Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by esquire

I'm assuming some sort of general admission standing party zone?

[esquire]

^ That's too bad, I like the look of the expanded stadium as shown in the pictures posted by elly.

I realize endzone seats are not very desirable for CFL games, but I think building a permanent endzone grandstand at THF would really improve the look and feel of the stadium... the open ends are somehow just too open. Same with TD Place. There is something to be said for a closed in end.

Don't get me wrong, I don't expect it to happen anytime soon as both stadiums arguably have enough seats in their current configurations, but it would be nice to see eventually.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by king10

If the private sector wants to build that so be it but the city wont be paying for an nhl sized arena. Also early indications are the private sector(andlauer) are more interested in a 10k arena better suited for the main tennant, the bulldogs, whether they are ahl or ohl. And it sounds like hes willing to put in a fair share of his own money.

IMO a happy balance would be something similar to Bell Place in Laval. Smaller than 17k but larger than 5k. Able to be more intimate for the bulldogs but still a decent size for larger concerts.

It's rare that a CHL team is ready to sink in significant capital on a new arena. When that happens, we should to grasp the opportunity. Of course, that means building to suit. I wonder if there 's an opportunity for a Winnipeg sized arena. That could be a good middle ground.

I never thought of it that way, but it is strange we never see the private sector build a large arena for shows, concerts and events in markets that need the additional space. Arenas are only built for sports teams, existing or aspirational. In Canada at least.

[Lugnut]

With baseball around the corner, does anyone think the Jays will get a new ballpark in the near future? The Skydome (yup, that's what I called it) will always have a special place in my heart, but it might be time for something new.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Lugnut

With baseball around the corner, does anyone think the Jays will get a new ballpark in the near future? The Skydome (yup, that's what I called it) will always have a special place in my heart, but it might be time for something new.

What is it missing? It's still modern enough to have all the revenue generating junk that teams demand these days, it's in a location that is tough to beat, and Rogers got it nearly for free, so it was paid for a long, long time ago... what's the point of spending the better part of a billion dollars on a new stadium?

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Lugnut

With baseball around the corner, does anyone think the Jays will get a new ballpark in the near future? The Skydome (yup, that's what I called it) will always have a special place in my heart, but it might be time for something new.

I'm not seeing much of an upside to replacing it.

Like esquire said:
- the location is great
- it's well connected to transit
- it has luxury boxes and whatnot for extra profit funtimes
- it was sold at a gift-like price - Rogers only paid $25m for it. That's peanuts for a new baseball stadium with a roof downtown in one of the most expensive cities in country.

Sure, it's from the multipurpose stadium era which makes it a little dated. That's about the only downside I can think of.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by esquire

I realize endzone seats are not very desirable for CFL games, but I think building a permanent endzone grandstand at THF would really improve the look and feel of the stadium... the open ends are somehow just too open. Same with TD Place. There is something to be said for a closed in end.

An early review


• Video Link

[blueandgoldguy]

I think it may be difficult to add seats to the one side of Tim Hortons Field as it will impose on the street. There may also be an issue with how the temporary stands disrupt the access to other parts of the stadium as I believe the staircases leading to main grandstands may possibly be effected by these structures.

There is a possibility these grandstands may only be accessed from temporary gates with their own concessions and port-o-potties. That shouldn't be an issue on the south side of the stadium with the expansive podium, but it will likely be on the north side given the restrictions in site space.

We could end up seeing a proposal of a 30,000 seat Grey Cup. Not a good look for the league or Hamilton with a stadium that has come under increasing scrutiny over the years for the countless defects and shortcomings.

As for Skydump, it's has dramatically fallen behind most baseball stadiums in terms of fan comfort, amenities and revenue-generating features. The seats are among the most cramped in all MLB stadiums, and due to the original multi-purpose function of the stadium, feature flawed sitelines. An example of this are the seats down the first and third base lines in the lower bowl. In most other MLB stadiums the seats are properly oriented towards the infield as one moves further out towards the foul poles. Check out Suntrust Field in Atlanta for a good example of this.

https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en...oiowGHoECAMQBg

Vs. Skydump

https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en...oiowGHoECAMQBg

Overall, it makes for an uncomfortable experience for the ticket buyer.

