The Rio Games officially closed last night with a "festive Brazilian farewell to a zany 17 days of brilliant athletic performances served with a sideshow of mishaps and scares," according to Partlow & Phillips of the WASHINGTON POST. With dancers "dressed as colorful birds, fiddlers and fireworks, Rio drummed and stomped its way to a happy, sopping, final note before passing the baton to Tokyo" (WASHINGTON POST, 8/22). ROCOG President Carlos Nuzman said, "We always said that Rio was ready, and we can now declare it. We did it: we delivered spectacular Games. We did it. We made it" (CNN.com, 8/22). IOC President Thomas Bach last night said, "These were marvelous Olympic Games in the 'marvelous city'" (AP, 8/22). Bach on Saturday said that he "had no regrets about bringing the Olympics to Rio," despite problems that "included several armed robberies and assaults and the smashing of windows on a media bus." Yesterday, he "again emphasized the importance of diversity to the Olympic movement" (Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE, 8/22).
BRINGING THEIR "A" GAME: USA TODAY's Christine Brennan writes Rio "pulled it off." Brennan: "Who thought we'd be able to say that?" (USA TODAY, 8/22). In Charlotte, Scott Fowler writes for all the "controversies coming into these Summer Games, they went off better than most expected from a logistical standpoint" (CHARLOTTE OBSERVER, 8/22). ESPN's Jeremy Schaap said the Games "were a success." Schaap: "If you are the organizers of the Rio Games, you look back at all the things that could have happened, didn't happen. So they’re going to look at this and say, ‘We came out of this okay’" ("Mike & Mike," ESPN Radio, 8/22). In Phoenix, Jeff Metcalfe writes the Games closed to "deserved applause if not a standing ovation." Most of the lead-up fears "were not realized," and Rio "functioned as well as Athens 2004 or Sochi 2014" (ARIZONA REPUBLIC, 8/22). In Denver, Mark Kiszla wrote, "Rio not only pulled off the Olympics, but this city’s mountains-hug-the-sea setting made it the most spectacular backdrop for any of the 10 Games I have attended." The $20B investment that Brazil made "should be rewarded by bringing back more than 10,000 of the world’s top athletes 20 years down the line" (DENVER POST, 8/21). In San Jose, Mark Purdy writes the Games "concluded with no major ecological disasters and no terrorism and no mosquitoes devouring random European visitors and no transportation collapses." They "ran on time" and delivered "thrilling athletic moments." The Rio Games, on "many levels, could be considered a success" (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 8/22).
SOLID EFFORT: NBC's Mike Tirico gave the Games a "B+," saying they "were OK." Tirico: "There was traffic, there were some issues, there's some infrastructure issues that Brazil couldn't solve. But at the end of the day, most of the events were on time. They were pretty memorable. You talk to the athletes ... they enjoyed it" ("Rio Olympics," NBC, 8/21). The WALL STREET JOURNAL's Reed Johnson notes the Games, "on their own limited terms, were a success." More things "worked than didn’t," and most visitors "got where they needed to get, if not always on time" (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 8/22). In Miami, Michelle Kaufman writes, "Was everything perfect? No. But it never is" (MIAMI HERALD, 8/22). In S.F., Ann Killion wrote, "It has been bumpy at times. But mostly beautiful." The title of "Worst Olympics in the modern mega-Games era still belongs to Atlanta" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 8/21). In Chicago, Bernie Lincicome wrote, "That wasn't so bad, not as bad as we thought it might be." To say that Rio "more or less pulled it off is not to praise these Olympics but to concede that things were not as bad as expected" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 8/20). However, Canadian IOC member Dick Pound said, "This has been probably a little below the expectations of the experts." Olympic historian David Wallechinsky, attending his 17th Games, said that the "shortage of volunteers, lack of Olympic signage and other logistical glitches have outweighed the well-run competitions and welcoming Brazilian people" (AP, 8/21).
CERTAINLY COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER: In Raleigh, Luke DeCock writes these "weren't the greatest Olympics ever." They were "disorganized, underfunded, spread out too far over a traffic-clogged city where it takes hours to get from one neighborhood to the next." If the '14 Sochi Games were a "bad idea for the Olympic 'movement,'" Rio was a "well-intentioned misstep." The legacy of these Games "will be that not everyone is equipped to host, no matter how good the intentions" (Raleigh NEWS & OBSERVER, 8/22). SI.com's S.L. Price wrote in the "best of Olympics -- London ’12, Sydney ’00, Barcelona ’92 -- there eventually comes a sense that the athletes, the administrators and the host population have melded almost mystically into sync." Yet, it was "impossible to ignore the increasingly trifurcated nature of Rio’s Olympics." Great drama and achievement "could be found on every pool and track and court, but kept getting undermined by one spectacularly unveiled problem after another" (SI.com, 8/20). In Houston, David Barron writes the Games were "not without problems." Ticket sales "were slow, volunteers did not show up for work, increasing the stress on those who did show, and organizers were unable to live up to promises to improve the city’s water quality" (HOUSTON CHRONICLE, 8/22). In Toronto, Bruce Arthur writes Rio "was a shambles, as Olympics go." Arthur: "Volunteers quit, food didn't get show up at venues, bus routes vanished or got altered. ... Theft was rampant." That is what happens "when you come to a still-developing country whose economy is crashing, and you judge the Games based on the IOC's criteria" (TORONTO STAR, 8/22).
TIME FOR A CHANGE? In DC, Sally Jenkins writes the IOC "needs a new model, one that rotates the Games among cities with existing sites." It is "time to end these massive cost overruns" (WASHINGTON POST, 8/22). The ARIZONA REPUBLIC's Metcalfe writes, "With every passing Olympics, I shift more in favor of a rotating set of Summer Games host sites" that would include London, L.A., Beijing and two others. That would allow for "true sustainability of venues," while "controlling costs and providing a more reliable event" (ARIZONA REPUBLIC, 8/22). In Miami, Linda Robertson writes it is "time to rethink the cost, size and purpose of the Olympics." Robertson: "Are the Games for the athletes or the VIPs? International and national Olympic Committee members receive obscene perks. Expensive seats at the track and field stadium went unused by corporate sponsors more interested in networking with clients than watching the competition" (MIAMI HERALD, 8/22). In Utah, Amy Donaldson writes, "I wonder if the IOC will ever understand the desperate need to honestly acknowledge the shortcomings in its system. It certainly won’t do it publicly, so I am not hopeful" (DESERET NEWS, 8/22). ESPN.com's Bonnie Ford wrote now that Bach "has declared Rio's absence of disaster a success, we can expect unabated entitlement and overburdened host cities to continue indefinitely" (ESPN.com, 8/21).
