OT: Olympics in New York?

...or Newark?

Facilities available post-2012 (capacity - usage in summer games):

New Giants Stadium (Meadowlands) - 82,500 - Athletics and Football
Red Bull Park (Newark/Harrison) - 25,189 - Football
Prudential Center (Newark) - 17,500~18,500 - Basketball
Madison Square Garden (Manhattan) - 18,200~19,763 - Artistic Gymnastics, Trampoline, handball
Golden Dome Athletic Center (RU-Newark) - ???? - Wrestling/Table tennis
USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center (Flushing) - 22,000 max - Tennis
New Yankee Stadium - 52,325 - extra
Citifield - ~45,000 - extra
Newark Bears Stadium - 6,200 - extra

Athletic housing: various dormitory facilities at Rutgers, NJIT, NYU, and Colombia universities. (Should be available as it is summer time)

In this timeframe, the Trans-Hudson Express (THE) Tunnel would be complete bringing in additional rail traffic to and from New York Penn Station going to Northern NJ/Meadowlands.

Additional facilities can be built in the Meadowlands.

New York has never held an olympic games... so do you think it is possible?

Or should we try and have a winter games using our local slopes... If this were done, NJ Transit would probably work to open the Lackawanna Cutoff which would be a direct rail line to the Poconos.

The olympics blow. I'd rather not waste our time. Plus that will never happen anyway. Brick city Olympics? I dunno man.

The olympics blow. I'd rather not waste our time. Plus that will never happen anyway. Brick city Olympics? I dunno man.

Well, it would be "New York" as it would be using facilities across the Metro area.

I'm assuming that when you say "Football" you mean Soccer.

I'm assuming that when you say "Football" you mean Soccer.

Yes. Unless the summer games see American Football added... (unlikely)

Yes. Unless the summer games see American Football added... (unlikely)

I think there's a better chance that the Olympics come to New York than Football being added as an Olympic sport.

God I hope not. I live in NYC and the city is already full of tourists in the summer. Put the Olympics here, and getting around would be impossible.

Part of the reason why New York didn't get the 2012 Games (which they were a finalist for) was because outside of the Mayor, NY Governor, and Woodie Johnson (who was set to get a new free stadium) few people in the area wanted the Olympics. I believe the IOC's own poll had interest level in a NY for hosting the games far lower than the ones for Paris or London the latter which won the games. The other part of it was the "Olympic Stadium" getting defeated which was because of the lack of interest in hosting.

For a city like New York that is already a "World" city there is no benefit to hosting the games. You risk putting the city in debt constructing all the venues needed (most of which doesn't exist). Montreal for example just two years ago paid off the massive debt from hosting the games in 1976, two years ago. 30 years after hosting a game and one year after their baseball team moved in part because the stadium built for the games was such **** that no one wanted to go there.

New York would absolutely have to build a new 90,000 Olympic stadium as a 400 meter track will not fit in the new Meadowlands Stadium which would be the only stadium in the area big enough seating wise to be the main stadium. Not to mention all the other venues for the swimming and such.

Once again the is no benefit to hosting for New York. The main reason why cities host the games is to build their cities brand to drive tourism to the city and business to the City. The Olympics won't help NY in this as it is a city that is already on the short list of places one must visit in their lifetime. Furthermore along with London, and Tokyo it's already one of the financial capitals of the world. Hosting the Olympics would just be a body organ measuring contest for the city that would cost a lot of money.

I was just over in London a couple of weeks ago, they are idiots for hosting the 2012 games. They are building a brand new 90,000 seat stadium that they are just going to knock to a 25,000 seats becuase they don't need a 90,000 seat stadium because Wembley was just rebuilt a couple of years ago. London is like New York in regard as there is little benefit for them to host the games. I don't think there are many people in the world with the ability to travel and do business that don't know where London is. London is already a "world" city they don't need to build themselves up in order to try and get in that category. Similarly there is Chicago which is bidding for 2016. Now Chicago could benefit from hosting as I wouldn't say they are a "world city" however they have to build a new Olympic stadium as well and they have no use for it as Soldier Field was just rebuilt.

The Olympics are a great event to watch and participate in. However if your a city you shouldn't want to host it. It's not worth the cost. Especially the Summer Games. The Winter Games are a bit scaled down to where you don't need the big venues so if you are a city like Vancouver or Salt Lake it can be worth it.

God I hope not. I live in NYC and the city is already full of tourists in the summer. Put the Olympics here, and getting around would be impossible.

Actually it would probably be quite the opposite. It would sort of be like when the Republican Convention was in two in '04 and everyone took that time as vacation. I remember riding with my father to a Yankee game down the FDR drive in Manhattan with no traffic during rush hour.

First off, the Olympics don't bring in as many visitors as you or most people (especially those who organize the games) think. What happens is most people think it will be crowded so those who would normally visit don't. That leaves low tourism for before, during, after the games. On top of that a lot of people who live in the area would take their 2 weeks vacation during that time because they, like you, think it will be crowded. The cities economy probable come to as much of a standstill as possible during the two weeks because everyone would be getting out of dodge. All that would leave is the specific Olympic tourist and there aren't as many of those as you think.

