This is a good wake up call to people that have called for cities to put in bids for Olympic games.

Nobody Wants To Host The 2022 Olympics (http://deadspin.com/nobody-wants-to-host-the-2022-olympics-1582151092?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebo ok&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow)

5 cities withdrew due to local citizens not wanting to foot the bill for it. Ukraine is a mess and will likely pull out.


There are only two healthy bids: Almaty, Kazakhstan, and Beijing, China. One's an oil-rich state ruled by a president-for-life, and the other's, well, China. That's no coincidence. With the Sochi games raising the bar to an absurd $51 billion, hosting the Olympics no longer looks like a winning proposition. The failed and aborted 2022 candidacies all have one thing in common: When actual citizens are allowed to have a say, they say they don't want the Olympics.

And some people in Tulsa actually thought it was a good idea for the much larger summer games.

You know... perhaps the Olympics should just set up shop in one city for good. I don't know why they have to be in a different city every time. Put the winter Olympics in Aspen or SLC and put the summer Olympics in Rio, Atlanta, or somewhere else suitable and keep it there. That would make more sense to me. The infrastructure could be built better. The olympic village could become a full time new urbanist environment, sales and taxes from it could go to general maintenance for four years or at least contribute something....

does anyone think that would be good?

You know... perhaps the Olympics should just set up shop in one city for good. I don't know why they have to be in a different city every time. Put the winter Olympics in Aspen or SLC and put the summer Olympics in Rio, Atlanta, or somewhere else suitable and keep it there. That would make more sense to me. The infrastructure could be built better. The olympic village could become a full time new urbanist environment, sales and taxes from it could go to general maintenance for four years or at least contribute something....

does anyone think that would be good?

I don't, plupan. Changing politics and global situations would make that very problematic. Would we want to go to Russia for the Olympics every four years? Would the Russians want to come to the US every time? It just won't work.

Or nations can just stop spending billions of dollars on Olympic infrastructure. Russia used its vast national wealth to bring the Olympics to Sochi. You won't find congress passing a bill to help bring the Olympics to a U.S. host city nor should it.

Or nations can just stop spending billions of dollars on Olympic infrastructure. Russia used its vast national wealth to bring the Olympics to Sochi. You won't find congress passing a bill to help bring the Olympics to a U.S. host city nor should it.

There are still multiple US cities (at least in the early rounds) that look to spend their money on bringing the games to their city.

What about a 8 city rotation? Pick cities in China/Asia, Americas, one in Australia, Europe/Africa. Then just update as needed

Or nations can just stop spending billions of dollars on Olympic infrastructure. Russia used its vast national wealth to bring the Olympics to Sochi. You won't find congress passing a bill to help bring the Olympics to a U.S. host city nor should it.

What? Russia went so far into debt over the Sochi Games its not even funny. $50 billion more or less. And all it got for it was cheaply built hotels, nonfunctioning sewer systems, and facilities that are already decaying.

The IOC should just face the truth. In an increasingly "shrinking" world, the winter games just lack the sex appeal of the summer games, and even saying that about the summer games is a bit of a stretch. Nearly all Olympics lose money. At least with the summer games, it can be a boost to whatever city on the world stage...most people outside the US probably had never heard of Atlanta before 1996...but winter games are just too limited in appeal to do the same.

I think Atlanta is a fairly well known city if I recall

The IOC needs to do something because their model is broken. Here is what JTF would do.

1) Move the Summer and Winter Olympics back to the same year like they used to be
2) All Summer games would be in Athens.
3) All Winter games would be in Switzerland.

The IOC has shown to be a rather corrupt (well, less-than-stellar?) organization, and the Olympics of this early 21st century surely don't hold the same kind of magic that they did in the late 20th century. Perhaps that's because there's no more cold war, no more days-long controversy about eastern-bloc judges shafting western-bloc athletes, the mixture(s) of pro and amateur athletes, heck, even changing tastes in sports that just seem to have taken the "edge" off the Olympics.

I remember as a kid what a big deal the Olympics were; ABC carried them overnight, there was no Internet or 24-hour news cycle to divulge time-zone-centric results, and most of the nation was tuned in. But these days, with the dilution of entertainment, the dilution of sports interests, and perhaps the lack of strong US participant presence in some of the higher-profile sports, has made the Olympics a lot less, well...Olympian in importance.

