PDA

View Full Version : Whitecaps might start MLS season in temporary stadium



drewski
12-22-2009, 12:42 PM
http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/story/?id=303294


The Vancouver Sun reports that the B.C. Pavilion Corporation and the Pacific National Exhibition will announce Tuesday that the old Empire Stadium site on the PNE grounds will be the location of a 30,000 to 32,000-seat temporary stadium to house the B.C. Lions and Vancouver Whitecaps.


According to the newspaper, the temporary stadium will be needed when BC Place Stadium closes for renovations between the end of the 2010 Olympics and the summer of 2011. The renovations will include a retractable roof.



The cost for the temporary stadium on the PNE grounds is about $20 million and is included in the $458 million renovation cost for BC Place Stadium.


The Lions will occupy the stadium for the 2010 CFL season and could play a few games there in 2011.


The Whitecaps will play at Swangard Stadium next season, but could play the first part of their 2011 schedule at the PNE site. The Whitecaps are scheduled to join Major League Soccer for the 2011 season.

ensco
12-22-2009, 01:17 PM
$20 million for a temporary stadium!

Since Braley owns them, maybe the Argos should play at that PNE Stadium.

Pookie
12-22-2009, 01:23 PM
I was thinking that too. They were talking about the costs to expand BMO and pegging them in the 10-20M range.

Curious number considering our stadium cost over $62.5M and let's face it, they didn't spend a ton on a partial roof, extra toilets, concession upgrades and traffic moving infrastructure.

I wonder what the differences would be between a 30,000 seat temporary stadium and a permanent one?

sidvan
12-22-2009, 01:27 PM
I was thinking that too. They were talking about the costs to expand BMO and pegging them in the 10-20M range.

Curious number considering our stadium cost over $62.5M and let's face it, they didn't spend a ton on a partial roof, extra toilets, concession upgrades and traffic moving infrastructure.

I wonder what the differences would be between a 30,000 seat temporary stadium and a permanent one?
Probably concrete! i see temporary benches with chain link fencing

Cashcleaner
12-22-2009, 01:29 PM
But...why not...I mean...if you're already...

Ugh. I give up.

Seriously, how difficult would it be to convert an existing site into one they need for soccer? If a 30,000 seat stadium could be built for $20 million, why not just go the distance and make it a permanent venue?

$20 million seems an excessive amount of money to pay for a stadium that they are going to tear down after a year or two, but would be a total bargain for a permanent one.

rocker
12-22-2009, 01:32 PM
and to think... they could have had that beauty SSS built off the harbour by now.. ugh!

Pookie
12-22-2009, 01:33 PM
Probably concrete! i see temporary benches with chain link fencing

You've got to have some form of concrete though to get 30,000 seats in there. Temporary grandstands can only go so high... can't they?

We get 20,000 in with a full "200 level" on one side. There's got to be a second level in the plans to squeeze that many in... ??

Pookie
12-22-2009, 01:35 PM
But...why not...I mean...if you're already...

Ugh. I give up.

Seriously, how difficult would it be to convert an existing site into one they need for soccer? If a 30,000 seat stadium could be built for $20 million, why not just go the distance and make it a permanent venue?

$20 million seems an excessive amount of money to pay for a stadium that they are going to tear down after a year or two, but would be a total bargain for a permanent one.

Agreed. What's the cost... $40M to go the distance and have your own vs $468M?

Mulder
12-22-2009, 02:37 PM
Pictures

http://www.bclions.com/page/tickets_2010

Mulder
12-22-2009, 02:40 PM
Agreed. What's the cost... $40M to go the distance and have your own vs $468M?


Difference is Pavco is obligated to provide the lions with a place to play during renovations. So the price tag of the B.C. place renovation includes the temporary stadium.

stugautz
12-22-2009, 02:59 PM
Pictures

http://www.bclions.com/page/tickets_2010

I don't see anything wrong with that if the Whitecaps want to make it permanent. The endzones only look 10yards though.

http://static.cdn.mrx.ca/cfl/bc/images/inside/2009/12/Empire-logoed-Green-WEB3805.jpg

akoto
12-22-2009, 03:04 PM
http://football.ballparks.com/CFL/BC/oldindex.htm

Vindaloo
12-22-2009, 03:24 PM
I don't see anything wrong with that if the Whitecaps want to make it permanent. The endzones only look 10yards though.



The main problem with the Empire Stadium/PNE site is it doesn't have any rail connections. Downtown/Waterfront location has metro, commuter rail, future tram, and ferry connections. Even Richmond is better with a metro link now. The Caps would want as many people as possible to have access to matches.

Pookie
12-22-2009, 03:41 PM
^ I think that's a matter for debate.

Phoenix uses that argument for not being able to draw folks to see the Coyotes play. Yet they built the Cardinals home just across the street.

One draws nothing. The other draws over 62,000. There are no rail services out there.

The Ottawa Senators are another example. Playing in Kanata they don't have a ton of trouble drawing fans. Attendance is down this year but that is more likely due to performance on the ice last year than the location. Fans were coming when they were winning... during the regular season.

rocker
12-22-2009, 04:23 PM
from the pics it looks like this stadium is just metal stands and scaffolding.

james
12-22-2009, 05:16 PM
ya me and most of you guys seem to agree whats the point on moving to BC Place when for only $40 million more the WHitecaps could have there very own SSS.

