THERE ARE plenty of reasons for a city like Boston to shudder at the idea of hosting a summer Olympics. The games are often not worth the investment; they’re a short-lived festival that can become a long-term headache. But that calculation is starting to change, led in no small measure by the United States Olympic Committee, which hasn’t won a bid to host the summer games since 1996 in Atlanta. Now, instead of seeking a glitzy venue like New York or Los Angeles, the USOC is actively courting somewhat smaller cities who have historically opted out of the process, whether because of a lack of money or a deficit of glitzy showmanship. Boston may not do bling, but that may no longer matter.
On Tuesday, the USOC sent letters to the mayors of 35 cities, including Boston, to determine their interest in hosting the 2024 summer games. That sounds like a long time off, but it’s the next summer games looking for a home. Rio de Janeiro has the 2016 games locked up, and the finalists for 2020 are already chosen. No American city so much as bid for 2020. That’s partly a function of the financial crash that came just at the time that bidding began, but also of the poor track record of American cities seeking the games: New York lost to London for 2012, and Chicago to Rio in 2016. While Salt Lake City held the torch in 2002, winter games do not garner as much media attention, public participation, or money as their warmer counterparts.
Comments
"Boston" hosting the Olympics? Well that's not really possible unless you vastly expand the borders of Boston to include more distant suburbs that even have the land available to build the necessary structures, etc that the Olympics requires. Will it really be the Foxboro Olympics? Milton olympics? I doubt it. Pass on this one, "Boston".
True, true. We would have to expand. Vancouver and London both did as well into outer suburbs.
Ms. Kayyem once again betrays her lack of historical perspective. She ignores the once magnified pipedream that emanated from the Kevin White administration uring the Olympic bigwigs to stage a games set on Boston Harbor islands. Might the good Ms. Kayyem be angling for space on the NYTimes op ed page?
This comment has been removed.
Take it from someone who lived in Atlanta in '96: No. No, no, no.
Olympics rarely turn a profit, and whatever meager cash to be made wouldn't be worth the restrictions on movement, speech, and other civil liberties that come with this grandiose boondoggle. It wouldn't be worth shifting our infrastructure priorities - sorry, no Green Line Extension, because we need to spend half a billion bucks upgrading Foxboro station with two platforms, four tracks, and sniper towers.
If Boston wants to bid on sports events, that's fine. But pick events that bring prestige and dollars to the city without putting the residents through a decade of endless preparations, budget deficits, and construction projects on facilities that will be used for two weeks.
I get your point, but some cities have managed it well. It is whether we think we can manage it that matters: every city has its glitches (I survived L.A. many years ago).
No thanks! I don't want my suburb to suddenly be a part of Boston to sustain the Olympics...keep them on my tv, not in my backyard...
Just say no.
NO
If the pols see opportunities for graft and extortion, you can bet they'll be bidding for the Olympics.
No need to worry about this one for a multitude of reasons none more than Mumbles would likely have to make the pitch. Too funny.
You are absolutely right!!
Boston's a wonderful city to live in and work in. It could be a great contender for the 2024 Olympics if there was vision and intellect to do so. As far as the lack of efficient infrastructure is concerned, if a third-world slum in Brazil with a poor infrastructure and vast corruption can do it, Boston certainly can! I'm just saying!
Hey, that was my point but you made it faster.
This comment has been removed.
Three words as to why Boston should not, could not and must not host any Olympic Games, summer or Winter. "THE BIG DIG!!!" Cost and deadline over runs. Yikes! I can see the headlines now, "The 2024 Boston Olympics" delayed. They will be held in 2025 or 2026 or who knows.
Boston I a great town but has a 3rd world transportation system. Olympics in Boston? Can't be done.
No other mega sporting event is as financially risky as hosting the Olympics. Every Games since 1960 has overrun its initial budget, and not just by a few percentage points, but by an average of 179%. Countries not only spend hundreds of billion of dollars on sports venues that could be spent on much-needed infrastructure, but those venues often go unused once the Olympics are over.
Read more: http://olympics.time.com/2012/07/26/londons-loss-why-hosting-the-olympics-is-bad-business/#ixzz2LZncqsVz
If Mumbles made the pitch, the Olympic Committee wouldn't be able to understand what he fully said and they would award the games site to Houston instead of Boston.
How about the Winter Games? Lots of infrastructure is already built: prelim hockey rounds in various college rinks, or in Providence and Worcester, then the medal round, and figure skating, at the Garden; skiing events at Waterville Valley (does it have enough vertical drop for the downhill?), and so on. To be built would be a speed skating loop, and a bobsled track (at Wachusett Mtn.?). Why not?