The IOC has shown to be a rather corrupt (well, less-than-stellar?) organization, and the Olympics of this early 21st century surely don't hold the same kind of magic that they did in the late 20th century. Perhaps that's because there's no more cold war, no more days-long controversy about eastern-bloc judges shafting western-bloc athletes, the mixture(s) of pro and amateur athletes, heck, even changing tastes in sports that just seem to have taken the "edge" off the Olympics.

I remember as a kid what a big deal the Olympics were; ABC carried them overnight, there was no Internet or 24-hour news cycle to divulge time-zone-centric results, and most of the nation was tuned in. But these days, with the dilution of entertainment, the dilution of sports interests, and perhaps the lack of strong US participant presence in some of the higher-profile sports, has made the Olympics a lot less, well...Olympian in importance.

I think that is in large part because they switch from Olympics every 4 years to every 2 years in 1986. It was much more magical when it was at 4 year intervals.

The IOC needs to do something because their model is broken. Here is what JTF would do.

1) Move the Summer and Winter Olympics back to the same year like they used to be
2) All Summer games would be in Athens.
3) All Winter games would be in Switzerland.

Funny, I was just thinking exactly the same thing as I read this.

The IOC needs to do something because their model is broken. Here is what JTF would do.

1) Move the Summer and Winter Olympics back to the same year like they used to be
2) All Summer games would be in Athens.
3) All Winter games would be in Switzerland.

I had this same thought as well. Both sets of Olympics should happen in the same year and I thought Athens was the obvious choice to host the Summer Olympics in perpetuity.

As far as winter olympics go, I guess Switzerland works. Didn't really care one way or the other on that one.

Tulsa's all like...

http://i.imgur.com/pLUwOqn.jpg

Rumor mill sez that IOC is worried about Rio screwing it up.
'Secret Plan' for London to Host 2016 Olympics Amid Rio Delays (http://news.yahoo.com/secret-plan-london-host-2016-olympics-amid-rio-171224141.html)

Rumor mill sez that IOC is worried about Rio screwing it up.
'Secret Plan' for London to Host 2016 Olympics Amid Rio Delays (http://news.yahoo.com/secret-plan-london-host-2016-olympics-amid-rio-171224141.html)

They are well on their way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/world/americas/preparations-for-rio-olympics-the-worst-committee-official-says.html?_r=0

Has there ever been an Olympics Plan B like that?

The IOC needs to do something because their model is broken. Here is what JTF would do.

1) Move the Summer and Winter Olympics back to the same year like they used to be
2) All Summer games would be in Athens.
3) All Winter games would be in Switzerland.

Lol Athens had to bring in cruise ships for hotel rooms because their infrastructure was so far behind what was necessary for the Olympics.

Has there ever been an Olympics Plan B like that?

At least not recently, construction has been behind schedule before but most have the venues finished at least a year ahead of time to host practice events. There are several buildings that at least seem like they should take at least 18 months that are still either a field of grass or barely look like they just finished leveling the ground.


Lol Athens had to bring in cruise ships for hotel rooms because their infrastructure was so far behind what was necessary for the Olympics.

Still a far better plan and post game result than many of the cities organizing had.

Lol Athens had to bring in cruise ships for hotel rooms because their infrastructure was so far behind what was necessary for the Olympics.

That is why the same city hosting the event makes sense. Also, have you ever been on a cruise ship? There is a reason people vacation on them.

Tulsa's all like...

http://i.imgur.com/pLUwOqn.jpgWell, if they do get it, it will end up being a crappier city than it already is which is unfortunate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/sports/olympics/new-york-drops-bid-for-the-2024-olympics.html?_r=0

They are well on their way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/world/americas/preparations-for-rio-olympics-the-worst-committee-official-says.html?_r=0

Ugh. The IOC will deny this "officially" until they light the torch in London (or wherever). It would be a gaffe of epic proportions to blow something like the Olympics.

What gets me is that there apparently is no "due diligence' done by the IOC to assess the ability of a bidding city to actually follow through with a hosting bid??

What a mess.

I seem to recall a slow, winding deterioration of each Olympic host venue dating back to Atlanta - higher bills, higher facility costs, increased concerns about venues, ticket sales, the works....

I think that is in large part because they switch from Olympics every 4 years to every 2 years in 1986. It was much more magical when it was at 4 year intervals.

Think there's some validity in that. It isn't as special when it happen every other year. I think they were concerned about the Olympics falling out of the "public eye" when the originally opted to stagger the starts like that, but I'm not sure if it hasn't had just the opposite effect - they're too frequqnt even if the suite of games is entirely different due to summer/winter.

