10 replies to this topic

[DRJWAREAGLE]

What are your thoughts on Langford's newest idea, the 2020 olympics?

[woob]

DRJWAREAGLE, on Jun 23 2008, 03:52 PM, said:

What are your thoughts on Langford's newest idea, the 2020 olympics?

no way we can compete with the larger cities!

[rtkenmore]

DRJWAREAGLE, on Jun 23 2008, 03:52 PM, said:

What are your thoughts on Langford's newest idea, the 2020 olympics?

Seeing as how Chicago is making a bid for the 2016 and from the sentiment that I've seen from most articles and such, they will be awarded the 2016 Olympics.  It will have been 20 years since the last time the Summer Games were held in the US.  Since the IOC likes to alternate the games from continent to continent, the most obvious choice for 2016 will be the Americas.  The games since the last US Summer Games have been in Australia, Europe, Asia and Europe.

Assuming that Chicago does host 2016, there's absolutely no way Birmingham would even be considered.  The USOC would not even allow Birmingham to submit a bid under those conditions.  Odds are that if Chicago won 2016, the USOC would not even submit bids for the following one or two Summer Games.  After Atlanta in '96, the USOC did not submit another bid to host until 2012.  And ultimately, whatever city that bids for the games to the IOC must be presented by the USOC first.  Taking that time line into consideration, if Chicago won the 2016 Games, the USOC would likely not allow a bid to be presented to the IOC again until the bidding for the 2028 or 2032 games.

Now assuming Chicago does not win the right to host in 2016, I think this would all but guarantee the America's the 2020 games as it would have been 24 years since the last Summer Games in America.  I don't, however, think Birmingham has a chance against cities such as LA, New York, possibly Chicago again, Phillidelphia, Boston and other much larger metropolitan areas interested in hosting.  We also have to consider that the 2020 games will be awarded in the summer of 2013.  Birmingham would have to have some major solutions in place to the transportation issues involved, the sports facilities that would be involved and funding.  FUNDING...  that's the big one.  Who in the hell is going to give Birmingham and Larry Langford the money it would require to fund the games considering the controversy surrounding him and his shady financial past dealings.  Jefferson County most likely can't do anything to help considering they are on the verge of filing bankruptcy theirselves.  And the way LaLa is going, he's going to have the city of Birmingham filing before long if he keeps funding more and more wacky ideas without the money to back up the funding.  You can only rob from Peter to pay Paul so much before there's nothing left to rob.

My personal opinion, Birmingham may eventually host the Summer Games but it won't be anytime in the near future.  There are too many other viable and established metro areas that have not hosted the games that will fight tooth and nail for the right before some second tier metro city like Birmingham would win the right from the USOC.  And there are certainly other cities that present a better image to the international community than Birmingham.  Purely speculating dates, I'd say Birmingham's first legitimate opportunity would be 2052 or after.  I'm assuming an American host in 2016 OR 2020 and then another American host in 2032 or 2036.

Of course, it's all speculation and opinion....

[SweetHomeColorado]

I'm sorry, but this makes me seriously doubt Langford's touch with reality, or at least wonder what he is smoking.  

No one in their right mind would even consider making a run at the Olympics for Birmingham.  What a colossal waste of time.  

Birmingham is no where near capable of even presenting a bid that would be slightly considered - transportation system?  venues?  financing?  hotels?  airpoft?

[Jim856796]

Birmingham can't host the Summer Olympics because

1. It is too small and Atlanta is about a few times larger than Birmingham
2. I am already rooting for Chicago to host the 2016 Olympics and I world rather have Birmingham host a Pan American Games
3. Birmingham doesn't have a good transportation system, partially adequate venues, not enough hotel rooms, and I don't know about its airport.
4. It doesn't have a sports franchise from the Big Four sports leagues. (NFL, MLB, NBA, or NHL).

[rtkenmore]

Jim856796, on Jun 27 2008, 02:04 AM, said:

Birmingham can't host the Summer Olympics because

1. It is too small and Atlanta is about a few times larger than Birmingham
2. I am already rooting for Chicago to host the 2016 Olympics and I world rather have Birmingham host a Pan American Games
3. Birmingham doesn't have a good transportation system, partially adequate venues, not enough hotel rooms, and I don't know about its airport.
4. It doesn't have a sports franchise from the Big Four sports leagues. (NFL, MLB, NBA, or NHL).