BC Place looks like its gonna be a sick stadium...but still to big for Whitecaps. They will have to block off somethin like 20 or 30,000 seats for the Whitecaps games. Just makes so much more sense to just go from temp. stadium to being a full time home for them.

Unless the Temp. stadium is way the fuck in no mans land. THen i see the reason not to stay at the temp stadium. I dont know Vancouver tho, never been before.

Vindaloo
12-22-2009, 05:26 PM
^ I think that's a matter for debate.

Phoenix uses that argument for not being able to draw folks to see the Coyotes play. Yet they built the Cardinals home just across the street.

One draws nothing. The other draws over 62,000. There are no rail services out there.

The Ottawa Senators are another example. Playing in Kanata they don't have a ton of trouble drawing fans. Attendance is down this year but that is more likely due to performance on the ice last year than the location. Fans were coming when they were winning... during the regular season.


I don't think it's debatable at all. The Caps would have already built a stadium in the burbs or at the PNE if that were the case.

Hockey numbers in Canada or even worse using hockey and baseball numbers in the US are not good examples. Soccer is a completely different animal in North America and it quite differs from Canada compared to the US too. It's more popular here. Americans also, or western US cities, have a different attitude toward urban transport than Canadians. An example, Vancouver's growing rail system is a total success. Seattle's on the other hand is becoming a total failure.

I live in Vancouver right now. Trust me, having the Caps play out at Empire permanently isn't a good idea. It's not convenient for the Metro region to get to if you don't drive. It's crap to get to by transit if you live in Richmond for example. One-off events sure, but not weekly Caps fixtures. CFL would work there permanently(Lions draw a lot of suburban fans who drive) but not the footie demographic. Different sports draw different demographics. It's a no brainer to build closer to the city core where a majority of the population(Van, Richmond, Surrey, Burnaby, Coquitlam) has a 40 min or less rail connection to watch games. This is why the Caps have been persistent on building Waterfront Stadium.

james
12-22-2009, 05:29 PM
^ I think that's a matter for debate.

Phoenix uses that argument for not being able to draw folks to see the Coyotes play. Yet they built the Cardinals home just across the street.

One draws nothing. The other draws over 62,000. There are no rail services out there.

The Ottawa Senators are another example. Playing in Kanata they don't have a ton of trouble drawing fans. Attendance is down this year but that is more likely due to performance on the ice last year than the location. Fans were coming when they were winning... during the regular season.

the way i feel about this debate is that Phoenix is and always will be a Football city/ state. There fans will travel and do whatever it takes to get to watch football games. However Hocky is not there game. People in Phoenix are probably like "i not driving half an hour away to watch some dam Coyotees play in some small town". Now if the stadium was in a busy area, lots of people around, maybe near some night life people might be saying well its really close by or easy to go to so whatever we will check it out. But then theres also the point where "no matter where you put a hockey team in Arizona will anyone ever care"?

Same can be said for Vancouver and Ottawa. Hockey is there sport, its in Canadian roots. You could put a hockey rink in middle of no where for Vancouver and OTtawa and fans will travel. Will fans travel half an hour or further to middle of no where with no transit for Soccer??? its hard to say, soccer is big, but is it big enough that fans will travel a fare distance every game? also the team is new to MLS. Yes the whitecaps have old roots, but on a much smaller scale. So they might have to have the stadium in a busy main transit area for fans easy to get to games. Say its a big success and gets fans hooked liker TFC has then maybe fans are willing to travel anywhere in the future. But as a starting point you probably want a good busy location with transit.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 05:34 PM
You've got to have some form of concrete though to get 30,000 seats in there. Temporary grandstands can only go so high... can't they?


You'd be surprised how high or how large temporary stands can be. The temp stands used for Grey Cups tend to be grand.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2604/3913064529_ac910c33fc.jpg
McMahon Stadium, Calgary

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_SeTHDym9LU0/SffbPdVw7kI/AAAAAAAAAk8/NVG1iTtvG38/s1600/Taylor_Field.jpg
Taylor Field, Regina - temp stands behind endzones

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_sqeGoIJSQHo/RlHIn70etSI/AAAAAAAAAKc/ZAkO57XkMH0/IMG_1817.jpg
Canad Inns Stadium, Winnipeg

james
12-22-2009, 05:38 PM
ya those are pretty big temp stands there. That temp stand in Regina looks like it goes up so dam high. maybe its just the angle tho.

james
12-22-2009, 05:44 PM
you know what tho. With Temp stands only costing $20m. And seems they can put them up really fast, makes me think they should force teams like New England or Houston use them till they can get a SSS sorted out, this way we dont gotta see dam Pointy ball lines all over the field come playoff times. Hell id say even put San Jose and Kansas in temp stands to since there stadiums are so small and shaped like ball parks.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 05:46 PM
ya those are pretty big temp stands there. That temp stand in Regina looks like it goes up so dam high. maybe its just the angle tho.

