Boston would rather be guest stars than host others
Some influential people in Boston thought it would be a good idea to host the Olympics in 2024. More people in and around the city thought otherwise.
Boston flirted with hosting the Olympic games for all of about 10 months. The city’s biggest cheerleaders convinced the USOC of its candidacy, and the bid won out over three other U.S. cities to be the country’s primary bid to the IOC. Ten months later, a resistance so strong arose within the city that the USOC had to withdraw Boston as its candidate city.
I can’t say I blame the majority here one bit. Boston is charming. Boston is a great city with a proud sports tradition and a great base of both businesses and residents, many of whom would have seen some benefit to hosting the world’s best athletes.
But those benefits here would never have outweighed the ultimate cost, which would have included tax hikes and infrastructure remakes that would snarled the region for years. (See Dig, Big.)
But to say the Boston metro area can’t handle big events? One only has to remember that the region has hosted the World Series four times in 15 years, the NBA Finals three times and the Stanley Cup Finals twice in the same span.
This area prefers to send its best athletes to the biggest of stages without incurring the cost to host the Games here. Thirteen athletes from Massachusetts competed at the most recent Winter Olympics, and many more from around New England. That number was even higher in 2016 in Rio, headlined by gymnast Aly Raisman.
And one of the most enduring images from 1984 in L.A. is of Maine’s own and Boston Marathon legend Joan Benoit Samuelson decimating the field in the first women’s marathon.
Boston may be more recently associated with the Olympics because of the pulled bid, but the city has and will continue to leave a mark on the Games, no matter where they’re hosted.