Not that I'm advocating or LaLa...  But seriously, these are your reasons???

1.  Small cities have hosted the games before (Helsinki).  There's no minimum limit on the size of the city that bids on the games so long as they provide an adequate bid that satisfies the other requirements of the IOC.  City size quite frankly doesn't really have anything to do with it.  Some might even argue that relatively smaller cities when compared to mega-opolis' would be better suited because they aren't as crowded.  Mass transit could easily become overwhelmed in cities like Chicago, New York, etc. during any Olympics because of the extremely large number of residents that use the mass transit system on a daily basis and then the increase of many millions of international tourists for the games.

2.  I think most of America is rooting for Chicago in 2016.

3.  The interstate system and major highways are adequate (not great though).  Most venues could actually be found within 120 mile radius that LaLa is referring to.  Between all the major college campuses and their facilities as well as some facilities that could be used in Atlanta even, venues wouldn't be an issue.  The only major venue missing is an Olympic Stadium which virtually no host has in place at the time they bid.  The stadium is usually a project not undertaken until the games are awarded.  The airport and hotel rooms is really the only truly valid reason I can find in your list.  The IOC requires something in the neighborhood of 40000 3star rooms at a minimum.  Birmingham comes no where close.

4.  What does a major sports team have to do with anything at all in regards to the Olympics?  It doesn't quite frankly.

[kayman]

I wouldn't say that it is impossible, but it is going to be a stretch to accomplish landing a bid.  I will say that Pan American Games and/or the Worlds' Fair are more financially feasible considering Birmingham tax bases is so limited at the moment.  However, I would be all for an Olympic bid for the city if the place can get its act together like Denver Metro has and have all the region's cities to band together and go for it.

[SweetHomeColorado]

Leonard23, on Jun 27 2008, 04:18 PM, said:

I wouldn't say that it is impossible, but it is going to be a stretch to accomplish landing a bid.  I will say that Pan American Games and/or the Worlds' Fair are more financially feasible considering Birmingham tax bases is so limited at the moment.  However, I would be all for an Olympic bid for the city if the place can get its act together like Denver Metro has and have all the region's cities to band together and go for it.

I live in Denver now after many years in Birmingham.  Denver definately has its act together in many ways, and the mayor is both progressive and practical (most of the time).

Langford needs to stop just spouting off big ideas that are far fetched and costly but get a lot of attention - domed stadium, Olympics, etc.  He should be doing the hard work of the details that will make Birmingham more livable vibrant city - pedestrian friendly development, an integrate public transit system that people will choose to use not just HAVE to use, business friendly environment for development in the central part of the city, and finally a stable well financed government.

[DruidCity]

Quote

I will say that Pan American Games and/or the Worlds' Fair are more financially feasible

I like the World's Fair idea. I mean, if Knoxville could pull it off years ago, why not Birmingham now ?

[The Memphian]

DruidCity, on Jul 2 2008, 12:58 PM, said:

I like the World's Fair idea. I mean, if Knoxville could pull it off years ago, why not Birmingham now ?

No World's Fair for Birmingham or any other U.S. city until we can restore membership in the BIE
http://www.usa-bie.org/

[kayman]

I will say this that although I highly doubt that the city will be able to land an Olympic bid for the 2020 games, the long-rang infastructure plan could be a hidden win.  This idea could spark some civic pride in this city that seems to be seriously lacking, all one has to do is pay attention to the forums and post on the Birmingham News site.  It would also bring to the light the serious infastructure issues such as an efficient regional transportation system, international attention, and possible business interests to the city.  

Even if one doesn't agree with Mayor Langford, and I really don't, I will admit this if Birmingham doesn't land this bid it could spark some major plan that help create regional cooperation.  Tampa, whose bid also failed, did get some major boosts to its civic pride, major involvement from the business community, and regional coordination from fellow cities like St. Petersburg and Orlando, so it could actually work here amongst our fellow cities within the metropolitan area, Tuscaloosa and possibly Anniston and Gadsden working with Birmingham to lobby for some major legislation in Montgomery.