Sports in Canadian culture

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

I don't really see the appetite for Canada to spend $billions on new/renovated stadiums to host a few round robin games if North America including Canada were rewarded World Cup Soccer. The times of government sinking billions of tax payers money into one time sporting events is a thing of the past.

Olympic stadium in Montreal is falling apart as it is and will be in even worse condition in a decade, its never even mentioned by Soccer Canada anymore when talks of World Cup in Canada.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/12/06...ld-cup-in-2026

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...says-1.3016520

I could see BC Place in Vancouver a shoe-in for hosting World Cup in North America, and it would be typical for Toronto to be bequeathed spot for a hosting site as well but does it really make sense to have any games at BMO when there is a fully complete & World soccer tested-ready stadium over twice the size in Edmonton right now? Usually countries that host World Cup use their main/biggest/best stadiums when hosting these events and not be preferential according to cities within countries

It's not about preferential treatment for cities. BMO Field even if currently smaller is considerably better for soccer than Edmonton's stadium, heck it's hands down the best soccer stadium in North America (Canada/USA). Also, BMO by then would need to be expanded anyway so the timing is great. BC Place and the Big O are both going to be used extensively for soccer games in the future so it makes perfect sense to also use them.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

heck it's hands down the best soccer stadium in North America (Canada/USA).

Based on what? Don't get ahead of yourself.

Originally Posted by Berklon

Pretty impressive to almost filling the stadium when at the same time the Leafs are trying to clinch a playoff spot, Matthews is trying to get his 40th goal and with the overall great young prospects creating excitement for the team.

26,812 out for a game in April against an expansion team when the Leafs are starting their first playoffs in years and the Raptors third in conference. For me, i'm interested to see how things go this summer if the Jays have a lame duck season (currently off to a sluggish 1-4 start).

The days of assuming TFC were a flash-in-the-pan-thing are starting to wither, i'd imagine.

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

If North America gets the World Cup there won't be any stadiums used that will be less than 50 or 60 thousand seats,

We don't have any confirmation of that.

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

otherwise Regina and Winnipeg with stadiums ready to expandable to World Cup Soccer requirements would be the next best options in Canada.

Canada likely won't be receiving more than two hosting slots for the WC. Toronto and Vancouver are obvious first choices, followed by Edmonton and Montreal. In that order. Regina doesn't have any history hosting any FIFA/CONCACAF events. Ottawa is ahead of both of them i'd imagine but it won't be coming down to that.

It would have to take a pretty ridiculous number of circumstances to occur for Canada's first ever World Cup hosting duties to not include Toronto. Any potential issues with BMO (size, whatever) can easily be remedied given that this WC is set for 2026.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

Soccer Canada is going to use the best of its resources it has in hand and use Commonwealth and BC place.

Is there something in the water in Maple Creek?

Originally Posted by JHikka

Canada likely won't be receiving more than two hosting slots for the WC. Toronto and Vancouver are obvious first choices, followed by Edmonton and Montreal. In that order.

In what universe are Edmonton and Vancouver going to get World Cup games while Toronto and Montreal do not? How is this even a discussion? Are we completely unhinged on this forum now?

The idea of the World Cup in Canada is far-fetched enough as it is, but let's say it actually happens. Is this the conversation that the higher-ups are going to have?

"Damn, if only we'd won the 2042 bid, then we'd have time to get some grass growing in proper venues in Montreal or Toronto. But 2026 is pushing it. I guess we'll have to have the games in Vancouver and Edmonton."

We had this ridiculous discussion a year ago already: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...13#post7385613

[csbvan]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Is there something in the water in Maple Creek?



In what universe are Edmonton and Vancouver going to get World Cup games while Toronto and Montreal do not? How is this even a discussion? Are we completely unhinged on this forum now?

The idea of the World Cup in Canada is far-fetched enough as it is, but let's say it actually happens. Is this the conversation that the higher-ups are going to have?

"Damn, if only we'd won the 2042 bid, then we'd have time to get some grass growing in proper venues in Montreal or Toronto. But 2026 is pushing it. I guess we'll have to have the games in Vancouver and Edmonton."