I don't think it's the angle. Those temp stands have to be that big for the Grey Cup. Taylor Field only seats around 30k on its own, yet it holds over 50k for the Grey Cup.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 05:54 PM
you know what tho. With Temp stands only costing $20m. And seems they can put them up really fast, makes me think they should force teams like New England or Houston use them till they can get a SSS sorted out, this way we dont gotta see dam Pointy ball lines all over the field come playoff times. Hell id say even put San Jose and Kansas in temp stands to since there stadiums are so small and shaped like ball parks.

Investing that kind of money into a temporary facility would seem like a last-resort move to me. Most MLS teams that don't play in SSSs are at least in the planning stages to build them. Hell, I'd love to see the end of pointy ball lines as well, but an investment in the order of $20 million should be put toward a permanent facility.

To be perfectly honest, I do like the look of the temp stadium at the Empire site. However, like Stade Saputo - which only cost $15 million - I wonder how extensive this temp stadium is going to be. The stadium may have the perks of individual seating and a scoreboard, but the guts of the stadium appear to be pretty bare bones based on one of the photos.

james
12-22-2009, 06:01 PM
Investing that kind of money into a temporary facility would seem like a last-resort move to me. Most MLS teams that don't play in SSSs are at least in the planning stages to build them. Hell, I'd love to see the end of pointy ball lines as well, but an investment in the order of $20 million should be put toward a permanent facility.

To be perfectly honest, I do like the look of the temp stadium at the Empire site. However, like Stade Saputo - which only cost $15 million - I wonder how extensive this temp stadium is going to be. The stadium may have the perks of individual seating and a scoreboard, but the guts of the stadium appear to be pretty bare bones based on one of the photos.

besides are west grand stand are stadium is mostly bare bones to.

Kansas and San Jose i have herd and seen plans to get stadiums built. Actually kansas may have even started construction, not sure tho. But for Houston and New England i have not herd of anything comming close to getting a stadium planned out for a new stadium. Serious i wouldnt be suprised if 5 years from now those 2 teams still playing on pointy ball lines.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 06:32 PM
besides are west grand stand are stadium is mostly bare bones to.

Kansas and San Jose i have herd and seen plans to get stadiums built. Actually kansas may have even started construction, not sure tho. But for Houston and New England i have not herd of anything comming close to getting a stadium planned out for a new stadium. Serious i wouldnt be suprised if 5 years from now those 2 teams still playing on pointy ball lines.

Houston is planning an $80 million stadium to be located downtown. As for New England, they won't move from Gillette Stadium any time soon, and why would they? The owner of the Revolution (Robert Kraft) also owns the stadium and the Patriots, so from a monetary perspective, that team already plays in a SSS.

Pookie
12-22-2009, 06:32 PM
I don't think it's debatable at all. The Caps would have already built a stadium in the burbs or at the PNE if that were the case.

I think the issue gets more complicated than that when it comes to the use of public funds, particulary with the Olympics.

I think the issue is one of optics not necessarily one of transit.

We have this argument in Toronto that says the stadium needs to be accessible by transit. I'll bet there would be cries of joy from thousands of people if they actually built BMO Field in the 'burbs and they didn't have to endure parking and downtown construction headaches.

No one has ever challenged this but with urban sprawl resulting in huge growth outside of the GTA, I'd wager that quite a few TFC fans live in the 905 and even the 519 and 705 area codes. I think that will only grow over time.

BMO Field is an inconvenient location for a large and growing group of fans.

Downtown might be the best for Vancouver. I'd have to defer to you on this one as I obviously have no intimate knowledge of the area. That said, I think we have to challenge our assumptions about locations in light of population trends.

Again though, moving to BC Place probably has more to do with the politics around the use of public funds than it does around transit.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 06:43 PM
^ Some people will inevitably prefer a suburban stadium, but in a city as big as Toronto, I'm not sure what would constitute a good suburban location. If you build a stadium in Mississauga, it will be a bitch for residents of Scarborough or Durham region to attend games; if you build a stadium in the east end, you get the same problem in reverse. Of course, if you build a stadium at Downsview or in York Region, then it becomes inconvenient for anyone living east or west to attend games. A centrally-located stadium may not be the most convenient option for everyone, but it is a good compromise given the catchment area of the TFC fanbase.

Personally, I love the fact that BMO Field is easily accessible by transit. Judging by the huge crowds that take the GO train east or west after each game, I'd say I'm not alone.

Pookie
12-22-2009, 07:02 PM
^ Some people will inevitably prefer a suburban stadium, but in a city as big as Toronto, I'm not sure what would constitute a good suburban location. If you build a stadium in Mississauga, it will be a bitch for residents of Scarborough or Durham region to attend games; if you build a stadium in the east end, you get the same problem in reverse. Of course, if you build a stadium at Downsview or in York Region, then it becomes inconvenient for anyone living east or west to attend games. A centrally-located stadium may not be the most convenient option for everyone, but it is a good compromise given the catchment area of the TFC fanbase.

Personally, I love the fact that BMO Field is easily accessible by transit. Judging by the huge crowds that take the GO train east or west after each game, I'd say I'm not alone.

Here's the question (and I don't know the answer).

