micheal_warren Posted June 25, 2006 Report Posted June 25, 2006 I wouldn't support any, because the US don't deserve to keep hosting the Games, they have already hosted 8. There is, however, ONE city in the US that i think should be given the chance to host; New York City. well, i do thnik that the games will be heading back to the US in 2016, the games will not be going to Europe as they are hosting the 2012 games and Asia is hosting the 2008 games. Africa or South America would have to pull something out of the bad to win the games. So i think the games will be going to the US
Triffle Posted June 25, 2006 Report Posted June 25, 2006 I wouldn't support any, because the US don't deserve to keep hosting the Games, they have already hosted 8. There is, however, ONE city in the US that i think should be given the chance to host; New York City.
micheal_warren Posted June 25, 2006 Report Posted June 25, 2006 Triffle whats wrong with the current cities that are bidding?
LA84 Posted June 25, 2006 Report Posted June 25, 2006 There is, however, ONE city in the US that i think should be given the chance to host; New York City. Hello and welcome to two months ago
cesco_82 Posted June 25, 2006 Report Posted June 25, 2006 I wouldn't support any, because the US don't deserve to keep hosting the Games, they have already hosted 8. There is, however, ONE city in the US that i think should be given the chance to host; New York City. + I'd like a SouthAmerican City to host the Games...time 4 BuenosAires!!!
Mikel Posted June 26, 2006 Report Posted June 26, 2006 San Francisco. For those who want Latin America hosting, you can support Miami! It's said to be the capital of the region!
Mikel Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 The obvious choice is Chicago 2016 The obvious choice would be NY...
ñuto Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 +I'd like a SouthAmerican City to host the Games...time 4 BuenosAires!!! the iberoamerican bid would be...Madrid
Triffle Posted July 3, 2006 Report Posted July 3, 2006 The obvious choice would be NY... Completely agree.
baron-pierreIV Posted July 3, 2006 Report Posted July 3, 2006 Completely agree. It's kinda stupid to be pining for a candidacy that will never be. Certain factors just didn't happen for a 2nd time, do get real fellas, and adjust to the reality of the situation; not some dream scenario which will never happen. the iberoamerican bid would be...Madrid See, this is why I keep calling you Spaniards down, nuto. THe thread is for a "US city vote' and you and cesco keep putting non-US-City votes, And you once said "...respect other individuals and other nations...? [/b] Liar! No; you don't. This a thread for US city votes. Duh? Can't you respect that because there are/were other threads for Madrid-Madrid, which isn't likely going to happen for another 8 years or so. At least mikel has moved on in that regard; but you are sounding like a tired, old record. Frankly, this Madrid-Madrid stuff is getting old and boring.
I Love Minneapolis Posted July 18, 2006 Report Posted July 18, 2006 Philadelphia because of its history and appeal. Plus, if Chicago hosts then the midwest will be represented and accounted for and wont host again for 100 years, all but smashing the great Minneapolis 2020 bid that is in (Seriously) consideration here. (Yes, I am still that naive).
lrd1rocha Posted July 18, 2006 Report Posted July 18, 2006 San Francisco, although I wouldn't mind Chicago or Los Angeles. I am not interested on Philadelphia or Houston.
seamus21514 Posted July 19, 2006 Report Posted July 19, 2006 After watching the whole season 1 of MONK: SF!
ryebreadraz Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 Los Angeles. By far the best choice regardless of how many times they hosted it. I don't care if they've hosted it 50 times. They would put on the best games.
Mainad Posted July 27, 2006 Report Posted July 27, 2006 Los Angeles. By far the best choice regardless of how many times they hosted it. I don't care if they've hosted it 50 times. They would put on the best games. Possibly,but we can't know that for sure until Chicago or San Francisco are given the chance to show what they can do! I suspect the USOC will prefer to go with a different city and that it's preference will be for Chicago,San Francisco and then Los Angeles in that order.If the first two can't cut the mustard,then I think LA will be a safe back-up.But I wonder if the IOC would want to go with Los Angeles again when it may be up against other world-class cities with excellent bids that have never hosted before?
Athensfan Posted July 28, 2006 Report Posted July 28, 2006 Peter Ueberroth emphasized that none of the cities currently have a plan that would succeed on an international level. Here are the weaknesses: LA -- the well-charted been-there-done-that issue. Not to mention transportation.... C-- stadium, stadium, stadium. Temporary ain't gonna fly. Dual stadiums ain't gonna fly. Must be spectacular and new. Plus McCormick Place seems over-utilized. It's buildings at layout are extremely bland and will seem even more so in comparison to Beijing and London. SF--bureacracy. Can they get themselves organized? Transportation is still an issue... All these cities (even left-leaning SF) will have an uphill battle if the U.S. international image doesn't improve. If we continue to be perceived as a country of self-centered, tyrannical cowboys, then forget it. Right now I'm betting the USOC won't bid. I doubt that the three cities will be able to sufficiently prove their international viability. I'm also betting that even if the USOC does decide to bid they won't win. Financial issues aside, I think there are enough members in the IOC that wouldn't be able to resist spurning the USA a la Paris 2012. I'd love to be proven wrong.... (By the way, just because 97 IOC members think the US should bid doesn't mean that a chunk of them wouldn't take a secret delight in shooting that bid down.)
nykfan845 Posted July 28, 2006 Report Posted July 28, 2006 Right now I'm betting the USOC won't bid. I doubt that the three cities will be able to sufficiently prove their international viability. I'm also betting that even if the USOC does decide to bid they won't win. Financial issues aside, I think there are enough members in the IOC that wouldn't be able to resist spurning the USA a la Paris 2012. I'd love to be proven wrong.... The Floyd Landis scandal certainly doesn't help. I agree that all three cities have big flaws.
SOlympiadsW Posted July 30, 2006 Report Posted July 30, 2006 The Floyd Landis scandal certainly doesn't help. I agree that all three cities have big flaws. definately
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.