We had this ridiculous discussion a year ago already: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...13#post7385613

It really is not far-fetched that Canada will host the World Cup. If the joint bid between Canada/US/Mexico goes forward, it is essentially a shoe-in. The last World Cup in North America was in the early 90's. If it were the three North American countries bidding against each other, we would have a lower chance of getting it, but one of those countries would get it. As a joint bid, it will win.

[Nicko999]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Is there something in the water in Maple Creek?

Apparently there is.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by rousseau

In what universe are Edmonton and Vancouver going to get World Cup games while Toronto and Montreal do not? How is this even a discussion? Are we completely unhinged on this forum now?

I've repeatedly said Vancouver and Toronto are the obvious landing spots for World Cup matches in Canada.

Montreal doesn't have a suitable venue without significant investment.

Originally Posted by Hackslack

I'd argue that unless they can add another 25,000 - 30,000 seats, there is definitely a way that Toronto cannot host.

I doubt the number of additional seats needed would even be that high. A BMO with another 15-20 would be fine, and they have nine years to add those seats. If they want to add more they can but I have a feeling the maximum size of BMO for consistent crowd sizes is somewhere in the 40K area, for both TFC and Canada's national teams.

People need to give their head a shake if they actually think CSA would let the World Cup be hosted without Toronto and BMO. It's the most obvious city for hosting duties.

[UPP]

Originally Posted by JHikka

I've repeatedly said Vancouver and Toronto are the obvious landing spots for World Cup matches in Canada.

Montreal doesn't have a suitable venue without significant investment.



I doubt the number of additional seats needed would even be that high. A BMO with another 15-20 would be fine, and they have nine years to add those seats. If they want to add more they can but I have a feeling the maximum size of BMO for consistent crowd sizes is somewhere in the 40K area, for both TFC and Canada's national teams.

People need to give their head a shake if they actually think CSA would let the World Cup be hosted without Toronto and BMO. It's the most obvious city for hosting duties.

The World Cup won't be awarded until 2020 so they will have only 6 years if our bid is chosen.

I don't believe a 40,000 seat BMO will cut it. If there are 40,000 seats, then anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 are used for media and dignitaries, etc leaving only 30,000 to 35,000 for actual spectator seating. That wouldn't come nearly close enough for a World Cup unless you're interested in hosting Turkmenistan vs Papua New Guinea.

Let's not forget, the US and Mexico will bring 70,000-90,000 seat venues to the table. A 40,000 seat venue for games in Canada? Yeah right.

[cjones2451]

Originally Posted by UPP

The World Cup won't be awarded until 2020 so they will have only 6 years if our bid is chosen.

I don't believe a 40,000 seat BMO will cut it. If there are 40,000 seats, then anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 are used for media and dignitaries, etc leaving only 30,000 to 35,000 for actual spectator seating. That wouldn't come nearly close enough for a World Cup unless you're interested in hosting Turkmenistan vs Papua New Guinea.

Let's not forget, the US and Mexico will bring 70,000-90,000 seat venues to the table. A 40,000 seat venue for games in Canada? Yeah right.

Look at Russia's bid, there are many 40-45K stadiums and even one as low as 35K.
They are not going to put Turkmenistan vs Papua New Guinea in Met Life stadium in New York either, hence the need for 40-45K sized stadiums

Last World Cup in the USA was 24 teams, now it is double that, which means not all games will get 70K people

[blueandgoldguy]

10 games with nothing in the quarterfinals and beyond is a little disappointing. I am thinking the World Cup in Canada will be confined to Toronto and Vancouver, with Montreal and Edmonton being the 3rd choice for matches. I believe Edmonton will have a shot due to the 1) renos at Commonwealth including new seats 2) large capacity at 56,000 and 3) proven ability of maintaining a grass field.

Montreal will only be able to host matches if they install grass at Olympic Stadium (this will be non-negotiable with FIFA) and they install new seating at a minimum as the seats in there are 40 years old. It will probably require a more extensive renovation than that but what kind of ROI is there in spending $300 - $500 million for a reno for 4 World Cup matches? If the Expos return, Olympic Stadium will be nothing more than a temporary home. I also noticed the major concerts that require greater seating in Montreal than the Bell Centre are now being held at Parc Drapeau so that is one less use for the big o.

