View Full Version : New Downtown Calgary Arena
kap384
May 21, 2011, 11:02 PM
I would think that the city/Stampede could find a number of events that would be able to pay the bills for the Saddledome. The Flames might not like it because some of those events, namely certain concerts, would cut into the margins they could charge with a monopoly on arena space.
As it is, with a single arena and three sports tenants, there are a number of events that we just cannot hold. With two arenas we could host the Memorial Cup and international tournaments. Sure we are hosting the 2012 World Juniors but we are sharing that honour with Edmonton. We simply don't have the capacity to do it on our own whereas cities like Halifax and Saskatoon are capable of making independent bids.
Could the Saddledome even accept more concerts if the acts wanted to play here and weren't concerned about the roof? I imagine there would be a real concern over scheduling as it is if the Flames, Hitmen, and Roughnecks all had long playoff runs in a single year.
I like the idea of the 'Dome staying, for much needed ice space, presentation space and trade show space.
However, once it is replaced, I hope there is NEVER another concert in there. The acoustics are horrid.
freeweed
May 22, 2011, 12:23 AM
The reason Calgary doesn't have the inventory of old buildings downtown to reno like 'peg does is because at the time they were shuttering their old empty buildings, Calgary was knocking old buildings over
It's more to do with the fact that Winnipeg was pretty much ten times the size of Calgary back when all these old buildings were constructed. Calgary just never had much inventory of this stuff in the first place (and yeah, what there was is now mostly gone).
93JC
May 22, 2011, 2:08 AM
ISure we are hosting the 2012 World Juniors but we are sharing that honour with Edmonton.
Speaking of the world junior championships, that brings up another point: the Saddledome's lower level seating is removable to accommodate the international size ice surface. As far as I know it's largest arena with the ability to host hockey on the IIHF surface in the world (although I wouldn't be surprised if the arena in Cologne is a little bigger; I don't remember off the top of my head exactly).
A niche market perhaps, but a market. Perhaps a deal for Hockey Canada to relocate its operations to the Saddledome could be made.
UofC.engineer
May 22, 2011, 3:51 AM
It is a LOT more than $100M from the feds - there is an additional $22M per year for operations - as this thing is a money sink in a major way. So over a couple decades, that's over half a billion! And that doesn't even count the provincial and municipal contributions / concessions.
Thry gotta do something to boost the economy. Winnipeg is a city that has experienced little growth over the last 40 years. The municipal population is stagnant at around 633,000.
http://demographia.com/db-cancma.htm
YYCguys
May 23, 2011, 1:54 PM
I'm not at all a football fan, so I'm hope I'm going to make sense here...but wouldn't it be feasible for the Stamps, if they chose to do so and the space was large enough, to convert the Dome into a football field? Then their current digs could be redeveloped.
BCTed
May 23, 2011, 2:02 PM
I'm not at all a football fan, so I'm hope I'm going to make sense here...but wouldn't it be feasible for the Stamps, if they chose to do so and the space was large enough, to convert the Dome into a football field? Then their current digs could be redeveloped.
Unfortunately, you are not making sense. A CFL field takes up more than five times as much area as an NHL rink and the seating capacity of the Saddledome is far too small.
Jay in Cowtown
May 23, 2011, 9:53 PM
I'm not at all a football fan, so I'm hope I'm going to make sense here...but wouldn't it be feasible for the Stamps, if they chose to do so and the space was large enough, to convert the Dome into a football field? Then their current digs could be redeveloped.
:haha: No, ya made absolutely no sense... at all.
But the area the dome is sitting on would make a great location for a new Stamps Stadium!
MalcolmTucker
May 23, 2011, 10:06 PM
^Whenever McMahon comes down, hopefully could do the replacement in conjunction with a redevelopment of the south end of Stampede Park, replace the Grandstand with a facility that is football friendly and still usable as a chuckwagon and rodeo ground. Would involve some compromises for sight-lines for the chucks, but I don't think we could ever replace either McMahon or the Grandstand on their own, especially now that the horsemen have left Stampede Park (but I have heard that their quest to get a track built at CrossIron Mills is at an end, so perhaps they could come back).
YYCguys
May 24, 2011, 6:39 AM
Yes, as I alluded, I'm not at all an expert in things football, so I certainly needed correcting!
Innersoul1
May 24, 2011, 7:50 PM
I would think that the city/Stampede could find a number of events that would be able to pay the bills for the Saddledome. The Flames might not like it because some of those events, namely certain concerts, would cut into the margins they could charge with a monopoly on arena space.
As it is, with a single arena and three sports tenants, there are a number of events that we just cannot hold. With two arenas we could host the Memorial Cup and international tournaments. Sure we are hosting the 2012 World Juniors but we are sharing that honour with Edmonton. We simply don't have the capacity to do it on our own whereas cities like Halifax and Saskatoon are capable of making independent bids.
Could the Saddledome even accept more concerts if the acts wanted to play here and weren't concerned about the roof? I imagine there would be a real concern over scheduling as it is if the Flames, Hitmen, and Roughnecks all had long playoff runs in a single year.
Let's think of the concerts and events thing from the promoters perspective. It is of the advantage for a promotor to provide the best venue for the concert-goers and for the bands to showcase themselves. i would still suggest that if the Dome was to stay in existence that the majority of concerts would still go to the bigger, newer, more modern arena. The Dome would be used for smaller stage concerts maybe shows in the round (utilizing only the lower bowl, or concert bowl seating.
For example, I am going to see Death Cab for Cutie on Wednesday at the Corral. I would expect that shows like this would favour a small/medium sized venues like the saddledome.
Additionally, the Stampede could operate the Dome as a western oriented venue. I wonder if the dome was retrofitted to become a year round indoor rodeo venue if this would have any merit to moving the Canadian Finals Rodeo to this city. Would the transformation justify the cost?
Danma
May 24, 2011, 7:55 PM
How about a single venue that contains BOTH a hockey rink and a football stadium with shared parking, restaurants, retail and other infrastructure? Call it Sports City, and in between build residential condos. With the condo fees, season tix are included for the various sports.
Here's a picture I drew up to capture my vision. I sort of imagine it with a Core-like mall between the two areas with restaurants and sports memorabilia. The food and such could be better, if it serves hockey, football, lacrosse (?) and soccer fans, in addition to concerts in both venues.
http://yfrog.com/h3482hdj
polishavenger
May 24, 2011, 8:21 PM
How about a single venue that contains BOTH a hockey rink and a football stadium with shared parking, restaurants, retail and other infrastructure? Call it Sports City, and in between build residential condos. With the condo fees, season tix are included for the various sports.
