By DJH
I’m starting to get sick of politics. Despicable news, despicable actions, despicable politicians. I’m tired of it. So today, I’m going to focus on something a bit different. Unfortunately there’ll still be politics involved- but to a much lesser degree.
I don’t know if you’ve heard of this, but on September 13 of this year- representatives of the city of Los Angeles will be heading down to Lima, Peru. Their objective is simple: finalize any support for their bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic Games. Their opponents will be Paris, France, and Budapest, Hungary. Until Donald Trump was elected, LA were considered the slight favorites (largely due to Paris having multiple major terrorist attacks in recent years). But since his election, and since his implementation of the “Muslim Ban” that isn’t a ban (even though he calls it that), the city’s Olympic stock has fallen. It is now a tossup between Paris and LA with Budapest likely to fall in the first round. (Side note- Budapest is considered a
learning city; many say that their focus is on 2028)
Now, the 2024 bid process has already been interesting. The process basically began with 11 cities in contention. Other than the final three candidates, the cities were:
-Berlin, Germany
-Boston, Massachusetts
-Dallas, Texas
-Hamburg, Germany
-Rome, Italy
-San Diego, California
-San Francisco, California
-Washington, DC
San Diego and Dallas were rejected early on by the USOC, with Washington, San Francisco, and Boston joining LA as the final candidates for their nomination. But the shock? LA is the USOC’s second choice. Their original choice was Boston.
Boston’s bid was submitted to the USOC on September 12, 2014 chosen on January 8, 2015- and within eight months, the bid was dead. Why? The bid was beyond awful. Just as an example- the Olympic Stadium was set to be in Widett Circle. The problem? The businesses in Widett Circle all openly stated they had no interest in leaving. The 60,000 seat stadium likely would take four years to build, use, and then deconstruct (yes- it was a temporary stadium). And from what I understand, after the Olympics, Widett Circle and nearby areas would’ve been turned into apartments. This would likely add another five years on to how long the Olympic implications would be for it. Ultimately, on July 28, 2015, the bid was fully canceled. On September 1, 2015, LA was ultimately chosen- and they haven’t changed since.
But the 2024 bidding race has also had some intriguing moments from outside the US. Italy’s capital city originally announced their bid in February of 2015, but on September 21, 2016, it had ceased due to fiscal problems (officially ended on October 11, but was announced on September 21). Germany had two bids presented- Berlin and Hamburg. They ultimately chose the latter on March 16, 2015, but with a massive amount of public push back, Hamburg’s bid was cancelled on November 29, 2015, and Berlin ultimately declined to bid. Perennial bidders Baku, Azerbaijan, and Doha, Qatar, didn’t bid despite being expected to. Toronto, Canada also declined to bid- though rumors persisted up until the deadline for submitting bids came and went.
With that said, it is likely that the 2024 Summer Olympic Games will end up in one of two cities: Paris, France, or Los Angeles, California. And that’s where a problem arises.
Let’s say the games end up in LA. The big pro for the games is that they’ll only need one or two permanent new venues, and most of the other venues are planned/existing. The big problem is the cost. The cost of the Olympics can get upwards of $20 BILLION dollars. That would probably pay for all of Trump’s wall.
But another question arises. Let’s say, worst case scenario, it ends up being $25 billion. The temporary stadiums don’t get torn down as fast as they were originally intended. LA gets about two months’ worth of exposure. Is it worth it? LA is already an extremely well known town- probably one of the most known in the entire world. Their sporting culture is, by no means, failing. Heck- it’s easily among the top sporting cultures in the US. So it doesn’t need that. It doesn’t need the infrastructure- or at least, the infrastructure an Olympic bid would provide.
So… Why is LA even bidding? Is it even worth their bidding?
And this brings me to a point I’ve long considered. One I’ve asked about but never gotten many answers.
Looking past the Olympics, there is another major international sporting event that the US has hosted before. The FIFA World Cup. The FIFA World Cup rivals the Olympics for international viewership- largely because soccer is the most popular sport in the world. And because of that, you need a LOT of accommodations and actually good stadiums.
The US is considered a backup host- in case the original ones back out. The reason why is because the US currently has 13 stadiums that can hold 90,000 people or more. The US has what it takes to host it- and it wouldn’t even need to bat an eye.
Many have also considered the US a backup host for the Olympics- likely in a sort of national endeavor since many cities would need to build some venues.
My question is… Is this good for the US? To be considered a backup, or to even be considered for hosting the events regardless. Is it?
Chicago’s failed bid would’ve killed what was left of the city, I think. The venues were beyond horrible. The backup plans were nonexistent. And the legacy plan seemed more like a “What Olympics?” plan instead of a legacy plan…
New York’s bid wasn’t as bad- but it definitely wasn’t as good as LA’s.
And so on, and so on. The US hasn’t hosted an Olympics or the FIFA World Cup since Salt Lake City in 2002. They’ve bid for four since then (three Summer Olympics and one World Cup), and while LA is still up in the air- the other three failed (though corruption is very likely in the World Cup bid’s case).
So I’ll leave you with these questions, and I’d love your answers.
Is it good for the US to be considered a backup venue for the Olympics and the FIFA World Cup?
Is it even worth it for the US to bid for these games?
