Are the end of the Olympics in sight?

[MisterSG1]

Tomorrow, the cauldron will be extinguished in Rio (and be relit a few weeks from now for the Paralympics) and now Brazil will deal with the after effects of this 5 Ring Circus.

Considering how the 2022 Winter Olympics situation went down, the IOC really wanted Oslo to host 2022 games, and everyone gave up except the communist country and the former soviet republic, the latter, Kazakhstan, not exactly the place to host an Olympic games. These places in the western world realized that the Olympics are nothing more than a poison pill, plain and simple.

While the Winter Games and Summer Games are apples to oranges in terms of complexity, the basic idea here is the same.

What is worse, there was a poster on this site, and I used to very much agree with this viewpoint in the past, that in the case of Toronto, the Olympics may be the only way to get a Downtown Relief subway line, or much needed infrastructure. But I look at the real issue, why can cities find resources for these infrastructure projects just because the 5 Ring Circus is in town, but yet they can't find resources for the ordinary citizens who pay taxes and live in the area and have to deal with inadequate infrastructure.

I think it's time for the Olympics to go myself, it's a silly event anyways, but what about the idea of the world getting together you say? Well let's be absolutely honest, for some who want to suggest that the Olympics are supposed to ease geopolitical tensions, the Olympics are probably one of the most political events there are. Think about it, Michael Phelps doesn't win that gold medal, no, the US won that gold medal, (how a country wins a medal in an individual event is a headscratcher for me)

Let's not also mention the playing of national anthems for the gold winner, ask yourself, what is a national anthem, most anthems in the world make acknowledgement to some bloody battle in the past. The Irish anthem takes a direct swipe at the British for instance. I won't get into this, but there are countless other examples. To my knowledge, unless anyone can correct me, the playing of national anthems didn't begin until the 1936 Olympics, it was that same Olympics where the torch relay was introduced. Yes, the torch relay has absolutely nothing to do with the Ancient Olympics but an idea by the person who shall not be named. So yeah, yet there are many who think that the Olympics symbolize peace.


I'm going off on a tangent, while Olympic competition can be good, there is a simple way we can end ALL the corruption permanently. Simple, stage every summer olympics for now on in Athens, back in Greece where it belongs, and Athens made the mistake of constructing permanent venues for their olympics. Imagine now, those venues being used every fourth year instead of rotting away. Thus Athens could have its Olympic Grounds, kind of like how Toronto has the Exhibition Grounds, prime land that's used for just 2 weeks of the year for the Canadian National Exhibition towards the end of August.

This is just a rant I wanted to type right now.

The question I'm asking, if no one wants to host the games, what will be the future of the games? My Athens idea is merely a pipe dream, so what do you guys think.

[Max Rockatansky]

I've always been a big sports fan...but there has always been something about the Olympics that really couldn't ever capture my interest.  About the only thing that I ever found exciting in the Olympics was the first couple Dream Teams when the NBA players were first used.  For me it's all just secondary sports or worse....secondary athletes.  I'm not saying they aren't skilled nor the best at what they do...it's just not enough for me to care.  I always much more into CIVIC pride with the teams I follow in professional sports as opposed to this National Pride angle so many people go with.  I would say that the Olympics tend to capture the interest of the more casual sports fan...  And no...I still can't get into soccer...I played it a little high school and while it was fun....watching it is like a slower version of the most boring aspects of hockey and American football.

Plus all this money and scandal stuff along side with this "supposed" ideal that the Olympics are supposed to stand for a complete joke.  At least professional sports make no bones about things being about money...  Even college football/basketball have been kind of a turn-off the last 15 years with it becoming more apparent it's just a money grab but everyone wants to live in denial about it.

[SSOWorld]

The Olympic Games might as well be the U.S. Olympics, because the USA tends to win almost every medal race.  I'm sure Russia would have challenged them had they not been doping (or at least caught doing such).