Here's a picture I drew up to capture my vision. I sort of imagine it with a Core-like mall between the two areas with restaurants and sports memorabilia. The food and such could be better, if it serves hockey, football, lacrosse (?) and soccer fans, in addition to concerts in both venues.
http://yfrog.com/h3482hdj
Its a nice concept, space efficient and creates more vibrancy due to overlapping event schedules. If the football stadium was domed, it could be a very good concert venue for the really big ticket shows and festivals.
The key is to get that retail and residential mixed into the picture. I've mentioned it in the past, but if the concourse could be turned into a mall that is open to the public and tickets would only be required to get into the spectator area, you could have a pretty cool venue.
Bassic Lab
May 24, 2011, 8:48 PM
Let's think of the concerts and events thing from the promoters perspective. It is of the advantage for a promotor to provide the best venue for the concert-goers and for the bands to showcase themselves. i would still suggest that if the Dome was to stay in existence that the majority of concerts would still go to the bigger, newer, more modern arena. The Dome would be used for smaller stage concerts maybe shows in the round (utilizing only the lower bowl, or concert bowl seating.
For example, I am going to see Death Cab for Cutie on Wednesday at the Corral. I would expect that shows like this would favour a small/medium sized venues like the saddledome.
Additionally, the Stampede could operate the Dome as a western oriented venue. I wonder if the dome was retrofitted to become a year round indoor rodeo venue if this would have any merit to moving the Canadian Finals Rodeo to this city. Would the transformation justify the cost?
Will the new arena be any larger than the Saddledome? I know that it will have more corporate boxes but some of the rumours I have heard indicate that it could have fewer seats. It definitely won't have the capability for an International sized ice surface.
I imagine that it would make the most sense to put the Flames, most concerts, and other high profile events in any new building. Then put the Hitmen, Roughnecks, and everything else in the Saddledome. The problem is the Flames will want to get all they can out of the new building, which means the Hitmen will move too. Hell, from what I have heard the Flames would love to shut the Saddledome down to completely eliminate competition. I think it would be much better to have two venues at 75% then one at 100%. Maybe we could work something out so that one organization manages both arenas. Then there would be no desire to condemn one of them.
I don't think there would be enough demand to permanently turn the Saddledome into a rodeo venue but with two arenas we could undoubtedly attract more events.
Danma
May 24, 2011, 8:49 PM
Polishavenger: That was my vision as well. There could be performance or convention space in the lower levels of the tower, and when nothing else is going on it could still function as a shopping area... the biggest issue with any sports venue is to ensure it's still a welcoming space outside of game day; having a built in population and a friendly space would help keep its vibrancy.
You Need A Thneed
May 24, 2011, 9:00 PM
the problem with having two venues together like that, is that it's hard to find enough land all in one parcel for one of the venues, never mind two of them together, and especially downtown. In Calgary, perhaps you could do it in the west village, if it was built before the plans for the area got too far along.
kw5150
May 24, 2011, 9:07 PM
So the west village would just be spaghetti interchanges, stadiums and parking? Fail.
You Need A Thneed
May 24, 2011, 9:14 PM
So the west village would just be spaghetti interchanges, stadiums and parking? Fail.
looking at google maps, it doesn't even look like there is enough room in the west village for a football stadium only. McMahon Stadium looks larger itslef than the vest villiage. So, yeah, it likely wouldn't work.
Innersoul1
May 24, 2011, 9:27 PM
Will the new arena be any larger than the Saddledome? I know that it will have more corporate boxes but some of the rumours I have heard indicate that it could have fewer seats. It definitely won't have the capability for an International sized ice surface.
I imagine that it would make the most sense to put the Flames, most concerts, and other high profile events in any new building. Then put the Hitmen, Roughnecks, and everything else in the Saddledome. The problem is the Flames will want to get all they can out of the new building, which means the Hitmen will move too. Hell, from what I have heard the Flames would love to shut the Saddledome down to completely eliminate competition. I think it would be much better to have two venues at 75% then one at 100%. Maybe we could work something out so that one organization manages both arenas. Then there would be no desire to condemn one of them.
I don't think there would be enough demand to permanently turn the Saddledome into a rodeo venue but with two arenas we could undoubtedly attract more events.
I guess this depends on how you characterize "bigger." I would imagine that the footprint of the arena itself would be larger. This would account for the arena having larger concourse, office and dressing room/fitness facility face. If we are talking about capacity I don't think it will be much bigger. Current capacity is just under 20,000. I believe that Ken King has said that the new venue will be around 17,000. With, as you point out, more corporate boxes.
As for the international ice hockey surface, I don't think that this will play a major factor in the process. The IIHF has shown that it has no qualms with playing international games in North American Ice surfaces. Additionally, for events like the World Juniors, there aren't supporting venues with the International Ice surfaced so i think it is a non-issue. Besides. If an international ice surface is needed I believe tha the new rink at COP has a capacity of 4000-5000 and that is where Hockey Canada will head its operations
freeweed
May 24, 2011, 9:33 PM
King at one point mentioned 17,000 for a new building, but I wonder... does anyone know what the count of Flames season tickets is? They started selling in the extreme nosebleeds recently (which is how we finally got ours), which tells me it's gotta be at the 15,000 level or higher.
If they transition to a new building with the current base, there will be very, very few individual tickets ever available. Sounds great from a financial perspective until you have a rough patch and you've completely shunned the casual fan.
Danma
May 24, 2011, 9:46 PM
the problem with having two venues together like that, is that it's hard to find enough land all in one parcel for one of the venues, never mind two of them together, and especially downtown. In Calgary, perhaps you could do it in the west village, if it was built before the plans for the area got too far along.
Meh, just get rid of that horse track on the Stampede grounds, lots of room! :D
mersar
Jun 14, 2011, 9:01 PM
Heres an interesting twist that makes the fate of the Saddledome more mysterious, the Flames have bought the Roughnecks. So when the Flames do build their new arena, I'd expect that we'll see the Roughnecks go with them rather then a lot of the original speculation of them staying in the dome.
MalcolmTucker
Jun 14, 2011, 9:25 PM
So Roughnecks, Hitman, Flames - I wonder how concerts will fit in during the part of the year with all three playing? I guess if they build it themselves they are free to do it - just don't force the public to close the dome until it is shown it can't make money. I guess Toronto does Rock, Leafs, and Raptors which I guess would be more dates than Calgary's three.
