View Full Version : Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison
historybuffer November 6th, 2006, 04:21 PM I don't have time to search the olympics.org website or the Chicago Tribune
for that matter.
Is there anyone from Chicago that has heard from Mayor Daley's office regarding the site selection?
UWMilwaukeeJay November 6th, 2006, 05:35 PM I dont understand the title. Madison is in the mix too?
Steely Dan November 6th, 2006, 05:48 PM the only thing i've heard from the chicago olympics officials about site selection is how they want to host the most compact games in the history of the olympics. i haven't heard anything about any of the events being locted outside of chicagoland.
EDIT:
here's what i found doing a quick search of the proposed site selction (this is of course still all very preliminary)
as it looks now just about everything is planned to take place in chicgao and the surroudning burbs, with the exception of some of the soccer prelims which may be held in other midwest locations.
1 OLYMPIC STADIUM
- Opening and closing ceremonies
- Athletics (marathon, race walk, track/field)
2 OLYMPIC VILLAGE
3 WASHINGTON PARK HOCKEY FIELDS
4 HARBOR COURSE ROWING BASIN
- Canoe/kayak (flatwater)
- Rowing
5 McCORMICK PLACE WEST
- Gymnastics (rhythmic)
- Taekwondo
- Fencing
- Table Tennis
- Badminton
- Modern pentathlon (shooting)
6 McCORMICK PLACE SOUTH
-Written press and broadcast facilities
7 McCORMICK PLACE NORTH
- Handball
- Judo
- Wrestling
8 McCORMICK PLACE LAKESIDE
- Indoor volleyball
- Weightlifting
9 NORTHERLY ISLAND VELODROME
- Cycling (Track and BMX)
10 SOLDIER FIELD
- Soccer
11 HUTCHINSON FIELD
- Archery
- Triathlon
12 OLYMPIC AQUATIC CENTER
- Aquatics (swimming, synchronized swimming, waterpolo, diving)
- Modern pentathlon (swimming)
13 UIC PAVILION
- Boxing
14 UNITED CENTER
- Basketball
- Gymnastics (artistic/trampoline)
15 NORTH AVENUE BEACH
- Beach volleyball
16 LINCOLN PARK WATERWAY
- Canoe/kayak (slalom)
17 WAVELAND TENNIS FACILITY
- Tennis
18 MONTROSE HARBOR
- Sailing
CHICAGO-AREA VENUES
(Not shown on map)
Chicago State University
(South Side)
- Basketball preliminaries
Allstate Arena (Rosemont)
- Basketball preliminaries
Palos Park
- Road cycling
(Also to be held in city)
Palos Forest Preserve
- Mountain biking
- Equestrian events
Illinois State Police firing range (Joliet)
- Shooting events
Midwest locations (TBA)
- Soccer preliminaries
Badgers77 November 7th, 2006, 09:15 AM Typically olympics are held around an area. Events for the SLC areas were held, in many instances, hours away from Salt Lake City. There was some talk about Madison getting a few events, but I think most of it has died.
historybuffer November 7th, 2006, 03:28 PM Maybe Daley put Milwaukee in the fold for the momentum of METRA?
Madison was mentioned for sailing and Camp Randall.
Does METRA go to Rockford?
jpIllInoIs November 7th, 2006, 03:33 PM ^ No Metra does not go to Madison.
I don't recall any talk of using any Madison venues. This may have been local Madison rap.
To repeat what Steely said. The biggest sellling point that Chicago has (besides the beautifull lakefront and skyline) is that their proposal emphasizes a 'compact' Olympics.
BTW there is a dedicated Chicago Olympics thread elsewhere.
historybuffer November 7th, 2006, 04:00 PM I knew METRA didn't go to Madison. I didn't say it did. I was
wondering about Rockford, home of Chicago's "Third Airport?"
Okay..... well this is a thread devoted to Richard Daley-Tom Barrett.
The honorable mayor of Chicago told the Mayor of Milwaukee that he would suggest to the Olympics Committee having Milwaukee host some events that's why this thread is here.
The operative word is "Milwaukee." And again that is why this thread is here.
jpIllInoIs November 7th, 2006, 04:19 PM ^ My bad, the Metra does not serve Rockford either.
i_am_hydrogen November 7th, 2006, 05:20 PM I think it would hurt Chicago's bid if we had too many satellite sites scattered relatively far from the city. As much as I like Madison, it's just too far away from Chicago to be a tenable secondary host. On a good day, it can take three hours to drive from Chicago to Madison. An athlete who has to compete doesn't want to spend that kind of time traveling to a venue. Travel, as we all know, can take a little bit out of you. These athletes obviously need all the energy they can get to compete successfully.