[kurumi]

Here's MisterSG1's post as aired on NBC, 4 hours later:

Tomorrow, the cauldron will be extinguished in Rio (and be relit a few weeks from now for the Paralympics) and now Brazil will deal with the after effects of this 5 Ring Circus.

Considering how the 2022 Winter Olymp

Commercial
Commercial
Be sure to watch our Timecop show, it's really cool
Commercial

ics situation went down, the IOC really wanted Oslo to host 2022 games, and everyone gave up except the communist country and the former soviet republic, the latter, Kazakhstan, not exactly the place to host an Olympic games. These places in the western world realized that the Olympics are nothing more than a poison pill, plain and simple.

While the Winter Games and Summer Games are apples

Inane commentary about another country's apparel or customs

4-minute biography of American athlete

Commercials

to oranges in terms of complexity, the basic idea here is the same.

What is worse, there was a poster on this site, and I used to very much agree with this viewpoint in the past, that in the case of Toronto, the Olympics may be the only way to get a Downtown Relief subway line, or much needed infrastructure. But I look at the real issue, why can cities find resources for these infrastructure projects just because the 5 Ring Circus is in town, but yet they

That's all the time we have, please tune in tomorrow here on NBC, from Al Roker and Matt Lauer, goodnight

[SignGeek101]

The question I'm asking, if no one wants to host the games, what will be the future of the games?

I wouldn't say no one wants to host it... quite a few cities/countries that are quite eager:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bids_for_the_2022_Winter_Olympics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Summer_Olympics
(more detail from above): http://www.latimes.com/sports/olympics/la-sp-oly-la2024-presentation-20160820-snap-story.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Winter_Olympics
(more from above): http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/olympics-bid-calgary-cost-1.3725811

To answer the question in the OP, the short answer is no. But is the interest in the Olympics on the decline? I would say so, at least with younger, more "aware" folks. By aware, I mean those who are more knowledgeable about the true cost of the Olympics (including corruption and other shady things).

For me personally, the biggest thing is how much economic and environmental cost there is with constructing the venues, and events etc. It costs so much (Sochi was $50B), and the people living there get nothing out of it. You hear the same stories all the time; locals getting ripped off (not getting paid, being promised stuff but not getting it etc), countries spending outrageous amounts of money on an event that lasts two weeks, and is never used again:

http://www.dmarge.com/2016/08/abandoned-olympic-venues.html#show_image=1

I love the Olympics (especially the Winter Olympics where Canada actually has a stronger chance  ) but the current system going into the future will be less and less tolerated by the general public I think. I recently read an article about the possibility of Calgary putting the bid in for the 2026 Winter Olympics (they've already hosted it and have most of the venues set up and maintained) but the amount of negative reaction in the comments was overwhelming (link near top of page).

With that said, many people want to see the best of the world compete. The most recent news is that half of the entire world's population has watched the Rio games at one point or another. That's pretty spectacular if you think about it.

If you put both the above paragraphs together, you get the final product, which is what is there now. People will watch the Olympics, but perhaps grumble about the current system is inefficient at best, and downright wasteful at worst.

[Brian556]

Quote from Mister SG1:

Tomorrow, the cauldron will be extinguished in Rio (and be relit a few weeks from now for the Paralympics) and now Brazil will deal with the after effects of this 5 Ring Circus.

Considering how the 2022 Winter Olympics situation went down, the IOC really wanted Oslo to host 2022 games, and everyone gave up except the communist country and the former soviet republic, the latter, Kazakhstan, not exactly the place to host an Olympic games. These places in the western world realized that the Olympics are nothing more than a poison pill, plain and simple.

While the Winter Games and Summer Games are apples to oranges in terms of complexity, the basic idea here is the same.

What is worse, there was a poster on this site, and I used to very much agree with this viewpoint in the past, that in the case of Toronto, the Olympics may be the only way to get a Downtown Relief subway line, or much needed infrastructure. But I look at the real issue, why can cities find resources for these infrastructure projects just because the 5 Ring Circus is in town, but yet they can't find resources for the ordinary citizens who pay taxes and live in the area and have to deal with inadequate infrastructure.