If crowds at BMO continue to trend in a positive direction in the next few years. I would not be surprised if MLSE chose to destroy the entire west side stands - a little cheap-looking when they were originally constructed if we are being honest - and build a larger lower bowl and upper deck with possible two levels of suites bringing the final row of stands to nearly the height of the new roof structure. This would probably bring the stadium capacity up to 35,000 or so. Add in another 10,000 temp seats on the north and south side and there would be seating for 45,000 minus those needed for media, dignataries, etc. More than appropriate for a World Cup venue imo.

Regarding the limited number of games in Canada, on the positive side it will mean limited public money required to stage this one-month event as the stadium infrastructure will largely be in place. Also, considering the likelihood that the World Cup matches will only take place in the three largest Canadian markets there shouldn't really be a major funding required for improvements in transportation infrastructure as these cities have proven capable of hosting large-scale event in the past. Maybe spending a billion or two in public money instead of 5 - 10 billion that would have been required if Canada was the sole World Cup host with 10 or so cities and the costs associated with hosting this event?

The negative aspect of this is that the World Cup will be confined to Canadian cities that already have a strong soccer presence in their community - most notably at the pro level - so it will do little to grow soccer in Canada as a whole. In Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal we have seen substantial growth in the soccer and I have my doubts this one-month event will spur that growth any further. It will continue on its long gradual ascent regardless.

Other cities, isolated by a thousand or so km, will not see an noticeable impact from this event. The World Cup might as well be on another planet. There will be no legacy - no additional soccer fields, locker rooms and training facilities, nothing. How will this event spur interest in these cities?

In the end, this World Cup bid feels a bit like dodging a bullet and a missed opportunity at the same time.

[Acajack]

Regarding WC stadiums, I think most people on here are disconnected from public discourse in Montreal and Quebec, because it's basically a given politically that the Big O will be getting major renos in the coming years. And this has nothing to do with a WC bid.

As someone already said, the chance of those renos happening will go from being a near-certainty to a 100% certainty if there is any chance that Montreal could be a host city in a WC.

Count on it.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Regarding WC stadiums, I think most people on here are disconnected from public discourse in Montreal and Quebec, because it's basically a given politically that the Big O will be getting major renos in the coming years. And this has nothing to do with a WC bid.

As someone already said, the chance of those renos happening will go from being a near-certainty to a 100% certainty if there is any chance that Montreal could be a host city in a WC.

Count on it.

I think it's practically a given that the Big O would be one of Canada's host sites. There is so much going for Montreal:

-big city with good track record of supporting big events and soccer
-good location proximate to other major centres
-stadium with largest seating capacity in Canada and specifically designed for huge events with extremely large concourses, big plazas, good ingress/egress, etc.

The Big O has been without a tenant for a while so naturally some stuff like production facilities, lighting, dressing rooms, etc. may be outdated. But that's all small potatoes stuff and easily fixable.

Vancouver/BC Place is the obvious second location given, again, a good facility and a good track record of support for soccer.

What gets more complicated is the third site... you would think Toronto would have it but neither venue they have is really 100% ideal for the World Cup. From what people are saying, Rogers Centre will become all but unusable for anything but baseball, so apparently it's out even though it would strike me as a great place for WC matches. BMO is a great venue for MLS/CFL, but it sounds to me putting a large event with more than 40,000 fans in there will be a bit of a stretch. I guess it could work, but it doesn't sound ideal.

Edmonton, on the other hand, has a good facility and an excellent record of supporting major events. Commonwealth is a more appropriate WC facility than BMO, but I suspect it would be difficult for the organizing committee to justify overlooking Canada's biggest city even if the venue would be a bit of a compromise.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

I think it's practically a given that the Big O would be one of Canada's host sites. There is so much going for Montreal:

-big city with good track record of supporting big events and soccer
-good location proximate to other major centres
-stadium with largest seating capacity in Canada and specifically designed for huge events with extremely large concourses, big plazas, good ingress/egress, etc.