Calgarian
Jun 14, 2011, 10:24 PM
So Roughnecks, Hitman, Flames - I wonder how concerts will fit in during the part of the year with all three playing? Same as they do right now.
just don't force the public to close the dome until it is shown it can't make money.
I don't think there is any question that the Dome can make money, it's bought and paid for, and I imagine it doesn't take too many concerts to pay the bills. The problem is that the number of events that come to Calgary are very limited, so the Flames want to get the revenue from the new building and not have it compete with the Dome.
MichaelS
Jun 14, 2011, 10:26 PM
I don't think there is any question that the Dome can make money, it's bought and paid for, and I imagine it doesn't take too many concerts to pay the bills. The problem is that the number of events that come to Calgary are very limited, so the Flames want to get the revenue from the new building and not have it compete with the Dome.
That is the Flames' problem, and not The City's. Why would The City willingly give up a source of revenue?
freeweed
Jun 15, 2011, 1:56 PM
Same as they do right now.
I think the implication is - they're replacing the 'Dome because it's not suitable for a lot of concert events, which skip Calgary entirely. In a new facility we're sure to see a lot more concerts coming through, so how will they manage a heavier concert schedule, 3 teams, plus all the other stuff?
Winnipeg has one of the most consistently busy arenas in country (and continent) and it only has one team playing there. I don't know how the Flames think 3 will work, unless the 'Dome sticks around - or we continue to miss out on major events.
Calgarian
Jun 15, 2011, 2:18 PM
I think the implication is - they're replacing the 'Dome because it's not suitable for a lot of concert events, which skip Calgary entirely. In a new facility we're sure to see a lot more concerts coming through, so how will they manage a heavier concert schedule, 3 teams, plus all the other stuff?
Winnipeg has one of the most consistently busy arenas in country (and continent) and it only has one team playing there. I don't know how the Flames think 3 will work, unless the 'Dome sticks around - or we continue to miss out on major events.
I don't think it will be a problem with a single building. The biggest reason I would like to see the Saddledome stay is for when we host things like the Brier or the figure skating championships. Currently the Flames will go on a 7 or 8 game road trip while something like this is in the city.
suburb
Jun 15, 2011, 2:29 PM
I don't think it will be a problem with a single building. The biggest reason I would like to see the Saddledome stay is for when we host things like the Brier or the figure skating championships. Currently the Flames will go on a 7 or 8 game road trip while something like this is in the city.
It would be a 'cool' penguins exhibit!
In all seriousness, the biodome in Montreal is quite the place. It is converted from the 1976 Olympics velodrome. This probably doesn't really make sense for the Saddledome because of the distance from the zoo, but is a good example for somewhat out of the box thinking.
http://freelargephotos.com/001394_s.jpg http://www.tourisme-montreal.org/TMImages/01200-01299/01295/biodome-de-montreal.jpg
http://www2.ville.montreal.qc.ca/archives/democratie/democratie_fr/media/images/contenu/expo/pieces/inspection/VM94-UC-6158-20.jpg
http://www.xoopla.com/docs/4c17bbe78e6b6/orig/biodome.jpg http://www.findandgoseek.net/uploads/XVoue61SOI.jpg
http://canada.sebastienangot.fr/gallery/pinguins_biodome_montreal.jpg
freeweed
Jun 15, 2011, 5:15 PM
The Biodome in Montreal truly is something else. I'd love for Calgary to do that with the lollidome - first, it preserves a truly iconic edifice. Second, because it would give Calgary another damn cool tourist attraction.
Calgarian
Jun 15, 2011, 5:17 PM
Trying to put glass panels on the cable suspended roof might be tricky...
suburb
Jun 15, 2011, 7:01 PM
Had the dome been available a couple decades ago, I would have voted for the Royal Tyrell Museum to be housed there instead of Drumheller. That would have been awesome! I don't think it would work well for a national portrait gallery though.
Hadn't heard anything on this in awhile. Isn't the Flames lease up in 2014 ? Are they likely to have a new arena in 2015 ?
freeweed
Oct 1, 2011, 3:44 PM
Hadn't heard anything on this in awhile. Isn't the Flames lease up in 2014 ? Are they likely to have a new arena in 2015 ?
Nothing being publicly discussed. Just like Edmonton, it's now pretty much too late to have a new building on time, so we can expect some bizarre negotiations to extend these leases for a year or three.
mintzilla
Oct 2, 2011, 5:30 PM
Hi, dumb question but where is the most likely location for you new arena going to be?
jeffwhit
Oct 2, 2011, 7:03 PM
Hi, dumb question but where is the most likely location for you new arena going to be?
In my opinion the most likely location is the empty land immediately to the north of the Saddledome
Between 12th and 14th ave NE. (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=calgary&hl=en&ll=51.039316,-114.051604&spn=0.007461,0.021136&hnear=Calgary,+Division+No.+6,+Alberta,+Canada&gl=us&t=h&z=16&vpsrc=6)
Calgarian
Oct 3, 2011, 4:06 PM
That's the ideal location, basically the same location as they have currently.
Innersoul1
Oct 4, 2011, 2:26 AM
I am curious as to how they would route the LRT access.
Calgarian
Oct 4, 2011, 3:09 AM
I am curious as to how they would route the LRT access.
I think they would almost have to build a new path around / through BMO Centre.
Ramsayfarian
Oct 4, 2011, 3:58 AM
I am curious as to how they would route the LRT access.
Make them walk. A couple more blocks won't kill anyone.
mersar
Oct 4, 2011, 4:33 AM
Hi, dumb question but where is the most likely location for you new arena going to be?
It will be north of 11th ave on the former rail yard. Won't be on the Stampede grounds.
Innersoul1
Oct 4, 2011, 12:58 PM
It will be north of 11th ave on the former rail yard. Won't be on the Stampede grounds.
What makes you think that Mersar? Do you have a hunch that there will be a falling out between the Flames and the Stampede as the Flames want to max revenue?
h0twired
Oct 4, 2011, 2:15 PM
Can you give some examples of what Winnipeg is doing that we wouldn't dream of?
If you need another one... check out this project.
http://www.5468796.ca/images/avenue/avenue_hample_web.jpg
http://www.facebook.com/TheAvenueBuilding
2 vacant office buildings converted to a mixed use development (offices, retail, rental apartments). Sure it's not exactly high end, but its a great project. The photo galleries will give you an idea as to what they started with.
Might as well check anything done by these guys.
http://www.5468796.ca/
Weird name. Great firm.