I think it's time for the Olympics to go myself, it's a silly event anyways, but what about the idea of the world getting together you say? Well let's be absolutely honest, for some who want to suggest that the Olympics are supposed to ease geopolitical tensions, the Olympics are probably one of the most political events there are. Think about it, Michael Phelps doesn't win that gold medal, no, the US won that gold medal, (how a country wins a medal in an individual event is a headscratcher for me)

Let's not also mention the playing of national anthems for the gold winner, ask yourself, what is a national anthem, most anthems in the world make acknowledgement to some bloody battle in the past. The Irish anthem takes a direct swipe at the British for instance. I won't get into this, but there are countless other examples. To my knowledge, unless anyone can correct me, the playing of national anthems didn't begin until the 1936 Olympics, it was that same Olympics where the torch relay was introduced. Yes, the torch relay has absolutely nothing to do with the Ancient Olympics but an idea by the person who shall not be named. So yeah, yet there are many who think that the Olympics symbolize peace.


I'm going off on a tangent, while Olympic competition can be good, there is a simple way we can end ALL the corruption permanently. Simple, stage every summer olympics for now on in Athens, back in Greece where it belongs, and Athens made the mistake of constructing permanent venues for their olympics. Imagine now, those venues being used every fourth year instead of rotting away. Thus Athens could have its Olympic Grounds, kind of like how Toronto has the Exhibition Grounds, prime land that's used for just 2 weeks of the year for the Canadian National Exhibition towards the end of August.

This is just a rant I wanted to type right now.

To me, the Olympics are boring and pointless. Also so are all other sports. I can't fathom why infrastructure would be constructed for a one-time event like this. You are absolutely right that it should be held in the same location, using the same facilities, every time.

[english si]

The Olympic Games might as well be the U.S. Olympics, because the USA tends to win almost every medal race.  I'm sure Russia would have challenged them had they not been doping (or at least caught doing such).

Russia hasn't been top-3 for at least three Olympics. And as I pointed out in the other thread, the US lead is only so big as they hand out medals like candy in the swimming (and only the swimming). The gap of 16 golds would be more like 5 if either swiming had fewer medals for doing the same thing, or cycling had a swimming-approach to golds.

Here's MisterSG1's post as aired on NBC, 4 hours later:

Surely not 4 hours later for Rio? London was, I know...

The terrible coverage exacerbates US disinterest in the Olympics - in the UK, with decent coverage we like our tiny bit of televised less popular sports every four years. I think the TV-proper (of course, we can watch all events in full online) coverage of the soccer was limited to a few minute long 'here is what happened' things, and a bit longer with the semis and finals. Because we're far more interested in sports we don't see (and also taking part in).

For me personally, the biggest thing is how much economic and environmental cost there is with constructing the venues, and events etc. It costs so much (Sochi was $50B), and the people living there get nothing out of it.

But does that happen in developed countries? Even Rio could repurpose some pre-existing stadia.

London 2012 used an existing exhibition centre, a concert venue (in the Dome's finest hour - and the Dome is an example of a boondoggle built because we could), and turned a railway-industrial wasteland at Stratford into a massive park and nature reserve with some stadia in it. Paris' bid is about reusing existing stadiums. Madrid wants to host the green games.

Sochi beats even Beijing for overkill spending, but Sochi can hold the summer Olympics without much bother, but Beijing 2022 will need some stuff (like a whole mountain) to be built. It's these BRICs countries where massive international sports events have large environmental and financial tolls due to the desire to hold the games there being pork prestige to promote to new markets (on both sides), not the events in and of themselves.

Yes London 2012 had gentrification problems (that were going to happen anyway), issues with the IOC's absurd demands and Government putting up with them. The next three summer games (assuming Paris and LA get 2024 and 2028) will all be like that, rather than . Also the riots and that were worse with the World Cup and FIFA's demands.

