Quaker2001

1 - What phelps said. The agreement between USC and the city of Los Angeles is that they can do whatever they want to the Coliseum so long as they make it available for the Olympics. Again, this means they just spent nearly $300 million on renovations to improve the stadium with little regard for hosting athletics, which will require an additional $300 million for the temporary overlay. I was there for the first time a few years ago visiting a friend in LA. For a building that's nearly a century old, I'm moderately surprised it's still standing. That there's public transportation there helps, so that will be a key selling point during Games time. 2 - Half the ceremonies is not a small deal. Debatable how much Kroenke and his interests will be involved, but now that he's firmly planted himself into the LA landscape, I'm sure he'll do what he can to capitalize on the Olympics being in LA. Remember, SoFi is his stadium. He owns and operates it, as opposed to the Coliseum which is owned by the city. 3 - Depends if it's a new arena or a replacement for the Forum, which right now is slated to host gymnastics. I agree with phelps that I've never been a big fan of the current plan for swimming. Not sure a new arena would be an option if if displaced gymnastics, but it's an interesting theory.

Funding for all things Olympics works differently in the United States than virtually anywhere else in the world. Everything is privately funded as opposed to being underwritten by the government. So yes, that gives them a good chance at success that they don't need to rely on government funding except for contingency purposes. As for USC, the NCAA had nothing to do with funding for the Coliseum renovations. All that money was raised by USC from donations and sponsorship. The crazy thing is that they spent close to $300 million on it and it's going to cost another $300 million to make the stadium ready to host athletics in 2028. The NCAA will have little to nothing to do with the Olympics. This isn't their show and they likely won't have a play to play. The thing to remember with Kroenke is that he didn't move the Rams to LA until early 2016. So he wasn't a part of the original plans for the bid. A nice added bonus for sure, and yes, he and his stadium will become a big part of things, I'm sure. There's a lot of public infrastructure projects going on in LA. Some of which are now tied to delivery of the Olympics in 2028. So there are potential pitfalls there in terms of money spent that won't show up in the Olympic budget. As opposed to with other cities where those expenses do fall on the OCOG. Sometimes it's too much. Rio and Athens most notably where the legacy plans weren't that great. But don't lump those cities in with Barcelona, which is the ultimate story of an urban revival tied to an Olympics. I know locals there aren't always too thrilled with the amount of tourism that took over the city afterwords, but it's the perfect example of right city, right place, right time. Unfortunately, no other city is likely to ever pull that off again.

The United States and France are able to willing to host because they have the majority of the needed facilities already in place without having to spend billions to build new venues with no planned use for after the Games. That was the problem with cities like Rio and Athens which in hindsight were poor choices to be Olympics hosts. Hosting the Olympics will lose money if it's planned and executed poorly. Unfortunately, it's extremely difficult to plan and execute them well. Let's see how that works out for Los Angeles in 2028 where the baseline for them will be the 1984 Olympics which made a profit. And it's hard to measure the long-term benefits of hosting an Olympics. Ask LA 1984 and Barcelona 1992 how that worked out for them. What we're seeing with the Winter Olympics is that the only cities that might want to host now are those with facilities in place. Which for the most part means cities that have host an Olympics before. Somehow, Italy stayed in the running for 2026, but they have many of the needed venues already in place. Yes, if no one else bids, maybe Qatar offers up a trillion dollar bid and the IOC has said yes (although after the impending disaster that is the 2022 World Cup, let's see how that goes after that).

You sure about that last part? Because without Western democracies, who else would have hosted the 2024 Olympics? I can't speak for outside the United States, but pretty sure "regular people" have heard about Lindsay Vonn and Shaun White (among others). Either way, there was still a hockey tournament in 2018, even if it didn't include NHL players. How anyone could argue that's a bigger story than the entire Olympics being postponed for a year is beyond me. That makes absolutely no sense.