MalcolmTucker
Oct 4, 2011, 2:20 PM
Offices are too valuable in Calgary to convert to residential. I don't think that is a negative thing ... Edmonton has converted some offices to residential, but they are mostly buildings with thin and long floor plates that weren't very efficient as offices to begin with. Converting a long term revenue stream into a one time pay out shows a lack of faith in the long term viability of downtown as an office centre, not the best thing imo.
Stang
Oct 4, 2011, 3:00 PM
What makes you think that Mersar? Do you have a hunch that there will be a falling out between the Flames and the Stampede as the Flames want to max revenue?
Interesting thought. The Flames do see a lot of revenue from parking go to the Stampede, so I could see why they'd rather own the land outright and all of the parking that would come with it. On the other hand, would a downtown arena in the middle of a sea of asphalt be feasible, practical, or desirable? Is there even enough land?
Just musing here - I know nothing about their plans, but I would love to hear more about Mersar's idea.
mersar
Oct 4, 2011, 4:54 PM
Interesting thought. The Flames do see a lot of revenue from parking go to the Stampede, so I could see why they'd rather own the land outright and all of the parking that would come with it. On the other hand, would a downtown arena in the middle of a sea of asphalt be feasible, practical, or desirable? Is there even enough land?
Just musing here - I know nothing about their plans, but I would love to hear more about Mersar's idea.
Theres already a bit of a touchy relationship between the two groups from what I've heard (mostly about rents but it likely goes deeper). Building another arena on the grounds would also remove a huge chunk of area that the stampede has identified for redevelopment (quite a good chunk of the Stampede Trail area for instance) and ownership would be tricky if the Flames built and paid for the arena on Stampede owned land.
Building on their own site gives them more control, more revenue and could be a significant element in pushing the city for the SE LRT as it would be almost right on the SE LRT (even closer then the dome is to Vic Park/Stampede station). In the short term this would be the only negative to the plan, as it would be a bit of a hike to the nearest CTrain station, but I'm sure some sort of shuttle system may be part of their plan.
freeweed
Oct 5, 2011, 12:04 AM
Interesting to see how this plays out. The Saddledome is used a lot during Stampede.
Stang
Oct 5, 2011, 12:42 AM
Interesting indeed. I believe that the Stampede will eventually be expanding to 12th anyway, so the new stadium would only be a block away from the north end of the grounds. Reentry stamps at the Stampede would allow people to move back and forth for concerts and that sort of thing.
Until the SE LRT is built, it looks like City Hall station might be a tad bit closer to the potential site than the Stampede-Victoria Park station. Still a hike from either though, but as mentioned, I would anticipate some form of shuttle as the LRT is obviously well utilized for sporting events, and I think that everyone would like to make is as practical as possible.
Innersoul1
Apr 3, 2012, 6:10 PM
So with the Flames becoming majority shareholders in the Stampeders organization I have heard a lot of chatter in the media about the potential for a multi-sport complex. Here are a couple questions I have, please feel free to share your thoughts:
1) With the Flames seemingly have made some progress as far as their desires for a new arena and 3 potential arenas is there any feasibility for a venue where both the Stamps and Flames could play?
2) The only location i can think of that could possible accommodate sucha facility with LRT access is the Grayhound/GSL site. Where else would this work?
3) Is there any value in having a stadium that has both NHL and CFL capabilities?
Personally, I think that it is in the best interests of the Stampede to keep the Flames close both for the feasibility of the site year round and for the value added through the Stampede Mainstreet development.
MalcolmTucker
Apr 3, 2012, 6:30 PM
So with the Flames becoming majority shareholders in the Stampeders organization I have heard a lot of chatter in the media about the potential for a multi-sport complex. Here are a couple questions I have, please feel free to share your thoughts:
1) With the Flames seemingly have made some progress as far as their desires for a new arena and 3 potential arenas is there any feasibility for a venue where both the Stamps and Flames could play?
2) The only location i can think of that could possible accommodate sucha facility with LRT access is the Grayhound/GSL site. Where else would this work?
3) Is there any value in having a stadium that has both NHL and CFL capabilities?
Personally, I think that it is in the best interests of the Stampede to keep the Flames close both for the feasibility of the site year round and for the value added through the Stampede Mainstreet development.
Well, it would have lots of floor space for a possible exposition centre. I doubt there would be much cost savings, or enough profit to pay for a football stadium.
MonctonGoldenFlames
Apr 3, 2012, 7:08 PM
So with the Flames becoming majority shareholders in the Stampeders organization I have heard a lot of chatter in the media about the potential for a multi-sport complex. Here are a couple questions I have, please feel free to share your thoughts:
1) With the Flames seemingly have made some progress as far as their desires for a new arena and 3 potential arenas is there any feasibility for a venue where both the Stamps and Flames could play?
2) The only location i can think of that could possible accommodate sucha facility with LRT access is the Grayhound/GSL site. Where else would this work?
3) Is there any value in having a stadium that has both NHL and CFL capabilities?
Personally, I think that it is in the best interests of the Stampede to keep the Flames close both for the feasibility of the site year round and for the value added through the Stampede Mainstreet development.
firestone park, next to the severely under utilized max bell/barlow ctrain station. it's roughly 40 acres in size and should be plenty for 2 stadiums and parking facilities. quick access to train, deerfoot and memorial drive. as the crow flies, it's less than 4 kms from the calgary tower.
Innersoul1
Apr 3, 2012, 7:09 PM
Well, it would have lots of floor space for a possible exposition centre. I doubt there would be much cost savings, or enough profit to pay for a football stadium.
So you are suggesting a domed stadium on the CFL side that could be used for exhibition space like BC Place?
So with the Flames becoming majority shareholders in the Stampeders organization I have heard a lot of chatter in the media about the potential for a multi-sport complex. Here are a couple questions I have, please feel free to share your thoughts:
1) With the Flames seemingly have made some progress as far as their desires for a new arena and 3 potential arenas is there any feasibility for a venue where both the Stamps and Flames could play?
2) The only location i can think of that could possible accommodate sucha facility with LRT access is the Grayhound/GSL site. Where else would this work?
3) Is there any value in having a stadium that has both NHL and CFL capabilities?
Personally, I think that it is in the best interests of the Stampede to keep the Flames close both for the feasibility of the site year round and for the value added through the Stampede Mainstreet development.
There is absolutely no chance of a combined NHL/CFL stadium. The metrics are just too different (just look at the original Heritage Classic in Edmonton, the rink was swimming in extra floor space).
