Cnnsi Writer lay forth her extremely half baked plan for Chicago bidding for the Olympics http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/maggie_haskins/07/08/chicago.2016/index.html Her is my issue: She states that soccer events could be held at some of the University fields! Maggs (can I call you Maggs) have you watched any Olympic soccer events? No, you don't have to answer that. I'm not sure which ignorance is greater: 1. Thinking that a 1,500 seat field could host an Olympic soccer event or 2. Total disregard that a state or the art, 20,000 seat soccer stadium will be sitting right in Bridgeview. Gupps, get your crack marketing team on this immediately!
Yes her glaring omission of Bridgeview aside......Sir Richard has repeated a billions times over that the Olympics are nothing but a venue building operation and nothing else. So he is opposed to bidding on the games in 2016. So I say dont even put this article in your realm of thinking. Not gonna happen in Sir Richard in office.
yeah maggie haskins articles are pretty much terrible every time. it's cool to be a chicago homer, but i read them and struggle to find a point every time. so basically it's almost like every BS thread.
This is true, that an Olympics won't happen here in Chi-town with King Richard II here, but I think in the next mayoral election next year, he finally will be voted out. The scandals and corruption have finally caught up to him. I can't wait, Daley needs to go. And possibly the next mayor will see the benefits of hosting an Olympiad.
Maggie Haskins does not know what she it talking about. Around 8 years ago Daley said in no uncertain terms Chicago would never again bid for an Olympics. He said the IOC was not an athletic organization but a construction company. He is right. FIFA is too. Both organizations set ridiculous rules that require hosts to build a whole series of white elephant facilities that will never be full and will always lose money. Portugal got Euro 2004 because they offered to build more stadiums than the other countries. They already had enough stadiums. The US was exempted in 1994 because they knew it would be a knockout at the box office. The Olympics are a financial disaster for the host city. Montreal is still trying to pay off the debt for the 1972 disaster. Sydney will be saddled with debt until 2030. Chicago should stay away and not wast 2 cents on this insanity. In my opinion, if you think Daley is corrupt, take a look at the IOC!
Not to nitpick or anything, but as memory serves, FIFA did not know WC94 would be a box office knockout. If anything, the US already had enough facilities in place where they would not have to build new stadiums and could therefore make a bigger profit. They also liked the US for two other reasons - 1. it is a BIG international tourist destination so they knew they would attract fans from other countries. 2. They wanted to build up soccer in the US because it represented a vast untapped market for soccer, similar to how the NBA and MLB is trying to build up their sports in China. I differ from everyone else on this thread in thinking that a Chicago Olympics would not be a bad idea. I have a hard time believing the IOC picks cities that promise to build more facilities. Being as corrupt as the IOC is, they probably end up picking the city that gives them the most perks and bribes the most. Who are the cities that resort to this? The ones who have weaker bids because they don't have the infrastructure or facilities. Daley doesn't want to bid because chances are the federal government will chip in money, which will prevent Daley from rigging the contract bidding process to favor his "friends". Federal jobs, especially construction, are harder to rig for local players unless they are tied to the federal government somehow, like Halliburton.
Show me a city that has made money off the Olympics in the last 35 years at least. The contract bidding will be rigged no matter who is in charge; the question is should public money be used to build duplicate facilities for the IOC to charge exhorbitant fees. We now have 9 per cent sales tax in Chicago, the highest of any large city in the US. It is a regressive tax because every student and shoeshine worker pays it. It is wasted because the increase was made necessary in large part for 80 million dollars in renovations to the Mausoleum On Thirty-Fifth Street, you know, the disaster designed by Mayor Reinsdorf. The Olympics have been a financial disater for every city that hosted them in recent years. Athens will be in debt for the rest of my lifetime to stage what I think were rigged events with acres of empty seats on TV in between the up close and personal baloney. Press reports have alleged that ATHLOC chair Gianna Angelopoulos-Daskalaki arranged for the contract killing of an Athens reporter looking into the alleged corruption where construction cost overruns were allegedly funnelled to construction companies controlled by her husband. Like everything the IOC touches it was botched; the reporter survived. Let some other city get into the mud and wrestle with the IOC, a match you are never going to win. We have enough of our own problems.
Salt Lake City Atlanta LA Lake Placid In the cases of these cities, they were also able to re-use or make permanent many of the venues they built for the Olympics. Remember, it is not necessarily bad to build new venues for the Olympics, WC, whatever. The key is what will be the LONG TERM benefit, not necessarily making a profit in the short term. Athens was a complete waste and the IOC let sentiment get in the way of common sense. I would not be surprised if we see the same problems in Beijing ('08 OLY) and South Africa ('10 WC) where they need substantial infrastructure improvements. Taking on debt is not necessarily a bad thing if it provides a long term benefit. It is when the debt becomes crippling that you have a problem. In the case of the US, there is a reason why international sports bodies keep awarding us games - because we know how to organize events that are profitable and provide a long term benefit. Daley's objections have to do with personal ego and the fact he will have less power in the planning and running of the games than he would like. If we get a new mayor after the next election, don't be surprised if Chicago is making a run for the Olympics within a few years.