Hockey is 1 sport out of many at the Winter Olympics. It cost them viewers, but if we're talking about major controversies with the games, what about the Russians and doping? What about North Korea-South Korea relations that created a number of concerns in the lead up? The NHL skipping 2018 would barely be a blip on the radar so far as history is concerned compared to if the Olympics had to be postponed. That literally has never happened before in their history. People will look back on that 200 years from now and wonder what happened? No one would do the same with 2018 because NHL players weren't there. And I disagree about social media. In the past decade, we've seen several potential Olympic host cities have to give up because it was put to a referendum or a public vote. I'm pretty sure that happened with Budapest with their bid for the 2024 Olympics. My understanding - and you can correct me if this is wrong - is that there were political movements to stop the bid and their efforts succeeded when it was going to force the possibility of city residents rejecting the Olympics. So yes, that's exactly how social media can influence a decision. You're right that if the Olympics get moved to next year and everyone figures out how to make that work, no one will care. The problem is now where the IOC is saying they could hold them this summer when it might not be possible to do so. So if the IOC continues on that path, they're potentially asking for trouble in the midst of a worldwide pandemic like we haven't seen in more than a century

The problem with the Olympics of the 60s through the 80s is that most of the issues with the Olympics were external factors rather than poor decisions on the part of the IOC. Political protests in Mexico City. Short-sighted security in Munich (although the IOC's response is obviously a big part of that history). Terrible financial management in Montreal. And obviously the boyotts in Moscow and Los Angeles. Right now, the IOC doesn't have the best reputation. People are starting to question the viability of the Olympics because of the burden they pose to countries that want to host them. If the IOC were to mis-handle this one, their opponents wouldn't soon forget it. And in the moment we're in now, a lot of people speaking out against the IOC and saying they are being insensitive to world events. The echo chamber of social media doesn't help matters. The "brand" you speak of is not as strong as it once was. A postponement is a major issue to deal with and will cause all sorts of problems for a lot of people. The NHL skipping PyeongChang was a very minor issue by comparison. I don't see how you can argue that was a bigger deal

There are still all the NOCs and sports federations out there who have a voice. The United States doesn't necessarily get to have the loudest voice here just because they have the greatest investment, particularly in a situation like this where they have to act quick. Everyone will be consulted because these are not normal circumstances. I agree there needs to be a long look, but that goes beyond American interests. When swimming finals are held for the benefit of American TV audiences, that's FINA making the decision they want to do that because it's best for them. Same thing the ISU did with morning figure skating in PyeongChang. Yes, these things are done for financial reasons because they have the choice to do so. Choices are limited here. In the end, I believe the Olympics will be postponed to next Summer. That's because it's the best decision for everyone involved, not just those with the most amount of money on the line.

I've seen some tweets from people a lot smarter than us make a good point.. the Olympics are a collaboration between the IOC, the OCOG, plus 200+ NOC's and however many sport federations. Takes more than a couple of meetings and some phone calls to come up with a new plan for the Olympics. Much easier for UEFA, who could make the quick decision to postpone Euro 2020 with very little consultation from the domestic leagues who may need that window in the late spring/early summer to finish up their seasons. Easy call for them. Bach couldn't come out and say the Olympics are postponed without a solid plan and consultation with everyone involved. They'll come up with something they can present to everyone. Yes, it's a little tone deaf to talk about training, but he's right about one thing.. speculation at this time would be extremely counter-productive

You have noble intentions, but you have your priorities bass ackwards. Yes, the cascade of changes to the calendar that might come into play of the Olympics got postponed to 2021 would be difficult to deal with. My response to that is... "So??" Your line about "why would any country want to host" line is misguided. This is a historically unprecedented circumstance. It's not something every potential event host needs build into their agreements any more than they would consider a potential natural disaster that prevents them from hosting their event. You bring up smaller events.. yea, they would suffer if the Olympics got moved to next Summer, but the IOC and the Olympics will always take priority over them. The World Games are just as vital as the Olympics? They're being held in Birmingham. No disrespect to the good people of Alabama, but the list of prior host cities tells me all they need to know about their place in the world. The IOC will not and likely need not care about what moving to next Summer might mean. As to your last point.. really? Do you know how many people are watching athletics and swimming during the Olympics compared to the World Championships? Not even close. Michael Phelps didn't become a household name from anything he did at a World Championships. That's crazy to think those organizations don't need the Olympics. The amount of sponsorship dollars they're generating there far outweigh what they're getting otherwise. We agree that postponing the Olympics is messy. There may not be another option though. As the famous saying goes.. "The Games must go on." And yes, the future of the Olympics would probably be irreparably damaged if they were cancelled outright.

You're still making this about the United States' interests. That's not what will motivate the IOC to make a decision. They're going to look at their interests and that of Japan to decide the best course of action. And the amount of money the IOC receives in rights fees from NBC does not change if the Olympics get postponed. Clearly there are a lot of things for the IOC to look at. But the usual lead-up to the Olympics has been severely compromised. If they are to hold the Olympics this summer, they're doing so without the usual level of preparation. So what it will likely come down to.. do they want to host the Olympics this Summer (if they can) knowing that everyone is not fully ready? Or do they postpone until next year, even with all the challenges that will come with, and give everyone a chance to prepare. The answer to that question will have nothing to do with American interests.