To me, the Olympics are boring and pointless. Also so are all other sports. I can't fathom why infrastructure would be constructed for a one-time event like this. You are absolutely right that it should be held in the same location, using the same facilities, every time.

With the exception of Atlanta, the infrastructure isn't constructed for a one-time event like this. Even the totally insane Manaus football stadium got some Olympic matches as well as 2014 World Cup ones. But while Manaus sitting empty is fairly exceptional, even in developing countries, Atlanta's demolition right after is unique. None of the European Olympic stadia are sitting doing nothing but look pretty.

No one bats an eyelid that the UK has basically got three cities that can and have pulled off epic international sporting events in the past 14 years (Commonwealth Games in Manchester 2002 and Glasgow 2014, plus the London 2012 Olympics) - because we're still using the Olympic and Sir Chris Hoy (Glasgow) velodromes, even though Team GB cycling is based in the Manchester one (so that gets daily intensive use). The main stadia are filled weekly for soccer, and the Olympic one also gets filled for athletics every now and again. The swimming pools are always busy with locals, the other arenas used as the big halls they are - for sport, for exhibitions, for whatever. OK, there's temporary stands and the like, but they go up all over the place for one off things without people batting eyelids.

Going to the same place every time seems excessive and unfair - it's a global games and several cities can host it without too much bother (London, Paris, Beijing, Tokyo, etc). The IOC need to place more on legacy usage and on reusing existing things.

[Duke87]

Here's MisterSG1's post as aired on NBC, 4 hours later:

Surely not 4 hours later for Rio? London was, I know...

Rio is currently only 1 hour ahead of the US East Coast but it is 4 hours ahead of the US west coast, where kurumi lives.

NBC doesn't show the same thing to the whole country at once. You get a different delay depending on which time zone you're in.

[MisterSG1]

The question I'm asking, if no one wants to host the games, what will be the future of the games?

I wouldn't say no one wants to host it... quite a few cities/countries that are quite eager:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bids_for_the_2022_Winter_Olympics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Summer_Olympics
(more detail from above): http://www.latimes.com/sports/olympics/la-sp-oly-la2024-presentation-20160820-snap-story.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Winter_Olympics
(more from above): http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/olympics-bid-calgary-cost-1.3725811

To answer the question in the OP, the short answer is no. But is the interest in the Olympics on the decline? I would say so, at least with younger, more "aware" folks. By aware, I mean those who are more knowledgeable about the true cost of the Olympics (including corruption and other shady things).

For me personally, the biggest thing is how much economic and environmental cost there is with constructing the venues, and events etc. It costs so much (Sochi was $50B), and the people living there get nothing out of it. You hear the same stories all the time; locals getting ripped off (not getting paid, being promised stuff but not getting it etc), countries spending outrageous amounts of money on an event that lasts two weeks, and is never used again:

http://www.dmarge.com/2016/08/abandoned-olympic-venues.html#show_image=1

I love the Olympics (especially the Winter Olympics where Canada actually has a stronger chance  ) but the current system going into the future will be less and less tolerated by the general public I think. I recently read an article about the possibility of Calgary putting the bid in for the 2026 Winter Olympics (they've already hosted it and have most of the venues set up and maintained) but the amount of negative reaction in the comments was overwhelming (link near top of page).

With that said, many people want to see the best of the world compete. The most recent news is that half of the entire world's population has watched the Rio games at one point or another. That's pretty spectacular if you think about it.

If you put both the above paragraphs together, you get the final product, which is what is there now. People will watch the Olympics, but perhaps grumble about the current system is inefficient at best, and downright wasteful at worst.

Funny when we brang this up, I have to ask you, you may be too young, but do you remember what these posts attached to various overpasses in the GTA were used for?

https://goo.gl/maps/oQmD1BNqjRD2

It's obvious that public support when real polls are taken regarding to hosting the Olympics always comes out extremely negative among the citizens of a said city/region. Krakow, and Oslo pulled out due to huge public disapproval.