Do the majority of folks take transit because they live in the downtown area or do they take it because of the traffic and parking issues? The later group would park at a GO Station and then drive home from there.

A location in the York U area (Steeles and Keele) would have been interesting. It has transit and accessibility (just off the 407) for those that are driving from all areas. It was the 1st choice . The Ex was the fall back plan.

What is true is that the 'burbs are growing and with the agreement expiring in 16 years, I would love to see a long range plan that looks at alternative sites. I would hope they could look at the 905 again.

james
12-22-2009, 07:23 PM
I think the issue gets more complicated than that when it comes to the use of public funds, particulary with the Olympics.

I think the issue is one of optics not necessarily one of transit.

We have this argument in Toronto that says the stadium needs to be accessible by transit. I'll bet there would be cries of joy from thousands of people if they actually built BMO Field in the 'burbs and they didn't have to endure parking and downtown construction headaches.

No one has ever challenged this but with urban sprawl resulting in huge growth outside of the GTA, I'd wager that quite a few TFC fans live in the 905 and even the 519 and 705 area codes. I think that will only grow over time.

BMO Field is an inconvenient location for a large and growing group of fans.

Downtown might be the best for Vancouver. I'd have to defer to you on this one as I obviously have no intimate knowledge of the area. That said, I think we have to challenge our assumptions about locations in light of population trends.

Again though, moving to BC Place probably has more to do with the politics around the use of public funds than it does around transit.

im from Oakville and there was actually talk before York came up that the soccer stadium was actually gonna be built in North East Oakville, basicly i could of walked to the stadium. Now as someone living in Oakville let me tell you that would of been a disaster. Oakville has a horrible bus service. North Oakville on Dundas and Upper Middle Roads traffic is often really bad, between 4 and 7pm weekdays traffic is worse then headding to Exhibition. Also traffic comming off the QEW between the Ford Plant and Trafalgar Road (which would have been the main exit for the stadium)traffic never moves, i dont know why, but they have some bottle neck effect and even dispite adding lanes recently its still jsut as bad as ever. It would not beable to handle traffic from Mississauga and Toronto for a TFC game. IT would of been a nightmere for those comming from Brampton, most of Toronto, Vaghn, Ajax, Paickerring. Only those in Oakville, Burlington and PARTS of Missisauga (like around Dundas maybe erin mills) would it of been better convience.

If you look at it West of Toronto
Mississauga 705,000
Oakville 170,000
Burlington 175,000
Hamilton 505,000

East of Toronto
Pickerring 100,000
Ajax 93,000
Oshawa 140,000

North of Toronto
Brampton 433,000
Markham 261,000
Vaughan 238,000

And whats in the middle of all of this...Toronto 2.5 million.
I dont know about other cities but Oakville all the transit pretty much only goes East to Toronto and West to Burlington/Hamilton, transit to places like Brampton, and Markham and Square One area is quite bad, you gotta transfer like 3 busses to get to those places. If you put the stadium in west Suburbs it sucks for those in the East and North. You put in it the East it sucks for those in the West and North..exct. Toronto downtown is prefect location makes sense for the overall population.

james
12-22-2009, 07:42 PM
Houston is planning an $80 million stadium to be located downtown. As for New England, they won't move from Gillette Stadium any time soon, and why would they? The owner of the Revolution (Robert Kraft) also owns the stadium and the Patriots, so from a monetary perspective, that team already plays in a SSS.

for some owner who maybe doesnt really care about MLS ya why would he. But if the owner cares anything about growing MLS reputation to a higer degree he should move out where pointy gridlines arent all over the field and one whole side of the stadium is tarped up. It deffinitly gives it more of an amature feel rater then a pro team. Not to mention a new stadium actually built in Boston could possible change the attedence average from 12,000 to +20,000.

If the league wants to gain a better reputation to get more fans to start supporting the league you need more stadiums like in LA, New York, Chicago exc. Not like in New England.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 07:45 PM
A location in the York U area (Steeles and Keele) would have been interesting. It has transit and accessibility (just off the 407) for those that are driving from all areas. It was the 1st choice . The Ex was the fall back plan.

Actually the Ex was the first choice. After that original stadium - which looked like the best overall stadium IMO - went by the wayside, a plan was drafted for a stadium at UofT, followed by the York U proposal. BMO Field was a return to the CNE grounds, and it was the fourth stadium proposal overall. (If you scroll down the following web page, you can see each of the stadium renderings.)

http://forums.soccerfansnetwork.com/showthread.php?t=33847&page=3

FWIW, the growing number of people who live in the 905 region should be taken into account when planning a stadium, but the problem with this segment of the city is that it is not concentrated at all. Right now, it would be extremely difficult to build a stadium in any particular part of the 905 area without making it even more difficult for other 905ers to attend games. At least with our current public transit system in place, our existing soccer stadium is more or less connected with all major parts of the 905 suburbs.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-22-2009, 07:49 PM
for some owner who maybe doesnt really care about MLS ya why would he. But if the owner cares anything about growing MLS reputation to a higer degree he should move out where pointy gridlines arent all over the field and one whole side of the stadium is tarped up. It deffinitly gives it more of an amature feel rater then a pro team. Not to mention a new stadium actually built in Boston could possible change the attedence average from 12,000 to +20,000.

