In the aftermath of Chicago’s shocking first-round exit in Friday’s Olympic bid announcement, the prevailing theory — at least from what I’ve seen and read — is that it was some sort of anti-American bias. Sure, Barack Obama was there, and his brand is a friendlier one to nations far and wide than the last regime’s, but wounds apparently still run deep for some IOC members. (Jerry Calangelo is the latest one to say Chicago had the goods, but anti-American sentiment was the reason for our downfall.)

But is this theory wrong? I mean, there’s no way to really know this. It’s just speculation, even if it’s educated speculation, right? Well, Alan Abrahamson has a much more convincing argument for why Chicago lost the bid, one that makes more sense. Essentially, the USOC is a mess. They’ve gone through several leaders the last few years — which was a concern that was voiced early on during Chicago’s try for the games — and according to Darren Rovell, now that CEO Stephanie Streeter is out (bid fallout?), the USOC is searching for its sixth CEO since 2000. That’s just not stable leadership.

But it’s not really the actual leadership of the USOC that’s as much of an issue. It’s forging deep relationships with members of the IOC, something nearly impossible to do with so much change at the top this decade. And not only that, but Mike Lee, the British strategist that helped bring the 2012 Games to London and was a key part of Rio’s winning bid, knew Chicago didn’t stand a chance in Copenhagen. The Rio team knew they would win, and knew they would face-off against Madrid in the final round. They predicted they’d have more than 65 votes. They ended up with 66. So why were they so accurate in their prediction and America was so embarrassingly off?

Because the Rio team and Lee have been in Olympic circles for years, and knew where IOC members were leaning. Chicago and the USOC just didn’t.

Abrahamson explains:

When Streeter replaced Jim Scherr, it was noted by her supporters that she had been a successful businesswoman who had played college basketball. A prior USOC chief executive, Lloyd Ward, had been a successful businessman who played college basketball, and look how that turned out six years ago. He resigned under fire.

Being a success in business — knowing how to streamline the purchase-order process, or whatever — is not what wins in Olympic circles. A history in college basketball counts for nothing.

It’s all about relationships and alliances.

If Streeter and Probst had been more attuned to such things, would the OK have been given in July to the launch of a USOC television network when the IOC expressly told the USOC not to do it?

Really?

If and when the USOC and IOC ever patch things up, and if the USOC opts one day to get back into the bid game, whoever is in charge of the USOC ought to call Lee. If the man’s rate by then is $1 million, pay it. It’s the best money the USOC could spend, because he knows what the USOC doesn’t — how to win in the bid game.

I suppose this doesn’t rule out anti-American bias; it could have affected some voters. Yet, I’m more inclined to take the opinion of Lee, a guy that has been a part of the last two teams to win the Summer Games.

He knows what he’s talking about. Those Americans claiming it’s because the world hates us, and that alone? They just don’t.