Monday, July 27, 2015

No Boston Olympics means no BC Olympics

The USOC pulled Boston's Olympic bid for the Summer 2024 games. But it seems like most in Boston are saying "good riddance."  As someone who doesn't live in Massachusetts this seems like a missed opportunity. As someone who cares about BC sports, I think this could have been a nice little niche and a chance to have someone else pay for facilities upgrades.

I didn't live in Atlanta during the Olympics, but have seen how it was a plus for the city. Boston could have been the same way. Because of the numerous colleges, the games could have avoided many of the White Elephants other Olympic hosts face. The one area that I was glad to see Boston draw the line on was the overruns and built-in five star demands for the IOC and its members.

As of the last plan, BC wasn't set to host any big events. So it wasn't like we lost out on a new pool, track stadium or basketball arena. But it still would have been neat to see some of the other sports at Conte or in the eventually renovated Plex.

This probably keeps Boston out of the Olympic talk for a long, long time, which also kills my idea of a Winter Games in Boston!

19 comments:

mod34b said...

ATL - do you recall the Big Dig? more wasted money than you can believe.

Massive, unprecedented cost overruns are the way of life in Boston. Mayor Walsh (a BC Man) refused to issue a guarantee for cost overruns. Good going Marty!

And, as Walsh knows, No guarantee = No bid. Of course, wormy Guv Charlie Baker could have had Massachusetts issue a guarantee to allow for the bid (it was not just a Boston bid, but a MA bid) but he sat on his hands.

Boston is in a far, far higher class of City in every way compared to what Atlanta was, is or ever will be. Boston did not need the Olymics to get any sorry of boost.

Yes, good riddance!

ATL_eagle said...

"Boston is in a far, far higher class of City in every way compared to what Atlanta was, is or ever will be. Boston did not need the Olymics to get any sorry of boost."

And that is why Boston's bid failed in a nutshell. No city truly "needs" the Olympics. But it can be a fun event that brings the world's attention to Boston in a positive way. The costs overruns and the IOC corruption are real objections in my opinion. The traffic would have been a non-issue. The "we're too good for the Olympics" is parochial, small-town stuff that turns people off about Boston. I love Boston and think this could have been special.

FakeShalomTfree said...

BC should be proud of Marty Walsh, who listened to his constituents and refused to put the taxpayers for inevitable cost overruns. The Olympics could have been special, but it was presented (or rather forced upon) Bostonians in an arrogant, offensive way, with Deval Patrick receiving ridiculous consulting fees and the CEO of a major construction company heading the effort. Then the city trotted out a who's, who of Boston athletes, further insulting the people by implying they'd buy anything David Ortiz was pitching.

Call me idealistic, but BC shouldn't need the Olympics to upgrade its sorry facilities.

Knucklehead said...

Mod knows wormy she sees it in the mirror every other morning.

Geoffrey Lux said...


"Boston is in a far, far higher class of City in every way compared to what Atlanta was, is or ever will be."

What a tool.

blist said...

It's stupid to ask taxpayers to pledge to cover cost overruns for 8 years away, especially in a state where cost overruns made us a joke (big dig). Olympics are nice to have, but let's face it. The Swiss-run IOC makes $2 Billion a year in revenue, and we're the ones who are supposed to pay for their big show? Credit to Marty on this one. This was handled so badly from there start by the USOC, dropping this on taxpayers like we'd be thrilled to be able to pay for the games. And the original plan had no BC, no NU, no BU in the plans, so they lost a ton of local support right off the bat, Promise to improve the awful commuter rail as part of it, maybe I;d be for it. But what would be the benefit? The world would like Boston? Ask all the mainland Chinese tourists coming here if that makes a difference. I was in Toronto when they started the Pan Am games this summer -- no one was happy. Good riddance.

mod34b said...