As for 2024, I think it's obvious that Paris is the favorite, as it will be the centennial of the 1924 Paris games. While the politicians in say Paris are steamrolling this through, the taxpayers there I bet are not happy about this at all.

The IOC was in this pickle back for the 1984 Olympics, nobody wanted to take the poison pill after that huge disaster in Montreal, so Los Angeles demanded that the IOC play by their rules. This is the main reason why the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics were very successful financially, because the IOC wasn't running the show.

It's possible that LA may have to step up to the plate and save the Olympics again like they did for 1984.

This article makes it clear what happened for the 1984 games:

http://gizmodo.com/how-l-a-s-1984-summer-olympics-became-the-most-success-1516228102

[nexus73]

The Olympic Games might as well be the U.S. Olympics, because the USA tends to win almost every medal race.  I'm sure Russia would have challenged them had they not been doping (or at least caught doing such).

The Britannian Empire always wins!  The Chinese Federation, a nation of dullards! (Code Geass reference)

This was the biggest wipeout in US Olympic history as far as I can remember.  USA 121  China 70  UK 67.  +51 between 1st and 2nd.  It could not have come at a better time with the Chinese causing troubles in the South China Sea since The Hague ruled against them. 

Right now we have all three bomber types (B-1, B-2, B-52) on Guam for the first time ever with a THAAD (anti-missile) system offering cover, ready to go if the need arises.  Giving the Chinese something to chew on and think about may hold them back for a while.  As good as our athletes are, our military is even better. Coming very soon will be the recently completed Ford-class carrier, Zumwalt-class destroyer and a squadron of F-35's from the USAF which just went to active status to make it even more lopsided in our favor. 

Better to win on the fields, courts and pools so we can hopefully deter war.  We're good at winning wars but lousy at winning peaces...LOL! 

Rick

[SignGeek101]

Funny when we brang this up, I have to ask you, you may be too young, but do you remember what these posts attached to various overpasses in the GTA were used for?

To be honest, no. Was born in '96.

I just hope that the system changes to be more efficient than it is now. Whatever they have to do, whether it would be the governments hosting the events, a shakeup in the IOC or whatever. I'm not an expert (for sure), but clearly the system now if far from perfect to say the least.

[english si]

This was the biggest wipeout in US Olympic history as far as I can remember.  USA 121  China 70  UK 67.  +51 between 1st and 2nd.

Only if you think third place as good as first place. The IOC don't.

That you (and the US media) are doing this is like the Australian's considering silver as the most important at London 2012 - having to mask that you didn't win enough gold to make the claim with lesser medals. Also the elevation of China above the UK masks that rich, sport-loving countries can do really well without needing to be massively populous - Team USA should be able to get 50 golds if they were doing a proper wipeout of other countries: the UK can get 27 (2 fewer than London, though 2 more medals overall), so a richer country with 5 times the population and a dominance in the medal-heavy main events of swimming and athletics, such as the USA, should be able to almost double that if they are performing well.

There were 19 Gold medals between first and second - still a lot (and still a victory even if you account for the pool having far too many similar events), but much less of one than you are claiming.

Also, you didn't win according to certain parts of the world near me :

202 more medals, literally double the second best's gold tally - what a victory for the non-existent 'Team EU'! 

[kkt]

This was the biggest wipeout in US Olympic history as far as I can remember.  USA 121  China 70  UK 67.  +51 between 1st and 2nd.

Only if you think third place as good as first place. The IOC don't.

That you (and the US media) are doing this is like the Australian's considering silver as the most important at London 2012 - having to mask that you didn't win enough gold to make the claim with lesser medals. Also the elevation of China above the UK masks that rich, sport-loving countries can do really well without needing to be massively populous - Team USA should be able to get 50 golds if they were doing a proper wipeout of other countries: the UK can get 27 (2 fewer than London, though 2 more medals overall), so a richer country with 5 times the population and a dominance in the medal-heavy main events of swimming and athletics, such as the USA, should be able to almost double that if they are performing well.

