While Massachusetts and the Boston area have long been known for sporting excellence, with a proud tradition of winning sports teams like the Patriots, and Red Sox, and standout universities such as Boston College, Harvard, and Boston University, the New England area had yet to foray into the world of international sports. This all changed in a big way on January 17th, when it was announced Boston had won the right to represent the United States bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics, being selected by the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) over several other world class American cities, namely San Francisco, Washington D.C., and the city most expected to be the front-runner for the games, the 1932 and 1984 host, Los Angeles, California.

Boston’s bid centers largely around its compact plan to house the games totally in the Boston area, eliminating the sprawl characteristic of Beijing and Sochi and the cost overruns associated with the past several games, as well as reducing the amount of public funding needed for the games by relying on private investment.  Boston’s bid is backed by a veritable who’s-who of the New England and national business and sports fields, it’s major contributors being New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, Suffolk Construction CEO John Fish, and ex-senator Mo Cowan, all leading the charge for the Boston 2024 effort. Fish, head of the Boston 2024 committee has stated the Olympics could be a “incredible opportunity for Boston” (via Boston Globe) while others, such as former Olympian and “Miracle on Ice” star Mike Eruzione of Massachusetts have stated, “the Boston area is exceptionally ready to host the games, and the best choice.”

Locally, Bostonians have unfortunately been largely divided on the subject, as while it is supported by Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and Governor Charlie Baker, polls show Bostonians are divided on the issue with support for and against both hovering in the 40% regions, showing the Boston public is divided on the merits of hosting the games, which would certainly stretch city infrastructure.

Currently, the USOC plan relies on the usage of existing venues for the majority of events, utilizing the TD Garden, BU’s Agganis Arena for indoor events, the facilities at Harvard for swimming and diving, Fenway Park for various events, Gillette Stadium for football and soccer, and various events on the grounds of Northeastern, BU, and BC, saving massive amounts of money, and improving local infrastructure.

However, some facilities would still need to be built, namely the full-size Olympic Stadium planned for Widett Circle, a velodrome for cycling, and a temporary facility for beach volleyball on the Boston Common, not including the full Olympic Village which would be constructed by the Charles River, and later function as dorms for an expanded UMass Boston campus, which is among the most expensive of the proposed infrastructure.

Clearly, opinions are divided in the Bay State, and lawmakers have pledged to not block a referendum on the Olympics, opening up a possible situation in which the games could either be approved or blocked by the Massachusetts public. Locally, some students have had opinions for and against, as Danny Boyle ’15 states, “ The Olympics would be huge for Boston and the state, and a crazy experience for everyone our age in 2024”, while some, such as Brian Swierzewski ’16 have professed concerns about costs, stating, “the Olympics would be awesome, so much fun, but I think you have to ask the question of how much is it gonna cost, how much are we gonna pay for it, and we don’t really have the answers”, showing just how divided opinion can be.

No matter one’s stance, it can easily be seen that the next several years will see much debate, until a host is chosen by the IOC in May 2017, which may not even select the city, as fierce competition is expected from several world class cities such as European capitals Rome, Italy, and Paris, France, as well as oil-rich Azerbaijan’s fast growing capital, Baku, all of which Boston can certainly hold its own against.