Bleachers might be the worst in MLB as well. The 500 level seats are a joke and should be closed permanently, while the 100 and 200 level seats feel like you are sitting in the cavern...bleacher seats should be open air, soaking in the sun and the elements which is basically anti-Rogers Centre. To compound the problems, current stadiums have now made bleacher seats - which were originally viewed as a cheap baseball ticket - an exclusive affair with a good portion being expensive club seats. This is something Rogers Centre lacks.

It also lacks the number of high-end, close-to-the-action club seats that more modern baseball facilities enjoy. Sure, there might be a few hundred seats like that at Rogers, but the newer stadiums have THOUSANDS of those seats in the infield. Club members also enjoy a number of different club lounges and restaurants that are lacking at Rogers Centre.

There have been discussions of plans for Rogers Centre last year ranging from $250 - $500 million but there has not been progress, at least not that I have heard. Given how cheap Rogers is, having spent a measly $50 - $60 million on renos in the nearly 20 years they have owned the Jays, I am skeptical if this will come to fruition. If it doesn't, the club will certainly fall further and further behind other clubs in revenues.

Renos are the only realistic option to solve the future revenue issues at this point given a new domed stadium would exceed $1 billion (see new Texas ballpark). The Jays will not be gifted another publicly funded stadium.

[Pinus]

Originally Posted by Lugnut

With baseball around the corner, does anyone think the Jays will get a new ballpark in the near future? The Skydome (yup, that's what I called it) will always have a special place in my heart, but it might be time for something new.

It's only 30 years old. It should be good for at least another 30-50 years yet before anything new is considered.

[isaidso]

Never liked Skydome but agree that it's not going anywhere for a long time.

[Tibor420]

It is the 7th oldest stadium in a 30 team league though, which includes classics like Fenway and Wrigley above it.

The Skydome does not belong in that category. It needs an overwhelming amount of renos for it to be even considered up to date a decade ago. Real grass at the very least and that is near-on impossible to do with this building. It had its fun and was a marvel of its time, but it also feels like a product of its time now. OLD. All the other futuristic domes are long dead.... Seattle, Minneapolis, Houston....

That people think it will last 50 more years is hilarious. Im not saying it needs to happen now, but there should be discussions on the future of it.

Because as it stands at the moment the Skydome is great for the skyline and not much else.

[esquire]

^ We'll see if those things matter enough to Rogers to justify spending a billion dollars, because as blueandgoldguy put it, I don't think governments will be gifting them with a new ballpark.

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by Tibor420

It is the 7th oldest stadium in a 30 team league though, which includes classics like Fenway and Wrigley above it.

The Skydome does not belong in that category. It needs an overwhelming amount of renos for it to be even considered up to date a decade ago. Real grass at the very least and that is near-on impossible to do with this building. It had its fun and was a marvel of its time, but it also feels like a product of its time now. OLD. All the other futuristic domes are long dead.... Seattle, Minneapolis, Houston....

That people think it will last 50 more years is hilarious. Im not saying it needs to happen now, but there should be discussions on the future of it.

Because as it stands at the moment the Skydome is great for the skyline and not much else.

Real turf (grass) isn't needed. Oddly enough, Phoenix is pulling up its turf to install fake stuff. Texas is leaning towards installing fake turf in it's new stadium.

Real turf isn't crucial.

As for comparing the old Kingdome, HHH Metrodome or the Astrodome to Skydome, well compare apples to oranges then. Skydome is still well and truly a current stadium comparing to those examples....

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by Tibor420

It is the 7th oldest stadium in a 30 team league though, which includes classics like Fenway and Wrigley above it.

The Skydome does not belong in that category. It needs an overwhelming amount of renos for it to be even considered up to date a decade ago. Real grass at the very least and that is near-on impossible to do with this building. It had its fun and was a marvel of its time, but it also feels like a product of its time now. OLD. All the other futuristic domes are long dead.... Seattle, Minneapolis, Houston....

That people think it will last 50 more years is hilarious. Im not saying it needs to happen now, but there should be discussions on the future of it.

Because as it stands at the moment the Skydome is great for the skyline and not much else.