There were 19 Gold medals between first and second - still a lot (and still a victory even if you account for the pool having far too many similar events), but much less of one than you are claiming.

Also, you didn't win according to certain parts of the world near me :

202 more medals, literally double the second best's gold tally - what a victory for the non-existent 'Team EU'! 

So that's if you think the EU is one country in the same way that the USA is one country?

[english si]

So that's if you think the EU is one country in the same way that the USA is one country?

Yes, which is very very few people.

They did it after 2012, but I think the one the media picked up (image posted above) on was a joke (it was certainly a lone wolf). But then, today, they did this
https://twitter.com/europarl_en/status/767691960920440832
The text is fine, but the picture is that classic tone deaf nonsense.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Also, you didn't win according to certain parts of the world near me :

202 more medals, literally double the second best's gold tally - what a victory for the non-existent 'Team EU'! 

If the EU is one, then South Korea should be plain Korea and have 15 golds, 11 silvers and 9 bronzes for a grand total of 35 medals.

[kphoger]

Also, you didn't win according to certain parts of the world near me :

202 more medals, literally double the second best's gold tally - what a victory for the non-existent 'Team EU'! 

If the EU is one, then South Korea should be plain Korea and have 15 golds, 11 silvers and 9 bronzes for a grand total of 35 medals.

I'm more interested to know how they tally the EU compared to tallying the US. Was there any effort at including or excluding overseas territories of EU member states? Was the same effort made with US territories such as Puerto Rico?

[SteveG1988]

The USA has to make a profit off the olympics, that is why whenever we hold it, a lot of redressing of existing properties happen. Or older arenas get replaced with new ones. Atlanta built the Olympic Centennial Stadium in 1993 to host the opening and closing ceremonies, and various athletics. Converted to Turner Field, to replace the Atlanta—Fulton County Stadium which was a Cookie Cutter Multi-Purpose stadium. The city got a nice new baseball field out of it (That was later replaced, but that's beside the point) and everyone wins. That is how olympics should be run. What does the host city already have, does it have a lot of universities in the area with sports facilities and dorms. For example if Philly hosted i'd expect NJ to also be used for events, Opening/Closing at the Lincoln Financial Field, Indoor events at the Wells Fargo Center, Soccer down in Chester, Aquatics at Rutgers, and/or Princeton, etc etc.

[MisterSG1]

The USA has to make a profit off the olympics, that is why whenever we hold it, a lot of redressing of existing properties happen. Or older arenas get replaced with new ones. Atlanta built the Olympic Centennial Stadium in 1993 to host the opening and closing ceremonies, and various athletics. Converted to Turner Field, to replace the Atlanta—Fulton County Stadium which was a Cookie Cutter Multi-Purpose stadium. The city got a nice new baseball field out of it (That was later replaced, but that's beside the point) and everyone wins. That is how olympics should be run. What does the host city already have, does it have a lot of universities in the area with sports facilities and dorms. For example if Philly hosted i'd expect NJ to also be used for events, Opening/Closing at the Lincoln Financial Field, Indoor events at the Wells Fargo Center, Soccer down in Chester, Aquatics at Rutgers, and/or Princeton, etc etc.

There are many cities in the US that could hold it overnight, but you need to understand, these same cities have to agree to the IOC's demands. Even so, as we saw with recent bids from the US, the IOC doesn't exactly like US bids, especially considering the bribery involved in getting the SLC winter games of 2002. Indeed, it is very shocking to consider that there hasn't been a Summer Olympics hosted in the US (or even North America) since 1996. Yes, I know the summer games have only been in the US 4 times, the situation regarding the media and what not is a whole lot different today than it was with LA's first Olympics in 1932.

[MisterSG1]

Funny when we brang this up, I have to ask you, you may be too young, but do you remember what these posts attached to various overpasses in the GTA were used for?

To be honest, no. Was born in '96.