Hard to say. Like I said earlier, I'm just not sure they're socially that big a deal anymore, regardless of the iteration cycle.

Think there's some validity in that. It isn't as special when it happen every other year. I think they were concerned about the Olympics falling out of the "public eye" when the originally opted to stagger the starts like that, but I'm not sure if it hasn't had just the opposite effect - they're too frequqnt even if the suite of games is entirely different due to summer/winter.

Hard to say. Like I said earlier, I'm just not sure they're socially that big a deal anymore, regardless of the iteration cycle.

One thing that is kind of odd is the choice between popularity of the sports and the Olympics being the pinnacle showcase of the sport, even during Olympic years. Football (Soccer), Basketball, Hockey, Tennis, Baseball (when it was included); while they do provide a different interest in which team/players you want to win, none of them are the highest event for the sport. There are probably others too, just I am not as familiar with where they rate. Then there are some of the events where the selection for making a national team that excels at the sport will be tougher than that nation to go and sweep that event.

That is why the same city hosting the event makes sense. Also, have you ever been on a cruise ship? There is a reason people vacation on them.

That city nearly burst at the seams trying to host the Olympics. London would be a far better permenant home.

I have doubts even making a couple cities permanent hosts would make it profitable/breakeven for the cities, yeh there could be some more revenue sharing but the politics of fixing the events perpetually is a big enough hurtle already, I guess it could at least make them less wasteful. The best choices to locate you end up just displacing a lot of normal tourist activity, they may still have to rebuild temporary venues that really just are not going to be worth keeping between games, plus at least a few large stadiums are going to be pretty much empty between since they are just not that popular a sport with the local population. Then there is the athletic village and media centers that are huge and no occupant is going to be eagerly looking for a clause that they get them kicked out for at least a month every four years. Then you have other operations costs and plenty of people/business were not happy about the disruption to them for just one set of games.

You could lease them out or do something like time shares...

As long as the Olympics keep switching cities the IOC is going to demand that winner be able to "top" what the previous host has done. I agree that a permanent home must be found or perhaps a rotation between all of the continents. As much as I would love for the US to host the Olympics every couple of years there are a lot of countries that would not like that idea. Switzerland is a nice choice because of its well defined neutrality. It's climate does make it possible to host both, although with its elevation it would give certain countries an advantage to a small degree.

If you rotate the host city then you solve nothing. Even a 4 city rotation would be 16 years between hosting so new facilities would need to be built in each city every 16 years. The only plan that makes sense is for one city to host forever. Also, if a sport has a professional league then it doesn't belong in the Olympics - so no basketball, hockey, etc... Keep the Olympics armature.

The IOC needs to do something because their model is broken. Here is what JTF would do.

1) Move the Summer and Winter Olympics back to the same year like they used to be
2) All Summer games would be in Athens.
3) All Winter games would be in Switzerland.I really like your list! Just curious, what made you pick Switzerland?

Neutral country and small enough cities with-in the country won't fight over it every 4 years.

Maybe we can get some countries with adjoining borders to cede some land as a "sport capitol" similar to federal districts that don't belong to a state (e.g. Washington DC, Canberra, etc).

That is why the same city hosting the event makes sense. Also, have you ever been on a cruise ship? There is a reason people vacation on them.

Athens bringing in cruise ships made great sense to me. Why build massive housing (on the extremely cheap plan) that you'll only need in a block once, when you could rent something that goes away when you don't need it?

They would need to make a decision quickly if they wanted to move it to London. They already converted a lot of the Olympic facilities to more practical uses. The Olympic stadium is currently underconstruction to be used as a soccer stadium.

They would need to make a decision quickly if they wanted to move it to London. They already converted a lot of the Olympic facilities to more practical uses. The Olympic stadium is currently underconstruction to be used as a soccer stadium.

Several of the venues in London were either temporary or had temporary expansions that are all surely already removed, like the one guy said there is not a plan B for this.

The Olympics has become a circus. Some events I like to watch but not all the hoopla that goes with it. Pare it down and focus on the events only. The IOC needs to take a long walk off a short pier.

The Olympics has become a circus. Some events I like to watch but not all the hoopla that goes with it. Pare it down and focus on the events only. The IOC needs to take a long walk off a short pier.

It has become a coming out party for 3rd world cities - who aren't ready to come out.

That's why Tulsa applied.

Athens bringing in cruise ships made great sense to me. Why build massive housing (on the extremely cheap plan) that you'll only need in a block once, when you could rent something that goes away when you don't need it?

