Jump to content

The Usoc Vote On April 14


Recommended Posts

The right decision I think. They'll be hard to beat and I now have a city to support for 2016. Sod impartiality.

I don't know if Chicago will start being regarded as the front-runner or not (though I tend to believe so, considering 2016 has its focus on the Americas), taking into account that the other confirmed bidders are very capable cities. But I too am feeling very supportive of this bid :) What a fantastic backdrop the Chicago Games would have: a lake on one side... a superb skyline on the other *drool* Let's say this is my unofficial favourite :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

LA84 - Chicago has a far better sports infrastructure than Toronto, most of the events will take place within Chicago, whereas with Toronto there was Hamilton for boxing, kingston for sailing and st. catherines for rowing, along with an earyl suggestion to have true white-water kayaking in the grand river near paris. (that plan was dropped). So Chicago's would be less expensive. Also Toronto needed the big new stadium, Chicago doesn't.

Its unfortunate that Chicago can't use a stadium plan like the one for Atlanta in turning it into a baseball park, but that ain't gonna happen since the cubs are never leaving wrigley.

I think Chicago would produce a great games, my preferance is NYC or Toronto, but Chicago is still close enough for me to volunteer for and Chicago is also a great centre for my future profession. So I would be happy to have the games so close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we know it was not unanimous as Peter U stated several times during the various press points that votes went both ways.

Wonder how long we'll get some leaks about the actual number of votes each city got.

Didn't see any of the press conferences afterwards. Am very tech-poor at home. Have very basic cable (no CNN, no ESPN, no MSNBC -- I cut all of those out). I can't get any live coverage on this iBook which I am in the process of getting rid of. It was only while at the bank that I saw some CNN coverage w/ Mayor Daley being interviewed.

Anyway, my initial guesses -- and whoever wants to, can dig it up - was either Chicago - 7/8; in which case LA - 4/3. So it could've been the 8-3 I think. If it was a "7"; then with the Cubs winning 7-0, with a "7" USOC win, then that's as auspicious a start as any!!

Re the "Stadium" issue, I think the IOC is now very accepting of the idea of less 'white elephants.' It has been pre-conditioned by the successful retrofit of Atlanta's stadium; and bought London's plan. They are, I beleive, wise and savvy enough to understand that Chicago DOESN'T really need another T&F stadium for just 2 weeks -- and that Chicago is budgeting something like $370 mil to accommodate the IOC's party. It will show that the American entry is at least a fiscally responsible entity and not some foolish, free-spending one; i.e., NOT a Montreal redux.

BTW, congrats LA84 ! Now, isn't it time to change that name?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, congrats LA84 ! Now, isn't it time to change that name?

I agree. If GB God will allow it I will change my name.

BTW I am back on Tuesday. Lunch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, congrats LA84 ! Now, isn't it time to change that name?

Don't be in such a rush. We're gonna have to brace ourselves anyway for a rush of newbie monickers like "Chicago16" "Chicago2016" "ChicagoGames" "GoChicago" "WindyCity16" etc etc etc.

I never could get a grip who was who in the old NY2012 series!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. If GB God will allow it I will change my name.

BTW I am back on Tuesday. Lunch?

I was hoping to see you jumping around in the background of the announcement!

Nevertheless, the USOC obviously made the right choice, even if I did personally hope for a Los Angeles victory - they win the award for the more attractive mayor of the two anyway!

It's far too early to discredit Chicago's stadium plans or anything else for that matter - they will change a lot over the next few years, especially when other cities begin announcing their plans. Do you remember a year ago their plan for two stadiums!!! :blink: ....and the 2012 teams all changed theirs to varying degrees throughout the campaign.

I've slightly warmed to the idea of a Chicago Games seeing how happy they all were - I hope they are awarded them.......in 2020 (if New York are still ostracised by the USOC - did you hear the venom when they were asked about 2012!?!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA84 - Chicago has a far better sports infrastructure than Toronto, most of the events will take place within Chicago, whereas with Toronto there was Hamilton for boxing, kingston for sailing and st. catherines for rowing, along with an earyl suggestion to have true white-water kayaking in the grand river near paris. (that plan was dropped). So Chicago's would be less expensive. Also Toronto needed the big new stadium, Chicago doesn't.

I just wanted to point something out.

White Water Kayaking would take place in St.Catherines which constitued for 4 medal events. Rowing and the remainder of the Canoe/Kayaking events would be at the Toronto Waterfront Regatta. Having those smaller events outside of the main city is not a bid loser. Involving these cities with these smaller events helps create more interest in the Olympics beyond the host city. Having every event concentrated in one area will undoubtedly cause major gridlock and transport problems. There is also the point of over-compactness leading to detrimental effects. I'm not sure how compact Chicago's bid is but I will definately research their bid more. I just know the basics of it at the moment.