Two teams would require two stadiums. There could be coordinated parking and LRT access, as well as coordinated office space. However where this has been tried there is massive amounts of space required for parking purposes (ie believe New Jersey Giants stadium is a good example).
Ultimately the Calgary Flames are looking to coordinate and consolidate the back office functions and marketing departments. Also, there are some public rumors the flames were offered the share rights as one Stampeders owner wanted to sell and there were no other buyers.
DizzyEdge
Apr 3, 2012, 8:17 PM
I think this gives a good idea of how the playing surface sizes differ
http://billsportsmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/michigan-stadium_104thousand-in-attendance_outdoor-ice-hockey-game_.gif
http://billsportsmaps.com/?category_name=ncaa-ice-hockey
I think the only way it could work is of the entirety of the stands could move in and out which sounds like some interesting engineering.
Calgarian
Apr 3, 2012, 8:22 PM
There would have to be 2 separate buildings, they could just be on the same site.
DizzyEdge
Apr 3, 2012, 8:29 PM
I do think Firepark is an interesting idea, unless anyone can think of a better use.
Actually, I'll give medium support to it, as I do like the idea of entertainment venues being downtown.
MonctonGoldenFlames
Apr 3, 2012, 8:42 PM
I do think Firepark is an interesting idea, unless anyone can think of a better use.
Actually, I'll give medium support to it, as I do like the idea of entertainment venues being downtown.
i think firepark, due to proximity of the runway approach, would have some sort of height restriction for typical commercial type buildings, so 2 stadiums would fit just nicely, while still maxing out the possible height limitations. it would also boost one of the lowest ridership train stations on the entire system. i'd also think that with the west lrt complete, it would be very easy for a lot the richies who own season tickets on the west side to get to the game, without transfers.
lubicon
Apr 3, 2012, 8:47 PM
I think this gives a good idea of how the playing surface sizes differ
http://billsportsmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/michigan-stadium_104thousand-in-attendance_outdoor-ice-hockey-game_.gif
http://billsportsmaps.com/?category_name=ncaa-ice-hockey
I think the only way it could work is of the entirety of the stands could move in and out which sounds like some interesting engineering.
Good analogy and don't forget a CFL filed is 12 yards wider and 30 yards longer than an NFL field so the ice sheet would actually be much smaller than it appears with this picture.
MonctonGoldenFlames
Apr 3, 2012, 8:49 PM
here is the saddledome and mcmahon stadium on the firepark site, with plenty of room to spare for parking or preferably, a mixed use tod next to barlow/max bell.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v519/monctongoldenflames/firepark.jpg
Bigtime
Apr 3, 2012, 8:49 PM
Anywhere but Firepark, that would suck so much.
It would be the worst, and by worst I mean blurst. Which is worst spelt wrong because it would be so bad.
Me&You
Apr 3, 2012, 8:50 PM
I do think Firepark is an interesting idea, unless anyone can think of a better use.
Actually, I'll give medium support to it, as I do like the idea of entertainment venues being downtown.
I would have ZERO interest in attending Flames games at Firepark. It's hard enough to get interested in them lately, but at least you can make a "night out" out of it by wandering down 17th / 1st / to DT to drown sorrows after the games. Since I'm a $8 cab ride away from the 'Dome, I'm sure my opinion is very YIMBY-ish, but I cannot think of any positives to come from locating the new rink at FP.
Innersoul1
Apr 3, 2012, 8:51 PM
There is absolutely no chance of a combined NHL/CFL stadium. The metrics are just too different (just look at the original Heritage Classic in Edmonton, the rink was swimming in extra floor space).
Two teams would require two stadiums. There could be coordinated parking and LRT access, as well as coordinated office space. However where this has been tried there is massive amounts of space required for parking purposes (ie believe New Jersey Giants stadium is a good example).
Ultimately the Calgary Flames are looking to coordinate and consolidate the back office functions and marketing departments. Also, there are some public rumors the flames were offered the share rights as one Stampeders owner wanted to sell and there were no other buyers.
LOL :haha: Obviously, it wouldn't be one venue for both sports. It would be a sportsplex that would contain a NHL arena and a separate CFL/Soccer pitch.
Calgarian
Apr 3, 2012, 8:54 PM
I definitely prefer it to be downtown, but if that was not an option, I would support Firepark.
MonctonGoldenFlames
Apr 3, 2012, 9:01 PM
I definitely prefer it to be downtown, but if that was not an option, I would support Firepark.
i agree. outside of downtown, i think this might be the lesser of all the evils. it is still close to downtown and not stuck on the fringe somewhere, has existing c-train access and very close to the major artery in the city. it has lots of pros if you look outside of the downtown box.
Bigtime
Apr 3, 2012, 9:02 PM
I refuse to look outside the downtown box. :D
MonctonGoldenFlames
Apr 3, 2012, 9:04 PM
I refuse to look outside the downtown box. :D
don't speak with a full mouth of latte, it's rude. :blink:
eggbert
Apr 3, 2012, 9:11 PM
A new downtown arena is the only way to go! I'm positive the Flames see it that way too. Who do you think are going to fill all of those new boxes they want to put in the new arena? It will be downtown corporate Calgary for the vast majority.
MonctonGoldenFlames
Apr 3, 2012, 9:13 PM
A new downtown arena is the only way to go! I'm positive the Flames see it that way too. Who do you think are going to fill all of those new boxes they want to put in the new arena? It will be downtown corporate Calgary for the vast majority.
correct me if i'm wrong, but are you implying that corporate calgary won't buy boxes if the arena is not downtown?
DizzyEdge
Apr 3, 2012, 9:23 PM
I would have ZERO interest in attending Flames games at Firepark. It's hard enough to get interested in them lately, but at least you can make a "night out" out of it by wandering down 17th / 1st / to DT to drown sorrows after the games. Since I'm a $8 cab ride away from the 'Dome, I'm sure my opinion is very YIMBY-ish, but I cannot think of any positives to come from locating the new rink at FP.
Definitely the 'middle of nowhere' (retail wise) applies to Firepark. For it to really work you'd want the area to be at least some sort of a destination on non-game days.
Me&You
Apr 3, 2012, 9:33 PM
Definitely the 'middle of nowhere' (retail wise) applies to Firepark. For it to really work you'd want the area to be at least some sort of a destination on non-game days.
Which would realistically take a decade to get some traction and even longer, if ever, before it's a viable destination. Boooo-urrns
Edit - I can see the appeal of Firepark for certain applications. It would be a great spot for a Quarry Park or similar office park, with 4-5 buildings in the 5 storey range. But as a destination for any sort of "fun"... no.