There won't be a new stadium. There will either be an extremely "light" renovation or a major renovation. Even with a major renovation it is unlikely the entire field will be natural grass based on the prohibitive costs...apparently $200 million just for that. The dirt infield is probably the extent of their on-field renos.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ We'll see if those things matter enough to Rogers to justify spending a billion dollars, because as blueandgoldguy put it, I don't think governments will be gifting them with a new ballpark.

I have my own frostbitten memories of sitting in the Exhibition Stadium bleachers “soaking in the sun and the elements” in early season Blue Jay games, so I’m not quite so dismissive of the virtues of a roof. The demands for yet another new stadium that will live up to the demands of today’s fans for endless pampering are not likely to get a lot of sympathy from governments or taxpayers.

[J.OT13]

Who are the idiots who sold Skydome for a song?

I would prefer seeing an overhaul the current building as opposed to building new. Keep the landmark, reduce waste and improve fan experience. Of course, Rogers is too damn cheap for that. I could see Rogers make a back-room deal with Doug for a new taxpayer funded stadium.

[le calmar]

I see the Skydome as an equivalent to Madison Square Garden, it might need extensive renovations but I don't see the Jays playing anywhere else.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Who are the idiots who sold Skydome for a song?

I would prefer seeing an overhaul the current building as opposed to building new. Keep the landmark, reduce waste and improve fan experience. Of course, Rogers is too damn cheap for that. I could see Rogers make a back-room deal with Doug for a new taxpayer funded stadium.

The Government of Ontario sold it to a consortium that was headed by Labatt for ~$150m.

Then Sportsco bought it for $80m from Labatt.

Then Rogers bought it from Sportsco for $25m.

I can't see the optics of a brand new baseball-only stadium going over well in government in a time of large deficits. The profitability of a new stadium will probably be worse than Skydome since Rogers would be obligated to kick in a few hundred million dollars of funding as the primary tenant.

They'll probably squeeze every last dollar out of the place, IMO.

Using other baseball stadiums as a metric isn't so great of an idea either - baseball has undergone a huge investment since the 1990s in new stadiums.

[DavefromSt.Vital]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

I think it may be difficult to add seats to the one side of Tim Hortons Field as it will impose on the street.

Both the south and north sides of THF are set back from the street. The south side has the large open concrete plaza between the current fence and Cannon. Behind the scoreboard on the north side is a surface level parking lot between the north fence and Beechwood.

To me, the biggest thing to work around in adding seats to the north side is the scoreboard.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by DavefromSt.Vital

Both the south and north sides of THF are set back from the street. The south side has the large open concrete plaza between the current fence and Cannon. Behind the scoreboard on the north side is a surface level parking lot between the north fence and Beechwood.

To me, the biggest thing to work around in adding seats to the north side is the scoreboard.

I agree. And there's lots of space in front of the scoreboard for temp stands over the current patios that may be about as high as the lower levels of each grandstand, perhaps higher to each side of the video board (hopefully soon Google will have a post-construction satellite view).

Rotating the stadium made a huge difference in the space at the north end.
Today: https://goo.gl/maps/5yvpHD4nSuM2
Pre-2013: https://goo.gl/maps/prk13P73TC42

For a Grey Cup, I wonder if the team is proposing to use more of the "social" spaces for standing room tickets. Aside from the paid seating in the Coors Light Patio on the north end, and Touchdown Lounge on the south, the others are used by people who've purchased a seat anywhere else -- there's The Stipley outdoor pub behind the south premium seats, and a Coors Banquet Bar and a Craft Gardens under the east side stands... those could instead be sold separately. Perhaps a couple of other standing options for the existing concourses.

Long term I'd love to see that space along the main scoreboard rebuilt, perhaps with a setup like the open end of NMS with multiple levels of premium "patios" and a concourse connecting the east and west sides. Make it a horseshoe, and easier to mingle between the grandstands (it's do-able now but the stairs make it a pain in the ass... I wish this stadium had been built more like Winnipeg's with a deep sunken field level, and perhaps it could have happened if the time was available but I don't want to get into the stadium location BS/drama and subsequent construction timeline pressure that's the unfortunate history of THF )