Yes, Toronto would require a "big new stadium" which would be utilized afterwards and would leave a lasting legacy. Chicago is building a brand new stadium up but then dismantling it after the games are over. Construction costs for this to take place must be high for constructing and then de-constructing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't say I'm surprised.

Part of me wants Chicago to fall flat on it's face, and thus open New York for a steal in 2020 or later on, and the other wants the games to come back to an American city (am I a greedy American? :lol:). I think I might be inclined to the latter. ;)

Regardless, I'm sure if Chicago does wins the honor, they'll pull off a great games.

Congrats!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the detractors of Paris was the number of temporary venues, having pretty much a temporary stadium could hurt them. I mean the the Olympic Games is based around the stadium and the grandeous nature of it. Thats why brand new stadium ideas in Madrid and London scored higher than Moscow with Lushniki and Paris with the stade de france. Giving the IOC a second rate stadium could be a slap in the face to the IOC members with illusions of grandeur and is a dangerous games. It means that the aquatics centre must be higher than most, and considering the precident Beijing is putting up, that could be hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the detractors of Paris was the number of temporary venues, having pretty much a temporary stadium could hurt them. I mean the the Olympic Games is based around the stadium and the grandeous nature of it. Thats why brand new stadium ideas in Madrid and London scored higher than Moscow with Lushniki and Paris with the stade de france. Giving the IOC a second rate stadium could be a slap in the face to the IOC members with illusions of grandeur and is a dangerous games. It means that the aquatics centre must be higher than most, and considering the precident Beijing is putting up, that could be hard.

London's stadium is a temporary stadium as well. Chicago is doing the exactly the same thing. Except that their legacy is an arts venue (one of the three pillars of the Olympic Movement) as opposed to an athletics one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

London's stadium is a temporary stadium as well. Chicago is doing the exactly the same thing. Except that their legacy is an arts venue (one of the three pillars of the Olympic Movement) as opposed to an athletics one.

London is just following in the footsteps of Sydney and Atlanta in building a stadium that will be built for the needs of the games and than down-graded to partical use, London's is still going to be a completely function stadium and athletics stadium after the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was hoping to see you jumping around in the background of the announcement!

Nevertheless, the USOC obviously made the right choice, even if I did personally hope for a Los Angeles victory - they win the award for the more attractive mayor of the two anyway!

It's far too early to discredit Chicago's stadium plans or anything else for that matter - they will change a lot over the next few years, especially when other cities begin announcing their plans. Do you remember a year ago their plan for two stadiums!!! :blink: ....and the 2012 teams all changed theirs to varying degrees throughout the campaign.

I've slightly warmed to the idea of a Chicago Games seeing how happy they all were - I hope they are awarded them.......in 2020 (if New York are still ostracised by the USOC - did you hear the venom when they were asked about 2012!?!).

Haha yeah, Mayor Daley has more of that warm father appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the "Stadium" issue, I think the IOC is now very accepting of the idea of less 'white elephants.' It has been pre-conditioned by the successful retrofit of Atlanta's stadium; and bought London's plan. They are, I beleive, wise and savvy enough to understand that Chicago DOESN'T really need another T&F stadium for just 2 weeks -- and that Chicago is budgeting something like $370 mil to accommodate the IOC's party. It will show that the American entry is at least a fiscally responsible entity and not some foolish, free-spending one; i.e., NOT a Montreal redux.

This will be a very good test on whether the IOC is true to its word.

I agree that Chicago Stadium option is the only fiscally responsible one and that should go well with the IOC claimed willingness to keep the cost of the Games under control.

This being said, based on previous votes (London being chosen over much more conservative bids from Paris and Madrid), I still think the IOC might go with what they find the most sexy bid.

July vote will tell a lot: there is clearly one fiscally responsible bid and that's Salzburg and I somehow feel that poor Sazlburg will finish last again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I feel is kinda sad is that while Chicago' Olympic Bid is THE big story going on today. with all day coverage provided by most of the stations.

Los Angeles on the other hand has only one station covering the Olympic Bid at all, and on that station (NBC) the bid is only a side story.

LA may have 90% support, but support is different than excitement.

? ? ?

Were you in LA at all yesterday?

I was gonna go to The Grove yesterday, just to look at the people gathered for the bid city announcement, so I could see the look of disappointment on their faces just as the bid city was announced, but I ended up not going. I listened to the announcement on the radio. I knew Chicago would get it.

