Say again? Olympic fantasy camp

Think about this. I am old. You're not supposed to say that but this comment needs context of actual witness.
... Bid for the Olympics is an okay move. Just avoid winning. Honorable mention is great.
... A sidebar. This observation applies to the huge Summer Games not to the Winter Games.
... Since Montreal's Olympics, those cities that succeeded in getting the
games aren't doing as well economically. Its sort of an economic
hangover. Gargantuan economic resources and human effort goes into holding the
modern games. Such a demand to the exclusion of any other thing on that city's agenda impairs the city's future economic vitality.
The city is burdened with the weight of enormous debt. Municipal
taxation rates remain high to pay off the burden.
... Every supporter says Legacy this. Legacy that. That is total horseshit
and a complete fabrication of reality. If your city, especially a city
the size of Toronto, supports sport, build an arena, build an Olympic
pool, or build a cycling velodrome. Its definitely worth the investment.
These facilities promote active healthy lifestyles and a preferred focus for youth.
... Building them because of a specific sporting event such as the Olympics
is a sample of utter foolishness. Construction schedules are sped up.
Construction quality usually is good, but more often than not, there is a
high percentage of facilities with poor construction. Rushing a facility construction on a specific deadline generates construction short cuts. Any shortcut in any construction never portends to any quantity or quality of good. The descriptive term is "White Elephant". The prime example of that description is definitely the Montreal Stadium. It was never completed to the original design and the construction turned out to be poor.
... Getting the Olympics hurt Montreal, and they were stuck paying off for
their facilities for decades. At the time they got their bid, Montreal
was the biggest world class city in Canada. After Toronto and other Canadian cities have economically thrived.
... Perhaps Toronto lost out in its bid to Atlanta but simply observe that
after Toronto bids on the games for the next decade foreign investment
into the city is stimulated. Now without getting the summer games,
Toronto benefits from the advertising efforts that went into making an
Olympic bid, without being burdened by actually winning the games.
... Indeed one indirect result of making the bid is that the city's
name is put out there. People are aware of its emergence. And every time
that Toronto made a bid, subsequently the local economy surged. Almost
every time that Toronto made a bid, it wound up in the ideal short list. That is good.
... Why is this? Making a bid, necessitates the city to promote itself on
the international stage. The members of the International Olympic are
chosen because they are influential.
... Suppose you had a plan for a major project and was
looking for a host city, would you want to proceed into a city where the
commercial activities are solely focused on a singular goal set of
economic priorities to the exclusion of you project? Or put that project
into a city with all the capabilities to hold an Olympics but would be
focused on your project. And you the investor is going to consult with professional and influential people who are familiar with the feature of each city. IOC members visit those cities. A venture capitalist will consult that source often.
... A major cause leading to the very serious recent Greek economic problems was their successful winning bid. People warned that Greece could not afford to hold the games. But the IOC got all traditional and shwarmy over the Athens bid. Those who tendered the warning have been proven right.
... Presenting the moral to all this. Making an Olympic bid is a very good idea. It seems absurd but the $10M to &20M spent on the bid promotion targets the international elite. Winning the Olympic bid... an economic disaster. Every city on the Olympic short list that didn't win the bid, did commercially better in thepost bid era compared to the winner. The winning city, not so much as what they hoped.
... Make the bid. But because winning it is actually losing and losing is actually winning. Just don't win the bid.



http://www.torontosun.com/poll/should-toronto-make-a-bid-for-the-2024-olympic-games

DA Boom - Sonic shock

By the Lard Tundrin Jaysus. Didn't na see that storm a coming. This isn't a rebuild. This got run over by a hurricane.

Truculence persona. I took chemistry. Mix 1 part Lamoriello, 1 part Shanahan, 1 part Babcock into 1 executive meeting. Don't shake. Stir. Kaboom.

Tune in Bob McCown later today. For sure. Betcha his jaw is on dat studio floor. Lou is, or rather was, one of his idols.

A winning trade idea - almost

REPORT: Maple ‪#‎Leafs‬ offered 4th overall to the ‪#‎BlueJackets‬ for picks #8, 34, 38 and 58 at the draft table according to theScore.

Things are looking up at the Leafs. While the trade effort failed, it does display the future plans of the Leafs. The attempted trade move is a crazy idea. On the surface it seems such. It is not the norm. The offer displays the future intent of the Leaf's managers. Columbus is right up against the CAP. Trading for Clarkson didn't help, although it is easy to understand why they would turn down the idea no matter how tempting. And it was tempting. The world of the Blue Jackets should have made that trade offer a solid.

