Quaker2001

That entire middle weekend is going to be incredible. Toss up for me between Day 8 and Day 9. Both have finals in swimming, track & field, and gymnastics. Plus it's the last 2 rounds of men's golf, the 2 cycling road races (that's going to be something special), all the finals in tennis. I will be locked in!!

This is awful. I get the IOC has to protect copyright law when it comes to video, but this one makes no sense.

They need 6 days for the rugby tournaments, so that slots in nicely at Stade de France before the athletics competition begins, especially since unlike pretty much any other Olympics, they're not using the stadium for the opening ceremony. The football tournament is spread out over the length of the Olympics, so they put that at Parc des Princes. I can't speak to French rugby, but I know they had the World Cup at Stade de France, so if they can get the big crowds there for the Olympics, it makes a lot of sense to have rugby there

Pushing Salt Lake to 2034 is a bonus for the IOC, but it was mostly the USOPC pushing that. Having LA and Salt Lake only 18 months apart would be tough for LA to try and share in sponsorship dollars. That's what the USOPC wanted to hold off on Salt Lake. If they're asking companies to invest big in the Olympics, it's a tough ask for those same companies to do the same thing again less than 2 years later. 6 years later is an easier sell

Been saying the same thing for years now. For all of the times that it was said the USOPC preferred 2034 to 2030, even when the IOC seemed like they may not have any options for 2030, that's going to be a huge boon for media rights. Have a feeling they'll open up those negotiations right around when things are heating up for 2028 so they can maximize that contract. As opposed to the 2022-2032 deal which they handed to NBC without much of a fight.

Sounds like financial guarantees were an issue. And yes, not a fan of how 1 day the IOC just decides that they have a location in mind for the 2038 games.

Feel bad for Sweden. 3 countries just got validated and Sweden left out in the proverbial (and literal) cold yet again.

It is assumed they will award the 2034 Olympics to Salt Lake City.

I trust the source, so perhaps this might be it and France is about to get announced as host of the 2030 Olympics. That would be a shocker

It's a long ways off, but I'd love to be there. I've only been to 1 other Olympics (Salt Lake 2002) and that was to work, so it would be nice to be there strictly as a spectator.

It's definitely fair to ask the question and I'm hoping if there's more to the story that this is mental health related, we'll learn about it. Again, I just don't want to jump to any conclusions because of some random posting on instagram. That said, this is someone whose opinion I weigh a lot more strongly and this definitely does hint at mental health as the reason she is gone...

Who is Paul Askew and why do we put that much stock into 1 post on IG that we're assuming she committed suicide? Especially if he's going to mention USATF in that post since there seems like there's an accusation there and not provide much additional context. I have a feeling we'll find out more in time, but for now, let's not jump to the conclusion that this was suicide just because 1 random post on IG said so

No cause of death has been mentioned. Suicide has not been brought up, so not sure why you would jump to that conclusion

I have seen it before and I think this would be a great addition to the Olympics. Not like they need a big fancy permanent venue for it, either. They probably don't have the appropriate international organization to make it happen, but I like the idea

The United States government does not have oversight over the USOPC. Nor do they provide funding. The USOPC changed their bylaws after 1980 so they wouldn't be forced into a boycott by the President. It's their stated mission to send athletes to the Olympics. So there is no shot of a boycott, yes in large part because they known the NBC money and the exposure that comes along with it is too big. Besides, Jimmy Carter has said in hindsight it was a making to boycott 1980. I can't imagine anyone would want a repeat of that for 2024.

