Wow! I never realized how many Americans were interested in the Olympic Games! The media backlash and gnashing of teeth over Chicago's 'loss' was quite impressive, and somehow so unexpected. But honestly, many comments come off as arrogant and uninformed, so typically American in their perspective.
The real question is "What Went Right (for Rio)?"
So let's tally up both:
What Went Right:
1. Timing - Rio was prepared to argue very effectively that the time was right for the IOC to finally award the Games to a country in South America.
2. Economic Conditions - It happens that Brazil was now the largest economy to have not hosted an Olympic Games. Fortunately, the recession was less harmful and recovery farther along.
3. Role of the Government - The Rio bid committee engaged the central government officials early on. This brought personal commitment of leaders AND financial backing of the entire country.
4. Rio really, really wanted it - Not only were they prepared and professional, but the enthusiasm of the country was evident.
5. Chicago Bid Was Well Done - Reports indicate that this was the best US bid in quite sometime. While that is little consolation, it does provide a positive template for the next US city.
6. Linking FIFA World Cup and Olympic Games - This may lead to some true synergies and economic efficiency, and may lead to a positive legacy for the country.
What Went Wrong:
1. USOC's Sad State of Affairs - Where to begin? Flawed USOC Network announcement? Ongoing difficult relations between the IOC & USOC? New leadership, with no NGB experience (and a salary that even made the IOC cringe) that doesn't even show up for major meetings? No US city should even consider a future bid until this leaky ship has been righted, and operating smoothly
2. Fear of Chicago / Anti US Sentiment - It appears some regional concern over Chicago led to the early ousting, despite the Obama factor. The Bush legacy will linger a bit longer.
3. Mixed Signals from the People of Chicago- When the bid committee is distracted in shoring up local support, emotionally and financially, the IOC will be concerned. Lack of a government funding guarante is always a turn off.
4. Star Power - The Oprah factor, while a good cheerleader for media hype, was not effective winning IOC interest. The bids should be based on the ability to execute a major sporting event.
5. Role of Statesmen - Despite the IOC's protest that the presence or absence of political leaders is a factor, the last 3 bids awarded (London, Sochi & Rio) had significant involvement of the leader of each nation. Presidents & Prime Ministers do not have adequate time to be actively engaged in Olympic bidding, but may have to to if they wish to win.
6. IOC & Controversy - No matter how an Olympic Bid voting ensues, it always comes off as a sordid, backroom deal. Somehow the sense of fair play and sportsmanship is overtaken by sour grapes. I guess a few billion dollars can do that. Call me idealistic, but I wish that a bid would be won based on providing the best expression of the Olympic Movement and the needs of the athletes.
I know I was selfishly pulling for Chicago as a way to boost the sports marketing industry in the US. But, Brazil and Rio were certainly 'due' to have a chance to host. It will engage the continent and lift sports and sponsorship broadly. Plus, Rio will be one HECK of a PARTY!
How do you see it?