USA Swimming calls for Tokyo 2020 postponement

Same question.. so what's the solution? We're dealing with an unprecedented situation in the history of organized sport. A lack of interested hosts in international events? What happens if that hits the Olympics? Talk about bad business If the Olympics were to get postponed to 2021, let's see who gets affected? The Euro moving back a year doesn't make a big difference as they'd still be clear of the Olympics. I'm sure the folks in Eugene would be disappointed if the IAAF Worlds had to be cancelled, but then they'd get first dibs on 2025. Not like the stadium is going anywhere. The FINA Worlds are slated for Japan, so they'll gladly sacrifice that for the sake of the Olympics. After that, you've got the World Games slated for mid-July. The Summer Universiade in August. After that, what else is there? As we all know, there are a zillion logistical challenges in order to make an Olympics postponement work. Very low on that priority list is what it does to other international events. IAAF and FINA need the Olympics a lot more than they need their world championships. If they have to skip a cycle to make that happen or for there to be a ripple effect on their future calendars, that seems like a small price to pay.

So what is the solution then? Since you seem to be blaming this on the United States, as if we're standing in the way of the IOC making a decision. If the Olympics have to move to 2021, the IAAF will very happily tell Oregon they can't have the world championships in 2021 and push them off to a later date. We are at an unprecedented time here, so if that's what needs to happen in order for the Olympics to be held, then that's a small price to pay.

Agreed. Priority number 1 is the safety of everyone who will be in Tokyo during the Olympics (and by extension, anyone they come in contact with when they return home). Very secondary is qualifying and how this affects the calendar. A lot of accommodations are being made and will be made for events moving around. If having the Olympics in 2021 instead of 2020 means the IAAF has to move the World Championships, that should be the least of the considerations

Yes. Everyone screaming "just cancel it now" need to pipe down. Let the IOC do their due diligence here, because what they can't do - and I saw someone suggest this - is to say "the Olympics are postponed to an unknown later date." That's not an option.

I agree, but they need to have more than 1 plan in place, even if they refuse to discuss that publicly. All the reporting I'm reading makes it sound like they're not even bringing it up.

I agree 100% with the last point and I'm concerned that Bach is not the right person to guide the IOC through this crisis and his decisions could do harm to the reputation of the IOC if he's not careful.

I'm okay with them planning for a Games to occur this July/August. But they need to be forthcoming about plans about a potential postponement. They don't have to make that decision now, it can wait until May. But what can't happen is we get to May, the state of the world is still not good enough to hold the Games, then my hope is that the IOC will tell us "we had hoped for this summer, but we are now planning to hold the Olympics _____." My fear is that we get to May and the IOC tells us "we cannot host the Olympics this Summer, we have no choice but to cancel"

2 weeks ago I would have said try for July. Not so sure that's realistic at this point. As long as they happen at some point, I'll be happy. I just hope the IOC doesn't torpedo their own best efforts to make that happen.

They're scheduled for late October/early November. Obviously it would be squeezing a lot onto the calendar with the Olympics, Paralympics, and Youth Olympics all in 1 year. But hopefully it wouldn't need to be pushed back

Easier said than done. There are a ton of logistical hurdles they'll have to overcome to make that happen and my fear is that they're putting all of their eggs into one basket trying to make this summer work where it may be out of their control. I'll hold out hope until the day the IOC makes the announcement. I just hope should it come to the point that they can't hold the Olympics that they've at least attempted to come up with a backup plan

Qatar: "We promise we can build air-conditioned stadiums and still hold the World Cup in June and July" Also Qatar: "Nah, just kidding, that was stupid.. thanks FIFA for awarding us the World Cup, but how's November and December for you?"

Don't forget the World Cup. How convenient it would be for the IOC that's not being held in its usual window during the summer and instead potentially leaves those months wide open for the Olympics to be held

Would the organizers and the IOC rather have a compromised Olympics this summer or have to scramble and reset to hold it in 2022? Tough to figure what decision they would make given all the logistical hurdles they would have to deal with

I've been saying that the right move is to wait until May to make that decision. But there needs to be a backup plan and it seems like the IOC and the organizers aren't even considering that.