That is actually the ultimate solution. Compared to most European hotels I would rent a room on a cruise ship in a heartbeat.

I'm not sure I can go with everyone on this "Let's keep it in one city"

The Olympics is a lot more than just one sport. It's a world travel event…It's like the World Cup in that regard.

What needs to happen though is that we need to stop with the madness that everything always has to be bigger and better. Plenty of places have relatively close to adequate facilities that they wouldn't need to entirely rebuild a new set of infrastructure. Furthermore, the Olympics ought to be limited to cities with, I don't know, like 4,000,000+ for the Summer and 2,000,000+ for the winter. Sochi is a city of <500,000 people…what the hell are they doing hosting the Olympics.

And the Olympics could take a page out of the World Cup book and have events in different parts of a country as well.

I'm not sure I can go with everyone on this "Let's keep it in one city"

The Olympics is a lot more than just one sport. It's a world travel event…It's like the World Cup in that regard.

What needs to happen though is that we need to stop with the madness that everything always has to be bigger and better. Plenty of places have relatively close to adequate facilities that they wouldn't need to entirely rebuild a new set of infrastructure. Furthermore, the Olympics ought to be limited to cities with, I don't know, like 4,000,000+ for the Summer and 2,000,000+ for the winter. Sochi is a city of <500,000 people…what the hell are they doing hosting the Olympics.

And the Olympics could take a page out of the World Cup book and have events in different parts of a country as well.

I agree. The Olympics should stay in large cities that already have the infrastructure in place.

I agree. The Olympics should stay in large cities that already have the infrastructure in place.

No city has all the venues/infrastructure in place, some have several, even then though a lot of those would still need renovations and or a lot of equipment to meet the standards. As good a public transit system London already had, they needed to have upgrades to host; Athlete's villages and the media centers are going to be universally missing. Which is why there is no easy option if the problems in Rio continue.

Slightly related topic...we (the US) may end up getting another World Cup soon after all

Report: $5 million in payments made in exchange for Qatar 2022 votes | ProSoccerTalk (http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/31/report-5-million-in-payments-made-in-exchange-for-qatar-2022-votes/#comments)

Slightly related topic...we (the US) may end up getting another World Cup soon after all

Report: $5 million in payments made in exchange for Qatar 2022 votes | ProSoccerTalk (http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/31/report-5-million-in-payments-made-in-exchange-for-qatar-2022-votes/#comments)

I am surprised it only took five million, maybe there was more in other nations but it is more politically expedient not to go into that on other continents.

Make it part of "Burning Man". Sleep in a tent and bring your own water. Summer games only of course.

I think there should be a rotation of just a few cities that host them.

Summer
-------
London
Athens
Beijing
Sydney
Los Angeles

Winter
------
Vancouver
Salt Lake City
Nagano
Torino
St. Moritz

Personally, I love the Olympics. The summer games have become so vast with so many different sports, I would like to see some of the games switched to the winter. I know it would never happen because it would interfere with the regular seasons, but I would love to see basketball changed to the winter games. It would certainly add a lot more interest.

It would be a terrible loss for the world to see them go the way of World's Fairs. Perhaps the answer is something like revolving sites as others have brought up......sort of like the BCS. Maybe 8-10 locations with facilities that can be reused.

Vancouver? No, nice city but if you are gonna give Canada a host city it begins and ends with Calgary. Weather too variable at Vancouver.

What, you don't think Canada would want to spend billions on making and storing snow? :-P

Once again, how does rotating cities solve the financial problem? The whole problem here is the expense and resources that goes into building the venues, only to have most of them torn down or reallocated after the games are over. It would be like OKC building a brand new WCWS venue every 4 years instead of improving the same facility.

So make everything "sturdy but disassemble-able" so all the venues can travel like a carnival?


(mostly kidding... mostly)

So make everything "sturdy but disassemble-able" so all the venues can travel like a carnival?
(mostly kidding... mostly)

It looks like the Ski Jump is going to be a little late.

http://www.northescambia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/jackandjill10.jpg

So make everything "sturdy but disassemble-able" so all the venues can travel like a carnival?


(mostly kidding... mostly)

It's not that crazy.

Shayba Arena - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shayba_Arena)

So make everything "sturdy but disassemble-able" so all the venues can travel like a carnival?


(mostly kidding... mostly)

London looked into that for at least the Basketball Arena (I do not remember how they were proposing to ship it to Rio), do not know if any other venues were considered, it apparently was neither cost effective nor desired by Rio.