Steely Dan November 7th, 2006, 05:23 PM The honorable mayor of Chicago told the Mayor of Milwaukee that he would suggest to the Olympics Committee having Milwaukee host some events
well, that must have been an older conversation because the current scheme for chicago's olympic bid is to have the events as concentrated in chicago as possible. that may be a loss for madison and milwaukee and other nearby cities in the region (rockford, peoria, southbend, etc.), but it's the way the chicago olympic commitee wants to proceed. they feel that by having a concentrated games in chicago, instead of having events scattered all over the region, will help their cause in winning the games.
and remember, there is still a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way to go before chicago even gets there, so there's a very big chance this planning is all for naught anyway.
milwaukeeunseen November 7th, 2006, 06:25 PM Well, if Chicago really focuses on pulling this off, I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to do it. That's how Chicago has always done things ... once it sets its civic mind on a goal, it does what it has to do to achieve that goal. That's one of the things I've always admired about Chicago.
The last summer games held in the US were in Atlanta in 1996. The 2016 Games will be 20 years after '96, making the time ripe for another US city to host the Games.
I'm dubious, however, about the long term benefits of hosting the Olympics versus the enormous costs. Of course, any city that hosts the Olympics gets all kinds of benefits. They get improved transportation infrastructure, sporting venues, parks and new housing that can be of a benefit for years after the Games. But I think people often overstate the long term benefits vis a vis the long term costs. Atlanta of course still uses its Olympic stadium but there are numerous other venues around town that are used very little -- but Atlanta is still footing the bill for them. Montreal is still paying off the debt from when it was the center of the universe for two weeks thirty years ago. Did the 1976 Olypmics make Montreal any more of a world city than it was before the Olympics? No one really can say for sure.
Chicago is already a bona fide world city that is a major player on the world stage. I'm not sure Chicago needs the Olympics to boost its profile globally. Even if it did need the boost, are the Olympics going to provide that boost? Atlanta is a good case in point. Is Atlanta a bigger, more attractive, more globally important city now than it was before the Games? I don't think the answer is very clear cut.
If Chicago goes for these Games and lands them, then I will be very happy because it will be of great benefit to the city and the region. But I think they need to think very carefully about whether or not the enormous costs of hosting the Games (paid for almost entirely by the host city) is really worth it in the long run. If they decide it is worth it, then full speed ahead.
Steely Dan November 7th, 2006, 06:43 PM well, chicago has definitely decided that the games will benefit the city. that is something that virtually no one is debating anymore. afterall, as our city just learned with millennium park, you gotta spend mad amounts of money to make even madder amounts of money.
the problem with chicago's bid won't be that the city doesn't want it bad enough, it is the able competition the two california cities (LA & SF) bring to the table and the fact that the USIOC is unusally packed with californians these days. the californians on the commission will either cancel each other out splitting between the two cali cites, or they'll all get behind one of them and then chicgao will basically be left out in the cold.
chicago is a very goal and reults oriented city, but no city, regardless of how much boundless civic pride and energy it may posess, can simply will itself to host the olympics. this is a competition between cities, and sometimes rather arbitrary qualities, such as "aura" or "vibe" can be the difference in one city winning and another losing. just because chicago so desperately wants to host the games does not mean that the matter is a forgone conclusion. far from it in fact. my money is still on SF getting the USIOC nod.
Badgers77 November 7th, 2006, 07:13 PM It wasn't just a rumor floating around Madison, Madison was mentioned in the Chicago Tribune (along with Fort Bend), for Camp Randall.
Chicago is a significant long shot to get the olympics though. Lately, after it was in Atlanta and Salt Lake City (WTF), the board has seemed a bit angry about putting it in the United States. Any United States City is a long shot 2006, and LA has a better shot than Chicago.
milwaukeeunseen November 9th, 2006, 12:26 AM You'd think the fact that Los Angeles has hosted the Olympics twice before would be a strike against it for 2016.
Personally, I think Toronto is the number one most overdue city to host the Olympics. But if a US city were to host them in 2016, I would obviously want it to be Chicago.
historybuffer November 9th, 2006, 04:49 PM ^ My bad, the Metra does not serve Rockford either.
Argh so not much demand from the west? Imagine if the train system returned to the golden age (1890s-1930s) and vacationing Chicagoans could take a train to Galena for the weekend. Reduce our regional dependence on fossil fuels. Trains used to serve Chicagoans escaping to Lake Geneva, WI.
Land the olympics, build regional infrastructure, create synergy for rail service between Madison-Milwaukee-Chicago= research triangle, biotech, IT, medical services technology. Atlanta did not have light rail before they hosted the olympics.
historybuffer November 9th, 2006, 04:53 PM well, that must have been an older conversation because the current scheme for chicago's olympic bid is to have the events as concentrated in chicago as possible. that may be a loss for madison and milwaukee and other nearby cities in the region (rockford, peoria, southbend, etc.), but it's the way the chicago olympic commitee wants to proceed. they feel that by having a concentrated games in chicago, instead of having events scattered all over the region, will help their cause in winning the games.
and remember, there is still a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way to go before chicago even gets there, so there's a very big chance this planning is all for naught anyway.
Yeah but maybe if enough of us talk about it on this international forum
we can yield tremendous influence on the Oympic Committee. :) :)
We can only hope and cross fingers and stuff.
|
|