Innersoul1
Apr 3, 2012, 10:25 PM
A new downtown arena is the only way to go! I'm positive the Flames see it that way too. Who do you think are going to fill all of those new boxes they want to put in the new arena? It will be downtown corporate Calgary for the vast majority.
I would have to agree with this. Moving to Quarry park would really isolate the arena and stadium. Given that the Flames have been pushing the idea of the fan experience, there really isn't much to service fans who go to the events. The only real plus of Firepark is the size of the land and access to LRT. Having the venue in close proximity to downtown, restaurants and bars is a real plus. I recognize that Firepark isn't as extreme say Kanata for the Senators but I don't think that it's a good fit.
eggbert
Apr 4, 2012, 12:22 AM
correct me if i'm wrong, but are you implying that corporate calgary won't buy boxes if the arena is not downtown?
Yes, I think it will have an impact, although I'm sure the bitching by the corporate crowd will end when it comes time to actually purchase tickets. The proximity of the Saddledome to offices, restaurants, drinking establishments, hotels, etc is a huge plus not only to box buying clients but to most of the corporate clients that own seats in the lower bowl. I've asked our HR department, which owns quite a few seats, and they were like no way, it can't leave downtown, no one will go. I think that's a little extreme but I'm sure their response will be a common initial reaction for most of these type of clients.
suburbia
Apr 4, 2012, 4:37 AM
I think anchoring the two in a new TOD would be a fantastic idea and would work. There might be other structures in the vicinity that could make sense for redevelopment. Barlow would also get reinvigorated, and it has developed 'some' over the last decades. It is also reasonable access to the airport and a good number of hotel rooms. The project should be larger, though. Maxbell would be across the way, and it is just down the road from the very nicely developing International Avenue (Barlow South becomes 17th Ave). Views would be fantastic.
McMahon's current location could have both also, especially if you include the field off to the South as part of the redevelopment plan. Remember that motel village is being re-done, and maybe they can repatriate the stadium nissan location for something. Am I mistaken of is foothills athletic park also being re-developed? Certainly that train station needs some more work.
Joborule
Apr 4, 2012, 4:51 AM
Why Firepark? There should be enough room for both a new arena and stadium north of 12th ave, east of Olympic Way. Just demolish the transit parking garage. Boom, space.
Especially since Ken King seems to imply the new arena is either gonna be on, or right outside of stampede grounds in his latest season ticket holder lunch talks. Think ownership wants to keep it in city centre, which is logical.
I wonder if Flames ownership would want to make a domed stadium rather than a outdoor one, so it can be used as a year round, all purpose venue? If MLS comes to Calgary, football and soccer would be going on for majority of the year, and then during some free time they can turn the venue into a convention centre or concert building.
If this gets done, only baseball would have a lackluster stadium in this city. (Not like it's necessary currently)
suburbia
Apr 4, 2012, 5:12 AM
in city centre, which is logical.
McMahon is not in the city centre. Do you feel it is illogical?
I wonder if Flames ownership would want to make a domed stadium rather than a outdoor one, so it can be used as a year round, all purpose venue? If MLS comes to Calgary, football and soccer would be going on for majority of the year, and then during some free time they can turn the venue into a convention centre or concert building.
I actually really hope it is covered. In fact, it would need to be more than just the stadium and arena, but additional convention infrastructure. A hugely important consideration for that to work, though, would be a plan for proximity to a thousand or more hotel rooms (preferably a couple thousand in fact). The current location is a 'fail' for that.
Fully agree that this is an opportunity to have some vision, and not limit. A combined facility (IE integrated / master planned site) including convention centre may interest the city, where as strictly professional sports team venues won't get as much buy in.
TallBob
Apr 4, 2012, 5:32 AM
Dwntown (or as close as you can get). All these new venues in US cities are all building DT. With the exception of maybe 2 or 3.
A major reason for advocating Firepark site for new NHL rink is that Flames ownership could control everything (parking, concessions, non-NHL events, etc). If the Flames control everything, there is no requirement for public funds.
Move the Stadium near the Stampede grounds, and either the Stampede association or the Flames (or both organizations) would approach the city and province for funding.
bigcanuck
Apr 4, 2012, 2:05 PM
Don't forget that McMahon is owned/operated by U of C - they're a key played in this discussion as well.
stampedeyeehaa
Apr 4, 2012, 2:18 PM
Yes, I think it will have an impact, although I'm sure the bitching by the corporate crowd will end when it comes time to actually purchase tickets. The proximity of the Saddledome to offices, restaurants, drinking establishments, hotels, etc is a huge plus not only to box buying clients but to most of the corporate clients that own seats in the lower bowl. I've asked our HR department, which owns quite a few seats, and they were like no way, it can't leave downtown, no one will go. I think that's a little extreme but I'm sure their response will be a common initial reaction for most of these type of clients.
I agree, alot of people going to the games just throw a Jersey on and cab/train it then after go back to their nice office parking spot and drive home OR leave the car and get it the next day. Significant impact leaving DT.
Joborule
Apr 4, 2012, 4:37 PM
McMahon is not in the city centre. Do you feel it is illogical?
McMahon was built quite a while back and is a shared facility with the university team. Nowdays it would be best to make professional sporting venues in the heart of the city for numerous reasons; mostly for it's accessible central location from all quadrants and surrounding business/activities. Better being in a large area commercial being city centre rather than a small commercial space like Motel Village.
suburbia
Apr 4, 2012, 5:44 PM
Better being in a large area commercial being city centre rather than a small commercial space like Motel Village.
'Motel Village' is being re-developed as a TOD. Additionally, even as is (which is pretty sad) there are more hotel rooms than you have around the Stampede area.
Innersoul1
Apr 4, 2012, 5:47 PM
I think anchoring the two in a new TOD would be a fantastic idea and would work. There might be other structures in the vicinity that could make sense for redevelopment. Barlow would also get reinvigorated, and it has developed 'some' over the last decades. It is also reasonable access to the airport and a good number of hotel rooms. The project should be larger, though. Maxbell would be across the way, and it is just down the road from the very nicely developing International Avenue (Barlow South becomes 17th Ave). Views would be fantastic.
McMahon's current location could have both also, especially if you include the field off to the South as part of the redevelopment plan. Remember that motel village is being re-done, and maybe they can repatriate the stadium nissan location for something. Am I mistaken of is foothills athletic park also being re-developed? Certainly that train station needs some more work.