If the league wants to gain a better reputation to get more fans to start supporting the league you need more stadiums like in LA, New York, Chicago exc. Not like in New England.

With regard to reputation, I agree completely. New England is a Micky Mouse operation, one that is a throwback to the time when teams relied on playing in huge stadiums with pointy ball lines covering the field. I would much rather see NE play in a SSS any day. I just don't see that happening, at least as long as Kraft owns the team.

rocker
12-22-2009, 07:55 PM
York is a shitty location.

Trust me, I spent many years there as a student and I would hate to have to trek over there from Mississauga, or downtown toronto. Then you'd have those airplanes flying over all the time (one time I sat on campus and just watched the planes go overhead for an hour). And at night you'd be jumping into your car as quickly as possible because the area surrounding the campus isn't very hospitable.... and until they build the subway line there's no rapid transit there.

I don't think you'd have marches to the stadium or the atmosphere you have at BMO. It'd be a different crowd..

The Ex is a great location because if you want to drive, you can get down the Gardiner and the exit is right near the stadium. If you want to take the Go, there's a dedicated station a few yards away. If you prefer the TTC, you've got streetcar. It's almost perfect (the only better location mighta been right where the ACC is...then you have subway right there). If they do ever build that downtown relief line, then BMO would have a subway stop right at its door......

Pookie
12-22-2009, 09:37 PM
York is a shitty location.

I don't think you'd have marches to the stadium or the atmosphere you have at BMO. It'd be a different crowd..

The Ex is a great location because if you want to drive, you can get down the Gardiner and the exit is right near the stadium. If you want to take the Go, there's a dedicated station a few yards away. If you prefer the TTC, you've got streetcar. It's almost perfect (the only better location mighta been right where the ACC is...then you have subway right there). If they do ever build that downtown relief line, then BMO would have a subway stop right at its door......

I'll disagree with the driving assertion. The annual summer construction on the Gardiner and 427 make it a headache. The parking lots that disappear with events on the Lakeshore are frustrating. Exiting the stadium with single lanes leading to 3 traffic lights only to have the Jameson exit to the Westbound Gardiner closed minutes after the game doesn't sound like good planning to me.

Take York as an example, I'm not saying it is THE spot. It would have been interesting though to see something built on the outskirts of the traditional area and see how well it could do.

I'm not sure you can conclude that the atmosphere would be different just because people couldn't take a streetcar/GO train there. Quite a few NFL stadiums are built in the "middle of nowhere" and it has no impact on the fan's ability to tailgate or be loud.

If the sport is popular, folks will go to wherever it is.

Are you saying that the RPB (or other SGs) wouldn't follow the team if they had to go somewhere else?

It has become "home" but that doesn't mean that it would be any different anywhere else.

Even if your fear still persists in terms of the atmosphere related to location, in 16 years, would the team not be established enough to the point that location would be irrelevant?

Stryker
12-22-2009, 09:41 PM
Yay for pointy ball lines and artificial turf.
Sucks to be you Vancouver.

Pookie
12-22-2009, 09:50 PM
^ I've never figured out why Seattle can get the lines off but NE and NY couldn't.

rocker
12-22-2009, 09:56 PM
I'll disagree with the driving assertion. The annual summer construction on the Gardiner and 427 make it a headache. The parking lots that disappear with events on the Lakeshore are frustrating. Exiting the stadium with single lanes leading to 3 traffic lights only to have the Jameson exit to the Westbound Gardiner closed minutes after the game doesn't sound like good planning to me.

Take York as an example, I'm not saying it is THE spot. It would have been interesting though to see something built on the outskirts of the traditional area and see how well it could do.

I'm not sure you can conclude that the atmosphere would be different just because people couldn't take a streetcar/GO train there. Quite a few NFL stadiums are built in the "middle of nowhere" and it has no impact on the fan's ability to tailgate or be loud.

If the sport is popular, folks will go to wherever it is.

Are you saying that the RPB (or other SGs) wouldn't follow the team if they had to go somewhere else?

It has become "home" but that doesn't mean that it would be any different anywhere else.

Even if your fear still persists in terms of the atmosphere related to location, in 16 years, would the team not be established enough to the point that location would be irrelevant?

I'd have to drive in on the 401 to York.... even without construction, the 401 is crap -- even on weekends. My GF lives at Yonge-Shepp so I drive along there a lot and it's awful. Weeknight games would be tough for drivers too. Plus, you have 10 minute drive from 401/keele or 5-6 minute drive from the 400. BMO is right off the Gardiner.

I do believe the atmosphere would be different up at York. I don't even think the RPB would have come together if the stadium was up there. Congregating at Joe's or other pubs before and after is a key part of the bonding of the group. I suspect also that a lot of single young men find it easier and cheaper to get to BMO than to York. At least you have GO and Streetcar. York would be just the bus or drive. That's worse.

The Ex is the crossroads of most forms of transport in Toronto. York just doesn't come close to having that convenience.

I also don't think casual fans would go up to York -- and you need them for success.. not just the diehards. I see so many people on the Go train coming from Burlington and Oakville. Not sure if they are all diehards, but I think the ease of transport brings them in.

