if it's another mess, the prevailing sentiment isn't going to be "that's okay, Salt Lake is waiting in the wings for 2034."  Because the truth is we have no idea what 2034 will bring.  2026 wasn't supposed to have 1, let alone 2 European bidders and it was the Canadian bid that fell apart.  Who knows what will be out there bidding then.  That's an issue for 4 or 5 years from now though.  And 2038 is something that's 8-10 years off.  The only way to approach this all is 1 Olympics at a time, not to try and project ahead.  The IOC doesn't have that luxury at this point.

10 hours ago, iceman530 said:

Making a phone call might be unbecoming to them, it might be a tad humiliating from their POV, but so long as that phone call is kept under wraps and cordial, what is the harm in going that route?  It might not be the route of "prestige and dignity", but it is the route of getting things done.  If my relationship was on the rocks, and it was a girl I liked, and the only chance to get back together with her was that she wanted a phone call to tell her how pretty she was, I would do it.  By calling up Tblisi, Almaty, Erzurum, none of those are ideal, but the Olympic movement is not going to collapse with one of them hosting it.  It WILL collapse if NONE of them hosts it.  If a phone call behind the scenes gets it done, get it done, dignity and tradition be damned.  

That's not how this game works and is a terrible way to get things done.  If you're going to make this into a relationship analogy, the IOC at this point is like the abusive boyfriend that no one seems to want to go out with except for the bad girls.  If they want a date to the dance - any date to the dance - they need to find someone who is pretty and smart and has all the qualities of a good date.  Not to tell the ugly girl how pretty she is and settle.  Which then makes it a lot harder to date the pretty girl the next time around.

The last thing in the world the IOC should be doing is courting a less than qualified city as an act of desperation, trying to work with them in private, and then that won't have future repercussions.  If the IOC is going to make a secret deal with Almaty, how's that going to look for their reputation the next time they're trying to deal with another bid city that may or may not have good public support?  You say the Olympic movement won't collapse if Erzurum hosts?  See the fallout from Sochi and Rio and Beijing and then ask yourself that question again.  Because if the IOC forces a city into the spotlight that doesn't belong there, other cities and the citizens of those countries will take a hard pass.  This isn't about swallowing your pride.  It's about trying to ensure the future of your organization.

10 hours ago, iceman530 said:

The winter games, there isnt even the luxury of a tiered system.  The criteria is:  Do you exist?  Do you want to host the winter games?  Very much a different dynamic.  There is no more HGTV dynamic of three homes, all are nice, but none that have all the options you want.  The IOC can no longer say "oh no.......a blue bathroom, thats a deal breaker for me". Now the criteria is, you buy the house if it has running water because thats the 2021 real estate market, and in this case........that is the market of the winter olympics IMO.  Maybe im more of a pessimist I guess.

There's a lot more criteria than that and if you think otherwise, you're a fool.  I've said it on here a hundred times.. the IOC can only choose from cities that bid for the Olympics (whatever the 2032 process is becoming notwithstanding).  They can't will a city into bidding by saying "hey, you guys exist and you have snow, how would you to host an Olympics!"  No question the IOC needs to lower their standards, but this is another poor analogy.  Because the dealbreakers won't be tiny things.  It'll be "this country is a totalitarian regime" or "this country has no support from its local citizens."  That's a world of difference from "we don't like this bid because the speed skating venue is outdoors."  To say nothing of your earlier "the Olympics is an event every 4 years" line which means there needs to be more house shopping later on and the market then will be influenced by choices they make now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2030 goes to SLC if they want it. Forget Sapporo after the financial disaster that Tokyo is shaping up to be. In terms of a SLB being  a case of pressing the panic button, it's far from it. In fact, the likes of Salt Lake City or a possible Vancouver bid are exactly what the IOC needs. Safe bids that don't require a lot of spending. I can only see a credible bid from western Europe being the only legitimate competition. The problem is where does that bid come from? France and Italy are out. The IOC burned all its bridges with Norway after the Oslo fiasco in the 2022 race, the IOC did itself no favors with the recent spat with Germany over the 2032 race, and can any bid survive a public referendum in Sweden, Switzerland, or Austria? The Barcelona bid seems to crop up every once in a while, but it's not exactly financially or logistically feasible. Forget the likes of Almaty (unless there are no other bidders) either. Add it all up and it's Salt Lake's for the taking. 

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

2030 goes to SLC if they want it. Forget Sapporo after the financial disaster that Tokyo is shaping up to be. In terms of a SLB being  a case of pressing the panic button, it's far from it. In fact, the likes of Salt Lake City or a possible Vancouver bid are exactly what the IOC needs. Safe bids that don't require a lot of spending. I can only see a credible bid from western Europe being the only legitimate competition. The problem is where does that bid come from? France and Italy are out. The IOC burned all its bridges with Norway after the Oslo fiasco in the 2022 race, the IOC did itself no favors with the recent spat with Germany over the 2032 race, and can any bid survive a public referendum in Sweden, Switzerland, or Austria? The Barcelona bid seems to crop up every once in a while, but it's not exactly financially or logistically feasible. Forget the likes of Almaty (unless there are no other bidders) either. Add it all up and it's Salt Lake's for the taking. 

Oh, of course! By 2023, the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics Bidding Committee delegation is about to arrive in Mumbai to participate!

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

Actually, 2030 will be the 98th anniversary of the 1932 Lake Placid Games!  Somehow, because of the change of calendar, no city can celebrate the 100th anny of the WOGs.  

Not until the 2094 Winter Olympics in Lillehammer!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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...