As I turned on the 5pm local news, the first story mentioned was that the entertainer Don Ho had died. Immediately afterwards, the next story was the Olympic bid. And yes, they showed tape of the people gathered at The Grove, looking really hopeful, some of them holding hands, even… and then they announced that Chicago was the candidate city, and then the people’s expressions turned to disappointment. It was funny!

I think now, Chicago’s main competition is Tokyo and Rio, and maybe even Istanbul. People on these boards are saying Tokyo isn’t a frontrunner because of Beijing 2008. But um, HELLO, London 2012 is only 2 Olympiads after Athens 2004. Obviously, the IOC has no problem with returning to the same continent after only 8 years. Plus, Tokyo’s bid is supposed to be extremely compact. And Rio, I think if they get all of their ducks in a row, would be a formidable bid for Chicago; South America has never hosted and Rio is beautiful… definitely more sexy and telegenic than Chicago. And Istanbul would be an opportunity to have the Olympics in a majority Muslim nation for the first time.

I guess we’ll find out in 2009.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the detractors of Paris was the number of temporary venues, having pretty much a temporary stadium could hurt them. I mean the the Olympic Games is based around the stadium and the grandeous nature of it. Thats why brand new stadium ideas in Madrid and London scored higher than Moscow with Lushniki and Paris with the stade de france. Giving the IOC a second rate stadium could be a slap in the face to the IOC members with illusions of grandeur and is a dangerous games. It means that the aquatics centre must be higher than most, and considering the precident Beijing is putting up, that could be hard.

I couldn't have said it better. That's is exactly what I'm thinking. Their stadium would be dismantled to such a little entity leftover from the Olympics. It just seems so unapplealing. What other Summer Olympic host cities have completely dismantled their Olympic Stadiums completely or into something so small and not holding much significance as it once was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What other Summer Olympic host cities have completely dismantled their Olympic Stadiums completely or into something so small and not holding much significance as it once was?

London (twice), Melbourne, Paris. Legacies totally gone. And probably Canada some day since they keep talking about tearing down Olympic Stadium (which would be foolish IMHO but . . . )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

London (twice), Melbourne, Paris. Legacies totally gone. And probably Canada some day since they keep talking about tearing down Olympic Stadium (which would be foolish IMHO but . . . )

But the question is did they dismantle it right after the games were done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

London (twice), Melbourne, Paris. Legacies totally gone. And probably Canada some day since they keep talking about tearing down Olympic Stadium (which would be foolish IMHO but . . . )

All those examples are over fifty years ago - Paris way back in 1924 - of course their Olympic legacies have faded - the Games were a completely different event back then - anyway the Olympic stadium from the 1948 Games (old Wembley Stadium)was only torn down a few years ago so had many years providing a legacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the question is did they dismantle it right after the games were done?

No, but they did destroy their legacies.

Unlike the U.S. which still has all 3 stadiums used for the Olympics in place. B)

Chicago isn't doing anything that Atlanta and London haven't already or will be doing. And what is this magic number anyway as far as what a stadium can be collapsed to? Who determines what is acceptable?

The plan is a good one. Reducing the size down to an amphitheater which can be enjoyed by Chicagoians for years to come with cultural events. Again, the arts is one of the three pillars of the modern Olympic movement - something I am confident the IOC will appreciate as a lasting legacy if Chicago is chosen. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but they did destroy their legacies.

Unlike the U.S. which still has all 3 stadiums used for the Olympics in place. B)

Chicago isn't doing anything that Atlanta and London haven't already or will be doing. And what is this magic number anyway as far as what a stadium can be collapsed to? Who determines what is acceptable?

The plan is a good one. Reducing the size down to an amphitheater which can be enjoyed by Chicagoians for years to come with cultural events. Again, the arts is one of the three pillars of the modern Olympic movement - something I am confident the IOC will appreciate as a lasting legacy if Chicago is chosen. .

Atlanta's stadium was perfectly converted into an MLB Stadium which was a perfect lasting legacy for the City of Atlanta. The thing with Chicago's case is that their stadium would be dismantled right after the games are complete unlike the other past host cities you've mentioned previously. Like Faster has previously mentioned, the IOC loves the big gem of such a new state of the art Olympic Stadium. I just would love to hear and read Olympic analysts and experts opinions on this issue. I'm really curious to find out what they think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious: we know Tokoyo and Rio are mounting bids and look pretty serious, but I keep hearing about Istanbul making a run and quite frankly, it surprises me just a bit. That I don't think Turkey isn't able to do it, but it seems like they've been staying out of the bidding for a while. Anyone know if Turkey is seriously considering a run at 2016?

It's going to be a good race and yes, what happens on July 4th could be most telling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...