But again -- the York campus has fewer transportation options than the Ex does. I do not see any transportation advantage to being at York. None.
Second, there's a great vibe at the Ex.. being close to the city... being near pubs and bars.

As a student at York, the last thing I wanted to do was dare walk off the campus, particularly at night. Actually, at York I wanted to find my car as quickly as possible and get the hell outta there as I drove past the ominous and rundown apartments on the west side.

To me, that's no place for a stadium.

Pookie
12-22-2009, 10:12 PM
I'd have to drive in on the 401 to York.... even without construction, the 401 is crap ... I do believe the atmosphere would be different up at York. I don't even think the RPB would have come together if the stadium was up there. Congregating at Joe's or other pubs before and after is a key part of the bonding of the group. I suspect also that a lot of single young men find it easier and cheaper to get to BMO than to York. At least you have GO and Streetcar. York would be just the bus or drive. That's worse.

What would be wrong about finding an open parcel of land and building the thing there as part of a development?

Along with the stadium would come bars/restaurants. Maybe some shops. Maybe some housing. Who knows what could come along with it. It's not like it would be built as a stand alone in the middle of a farmer's field.

I'm thinking Vaughan and probably somewhere just off the 407 but it could be anywhere. With GO train service now stretching into Barrie (and planned 427 expansion up that way as well) there is no reason to think that in 16 years, Transit services couldn't reach this new stadium.

To your point about young men, between Humber College, Seneca College, York University and Sheridan there are over 100,000 students living in those areas.

james
12-22-2009, 10:42 PM
Football stadiums in the middle of miles of nothing but parking lots has been a big part of Football and reason why there is such tailgatting. Canada doesnt really have the tailgate party in the same way, its illegal to here.


In 16 years location of a stadium in Toronto might not matter and fans may travel the distance to go see games weekly. However thats in 16 years not now. Also not to say it will happen here, but some new stadiums in England built in recent years who have moved outside the main city area like there previous stadiums has hurt the atmosphere culture. Bolton and Conventry City are 2 that i know of. Tho that goes for mojority of new stadiums in general, whether you in NHL, NFL or soccer.

james
12-22-2009, 10:52 PM
401 has the highest volume of traffic in all of North America by the way to. So it ainy everyones favourite to drive.

Cashcleaner
12-22-2009, 11:41 PM
I don't see anything wrong with that if the Whitecaps want to make it permanent. The endzones only look 10yards though.

http://static.cdn.mrx.ca/cfl/bc/images/inside/2009/12/Empire-logoed-Green-WEB3805.jpg

You know what? Seeing this sorta shit makes me angry. I mean, look at that stadium. Even for a temp facility, you've got roofs over the two large stands and the corners nice and filled-in. And all this for $20 million?! I imagine the exterior walls are plywood or some sort of similar material, but just think what that would all look like with concrete and/or panelling instead.

Who here would be upset if the stadium above is what BMO Field looks like some day? Not me.

ilikemusic
12-23-2009, 02:14 AM
Hell, keep the Whitecaps in there permanently; Thats a nice lookin stadium!

Dirk Diggler
12-23-2009, 02:27 AM
The stadium in the rendering does not even look close to being a 30,000 capacity stadium. Seems about 18,000 at best. If we are to assume that the stadium will be built for $20 million and will hold 30,000 , I can bet any dollars to donuts that it will not look like the renders.

Kaz
12-23-2009, 06:48 AM
as far as BMO's location, I'd hate to have it anywhere outside of the main area of Toronto (ie Downsview, Varsity, or the EX) I know where those locations are as an out of towner. I'd have a heck of a time trying to get to York intentionally. Not to mention if I want to go to BMO from Brampton, where I am now, I have the choice of a GO bus, Train, Mississauga Transit to the TTC, or Brampton Transit to the TTC. Just about anywhere in the 905 there is a lowish cost transit solution that involves simple thinking...

That Temp Stadium has a nice look almost jealous, till I think about pointy ball lines, Still am sad that bmo wasn't a 20,000 lower bowel with the infrastructure for an upper bowl to be built later... but that would have added to cost, and who woulda thought that it would sell out for 3 three seasons in a row. Or that no concerts would really be had there after there after the first year.

Broadview
12-23-2009, 07:41 AM
All of MLS' attendance darlings have their stadiums in the city proper. TFC, DC, Seattle, Houston.

Compare these attendances with the suburban based teams: Colorado, Dallas, New England, even RSL in their shiney new stadium struggle to sell out. Chicago is a bit of an exception but they don't sell out like clockwork by any means.

We'll see what kind of numbers Philly can maintain with an out of the way stadium.

We'll also see how mobile a good fan base can be if/when DCU gets their situation settled.

Pookie
12-23-2009, 08:08 AM
All of MLS' attendance darlings have their stadiums in the city proper. TFC, DC, Seattle, Houston.

Compare these attendances with the suburban based teams: Colorado, Dallas, New England, even RSL in their shiney new stadium struggle to sell out. Chicago is a bit of an exception but they don't sell out like clockwork by any means.