I said to someone on Twitter.. creative teams for TV networks will have some fun with these. Might not be the most useful to identify what sport they're all for, which will be unfortunate for people on the ground in Paris

Not the whole world, but seems like there's more than a few countries who don't like the IOC's decision on this one. And considering there hasn't been a Russian flag at the last 3 Olympics, it's not like this isn't without cause. Their NOC was banned for a state-sponsored doping scandal, and then after they used the last Olympics to begin an invasion on Ukraine, the IOC is looking for pathways for them to be allowed back in? That's not living in an echo chamber. That's acknowledging the reality of the situation. Yes, I'm aware that not everyone feels the same way and that the population outside the Western world is bigger than the majority of the Americas and Europe that is calling for the ban. That all said.. this is the IOC we're talking about. They claim to advocate for human rights, but then they say they're apolitical when it's not convenient for them. They are trying to be accommodating for Russian athletes (some of whom would undoubtedly return home with a Z displayed on their clothing), and yet they'll shame other countries who push back against that decision and who might threaten to boycott. This is the state of the Olympics these days. The problem remains that the Olympic movement is under the control of an organization of corrupt autocrats who don't realize how much they are disliked throughout much of the world. I'm not rooting for them to go down because that would be a shame for sport and for the athletes. But until they have that realization of the Olympic brand being tarnished, perhaps to the point it can't be repaired, there's no catch all solution for this.

The IOC doesn't want to listen to outside opinions. And Bach doesn't want to get on the bad side of leaders like Putin in case he needs him to host an Olympics. I think the biggest mistake was being so openly public about wanting to include the Russians in Paris, in whatever form that would take. I've see a lot of sentiment on social media that people will tune out the Olympics if Russia is there. I know I'm not taking that tact, but we saw it happen with China. It would be a shame if we had another Olympics clouded by politics, but sadly that's the road we're headed down. And there's really not much of a way around that problem so long as Russia continues their offensive in Ukraine

Don't know if Thomas Bach or anyone at the IOC will take note of this, but it's an interest change of position for Anne Hidalgo.. Paris Mayor Against Russian Athletes Competing In 2024 Olympics 'While War Goes On'

And also, the Mets have a lot of players participating, so it wouldn't surprise me if someone got in his ear and told him it would be smarter if he was in camp with them. Not that he's playing for a job or anything like that now that he has his contract

My thoughts exactly. A lot of nations - again, this one in particular - will express their dissatisfaction with the IOC, but I don't believe for a second they'll withhold athletes from competing.

We'll see how serious these threats of a boycott are. There's a lot of time before things start to get serious in the ramp up to Paris 2024. I can promise you that for any notions about the United States boycotting, the USOPC will stand pretty firm that they plan on sending athletes to Paris. However they have to message that to avoid making it seem like they're supportive of the IOC's decision

For all the times that the IOC has claimed to advocate for human rights (and then not advocate for human rights when they claim they can't actually change the world), the course of the war probably will not be affected by whether or not there are Russian athletes competing in Paris. That said, there is definitely an argument that their presence there will be used as a propaganda tool to support the war. So I can fully understand why there's no good solution here

It doesn't matter how many nations boycott. What matters is the money. If the United States were to boycott (which they won't.. the USOPC changed their bylaws after 1980 to largely detach themselves from government involvement so the president wouldn't have the authority that Carter did to force their hand), then the IOC doesn't get their TV money from NBC. That's what would cripple them. But that's not going to happen. The USOPC exists to send athletes to the Olympics and NBC will want the show to go on.

NBC messed up big time with Tokyo because they were touting Peacock as their big new streaming service, but didn't really advertise the fact they'd only have coverage of certain events. And some of the live events they did have were on the free version rather than the subscription service. Plus, I interacted with some people that weren't aware that every event could be live streamed through their app if you have a cable subscription. They fixed that for Beijing. All of the streaming was there, so you get everything with the basic subscription tier. I remember back in the day the thinking was "wouldn't it be great if NBC had a pay-per-view where you could get all the Olympics." Well, that's exactly what we have now. For $5, sign up for Peacock for the month and cancel right after. Sure, technically that's a paywall, but that's an unbelievably good deal for the country that once put a $125 price point on the Olympics Triplecast. Looking forward to clapping back at the "it's the Olympics, they should be free" crowd next summer when they're complaining that $5 is too expensive. For.. the.. entire.. Olympics!