I just hope that the system changes to be more efficient than it is now. Whatever they have to do, whether it would be the governments hosting the events, a shakeup in the IOC or whatever. I'm not an expert (for sure), but clearly the system now if far from perfect to say the least.

Those grey posts, seen on various overpasses throughout the entire Golden Horseshoe had a banner attached to them that read something along the lines of this on the lower half of the banner:

"(Corporate Logo) Supports Toronto's 2008 Olympic Bid"

The upper half of the banner used a variation of the Toronto 2008 bid logo if I recall. These banners were attached to the overpasses from about Summer 2000 until Toronto lost the bid in July 2001.

The thing I remember the most about this was the public support for the games, if I recallm people were positive about the idea, as we saw with even mentioning 2024, the Olympics is something that the public doesn't want to touch with a 10 foot pole.

[english si]

Also, you didn't win according to certain parts of the world near me :

202 more medals, literally double the second best's gold tally - what a victory for the non-existent 'Team EU'! 

If the EU is one, then South Korea should be plain Korea and have 15 golds, 11 silvers and 9 bronzes for a grand total of 35 medals.

Good to see some sensibleness on the continent. Though I'd imagine that the idea of the EU being one country in the future is confined to a few million out of the hundreds of million citizens. Just a shame that in most countries you'd have to vote for fringe parties to oppose the idea.

I'm more interested to know how they tally the EU compared to tallying the US. Was there any effort at including or excluding overseas territories of EU member states? Was the same effort made with US territories such as Puerto Rico?

Most overseas territories aren't part of the EU (I believe Gibraltar is the only one, and didn't have a Olympic team) - the French places are fully part of France and don't have a separate team. I doubt they wouldn't have counted the US territories (or Hong Kong for China), mostly as they are too inward looking to know that PR isn't its own country and ought to be added to the USA without being reminded. They did seem to count Manx Mark Cavandish's silver, despite the Isle of Man not ever being in the EU. I guess he gets 'EU' cash, being part-funded by the UK's National Lottery (many British Olympians thanked the Lottery. A couple also thanked the UK Government IIRC. None thanked the EU as the EU did nothing for them, and may (I don't know) have funded their competition. But the EU's supporters are claiming credit for it and one paper said on it's front page that Brexit means funding could be pulled as if EU membership has anything to do with how the Lottery spends its money!).

Bringing this back on topic, a single European state (by European, I mean in the narrow way that EU-supporters talk about it: always excluding Russia and often forgetting the existence of eg Serbia) could kill the Olympics - you'd lose a lot of athletes and also most of Europe wouldn't support the team, so interest will decline.

[roadman]

If the Olympics are to survive as a viable sporting competition, and also "clean up their act" in terms of costs, they really need to establish permanent venues for both the Summer and Winter Games.  Also, if they cannot support a particular event without loading the teams with professional athletes (like Basketball), that event should be eliminated from the games.

[english si]

If the Olympics are to survive as a viable sporting competition, and also "clean up their act" in terms of costs, they really need to establish permanent venues for both the Summer and Winter Games.

If the Summer Olympics were held in, say, Paris, every four years wouldn't that be a massive turn off for people in the wrong time zone, etc? And if Rio wasn't hosting the Olympics, then would Brazil have ever given two hoots about Rugby Sevens (to pick a 2016 example - they ended up automatically qualifying for the world championships by their 9th place)? One of the reasons why the games move around is that host countries put some effort into sports that they aren't naturally aware of and some stick (Taekwondo in the UK had 20% increase in club membership, and 50% increase in seminar participation, post-2012). A permi-Parisian affair would be seen as something local, not global, and the global nature of some sports would drop off.

Cementing the games to one location would assist in its downfall, not halt it.

And it would be worse for the Paralympics - while London as a permanent location would allow sell out crowds (or thereabouts) for most events - unlike almost everywhere else where you'd struggle to sell tickets (see Rio), hosting them has done wonders for the profile of parasport - China went from 9th place with 16 golds in Atlanta to 1st place with 95 golds in London. GB's always been near the top (as they started the Paralympics in 1948), but Brazil has been slowly climbing the rankings. Even with using Olympic stadia not long afterwards they are struggling financially.