None of those Olympics made money unless you pretend the infrastructure "improvements" didn't cost anything. I hope Daley does not lose the next election because the alternatives are worse. But that is another thread. Remember he staged the Democratic Convention here a few years ago taking many orders from the National Committee. That didn't seem to hurt his ego too much. The Olympics are a fiasco that we should stay as far away from as possible. Simon Kuper wrote in Saturday's London Financial Times that the Olympics have become an event where shponsors' guests stand in line to watch doped-up athletes. It is really much, much worse than that. The city has taken on lots of debt for sports fiascos (The Blue Ghost on 35th Street, the Eyesore by the Lakeshore that cost 9 times as much as the Firehouse). We don't need any more. Let somebody else lose their shirt and stage this shameful fiasco.
From carrying every single precint to out in one cycle? Yah, that's lucid. He's got a greater chance of marrying Queen Elizabeth and becoming the actual King of England than he does of losing the next election.
Yes, if you assume the infrastructure improvements are free. They aren't. They are still paying for them. If you believe every press release that comes down from Zurich I think World Com and Enron have some old press releases you might want to believe too. I don't think you can believe anything the IOC says. If you want to have a 16 per cent sales tax and ruined bond ratings in 2016 that is fine. Maybe the warm memories of completely empty stadiums watching women's wrestling and Synchronized Something or Other will provide some relief from the financial pain. The Olympics have become a complete joke. Let Chicago have the last laugh while someone else goes bankrupt. Daley is right about this and you know I am no fan of Daley. Keep in mind that Mayor Reinsdorf will not allow this. He vetoed a dome at Soldier Field and a Fire House in the city. He will not approve an Olympics even if he gets to design another disaster stadium with leg-o blocks.
Oh geez, not this... Because someone is too lazy to do any research, here's a good primer. The article does go on to note that: Barcelona, Atlanta and Munich seem to have done pretty well in this regard. Montreal and Syndey not quite so well.
I would not believe any "report" issued by Price Waterhouse Cooper or any other Big Eight (or is it now Four) accounting firm. Radio Deutche Welle is not a very good source either. Creative accounting and self-serving press releases can make the Titantic appear to be a great success. I think the deal you get with the "modern" Olympics is so rigged the host city can never make any money. We already have most of the facilities needed for a Summer Olympics but the IOC would make us build new facilities for esoteric, fake "sports" that nobody cares about. It is a recipe for disaster. Keep in mind that Chicago was very active trying to get the Olympics way back in the sixties and seventies and Daley's scepticism is based on some of those experiences. Most of the world could not care less about the Olympics. It is US hype that a lot of people laugh at. Chicago already has a stellar reputation among Americans, practically the only people that give a damn about the Olympics. We don't need a 12 billion dollar hole in the ground to salvage our reputation.
The only new facility built for LA was the velodrome (now reconstructed on the site of the HDC)... $250 mil surplus still pays for a lot of top-flight youth sports programs in LA to this day.
As far as making money and the Olympics are concerned, assessing the outcome is complex. In a lot of places, you see roughly 30 years of urban renewal in 6 or 7 years which is rather impressive. But true, who would want to have an Olympics these days with all the security issues and all the money you need to spend? I guess people are hoping for something similar to the "Barcelona" effect. Look at what the Olympics did for that city.
Well, apparently Da Mare is having second thoughts... http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-olympics27.html An Olympic flame at Bridgeview Bank Stadium in 11 years is not as far out of the question, unless Daley harbors a grudge that the Fire chose to build outside his town, in which case he has no one to blame but himself, or his staffers.
My wife is from Chicago and we talked about this the last time we were there. So many of the stadiums are already there - and Bridgeveiw, despite being overlooked by the SI writer, would definitely be in the mix - that it makes hosting the Olympics much easier. Between Northwestern, the Fire, Solider Field and the two baseball teams, you've got 5 venues holding 20K plus. The lake or the Chicago River or the lagoons in the parks are natural for the water events. The beach is a natural for volleyball. United Center, again Northwestern's hoops gym, the place at UIC where the Storm play, the McCormack (sp?) Center could host a lot. I mean, so many of the venues are already in place. Sure, some upgrades and improvements might need to be made but not many facilties would have ot be built. And you've already got a viable public transportation system with the L and the commuter rails. Yes, an athlete's village would need to be built, but, like London is doing, that could be done in the South Side and used to spur revitalization in an area that needs it. I'n not a native Chicagoan so I don't know a lot of the pitfalls that locals would know about, but from afar, I really don't think this idea is all that far fetched.
It's being pushed from business money, which means Daley won't have to go into the public till. I wonder what changes would need to be made to Soldier Field to put a track in? Probably have to cut out the first 10 rows or so.
Also don't forget about the Allstate Rosemizon, which is probably where the gymnastics will be. CUS is right...all you need to do is find a place to put in a track. Hell, even Northbrook has a velodrome!
Do the track and field events usually draw that many? I wonder if the track events are always held in the main stadium because - well, they've always been held in the main stadium. Is it possible that SF would host opening, closing, maybe soccer semis and final and that's basically all while track and field get hosted elsewhere? Also, I had forgotten about McCormick Place because it's not a sports venue. I could see that easily being adapted for a pool and stands for a couple thousand - wouldn't even take that much space. There would be plenty left for small stadium spaces for hardcourt Volleyball, badminton, ping pong, skee ball - and the annual printing trade show at the same time.
Yeah...they do. America's not a track country, but the rest of the world is big time into it. I'm not sure if it's traditional or just logicistical that the track be housed in the Olympic Stadium (which couldn't be anything other than Soldier Field), but the soccer would most definitely be relegated to Bridgeview, Ryan Field (hey, suck it Evanston, it's not a professional sporting event), Milwaukee's new stadium, and maybe some place like St. Louis or Madison...