(07-31-2015 04:22 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(07-31-2015 01:12 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  They are about to jump into the waters in Rio and swim in sewage sludge.

And dead bodies (Google it).

The Olympics will be back in the US because we're perhaps the only country in the world that has multiple cities that have most of the necessary facilities already built. Either that or they'll stick to a permanent site (which they should) and no place would make more sense than Athens. There's also the corporate angle and the money to be bribed--err, made by hosting the Olympics here. Its only been 13 years since the US hosted an Olympics (and 5 years since Canada did so), so I'd say we're just fine.

(07-31-2015 01:42 PM)Niner National Wrote:  The Olympics should move to more of a WC model where there is a host country rather than a host city. For huge countries like the U.S., maybe have a region host. For example, you could have a Boston, NYC, Philly, DC host region or a SF, Los Angeles, San Diego region.

This would cut down on the amount of new crap that has to be built. We have enough Olympic caliber venues in this country (and so do many other developed countries) to host the Olympics without really spending any new money on infrastructure.

The issue with that is suddenly the average Olympic fan would not have easy access to most of the events and would have to travel to multiple cities and not just one site. This is especially problematic to international visitors to another country, especially to one as large as the US or Russia as opposed to the UK or Japan.

That said, financially, that makes a ton of more sense than having random cities, especially outside the US, spend so much booty to build new facilities.

(07-31-2015 02:39 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I guess there remains the potential for a permanent Olympic venue. I suggest Vancouver for the Winter Olympics and London for the Summer Games.

Nowhere would make more sense than Athens for the Summer games.

I agree. Nowhere is a better choice than Athens.

Los Angeles was announced as the replacement city for the U.S.'s bid for the 2024 Summer Games. I truly feel that if the United States is passed over in lieu of some odd choice, we should be done with legitimate bids for the Summer Games at least. This will be 40 years since LA hosted, and 28 since Atlanta - it's been long enough that we should get another Summer Olympics.

we don't bribe. Olympic Committee and the World Cup Hosting committee love these dictatorships and communist countries because they can get paid.

(09-02-2015 06:26 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Los Angeles was announced as the replacement city for the U.S.'s bid for the 2024 Summer Games. I truly feel that if the United States is passed over in lieu of some odd choice, we should be done with legitimate bids for the Summer Games at least. This will be 40 years since LA hosted, and 28 since Atlanta - it's been long enough that we should get another Summer Olympics.

I'd say there is very little chance of LA getting it. It will be in Rio next year and will be Tokyo in 2020. Europe is virtually a lock for 2024.

(08-01-2015 01:23 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  It should be host nations with a lead city instead of host cities.

You do that and there are probably a dozen sites in the US for the summer games (Los Angeles, New York City, Boston, Miami, Atlanta, San Diego, Orlando, Chicago, Charlotte, Houston, Dallas, St. Louis) and probably a half dozen sites in the US for the winter games (Denver, Salt Lake City, Buffalo, Minneapolis, Seattle).

The "royalty" treatment for the IOC is also total BS and should be a non-starter.

Makes more sense today with the ease of TV coverage and reduce cost dramatically. The opening and closing ceremonies would be a problem though.

(09-02-2015 07:36 AM)fsquid Wrote:  we don't bribe. Olympic Committee and the World Cup Hosting committee love these dictatorships and communist countries because they can get paid.

Didn't we bribe for the winter olympics in Salt Lake? People kept bringing up Romney's involvement with that back in 2012.

I'm pretty sure Atlanta did some bribes behind the scenes to get a games so soon after Los Angeles. It doesn't matter though - other countries and cities have taken the bribery to a whole new level.

(09-02-2015 04:36 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'm pretty sure Atlanta did some bribes behind the scenes to get a games so soon after Los Angeles. It doesn't matter though - other countries and cities have taken the bribery to a whole new level.

This being a college sports forum, we're all aware of the changes that television income has had on that industry. I'm sure it's no different when it comes to other sporting events, like the Olympics and FIFA. That, along with the rise of 3rd world countries economies probably caused this race to exorbitant bribery as much as anything else.

(09-02-2015 04:36 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'm pretty sure Atlanta did some bribes behind the scenes to get a games so soon after Los Angeles. It doesn't matter though - other countries and cities have taken the bribery to a whole new level.

Based on all the stuff that goes on every day here in Atlanta, I would say that is a safe bet.

(09-02-2015 05:04 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-02-2015 04:36 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'm pretty sure Atlanta did some bribes behind the scenes to get a games so soon after Los Angeles. It doesn't matter though - other countries and cities have taken the bribery to a whole new level.

Based on all the stuff that goes on every day here in Atlanta, I would say that is a safe bet.

Of course there were bribes, Coke and Delta said they pay for the games.

(07-31-2015 01:34 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  This is a perfect example of you need to destroy the village to save the village. I think the Olympics will be radically re-imagined into smaller venues, formats and cities.

I think you're right and it's bound to happen.

There will be an Olympics for the foreseeable future. But I suspect at some point you will see cities and nations decide it's not worth building up for "the olympics". Instead Olympic ready cities will start to emerge.