The Big O has been without a tenant for a while so naturally some stuff like production facilities, lighting, dressing rooms, etc. may be outdated. But that's all small potatoes stuff and easily fixable.

Vancouver/BC Place is the obvious second location given, again, a good facility and a good track record of support for soccer.

What gets more complicated is the third site... you would think Toronto would have it but neither venue they have is really 100% ideal for the World Cup. From what people are saying, Rogers Centre will become all but unusable for anything but baseball, so apparently it's out even though it would strike me as a great place for WC matches. BMO is a great venue for MLS/CFL, but it sounds to me putting a large event with more than 40,000 fans in there will be a bit of a stretch. I guess it could work, but it doesn't sound ideal.

Edmonton, on the other hand, has a good facility and an excellent record of supporting major events. Commonwealth is a more appropriate WC facility than BMO, but I suspect it would be difficult for the organizing committee to justify overlooking Canada's biggest city even if the venue would be a bit of a compromise.

Of course, we wouldn't be having this discussion (or at least an important part of it) if Toronto had a stadium like BC Place, Commonwealth or even the Big O.

[SaskScraper]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper
If North America gets the World Cup there won't be any stadiums used that will be less than 50 or 60 thousand seats,

Originally Posted by JHikka

We don't have any confirmation of that.

USA never had any stadiums with less than 53,000 way back in the 1990s when they last held the World Cup and they have a larger list of even larger stadiums to choose from now, there's no chance America will field any stadiums less than 60,000 seats.
Mexico City & Guadalajara each have stadiums over 114,000, 72,000 & 66,000. For Canada not to be embarrassed with BMOs small capacity, Soccer Canada will have to choose Commonwealth Stadium first & foremost to look like we are hosting at at least the same capacity as US & Mex.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

USA never had any stadiums with less than 53,000 way back in the 1990s when they last held the World Cup and they have a larger list of even larger stadiums to choose from now, there's no chance America will field any stadiums less than 60,000 seats.
Mexico City & Guadalajara each have stadiums over 114,000, 72,000 & 66,000. For Canada not to be embarrassed with BMOs small capacity, Soccer Canada will have to choose Commonwealth Stadium first & foremost to look like we are hosting at at least the same capacity as US & Mex.

Feels sort of similar to me. Canada is like a tag-a-long here. Domestic leagues that might potentially require stadiums of World Cup size are denigrated here (the only one being the CFL... MLS is largely a US league). And of those considered in this thread, with the exception of BC Place and maybe Commonwealth, Canadian "stadiums" are underperformers to put it kindly (personally, I love Olympic Stadium, but it definitely needs some TLC). As for BMO, though some poeple like to say is the "premier soccer ground" in the country, it is pretty embarassing on an international stage, and $100-200 mill isn't going to raise the standard all that much. I'm not a "local booster" typed person, but as far as stadiums go IGF and New Mosaic would present a much better image than BMO (barring the severe limitations of city size/accommodations).

All told, I'm less than enthused about a 3-way bid. People comment about Mexico not having too many top their stadiums now, but the Mexican league is ranked higher than the MLS and if they really wanted, they could push their country forward and build just a few stadiums and take themselves above whatever Canada has to offer in the 3-way partnership. The US of course has more than enough stadiums through their various leagues to host on their own if they wanted.

With the way it will likely shuffle out, it may as well be a "foreign bid" as far as excitement goes... And much of the country, outside he periphery of the Canadian cities selected, will probably feel much the same. The one positive about a World Cup type bid for a country like Canada is that it has potential to trickle down to the 2nd and 3rd tier cities, appending ourselves to an American bid (not to mention Mexico in this case), at best, basically guarantees even our top cities to be "poor boys" at the table.

The decision of FIFA to expand the tournament also basically guantantees that all but the largest/richest countries won't be able to host on their own. In some ways it's a smart way to get more countries into the tournament, but it will also likely start to become problematic as the grass-roots level becomes more and more disconnected from the top tiers in most countries. Sort of a profit ahead of future growth situation.