Today, Washington entered the fray for the 2024 Olympics, becoming the seventh different American city to express interest in joining that race. The 2024 host won't be announced until 2017 (in fact, the 2020 host won't even be announced until next week), and the USOC hasn't even decided if an American bid will be put forth, but with the number of cities coming out an declaring their interest, it certainly looks like a bid is inevitable.
Whether or not the U.S. should bid for the 2024 Olympics is a completely different topic (my vote would be "No," a 2026 Winter bid makes much more sense, and would stand a better chance of winning). Neither is sizing up any international competition, which would be a pointless exercise at this point anyway. We don't know where the 2020 Games will be yet, and the two cities that don't win will likely re-up as candidates (a Tokyo win would all but assure a slew of European bids, as well, since that would make 12 years between European hosts).
Instead, let's compare the seven American cities that have already declared their interest against each other, while also keeping in mind that Toronto may bid, and an Olympics in Toronto would further extend the American hosting drought that by 2024 will be 28 years.
Tulsa-When Tulsa first announced it wanted to host the Olympics, I honestly thought it was a joke. But evidently they're serious. Can't blame them for dreaming, but there's no chance in hell the Olympics will ever be in Tulsa, Oklahoma. We'll let them have their cute little fantasy, though.
San Diego-My biggest problem with this bid is that they would want to co-host with Tijuana, Mexico. I didn't think that was allowed, but evidently the IOC rules have changed. Regardless, San Diego doesn't need Tijuana. If they do it with them, everything would just be weird. If they do it without them, there'd be a whole lot of resentment. Either way, there are other American cities better equipped to handle hosting the Olympics.
Dallas-Dallas is certainly capable of hosting the Olympics. The size, population, prestige and money are all there. Also no issue with venues. There are plenty of professional/college facilities in and around the Dallas/Fort Worth area that they're ahead of the curve in that regard. The big issue though is the summer Texas heat. The Rangers play almost all of their home games in July and August, even on the weekends, at night because the heat is so oppressive. Think that wouldn't be a major concern? Ask Doha.
Los Angeles-LA has hosted the Olympics twice. That's the only reason I put them in the middle of my list. Sure, London just hosted its third Olympics, but the difference between London and LA is that the number of cities capable of hosting an Olympics in the U.S. is far greater than in Great Britain. I have nothing against LA or an LA bid. I just think other American cities that have never hosted the Olympics (or necessarily even been an official candidate) should get the chance before LA goes for a third time.
Washington-I rank today's entrant, Washington, third among the interested American cities. The IOC likes capitals, which would certainly work in Washington's favor. They also have plenty of room in the DC/Maryland/Virginia area, and I'm sure they'd probably go as far as Baltimore for some events. Likewise, they've got plenty of colleges and pro arenas that they wouldn't have to do much building. The public support is there, the backdrop would be beautiful, and Washington certainly has plenty of hotel rooms. Another plus is that Congress is out of session in the summer, so the government and the Olympics really wouldn't get in each other's way. Should this Washington bid amount to something more, it would be a very solid choice.
Boston-The differences between these top cities are all very minor. In fact, it really comes down to preference. I just think an Olympics in Boston would be slightly cooler than an Olympics in Washington. The biggest thing in Boston's favor could also be something that would work against it--it would be an Olympics for all of New England. Regardless, Boston loves its sports, so support for the Olympics would be easy to get (although, the back page would still probably belong to the Red Sox). And Boston is a college town, which means there are plenty of pre-existing venues all over the city.
Philadelphia-If the only cities up for a potential American bid are the ones that have already declared their interest, Philadelphia would be my pick. I've been saying for years that Philadelphia is one of the American cities best equipped to host the Olympics. Philly bid in 2016, but the USOC chose Chicago instead. Philadelphia's ready, though, and would be an excellent choice. Everything that's needed is already in place, it's on the East coast (which NBC would likely prefer), Philly fans are ridiculously passionate, and the Olympics would add a wonderful chapter to the city's rich sporting history. Most importantly, I think a Philadelphia bid would have the greatest chance of success against international competition that will be stacked. If the ultimate goal is seeing the Olympics finally return to American soil, people would be smart to back the City of Brotherly Love.
With that in mind, Philadelphia is not the ideal American Olympic city. I'm still holding out hope that my hometown of New York will eventually put together another bid, and be successful this time, but I wouldn't even make New York the frontrunner in this race. My stance on the ideal American city to make an Olympic bid has been the same for the past few years. What city is that? San Francisco. If San Francisco ever decides it wants to bid for the Olympics again, it will immediately jump to the front of the line among American contenders. Not only that, San Francisco would instantly rank very highly among all potential host cities. I'm that confident an Olympics in San Francisco would be amazing.
No comments:
Post a Comment