ATL - The bid did not fail, it was rejected by the people. it is just too costly. the rejection was not a "we are better" thing,

[but really you can't compare Atlanta to Boston. That is like comparing Indianapolis to San Francisco. ha! #bostonstrong! i know you and Mr. CT luv Atlanta -- just pulling your legs! Atlanta has a ton going for it! just not as much as Beantown! chill Lux]


funny about politics in boston. The progressive crowd hated the olympics' bid because they don't want "their" (read mine) tax dollars spent on a luxury program. They want improvements to housing and public transportation. The Big Dig will not be forgotten any time soon. State is run by a lot of crooks. IOC guys would luv the MA pols. LUV 'EM! There is close to ZERO trust in politicians in MA

the above 50 - 99.5 % income people hated the new spending and inevitable new taxes.


the really rich loved it: what a marvelous was to be entertained! As FakeShalom ably points out: it was an attempt of tyranny by the elites force the "good' on the little people.

i have not meet anyone really excited about the bid.

Knuck... give it a rest

Kevin A said...

I think Billy Paine delivered the Atlanta Olympics with ZERO effect to the taxpayer.

Kevin A said...

Billy "Payne"

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-09-21/news/0909200352_1_centennial-olympic-games-billy-payne-atlanta-committee

3xEagle said...

BC embarrassed itself by its willing complicity in this farce.

Napolean Bonaparte said...

No city needs Olympic attention. It will get plenty of attention - meaning the generation of wealth - by focusing on making it a great place to live and do business. Reasonable taxes, good education, modern public transportation, good infrastructure, low crime, cultural opportunities, intolerance for corruption and an attention to overall city landscape and aesthetics.

Bravesbill said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bravesbill said...

Boston just wasn't a good city to host the Olympics. It's too small, transportation is still a mess and it doesn't have the necessary land to build the extra facilities and infrastructure to host the games. Just imagine how much of a nightmare it would be to get all the athletes out to Foxborough (which I presume is where the Olympic Stadium would be; with the Olympic village being downtown). Cities that already have the necessary infrastructure like LA and NYC should be the hosts.

Hoib said...

I think the Greek mess started w/ the debt and over runs for the Olympics. At least the Big Dig produced a long term benefit unlike the short term benefit you'd get from the Olympics. To a frequent visitor to the City it is a huge improvement over what was there.

One huge plus for Atlanta over Boston is that there is no Mod 34b there.

mod34b said...

Hoib you old thin-skinned SOB... still smarting at the reply to your comments about Bates being wooed to Michigan as a secret way to hire Daz (omg! too funny).

Tony from Belmont said...

You do know that CEO of a major construction company is now the Chair of the Board of Trustees. Just saying . . .

I live in the area and I’m with ATL on this. It could have been special. A potential game-changer if leadership could generate confidence that they knew what they were doing. So now what? Big Dig references and the sullen not-in-my-backyard attitude rules the day. An opportunity lost. That’s too bad.

mod10aeagle said...

The shame of this whole debacle is that none of us will ever know what could have been. The Boston 2024 effort was doomed from the start as a result of the original Boston committee's willingness to comply with the USOC's demand that initial bids be developed with minimal public exposure (i.e. in secret). Had the appropriate resources from all facets of city life and management been involved from the beginning, I think we would have seen a very different approach, and perhaps a "walking Olympics" that worked for all. It still might not have been right for Boston, or it might have failed to capture the support of enough Bostonians, but it would have been a more honest and thoughtful plan. The clown show we actually got was an almost daily embarrassment, and I'm relieved that it's over.

The bottom line isn't that Boston isn't big enough or smart enough or generous enough to host an Olympics. It's that this group of bloated egos totally botched an opportunity to prove that it is.

eagleboston said...

Boston is not capable of big projects. Most cities could have done the Big Dig for half the cost and half the time. Too corrupt. Too political. Boston just can't handle this type of project.

eagleboston said...

Did I just hear the the NFL's first female coach is a BC grad?