This might be the topic for its own thread but do we need 2 Olympic threads?

What would you all think about not having a US Olympic team and letting each state have their own team? The EU doesn't have a team; they still are represented by their individual member states. It would allow a lot more athletes to participate. Sure not every state would compete in every sport and it is possible that states like Oklahoma might not even have a Winter Olympic team, but that is okay.

This might be the topic for its own thread but do we need 2 Olympic threads?

What would you all think about not having a US Olympic team and letting each state have their own team? The EU doesn't have a team; they still are represented by their individual member states. It would allow a lot more athletes to participate. Sure not every state would compete in every sport and it is possible that states like Oklahoma might not even have a Winter Olympic team, but that is okay.

LOL, first the Olympic committees would never go for it. Outside of the minority of sports that have the well established pro leagues, large base like swimming/gymnastics and/or endorsement opportunities most of the national teams barely can collect the funding for coaches, equipment, travel and get the likely candidates to medal funding to cover standard bills; others can not even afford to do that. Second I do not see other countries being that interested in it either and the EU is not a country.

Other than that it pretty much guarantees worse over all results in people's team, it will decrease there interest to watch the sports most go on to ignore the next four years.

Oklahoma would not have much of a summer team as well, I think only like five were sent that are 'from Oklahoma' to London, we sent more that train in Oklahoma due to the present national system. Also, you do not get to just send how many you want, there are qualification before the Olympics even start. Unless this some how leads to more support in general there is the distinct possibility it could lead to less US athletes making it to the Olympics.

I don't see any way it could lead to less athletes and as far as training - the rest of the world shares training venues. I wouldn't expect each state to build their own rowing venue. If Oklahoma sent 5 athletes to London how many do you think we would send if Oklahoma had its own Olympic team? Surely we would qualify more people. I actually came up with this idea after analyzing company executives in countries with smaller populations. How hard is it to rise to the top in a country of 350 million compared to a country of 10 million. We simply don't get the best out of most people because there isn't enough room at the top to do that. Instead of one big social pyramid it would be better to make more small pyramids.

I don't see any way it could lead to less athletes and as far as training - the rest of the world shares training venues. I wouldn't expect each state to build their own rowing venue. If Oklahoma sent 5 athletes to London how many do you think we would send if Oklahoma had its own Olympic team? Surely we would qualify more people. I actually came up with this idea after analyzing company executives in countries with smaller populations. How hard is it to rise to the top in a country of 350 million compared to a country of 10 million. We simply don't get the best out of most people because there isn't enough room at the top to do that. Instead of one big social pyramid it would be better to make more small pyramids.

Only problem is we don't get to make the decision about sending a team - think the Olympic organization only hands out those invites as it were to nations, not the states within them. Or at least the organizing bodies for the relevant sports. They're not interested in conducting endless rounds of qualifying to winnow out the Cleveland County Top 10 500 Meter Dash Winners to advance to the Oklahoma 500 Meter Dash Olympic Qualifying Finals - especially when you know ahead of time that the chances of ANY of those players denting the Olympic elite is vanishingly small.

I don't see any way it could lead to less athletes and as far as training - the rest of the world shares training venues. I wouldn't expect each state to build their own rowing venue. If Oklahoma sent 5 athletes to London how many do you think we would send if Oklahoma had its own Olympic team? Surely we would qualify more people. I actually came up with this idea after analyzing company executives in countries with smaller populations. How hard is it to rise to the top in a country of 350 million compared to a country of 10 million. We simply don't get the best out of most people because there isn't enough room at the top to do that. Instead of one big social pyramid it would be better to make more small pyramids.

There are many if not most events where they are restricted on slots people can qualify for and the existing limits between one to a few individuals/teams per country does not allow them to participate, if we are doing it than China and India ought to be allow to send somewhere around 200 teams, the next several countries would be allow like 15 to 30 teams each. Also add in another possible 70-ish of the dependent states teams, since the rule that excludes them from having their own team ought to be out the door. There are a few sports we might get a few more in but there are going to be others that we would be the ones pushed out. Plus if you know your ranked like 30th in the country and projected to come in around last if you make it, would that really be much of a motivator to put in the ridiculous amount of time and dedication it takes or for any group to sponsor them.

There is the issue especially initially, where the percentage of athletes who are from the same state there is funding donated is not going to match up all that well and break up existing teams, of course people could move to the state that would fund them and become a resident but then what is the point of doing this to begin with.