I'm not sure you are presenting a full and scientific picture there.

RSL outdrew DC.

LA, which was second overall in average attendance is located in Carson, CA.

Those are just a couple of examples and doesn't explain why teams like NY didn't draw.

If location is the key, you'd then have to ask why location is a factor in soccer attendance but a non-factor in NFL attendance. NE is the prime example there. Maybe the differences are more related to marketing than anything else. A cause and effect relationship between location and attendance would be very difficult to prove.

---

The part of this discussion that is missing is a listing of STHs and Gold Listers by postal code. If you found that the majority of your loyal fan base lived in the 416, then it makes complete sense to keep the stadium where it is.

MLSE should then be looking at how to wrestle ownership away from the City and ensure complete control over who and what goes in there (ie lock the Argos out for good).

If you found that the majority are immigrating to the 905 area code, then you have a different story.

MLSE should then start to conduct feasibility study to examine the economics around building a new venue (perhaps as part of a development complex) in the area that is most convenient for the majority of their fans. Keeping in mind that moving north (or east or west) doesn't necessarily mean an end to bars and public transit.

Oldtimer
12-23-2009, 08:21 AM
MLSE should then be looking at how to wrestle ownership away from the City and ensure complete control over who and what goes in there (ie lock the Argos out for good).


They couldn't do it, even if the city would let them. The province has laws governing Exhibition Place that restrict what Toronto can do to it. For one, they can't sell any of it.

Pookie
12-23-2009, 08:23 AM
^ If that is true, the management agreement was for a term of 20 years which means that in 16 years MLSE will have a choice to continue on as a renter forever or make a decision to become owners of their own house.

Oldtimer
12-23-2009, 08:28 AM
Actually the Ex was the first choice. After that original stadium - which looked like the best overall stadium IMO - went by the wayside, a plan was drafted for a stadium at UofT, followed by the York U proposal. BMO Field was a return to the CNE grounds, and it was the fourth stadium proposal overall. (If you scroll down the following web page, you can see each of the stadium renderings.)

http://forums.soccerfansnetwork.com/showthread.php?t=33847&page=3



Great link. There was a good prediction by "Joe McCarthy" long before TFC came on the scene:


A top-level professional team in Toronto will give our homebred players a chance to become household names in our sporting landscape. There is no reason every Canadian soccer fan shouldn't be familiar with Dwayne de Rosario. We should all have all heard about young Canadian Julien de Guzman's scoring against soccer powerhouse Real Madrid last week. But instead of hearing about de Rosario being short listed as MLS player of the year or de Guzman's success at Deportivo, we get to hear about a 4th line winger on some obscure NHL team south of the border sustaining a lower body injury Fair, not really, but that's the reality of the sports coverage in this country. The pending arrival of MLS in this country may go a long way to re-shaping the way we look at soccer from a domestic standpoint. Montreal has done a fantastic job promoting the Impact in the 'A' league. The same can be said of the Whitecaps in Vancouver. But a team in soccer's biggest league in North America in Canada's largest media market has the potential to turn a lot more heads. He was so right. Building BMO Field and the subsequent coming of TFC sure changed a lot.

Redcoe15
12-23-2009, 10:00 AM
There was a good prediction by "Joe McCarthy" long before TFC came on the scene:


A top-level professional team in Toronto will give our homebred players a chance to become household names in our sporting landscape. There is no reason every Canadian soccer fan shouldn't be familiar with Dwayne de Rosario. We should all have all heard about young Canadian Julien de Guzman's scoring against soccer powerhouse Real Madrid last week. But instead of hearing about de Rosario being short listed as MLS player of the year or de Guzman's success at Deportivo, we get to hear about a 4th line winger on some obscure NHL team south of the border sustaining a lower body injury Fair, not really, but that's the reality of the sports coverage in this country. The pending arrival of MLS in this country may go a long way to re-shaping the way we look at soccer from a domestic standpoint. Montreal has done a fantastic job promoting the Impact in the 'A' league. The same can be said of the Whitecaps in Vancouver. But a team in soccer's biggest league in North America in Canada's largest media market has the potential to turn a lot more heads.

He was so right. Building BMO Field and the subsequent coming of TFC sure changed a lot.

:eek6: HOOO-LEEEE FUUUUUCK! That is becoming so prophetic. What's even more interesting is that now we've got both DeRo and JDG playing for TFC. Wait until Vancouver and Montreal join the league. :canada: :D

Carefree
12-23-2009, 10:53 AM
In all this discussion about the best location for TFC's stadium, I find it strange that everybody takes for granted that there can only be ONE team to serve soccer fans in southern Ontario. What's wrong with having a team based in Oakville or Burlington to serve the Western suburbs and the Hamilton area, a team in Vaughn, and one in Scarborough (near the zoo would be nice... lots of space out there)?

I'm sure all these locations could fill a 10,000-15,000 seat stadium on a weekly basis. With all the transition going on with USL, NASL, etc, why aren't these cities getting involved in getting teams in what would be second-tier soccer in North America? I'm sure there is enough interest in the sport that it wouldn't affect TFC in the least.

