Rochester/Buffalo are about an hour apart, right? Probably too far if the IOC wants "compact" games.

(06-22-2013 08:19 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  According to the folks on the Gamesbids forums, a lot of people in the IOC were interested in San Francisco hosting, but the 49ers moving to Santa Clara effectively killed that.

Chicago's 2016 bid was done in largely by the lack of a post-Olympic use for an Olympic stadium-unless if the Bears or Cubs move (no chance whatsoever) an Olympic stadium would be a complete waste.

In 2024 Turner Field will be 27 years old-the more time passes, the more likely the same strategy employed for the 1996 Games becomes likely. 2032 would probably be more likely for Atlanta to get the maximum utility out of Turner Field before using a new stadium.

I personally don't think Atlanta would get it in 2024, but they probably will host again-the United States is by far the IOC's most valuable TV partner.

Chicago's stadium, like London's, was going to be largely temporary. While the IOC may have wanted a more lasting impact from the games, it was not a deal breaker the biggest issues that plagued Chicago were funding sources and a hostility between the IOC and the USOC

Here are some articles that explain what happened

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...=113468287

http://www.sportspromedia.com/notes_and_..._analysis/

and here is the official candidate evaluation report

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10647013/IOC-Report