,,, At the moment, the poor Blue Jackets are full of long term, overpriced player signings. The Leaf-Jackets trade provided a sour taste because the major component was David Clarkson. Hard to forget that burn. But keeping a solid core of players on a pro team is another strategy. Its another approach common in middle America where one tries to keep a unit of players together for a long time to provide competitive play. The offer for one of the top five picks this year must have been terribly tempting. Its a devil's offer. You have a long term core team, with a splashy flashy young affordable forward.

... For the Leafs its a smart offer. Its an all win, all lose scenario. And probably this trade was on the table in discussions with a lot of other teams. Dangling Marner was almost an irresistible trade lure. Those were a lot of draft picks. To pass on a potentially solid franchise player like Marner by trading him away for lesser picks seems strange unless your management is looking towards the free agent market of 2016. The trade offer tips MLSE hand going forward into next year.

... Getting all those lower positioned draft picks shows just how much power Babcock has. He brings a lot of the Detroit team management philosophy here. The target is probably going to be Stamkos. Now supporting Stamkos with a solid young skating team players seems a good approach. Marner will be a good partner on the top line but he is only one guy.

... Marner's future NHL career is almost a certainty. Yet play in the big league is much different than the minors. There is a very good chance that he might not perform up to hopes. So here comes the chance to get Stamkos who is going to demand and deserves a salary befitting his talent which would be in the ball park of $12 to 14M per for 4yrs and an option. With Stamkos the winner would need a lot of CAP room. Like gravy, the plot thickens.

... Tampax Bay is in big CAP trouble at the moment, although their team GM is also a former Detroit operative so he'll manage. No matter what happens or for which team he plays for, in the fall of 2016 Stamkos salary doubles. It isn't even a matter of guesswork. $14M is the max contract value in the NHL at the moment. Stamkos is going to get that.
... The Lightening might want to sign and trade for Stamkos if they can. If they can't keep him due to contract problems they will attempt to auction him off. This means the other team might have to put up a plentiful number of young players in that event. The larger the prospect stable of the Leafs, the more likely a sign and trade with Tampa. Hence the Leafs ambition to get as many draft picks through one year of professional experience suddenly becomes smart. Its the bait.

... So if the Leafs target is Stamkos, having all these draft picks signed and playing in their development organizations gives them the best chance. If Stamkos decides not to play along with Tampa, deciding to move to the Leafs, in that event, from the brutal statistic point of view, there would be a lot of potentially fast young legs in support. Remember, most draft picks (including Marner) may not be good enough to make it to the NHL level. Many are picked, few survive the competition.

... If Stamkos doesn't sign to the club, the Leafs still have Marner in their stable, albeit with a smaller talent pool under development. Understand the new philosophy brought in by Shanacock from Detroit. There is a very good chance that Marner, unless he is very talented, with excellent defensive skills and very tough will spend a one or two year apprenticeship in the minors. He would have to impress Babcock to make the rookie season, the very next one.

... So it would be at least 2016 before any other top forward steps up to replace the play of Kessel without the hassle. Knowing this, one now understands what was behind the lowering of the boom on Kadri last season. It was a very serious public message to Kadri. The team administration likes Kadri. A Stamkos, Kadri, Van Riemsdyk line would be a potent number one line.

... Try to understand the thinking of Maple Leaf's new management. They want a team that can go very deep into the playoffs every season. To do this, they have a choice, go with a Kadri, Marner, JVR line or a Stamkos, Kadri, JVR front line. One would naturally pick the latter as a sure thing.

... Columbus would have benefited from the proposed trace but the reality of the Clarkson trade left a sour note in their minds. It makes sense to trade with Columbus because in any scenario their ability to be in the hunt for Stamkos is not on the table. Their CAP situation leaves little flexibility to be a future suitor.

... Either way the Leafs would have won but the additional draft picks would have literally secured their goal in any scenario, if that goal of the Leafs is to put them into a position to challenge for getting Stamkos. The absolute best scenario for the Leafs would be to get Stamkos with Marner and JVR with Kadri leading the second line. The trade idea would have provided the Leafs with a lot more choices.

... The trade offer simply means that the Leafs will be one of the teams in the hunt for Stamkos, and having a pile of minor league prospects would have solidified their chances. That was the rationale behind that idea. And something like that might happen. ie. Since the Tampax are up against yee old CAP, the Leafs might sign and trade using Marner as bait, instead of the small platoon of players conceived in the Jackets trade.

NBC Sports Fashion police

Entering a new phase, the National Hockey League (NHL) seems to be getting pressure from NBC. One of the senior executors insist that most hockey players be clean cut. Its for image. A lot of other malarkey from the vacuous brain of a suited executive.

Why is it that American sport media feel the need to manage a sport? I doubt the slagging ratings experienced annually by NBC have anything to do with player's face hair. Check the employee list. NBC sports pun-ditz carry the worst baggage on television. 

