Boston 2020 Olympics

Boston + Barcelona Effect = Awesome.

Sailing: Rhode Island is, in almost every aspect, better for sailing that Boston harbor. Marblehead and Newport are two of the biggest sailing towns in the world. Having sailing in Newport would still be a very compact games, compared to some other cities. I agree with czsz, though; that with such an abundance of water and such a beautiful coast, it would be a shame not to sail either on the Charles or in the harbor.

I'm not entirely sure of IOC requirements for Olympic courses, but collegiate/high school sailing all takes place on the Charles. The only problem would be the 49er/Tornado(if multihulls comes back) fleets, they wouldn't have enough room for sure. They really wouldn't even have enough wind in Boston, they'd almost certainly have to go to Newport...or have a really boring race. Like Qingdao.
 
Does anyone know how much of the broadcast rights payout goes to the host city to actually put on the games?
 
The idea of Boston actually hosting the Olympics strikes me as a bit...insane.

That said, I'll inject a little insanity into the discussion:

  • Construct a new international airport at Hanscom Field, with a high-speed rail connection to Downtown via Cambridge;
  • Redevelop the present site of Logan Airport as an all-inclusive Olympic Village, with many large-scale venues on site;
  • Run a spur of the Red Line under the harbor to the site;
  • Post-games, turn the site into a new residential and entertainment center, with the water-edges functioning as urban wilds, much as they did before Logan was built.

Sure it's crazy, but...
 
Beton Brut said:
The idea of Boston actually hosting the Olympics strikes me as a bit...insane.

That said, I'll inject a little insanity into the discussion:

  • Construct a new international airport at Hanscom Field, with a high-speed rail connection to Downtown via Cambridge;
  • Redevelop the present site of Logan Airport as an all-inclusive Olympic Village, with many large-scale venues on site;
  • Run a spur of the Red Line under the harbor to the site;
  • Post-games, turn the site into a new residential and entertainment center, with the water-edges functioning as urban wilds, much as they did before Logan was built.

Sure it's crazy, but...
Click to expand...

still makes more sense than the silver line
 
?Construct a new international airport at Hanscom Field, with a high-speed rail connection to Downtown via Cambridge;
Click to expand...

Does CSX or the MBTA have existing tracks that run near Hanscom. Otherwise the right of way will cost more than the airport. There is already a cummuter rail line at the South Weymouth Naval Air Base, which is bigger than Hanscom (and won't have anything built on it anytime soon).
 
It's a nice thought, but does anyone really, honestly believe this city is even remotely capable of hosting anything like the Olympic Games? Seriously?
 
Shush Briv! We can dream. And yes, if Boston really, really wanted to and had really, really dedicated leaders and authentic public support, Boston could certainly pull off an Olympic Games. But probably not until at least 2028-ish.
 
^^ Maybe in a generation or two.

Today, in this hive of parochialism and political patronage, it's tough to host a bachelor party.
 
Beton Brut said:
^^ Maybe in a generation or two.

Today, in this hive of parochialism and political patronage, it's tough to host a bachelor party.
Click to expand...

I would certainly get a laugh out of Hizzonah's demands.

Mayor Thomas M. Menino
(oh, and the International Olympic Committee, too)
present
The 2020 Olympics​

With the Mayor's name in 72 pt, and everything else in 12 pt.

That said, Boston 2020 is a bad idea that thankfully won't go anywhere. Toronto will get the bid.
 
Ageed, its a shame that managing an olympics would be completely overwhelming to the current generation of city and state leadership.

FWIW, using Harvard stadium for the Olympics is infeasible because it is too narrow for a running track (some might recall that 100 years ago the powers that be proposed expanding the standard width of a football field to speed up the game and reduce violence, but because Harvard stadium had just been built, they decided to create the forward pass instead).

A compelling case could be made, however, for locating it above Beacon Yards. You'd have plenty of space for a new stadium, within striking distance of facilities at Harvard, MIT, and BU (especially if you rebuilt the former Braves field and renovated and integrated the BU facilities along gardner st into the site)..plus you'd have good proximity and rail connections to sites slightly further afield at BC and Northeastern. (This would also set up very nicely a narrative about the Olympics celebrating boston as a center of learning, enlightenment, and liberal values in way that would be well differentiated from Birmingham and Denver bids, to say the least).