I think it's very unlikely (for all the reasons already stated), and even if it did happen the absolute earliest could be 2020. The bidding for 2016 is already down to four finalists; I'm not sure if the bidding process for 2020 has started already. If Chicago wins the 2016 bid, then you can kiss that thought goodbye for another 2 decades or so. Personally I'd love to see it happen, but I highly doubt it will.

Actually it would probably be quite the opposite. It would sort of be like when the Republican Convention was in two in '04 and everyone took that time as vacation. I remember riding with my father to a Yankee game down the FDR drive in Manhattan with no traffic during rush hour.

First off, the Olympics don't bring in as many visitors as you or most people (especially those who organize the games) think. What happens is most people think it will be crowded so those who would normally visit don't. That leaves low tourism for before, during, after the games. On top of that a lot of people who live in the area would take their 2 weeks vacation during that time because they, like you, think it will be crowded. The cities economy probable come to as much of a standstill as possible during the two weeks because everyone would be getting out of dodge. All that would leave is the specific Olympic tourist and there aren't as many of those as you think.

It's not just the number of people. Its the huge security presence and the fact that they would have to re-route some of the subways. During the RNC, large areas of the city were basically "closed" to most people.

It's also the huge amount of infrastructure that would have to be built, as alluded to in the previous post. Cramming all that infrastructure into the city would create a nightmare. The original plan for the West Side Stadium would have screwed up traffic on the several major west side arteries, both streets and the subway, for years while it was under construction.

We could probably host a Special Olympics. :nod:

It's not just the number of people. Its the huge security presence and the fact that they would have to re-route some of the subways. During the RNC, large areas of the city were basically "closed" to most people.

It's also the huge amount of infrastructure that would have to be built, as alluded to in the previous post. Cramming all that infrastructure into the city would create a nightmare. The original plan for the West Side Stadium would have screwed up traffic on the several major west side arteries, both streets and the subway, for years while it was under construction.

You don't cram it into manhattan, you build it in NJ. :)

Also, you do have existing facilities which are world class in their own right. This cuts down on overall construction.

You don't cram it into manhattan, you build it in NJ. :)

Also, you do have existing facilities which are world class in their own right. This cuts down on overall construction.

Okay where is the spectator aquatic Center? Also where is the 90,000 seat stadium where you can fit a 400 meter track in? You might have to build one and then just knock most of it down like London is doing and like Chicago plans to do but you still have to build one and cost a lot of money fore 2 weeks worth of use.

That's the two main venues that would need to be built. Plus on top of that you have to build most of the minor outdoor venues which again cost a lot of money. Then you have to ask the question what are these buildings going to be used for afterward?

That doesn't even take into account infrastructure improvements you have to make. London has about as complex of a transit system as New York and they are having to add lines to the Underground to accommodate this. There would certainly be a hassle to residents in all of the Metro area. It is the most densely populated area in the country.

Again it all goes back to the question "is it worth it?" And as I said before I think the answer is no because New York already has a strong brand that already attracts what cities who host the Olympics want to bring in.

If WE are gonna spend a ton of money on it...we should just build all the **** in Iraq.

We've already had about that much money go "unaccounted for" it'll put Iraq back on the map as a tourist destination and I'm sure there will be plenty of fireworks. Plus we can always go back in 10 years and say they're housing weapons there and blow it up.

It's totally win-win.

I was closely following NYC's bid for 2012 and IMO, that's our best time for hosting the games. 2016 would actually be even better but Mayor Mike decided not to because we can't commit politically for hosting the games.

When we were bidding for 2012, a lot of the facilities that were proposed for the games were either being built right now, or needed renovations or rebuilding.

NYC2012's bid was perfect IMO because it proposed building residential buildings where NYC needs it in Queens and Brooklyn to relieve Manhattan whichc still has less than 1% vacancy, the new Yankee and Mets Stadium (would be the 80K+ stadium with extra seats going to Icahn Stadium after the games), new Giants and Jets Stadium, Red Bulls Stadium, Brooklyn Nets Arena... and renovating a lot of old facilities around the city, expanding Jacob Javits Center (the city is 19th in the country when it comes to convention space)

Tourist problem? NYC2012's proposal was to hold the Olympics in the 2 lightest-traffic days, be it vehicular and mass transit traffic, from the 3rd week of July to the 1st week of August. Plus, it's at least 2 weeks before the US Tennis Open which is usually one of the busiest weeks of the year with students coming back to school, start of football season, etc, etc...

NYC can surely handle it. If Beijing can, NYC surely can. It's just a pity they chose Chicago as the US Candidate. They're having a lot of issues to fix in their bid, plus they have new facilities that were already built, not like New York where the newest arena or stadium at the time of their bid is the Brendan Byrne Arena/Continental Airlines Arena/Izod Center build in 1980 and Arthur Ashe Stadium which is a little less than 20 years old.