Pan American Pan (PAP)

Heading into the Pan American Games the organization deserves to be wiped across the examination table of the provincial auditor. Call the PAP smear.

Contrast the original forecast with now. They forecast a rush on hotels, reserve early. Recent comments by the phenomenally greedy Toronto hoteliers there was no rush to reserve. Indeed there will be vacancies all over the place.

Contrast. They pushed the idea to buy advance tickets. Unfortunately up til this moment, this date, ticket sales are so far behind that the officials are skirting around the issue of ticket sales. Trust this observation. If ticket sales were furious they would be bragging like it was 1066ad in Normandy.

Indeed, there are rumored price drops which means that advanced ticket buyers hoping to purchase seats at a discount will now be paying the premium price for some events. Some people are upset.

After the fun ends there will be the predictable hangover. Except so few people will see the games in person that no one will get much of a headache. Rather taxpayers will be outraged by the final enormous cost overruns of which cost points will trickle rather than pour out.

Is there a beneficiary, certainly UofT Scarborough campus will be a big winner. A low cost world Olympic class swimming pool is in their use. After it will certainly be declared as a probable venue for Toronto's next summer Olympic bid. Its certain to happen. The Pan Am Games will be declared by all the politicians as a success. Taxpayers will go..."What the hell?"

And everything will be right with the world.

The Big Elephant

FIFA fell on its own twisted arrogance. In some ways, this scandal was good not just for football/soccer but brings a framework for scrutiny for all professional and amateur sports. The message it sends is fatigue over the escalating costs of major international and national sports events.


Wrapped in total angst, the observer must ask whether bribery in this case truly effected the outcome of the choice of event venue(s). The Republic of South Africa(RSA) was chosen. When the investigation proved that FIFA officials allegedly received bribes and kickbacks the decision was criticized albeit encased in the convenience of hindsight. Here lies the problem. Before the decision to have RSA hold the World Cup of Football, FIFA was under considerable pressure to have the cup sited on the African Continent. Of all the nations on the African continent, RSA was the most capable from an economic, political and social aspect. Its the number one pick if one wanted to hold any major sports event in Africa.

The same goes for the World Cup choices of Russia and Qatar. Bribery seems totally pointless because both those nations can and will comfortably host successful tournaments. They would have been the best choices on that cycle. This fact which sustains those choices despite the rapacious challenges of the bribery scandal. And that is the problem with bribery in these cases. The payments were quite unnecessary.

One must also question the selectivity of American justice. The massive arm of the United States Justice system goes after FIFA for very two very strange reasons. When the choice process took place the nation in second place was the United States. But it was a second place that wasn't even close in voting. The last round Qatar had 14 votes to the United States 8.

The American prosecution seems a major case of the sour grapes of being the poor loser. Their prosecution seems very legitimate because FIFA officials carelessly used US based banks and financial firms. The allegations include money laundering and this is illegal in the USA. This single fact opened the door for the USA government to undertake legal action against FIFA officials.

Whether these officials will be successfully convicted seems likely since the modern US court system smells a lot like the kangaroo. The United States does seem very selective in its choice. The reason for this assessment emerges as the righteous weight of the US comes down on FIFA, other professional organizations continue on unscathed. The big one, the big international fish is the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

Some time ago, some Olympic Committee members were accused of the very same thing. One prominent point of strangeness was when the City of Athens magically lost its bid to the much weaker Atlanta bid. Up to the final vote, the contention by rumor that some votes were enhanced by money offers. Indeed, the wining and dining of Olympic officials seems to point to the use of financial or perk incentives. It comes to the single question, the big elephant. Does the IOC stand up the to the same scrutiny as FIFA experienced?

Gilmour for ....

On paper Mark Hunter will get the job. Should he? Yes he is a skilled scout and player negotiator. The problem for the Leafs is to get more of a politically diplomatic powerhourse. Unlike other clubs, the Leafs have a monumental wailing wall of sports media. The guy should have some Leaf cred but been on his own so as not to get tainted with failure.

In that light then, if they are as smart as they pretend to be there is only one effective choice. The only person to fit that role and is now a General Manager, is Doug Gilmour of the Kingston Frontenacs.

He played for the Leafs during a more successful period. He does wear a Stanley Cup ring. He has played with a variety of hockey clubs, not just the Leafs. The variety means he's been in a position to study other organizations. He would also provide cover for those who will assert that the Leaf's have no tradition blah, blah. He has been away from the Leafs long enough so as to be free from the taint of the recent Leaf regimes. Gilmour would be far more recognizable and popular with the fans and with the media in other words, Leaf-cred.

And most important of all, unlike Hunter, the presence of Doug Gilmour would be a hip check to Don Cherry's voice. He's a good Kingston boy too.