Also, rowing would probably be on lake quinsigamond (spelling?) in Worcester, because the format is right for olympic-style races, and because they'd have to throw some kind of bone to Worcester to make things happen at the state house...
 
Boston could do it except the 80,000 seat stadium but if that could be reduced in the future then why not.
Think of how many sports venues Boston has with Harvard, BU, BC, and Northeastern those could be temporarily converted to a specific sport for the olympics.

And who has more housing for athletes than boston universities during the summer.
 
to make things happen at the state house...
Click to expand...

And what does North Adams get?

More importantly, how do things happen at city hall without calling it the James T. Flaherty South Boston Olympiad?
 
BostonSkyGuy said:
I understand the civic pride sentiment in wanting the games to be in Boston. However financially, why would any of you want the Olympics in 2020?

I'm not trying to be a party pooper, but it just seems like a big waste of money to me. No matter how many tourists it draws you never make money by hosting the Olympics. Heck, you don't even come close to breaking even.

I just don't understand why people would want the Olympics here. I'd rather them spend 1% of the money fixing the infrastructure of the city.
Click to expand...

It's not just the tourists... it's upgrades that we could use for a LOOOONG time. The city would be much more likely to extend the Blue Line to Lynn, Green Line to Malden/Medford, Blue/Red Line Connector, and commuter rail upgrades. They'd be quick to improve and add bike lanes and pedestrian crossing infrastructure (i.e. better "Walk" signals) to show just how "with it" Boston is. All of those infrastructure projects we'd all be thrilled to see would probably happen. And yes, of course it would be a great marketing opportunity for Boston. However, it's been mentioned that it simply won't happen under the current regime.
 
^^Money is still a factor. Just remember that. They can't just "build" an extension with money they don't have and having the Olympics here doesn't magically solve that problem.
 
Of course they can build with money they don't have. Credit? And the city/state/USOC could pay for it, with all the corporate sponsorship and residual(?) income after the games, not to mention the tourism from the games themselves.
 
I think there are serious limits on that. The Atlanta Olympics relied on corporate sponsorship to the point of absurdity, and the IOC found the result almost vulgar. And Boston and Massachusetts are not the most populated places. Both of these might have something to do with why much larger cities and states are now looked at to take on the Games.
 
When I saw that people were actually, in all earnestness, advocating Boston host the Olympics in 2020, two things immediately popped into my head. The first was the fact that our city's public transit infastructure convulses violently whenever there's a Sox game ( smallest park in the league, by the way).

The second thing was how we handled the Democratic National Convention in 2004. The entire city was so horrified of the potential inconvenience to their everyday existence that they decided, at our fearless leader's behest of course, to not even bother coming into the city's core. As a result, the city looked like it was hit by a neutron bomb. It was like something out of 28 Days or Vanilla Sky-- a metropolis completely devoid of human beings or human activity. As a Bostonian, walking its streets, I was embarrassed. It was so utterly empty, desolate, and surreal. My city felt so small-time
 
People staying away from the activity core is not unique to Boston....it happened in Beijing last year....

And the Olympics are a self-contained event...inflows from non-ticket holders and non-tourists are not needed.

The DNC was in one small area of the city and you could quarantine it for a few days...you really couldnt even avoid the Olympics in a city the size of Boston if you wanted to....

I really don't think they are comparable in terms of how the city would react 11 years from now based on a much smaller event 5 years ago.
 
. . .our city's public transit infastructure convulses violently whenever there's a Sox game ( smallest park in the league, by the way).
Click to expand...

Smallest park in the league but 8th highest attendance. NYC, Philadelphia and Chicago (NL) are the only mass transit dependent cities that averaged higher attendance per game. I've been to games in all those stadiums and really only the Yankee's game wasn't a complete clusterfuck of a train ride and that's probably because I went on a Sunday. I'm no Green Line apologist, but I think packed mass transit is pretty common 7PM games in a urban stadium on a week day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top