'Motel Village' is being re-developed as a TOD. Additionally, even as is (which is pretty sad) there are more hotel rooms than you have around the Stampede area.
Motel rooms aside there aren't service around McMahon to support a huge stadium complex, nor is there room to develop. McMahon already suffers from NIMBYism from the communities surrounding it. Add the influx of traffic from the arena and special events and those folks are going to be right PISSED!
kw5150
Apr 4, 2012, 6:25 PM
McMahon was built quite a while back and is a shared facility with the university team. Nowdays it would be best to make professional sporting venues in the heart of the city for numerous reasons; mostly for it's accessible central location from all quadrants and surrounding business/activities. Better being in a large area commercial being city centre rather than a small commercial space like Motel Village.
Just as long as the facility is a kept active when not in use. Stadiums and sport complexes can destroy the live-ability of a downtown if not done correctly. Luckily, there is a push for more urban designs with these new facilities as we learn from the past.
Joborule
Apr 5, 2012, 1:44 AM
'Motel Village' is being re-developed as a TOD. Additionally, even as is (which is pretty sad) there are more hotel rooms than you have around the Stampede area.
True that if you really want to do a massive renovation of the Motel Village/McMahon area, you have plenty to work with (aside from NIMBYism as acknowledged a couple posts up).
I just think in comparison of having a stadium somewhere, it's better to put it in a downtown area that already has tons of activity within and surrounding it; which will only increase with future development of the East Village, Stampede Trail, and possibly Inglewood. A more residential/academic focused area shouldn't be a preference over downtown.
It would be nice to have Olympic Way/Stampede Trail, Stephen Avenue, and 17th Ave busy before and after big Flames/Stamps games. Assuming both facilities are on or right around Stampede Grounds, the pedestrian traffic coming from those venues would have direct access to the best downtown has to offer. Motel Village or a redeveloped Firepark wouldn't match the pre/post game festivities city centre can offer.
Just as long as the facility is a kept active when not in use. Stadiums and sport complexes can destroy the live-ability of a downtown if not done correctly. Luckily, there is a push for more urban designs with these new facilities as we learn from the past.
Which is why I think Flames are keying in on bringing a MLS team to be a tenant for a new stadium if it gets built. Makes no sense to spend so much dough to build a new venue only the Stamps call home, which would only be used 9-12(?) times a year. Might as well just major reno McMahon only. MLS would give the facility some action during the winter/spring while football isn't ongoing.
jeffwhit
Apr 5, 2012, 2:24 AM
Which is why I think Flames are keying in on bringing a MLS team to be a tenant for a new stadium if it gets built. Makes no sense to spend so much dough to build a new venue only the Stamps call home, which would only be used 9-12(?) times a year. Might as well just major reno McMahon only. MLS would give the facility some action during the winter/spring while football isn't ongoing.
The MLS is never coming to Calgary, they expanded into markets where support for the pyramind league teams was huge. When Calgary had an A-League team the crowd was in the dozens (I was among them). MLS isn't coming to Calgary just because there is a new CFL stadium- if the Flames want an MLS team they've got to play the long game and get people to come out to a lesser-league team.
monocle
Apr 5, 2012, 3:05 AM
The MLS is never coming to Calgary, they expanded into markets where support for the pyramind league teams was huge. When Calgary had an A-League team the crowd was in the dozens (I was among them). MLS isn't coming to Calgary just because there is a new CFL stadium- if the Flames want an MLS team they've got to play the long game and get people to come out to a lesser-league team.
You are moat likely right. However, there are a lot of rec league soccer players in this town, many who came from "football countries".
Possibly a team in a lower professional league could gauge support? Is there "minor leagues" to MLS?
Joborule
Apr 5, 2012, 3:11 AM
The MLS is never coming to Calgary, they expanded into markets where support for the pyramind league teams was huge. When Calgary had an A-League team the crowd was in the dozens (I was among them). MLS isn't coming to Calgary just because there is a new CFL stadium- if the Flames want an MLS team they've got to play the long game and get people to come out to a lesser-league team.
This bit was discussed over at CalgaryPuck but it was considered that Calgary is a city that will only support major league teams rather than lesser league. From a lot I know their seems to be moderate interest in the game of soccer in this city. Not enough that are hardcore to watch the teams that have tried and failed recently. But if an actual legit soccer league was in Calgary, possible that there would be enough fans that would come out to support it.
Flames and Stamps get obvious support, but Roughnecks aren't doing too bad either.
Granted this is something I have very little knowledge about so it could be a complete bust and MLS wouldn't even bother.
suburbia
Apr 5, 2012, 3:15 AM
The MLS is never coming to Calgary
Never is a long time.
jeffwhit
Apr 5, 2012, 2:07 PM
This bit was discussed over at CalgaryPuck but it was considered that Calgary is a city that will only support major league teams rather than lesser league. From a lot I know their seems to be moderate interest in the game of soccer in this city. Not enough that are hardcore to watch the teams that have tried and failed recently. But if an actual legit soccer league was in Calgary, possible that there would be enough fans that would come out to support it.
I think this hits the nail on the head regarding the catch 22 of bringing an MLS team to Calgary. Calgarians won't support minor league sports (alledgedly, and I'm not sure where the Hitmen fall into this scenario) but MLS won't come to markets where minor league soccer isn't supported.
Never is a long time, but if the Flames ownership made a presentation to the public saying they have a 5-10 year plan to bring the MLS to Calgary and gets a pyramid league team- and builds a modular soccer stadium, which would cost next to nothing and could actually grow with the support for the team, then it could happen.
ZeDgE
Apr 5, 2012, 2:31 PM
The MLS is never coming to Calgary, they expanded into markets where support for the pyramind league teams was huge. When Calgary had an A-League team the crowd was in the dozens (I was among them). MLS isn't coming to Calgary just because there is a new CFL stadium- if the Flames want an MLS team they've got to play the long game and get people to come out to a lesser-league team.
This is saddening as minor soccer here is huge. Even the mens league has dozens of teams. However the soccer teams we have had, especially the last had pretty poor facilities to play in.. Foothills stadium really? It was a few bleachers with some port a potties.. If we had a decent stadium and a little more hype I think we could make a go of it. MLS would likely do well here.
Innersoul1
Apr 6, 2012, 2:44 AM
Which is why I think Flames are keying in on bringing a MLS team to be a tenant for a new stadium if it gets built. Makes no sense to spend so much dough to build a new venue only the Stamps call home, which would only be used 9-12(?) times a year. Might as well just major reno McMahon only. MLS would give the facility some action during the winter/spring while football isn't ongoing.