I think the Twin Cities would be a perfect fit for the summer Olympics (for example)

We have
1 - NFL Domed Stadium (capacity 80,000)
1 - 1st Class NCAA Football Stadium (Capacity 50,000)
4 - Arenas for indoor sports (xCel 18K, Target 19K, Mariucci 10K, Williams 15K)
2 - Arenas for smaller indoor events (Sports Pavilion 6K, Ridder 3K)
3 - New Baseball Venues Built since 2008 or so - (Target Field 40K, Siebert Field 1.5K, CHS Field 8K)
1 - upcoming MLS Stadium

- Add in international level Aquatic Center, Track venue and the like which are attached to the UoM

The Olympics should be going to cities like this where the construction needed would be at most one or two niche venues and some transportation infrastructure.

(09-03-2015 09:49 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-31-2015 01:34 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  This is a perfect example of you need to destroy the village to save the village. I think the Olympics will be radically re-imagined into smaller venues, formats and cities.

I think you're right and it's bound to happen.

There will be an Olympics for the foreseeable future. But I suspect at some point you will see cities and nations decide it's not worth building up for "the olympics". Instead Olympic ready cities will start to emerge.

I think the Twin Cities would be a perfect fit for the summer Olympics (for example)

We have
1 - NFL Domed Stadium (capacity 80,000)
1 - 1st Class NCAA Football Stadium (Capacity 50,000)
4 - Arenas for indoor sports (xCel 18K, Target 19K, Mariucci 10K, Williams 15K)
2 - Arenas for smaller indoor events (Sports Pavilion 6K, Ridder 3K)
3 - New Baseball Venues Built since 2008 or so - (Target Field 40K, Siebert Field 1.5K, CHS Field 8K)
1 - upcoming MLS Stadium

- Add in international level Aquatic Center, Track venue and the like which are attached to the UoM

The Olympics should be going to cities like this where the construction needed would be at most one or two niche venues and some transportation infrastructure.

And arrange the academic calendar so that U of M dorms can serve as the Olympic Village.

The Olympics are a money losing situation. No one can justify the billions needed to build a village for the athletes and structures that will only be used for 2 weeks TOTAL. The Olympics were on a roughly 1500 year hiatus until 1896 when the modern Olympic games began. They simply grew too large and too inclusive to be economically viable anymore. Also, there are a slew of world events that take place regularly in the sports that the Olympics have anyways, so their need is questionable in today's world.

Have them in the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, or Korea.....you know....countries that actually have the infrastructure currently in place to support them.....or just do away with it all.

Why these idiots insist on putting them in terrible locations is beyond me. Same thing with the dopes that run the World Cup.

(09-03-2015 11:27 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Have them in the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, or Korea.....you know....countries that actually have the infrastructure currently in place to support them.....or just do away with it all.

Why these idiots insist on putting them in terrible locations is beyond me. Same thing with the dopes that run the World Cup.

You know the reason. IOC members love the bribes. And many of the nations you mentioned aren't interested in that game anymore.

South Africa and Qatar for the World Cup.....I mean seriously.

(09-02-2015 02:17 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(09-02-2015 07:36 AM)fsquid Wrote:  we don't bribe. Olympic Committee and the World Cup Hosting committee love these dictatorships and communist countries because they can get paid.

Didn't we bribe for the winter olympics in Salt Lake? People kept bringing up Romney's involvement with that back in 2012.

correct and I believe there was legislation enacted that would not make bribing stop, but probably not worth an American's time for this thing.

Romney was brought into head this up after the scandal was uncovered.

(09-03-2015 09:49 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-31-2015 01:34 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  This is a perfect example of you need to destroy the village to save the village. I think the Olympics will be radically re-imagined into smaller venues, formats and cities.

I think you're right and it's bound to happen.

There will be an Olympics for the foreseeable future. But I suspect at some point you will see cities and nations decide it's not worth building up for "the olympics". Instead Olympic ready cities will start to emerge.

I think the Twin Cities would be a perfect fit for the summer Olympics (for example)

We have
1 - NFL Domed Stadium (capacity 80,000)
1 - 1st Class NCAA Football Stadium (Capacity 50,000)
4 - Arenas for indoor sports (xCel 18K, Target 19K, Mariucci 10K, Williams 15K)
2 - Arenas for smaller indoor events (Sports Pavilion 6K, Ridder 3K)
3 - New Baseball Venues Built since 2008 or so - (Target Field 40K, Siebert Field 1.5K, CHS Field 8K)
1 - upcoming MLS Stadium

- Add in international level Aquatic Center, Track venue and the like which are attached to the UoM

The Olympics should be going to cities like this where the construction needed would be at most one or two niche venues and some transportation infrastructure.

Assuming attendance doesn't fall into a total tailspin, Orlando should host an Olympics - there are over 100,000 hotel rooms in the Orlando area, comparable to New York and Las Vegas, and well ahead of other major US cities. Disney's Wide World of Sports and UCF could make up the bulk of the venues.

I would hate to see the Olympics go away. But there's no reason to hold them anywhere but cities that have most of the infrastructure in place. Most any major US city would fit the bill.

One of the things that I found surprising is how few cities in Europe have the kinds of sports facilities that we have. Then again, under their system franchise owners cannot hold cities hostage to get new venues.

(09-03-2015 11:45 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-03-2015 11:27 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Have them in the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, or Korea.....you know....countries that actually have the infrastructure currently in place to support them.....or just do away with it all.

Why these idiots insist on putting them in terrible locations is beyond me. Same thing with the dopes that run the World Cup.

You know the reason. IOC members love the bribes. And many of the nations you mentioned aren't interested in that game anymore.

And Rio was picked partly to give point a certain finger at the US.