Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We don't need the Olympics in the Boston area. We are not some place out to sacrifice fiscal responsibility in order to make a mark on the international scene. Boston, by virtue of its history, arts, culture, science, industry, hospitals, and universities already do that.
It should be no surprise that the public in the greater Boston area were not willing to pay exorbitant sums to host a sports event. Massachusetts, though it may be sports crazed, is probably only area in the US with all its major league sports teams playing in privately owned venues that were built with no direct public monies.
L.A. also doesn't use public money to build stadiums -- Staples Center (Lakers, Clippers, Kings) and Dodger Stadium (Dodgers) were privately financed and built. (And both of the 2 proposed NFL stadiums are as well.)
It's too bad there isn't a mountain within a 1.5-2 hour drive of Boston with the necessary vertical drop to host the alpine events. Because if there was, Boston would be a great city to host the winter Olympics.
I will root for whatever city the USOC puts up now that the Boston bid is dead. I don't understand how people can be so negative towards the fact that Boston was the USOC's first choice. I think our best chance of hosting the Olympics next will be the 2026 Winter Olympics and Denver should put up a bid.
Hopefully this finally makes people realize that all the New England fanfare is at least two hours away from Boston.
The way people talk about New England's scenery and Boston, make it out like Boston's in the White Mountains.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,774 posts, read 23,921,615 times
Reputation: 14706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezter
Nice. LA is a much better choice imo
Just wish another city that hasn't hosted was bidding
I just can't think of another US city that can support the infrastructure needed to host the Olympics pulling it off as well as LA could. LA is already morphing into something very different in the 21st century. 1984 is getting more distant in terms of what LA was back then. And lets face it, a whole world of international cultures is already ever present in LA running the whole gamut. This native Bostonian supports Los Angeles 2024.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,774 posts, read 23,921,615 times
Reputation: 14706
On another note, I wonder if this will get Boston blacklisted from ever hosting the Olympics, the same way Denver was when they turned down hosting the 76 Winter Olympics.
I just can't think of another US city that can support the infrastructure needed to host the Olympics pulling it off as well as LA could. LA is already morphing into something very different in the 21st century. 1984 is getting more distant in terms of what LA was back then. And lets face it, a whole world of international cultures is already ever present in LA running the whole gamut. This native Bostonian supports Los Angeles 2024.
Yeah, I still think LA is a great choice and has everything needed compared to most cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert_SW_77
On another note, I wonder if this will get Boston blacklisted from ever hosting the Olympics, the same way Denver was when they turned down hosting the 76 Winter Olympics.
I doubt it. The OC probably won't think of Denver because they won the games and bailed, leaving them to scramble for a new host quickly. Boston didn't stay in the running long enough to win so it wasn't really a slap in the face.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.