Also, if they cannot support a particular event without loading the teams with professional athletes (like Basketball), that event should be eliminated from the games.

What do you propose? Some kind of NCAA-type slavery where payment is verboten?

The concept of amateur sports being better seems so Victorian England - whereby independently wealthy gentlemen played sport alongside the pros for fun (and in cricketer WC Grace's case, a massive amount of beer that wasn't 'payment' but 'expenses') - mixed with a dislike of plebs who need to work for a living. Now, sure, ditch Basketball, Soccer, Tennis, Golf and other sports where Olympic Gold is never going to be the pinnacle of the sport, and merely a nice-to-win tournament due to high profile other events. But don't ditch people who also earn money for doing what their competing in.

[Scott5114]

I didn't actually watch the Olympics other than in a few 30-minute chunks on break at work. I don't have live TV at home, and if I did, I'm not really a sports person so I probably wouldn't have watched for an extended period. That said, I like the idea of the Olympics. It helps show off some sports that don't get a whole lot of attention. When else do you see televised swimming or volleyball?

That said, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. The method used to decide which city hosts the events seems pretty corrupt, and all of the doping scandals make the fairness of the competition questionable.

I think if a city undertakes a bid to get the Olympics, the planning should really focus on the use of the venues after the Olympics. Venues should be designed for reuse after the games. I know in prior games there was some conscious effort to do this (I know Atlanta did and I think I read London did it too), and while there was complaints from the Olympic visitors about some of the design compromises required to ensure this, it's obviously in the city's best interest to do so. I think about what would happen if Oklahoma City landed the Olympics, and I realize that done right we could get a lot of really neat stuff out of it that could enhance the city, but only if it's not built to lapse into ruins after the games.

Paris[...]London[...] Cementing the games to one location would assist in its downfall, not halt it.

The city I've always seen proposed as the permanent site is Athens, which would make sense thematically. Unfortunately the 2004 venues have greatly deteriorated since then, so a lot of money would still have to be sunk into repairing or replacing them. With the Greek economy the way it is, that makes the prospects of that happening dicey.

On the other hand, the influx of tourism money every four years might end up being a boon to Greece. You would probably be able fill the seats with visitors from the rest of Europe. Don't know if it would be profitable in the long term, though. It might take a few cycles to recoup the money. Los Angeles did have a pretty successful Olympics reusing existing venues.

[roadman]

Also, if they cannot support a particular event without loading the teams with professional athletes (like Basketball), that event should be eliminated from the games.

What do you propose? Some kind of NCAA-type slavery where payment is verboten?

Leaving aside the fact that the idea of college players being paid to play sports in the first place is utterly absurd, the Olympics are supposed to showcase AMATEUR athletes.  Last I checked, NBA stars that pull down multi-million salaries don't exactly qualify.  As I said, if you can't find enough amateurs to participate in an event, that event should be eliminated.  And it's not like the Greeks played basketball in their time, so how is it a relevant Olympic sport in the first place?

[jeffandnicole]

Also, if they cannot support a particular event without loading the teams with professional athletes (like Basketball), that event should be eliminated from the games.

What do you propose? Some kind of NCAA-type slavery where payment is verboten?

Leaving aside the fact that the idea of college players being paid to play sports in the first place is utterly absurd, the Olympics are supposed to showcase AMATEUR athletes.  Last I checked, NBA stars that pull down multi-million salaries don't exactly qualify.  As I said, if you can't find enough amateurs to participate in an event, that event should be eliminated.  And it's not like the Greeks played basketball in their time, so how is it a relevant Olympic sport in the first place?

Personally, that's an embarrassment of the US to include paid pros in this sport.

I know they do it in hockey as well, but the pros playing in America tend to play for their own country during the Olympics, spreading the talent to many different nations.