I have spent a lifetime playing soccer and loving the game and I must admit that the notion of the MLS in Calgary is a pipe dream...for now. The Flames as an organization make some odd decisions but i don't think that they are foolish enough to believe at this time that the MLS would be a successful endeavor in Canada. First and foremost, the MLS as an organization has more markets that they wish to expand into in the US before they would even look at fourth expansion team in Canada. From their perspective they have achieved their goal of expanding into the 3 markets in Canada that have successfully supported professional soccer programs.
The MLS is never coming to Calgary, they expanded into markets where support for the pyramind league teams was huge. When Calgary had an A-League team the crowd was in the dozens (I was among them). MLS isn't coming to Calgary just because there is a new CFL stadium- if the Flames want an MLS team they've got to play the long game and get people to come out to a lesser-league team.
Calgary's lack of support for previous soccer franchises really isn't going to win us any points in the bid to get an MLS franchise. Moreover, one of the major focuses of the MLS is to have their teams play in soccer specific stadiums (SSS). The exceptions to that rule are Vancouver soley because they have made stadium modifications to make the space more intimate and that they have numbers to support the team and fill the space and Seattle who regularly sell out Century Link Field to the tune of 36,0000. Calgary might potentially have a stadium for the team to play in but that by no means guarantees that we will get a team or are worthy of a team.
This bit was discussed over at CalgaryPuck but it was considered that Calgary is a city that will only support major league teams rather than lesser league. From a lot I know their seems to be moderate interest in the game of soccer in this city. Not enough that are hardcore to watch the teams that have tried and failed recently. But if an actual legit soccer league was in Calgary, possible that there would be enough fans that would come out to support it.
Granted this is something I have very little knowledge about so it could be a complete bust and MLS wouldn't even bother.
I am born and raised in Calgary and I love this city with all of my heart. But I must say that fans of our sports teams are often very fickle. We would be doing a disservice to our city by jumping straight to and MLS franchise (which wouldn't happen anyway). We need to develop the game here and see if there really is a taste for the game here. By doing so with something like an A-League franchise ticket prices would be accessible to most families. I would say that baby steps are the way to go with this one.
Tropics
Apr 6, 2012, 3:45 PM
I would be shocked if Calgary actually supported a MLS franchise. They would get very little fan support.
We are not quite big enough yet but I think in the future Calgary might actually manage to get a Major League Baseball team and they would probably support that and get alot of support from surrounding communities and rural areas where softball is huge, way bigger then soccer in this country. Next to hockey I would guess that baseball/softball is the major team sport with the most participation in Calgary and area. Football might be close but the CFL has blocked any real chance of a NFL team coming to this city, the fact the NFL have not even moved into the Toronto market yet is quite amazing.
RiverRat
Apr 6, 2012, 4:38 PM
Here's some wild speculation:
- The arena goes into the East Village. This could either be a more compact urban arena in one of the "commercial" blocks in the village (around 8 ave NE ?), or could be built just south of the tracks near 11th Ave SE.
- The new building will be mixed-use and will contain other commercial and public-use facilities.
- The Saddledome is demolished. In its place a new outdoor arena is constructued for use by the CFL, the Stampede, and for outdoor concerts and other shows.
eggbert
Apr 6, 2012, 5:50 PM
I would be shocked if Calgary actually supported a MLS franchise. They would get very little fan support.
We are not quite big enough yet but I think in the future Calgary might actually manage to get a Major League Baseball team and they would probably support that and get alot of support from surrounding communities and rural areas where softball is huge, way bigger then soccer in this country. Next to hockey I would guess that baseball/softball is the major team sport with the most participation in Calgary and area. Football might be close but the CFL has blocked any real chance of a NFL team coming to this city, the fact the NFL have not even moved into the Toronto market yet is quite amazing.
Isn't soccer the most played amateur sport in Canada, even ahead of hockey? I might be wrong with that but it's way more popular than baseball and softball combined. While I don't think MLS will be coming here anytime soon it has a way better chance than baseball or football. Have you ever been to a Calgary Viper's game? There's nobody there! In fact, I'd bet that we will never see MLB in Calgary.
nick.flood
Apr 6, 2012, 6:34 PM
delete
suburbia
Apr 6, 2012, 7:03 PM
Baseball: 1998 22.1% 2005 13.6%
Soccer: 1998 32.1% 2005 44.1%
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-595-m/81-595-m2008060-eng.pdf
Baseball's downward spiral doesn't surprise me. It is as interesting as watching grass grow(and then learning it is AstroTurf). In 2011, the Toronto Blue Jays (with a catchment of about 6M?) had an average of 22K attending at the Roger's Centre (Skydome), down from 50K+ in 1993 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/toroatte.shtml). Of course, half were actually looking for some time away from home to knit.
http://www.yarnharlot.ca/blog/archives/2004/05/06/stereotype_much.html
UC-LAW
Apr 7, 2012, 6:36 PM
Baseball's downward spiral doesn't surprise me. It is as interesting as watching grass grow(and then learning it is AstroTurf). In 2011, the Toronto Blue Jays (with a catchment of about 6M?) had an average of 22K attending at the Roger's Centre (Skydome), down from 50K+ in 1993 (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/toroatte.shtml). Of course, half were actually looking for some time away from home to knit.
http://www.yarnharlot.ca/blog/archives/2004/05/06/stereotype_much.html
Is soccer really that much more interesting?
Tough to say how soccer will grow in this country. Alot of kids play it because its cheap and easy for parents to take them. Do they continue to play and watch when they are older as opposed to the big 4? tough to say
MalcolmTucker
Apr 7, 2012, 6:59 PM
At lest up to a year ago individual CFL games on tv still had more than 10 times as many people watching as ondividual MLS games.
Medicineline
Apr 7, 2012, 7:43 PM
For the indigenous North American, soccer's appeal will change little. The level that we rely on immigration for growth will inevitably change all that at some point. Soccer's day in this country will come.
suburbia
Apr 7, 2012, 10:05 PM
Is soccer really that much more interesting?
UC-LAW - look at the numbers from nick.flood that I quoted. It showed percentages in 1998 and 2005 for both soccer and baseball, so those numbers answered your question. Do you really think as many people go to soccer games to knit as do to baseball games?
ZeDgE
Apr 7, 2012, 10:14 PM
Is soccer really that much more interesting?
Is that a serious question?
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.