NYC will host... not in the near future though. It could very well be a cycle of at least 20-30 years when there will be a need to renovate or build newer facilities to keep up with current technology at that time.

, new Giants and Jets Stadium, Red Bulls Stadium, Brooklyn Nets Arena...

I'm actually glad NYC lost its Olympic bid, especially if it can in any possible way hurt the pompous, arrogant Bruce Ratner, his pathetic Nets franchise, that slovenly ugly dork: Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowicz (who took pot shots at Newark and the state of New Jersey), the very grating Jay-Z (with his designs of landing both LeBron James & Dwayne Wade in 2010) and every other moron involved in that hideous Frank Gehry designed monstrosity.

...or Newark?

Facilities available post-2012 (capacity - usage in summer games):

New Giants Stadium (Meadowlands) - 82,500 - Athletics and Football
Red Bull Park (Newark/Harrison) - 25,189 - Football
Prudential Center (Newark) - 17,500~18,500 - Basketball
Madison Square Garden (Manhattan) - 18,200~19,763 - Artistic Gymnastics, Trampoline, handball
Golden Dome Athletic Center (RU-Newark) - ???? - Wrestling/Table tennis
USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center (Flushing) - 22,000 max - Tennis
New Yankee Stadium - 52,325 - extra
Citifield - ~45,000 - extra
Newark Bears Stadium - 6,200 - extra

Athletic housing: various dormitory facilities at Rutgers, NJIT, NYU, and Colombia universities. (Should be available as it is summer time)

In this timeframe, the Trans-Hudson Express (THE) Tunnel would be complete bringing in additional rail traffic to and from New York Penn Station going to Northern NJ/Meadowlands.

Additional facilities can be built in the Meadowlands.

New York has never held an olympic games... so do you think it is possible?

Or should we try and have a winter games using our local slopes... If this were done, NJ Transit would probably work to open the Lackawanna Cutoff which would be a direct rail line to the Poconos.

All this is nice but traffic in these areas is bad enough as it is. Plus building anything new in the area is a royal pain in the arse considering all the hoops you have to jump through. In New York there is always some loudmouth who opposes everything and they typically get their way. While I think it would be cool since I love the Olympics I just can't see it ever happening because of all the bureaucratic red tape and because of the sheer logistics of it all just don't seem to fit in with New York. But hey LA got the Olympics off pretty good so who knows.

And now that I think about I'm not so sure the IOC would want to come to north America again so quickly.. We've hosted a lot of games recently. NA has hosted 5 times since 1984.(including Vancouver) Who knows.

All this is nice but traffic in these areas is bad enough as it is. Plus building anything new in the area is a royal pain in the arse considering all the hoops you have to jump through. In New York there is always some loudmouth who opposes everything and they typically get their way. While I think it would be cool since I love the Olympics I just can't see it ever happening because of all the bureaucratic red tape and because of the sheer logistics of it all just don't seem to fit in with New York. But hey LA got the Olympics off pretty good so who knows.

And now that I think about I'm not so sure the IOC would want to come to north America again so quickly.. We've hosted a lot of games recently. NA has hosted 5 times since 1984.(including Vancouver) Who knows.

But you got to remember, they picked that s*** hole Beijing so they don't seem to care where the Olympics are held.

But you got to remember, they picked that s*** hole Beijing so they don't seem to care where the Olympics are held.

I think that has more to do with the fact that China is the most populated country in the world and the only nice places in China are impoverished and mostly unsettled. I suppose they could have put the games in Shanghai but even so that city suffers from many of the same problems that Beijing has.

I think there's a better chance that the Olympics come to New York than Football being added as an Olympic sport.
I think there's a better chance the world really will come to an end in 2012 than the Olympics coming to New York.
<(-:**
Besides, if they're going to call it "New York's" Olympics, I'd rather not have New Jersey help them out. Tell 'em to go **** 'emsleves and build their own damn facilities.
I'm actually glad NYC lost its Olympic bid, especially if it can in any possible way hurt the pompous, arrogant Bruce Ratner, his pathetic Nets franchise, that slovenly ugly dork: Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowicz (who took pot shots at Newark and the state of New Jersey), the very grating Jay-Z (with his designs of landing both LeBron James & Dwayne Wade in 2010) and every other moron involved in that hideous Frank Gehry designed monstrosity.
My thoughts exactly.
(No offense to any of our fine Devils' brethren who happen to live outside of NJ)

Somehow, Sheldon Silver, as speaker of the Assembly, was allowed to yield a substantial amount of power in the deal to squash the West Side Stadium. His voice made sure that we'll never see the Olympics.

Somehow, one person, who's biggest backer was CABLEVISION, who stood to lose a LOT of money on the deal, was allowed to get the final say on the matter. The worst part is he pulled the 9/11 card on it saying that the city needed to focus on rebuilding downtown, and since that is his district, he needed to act in his constituents best interests.

That was over 3 years ago. Last I checked, we haven't made a dent as far as progress downtown goes.

I'm still very pissed off about this as you can tell.