Obviously this won't happen anytime soon, but if we're talking 15-20 years down the road, I don't think it's too far-fetched.

drewski
12-23-2009, 11:34 AM
They couldn't do it, even if the city would let them. The province has laws governing Exhibition Place that restrict what Toronto can do to it. For one, they can't sell any of it.

ok, so you just have to convince 2 levels of gov instead of one. McGuinty has already hinted at the possibility of asset sales and its in Rocco Rossi's platform, and I'd assume John Tory's too

drewski
12-23-2009, 11:37 AM
In all this discussion about the best location for TFC's stadium, I find it strange that everybody takes for granted that there can only be ONE team to serve soccer fans in southern Ontario. What's wrong with having a team based in Oakville or Burlington to serve the Western suburbs and the Hamilton area, a team in Vaughn, and one in Scarborough (near the zoo would be nice... lots of space out there)?

I'm sure all these locations could fill a 10,000-15,000 seat stadium on a weekly basis. With all the transition going on with USL, NASL, etc, why aren't these cities getting involved in getting teams in what would be second-tier soccer in North America? I'm sure there is enough interest in the sport that it wouldn't affect TFC in the least.

Obviously this won't happen anytime soon, but if we're talking 15-20 years down the road, I don't think it's too far-fetched.

hamilton is going for a usl-1 team to use the pan-am games stadium. london is starting off with a pdl team and may try to move up if things go well. Ottawa also has a pdl team and its been rumoured to be going after a usl-1 team as a second tenant for the redone landsdowne park

Carefree
12-23-2009, 12:33 PM
Hamilton getting a team would be an excellent start.

It's unfortunate that sports culture in North America dictates that there can only be one pro team of any sport per city or metropolitan area. I live downtown, and probably always will, so I'm happy with the current location of TFC's base of operations. But if I lived for example in Vaughn, I would much prefer to support a team based in Vaughn rather than in downtown Toronto, even if it's in a "lower" league. Am I alone here?

I'm sure there are a lot of people in the suburbs who grew up playing soccer and are just starting to pay attention to the pro game, who would love to go to a game but can't for practical reasons. USL (or MLS-2 if that ever gets off the ground) needs to build the infrastructure to capitalize on these people's interest.

Sadly the USL has done a notoriously shitty job of marketing itself, and the general perception is that because it's not the best game in the country, it's not worth paying attention to. Hopefully that can change.

Dirk Diggler
12-23-2009, 01:54 PM
I can't believe that this is even being discussed. Having a stadium that is accessible through mass transit is FAR SUPERIOR to having a stadium that is accessible primarily through highway commutes. There is no debating this whatsoever. That is just a basic concept of proper city planning ... to have big public places on transit corridors.

Pookie
12-23-2009, 05:17 PM
^ you do know that the GO train runs up to places like Aurora, King City, Bradford, Barrie, Etobicoke, Malton, Bramalea, Richmond Hill, Agincourt, Unionville, Erindale, Streetsville, Milton and Markham?

twistedchinaman
12-23-2009, 05:26 PM
This is how you get to "Empire Fields" via transit: HERE (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=601+West+Cordova+Street,+Vancouver,+BC+V6B+1 G1,+Canada+%28Waterfront+Station%29&daddr=49.282639,-123.033222&hl=en&geocode=CRuN9eYLQgT6Fd0I8AIdWHap-CG57FcDPw7zwCmlVa92eHGGVDG2FV06kgUnSg%3B&mra=pe&mrcr=0&dirflg=r&date=12%2F23%2F09&time=3:19pm&ttype=dep&noexp=0&noal=0&sort=&tline=&sll=49.28399,-123.073731&sspn=0.055988,0.1157&ie=UTF8&ll=49.284884,-123.102365&spn=0.013997,0.028925&t=h&z=15&start=0)

There's just something not right with this picture -- having the Shitecaps play here would be gate receipt suicide.

Compare this to say, Swangard... (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=601+West+Cordova+Street,+Vancouver,+BC+V6B+1 G1,+Canada+%28Waterfront+Station%29&daddr=Swangard+Stadium,+Burnaby,+British+Columbia, +Canada+%28Swangard+Stadium%29&hl=en&geocode=Fd0I8AIdWHap-CG57FcDPw7zwCmlVa92eHGGVDG2FV06kgUnSg%3BCbABBli3Y5 BfFTAy7wId-NOq-CH9vVXEiuzn9Q&mra=pe&mrcr=0&dirflg=r&date=12%2F23%2F09&time=3:19pm&ttype=dep&noexp=0&noal=0&sort=&tline=&sll=49.25364,-123.064551&sspn=0.112045,0.2314&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=13&start=0)

And even the new stadium location! (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Canada+%28Whitecaps+Waterfront+Stadium%29&daddr=601+West+Cordova+Street,+Vancouver,+BC+V6B+1 G1,+Canada+%28Waterfront+Station%29&hl=en&geocode=Fb8K8AIdzo2p-CFktmigb80EUQ%3BCRuN9eYLQgT6Fd0I8AIdWHap-CG57FcDPw7zwCmlVa92eHGGVDG2FV06kgUnSg&mra=pe&mrcr=0&dirflg=w&sll=49.285222,-123.110041&sspn=0.013997,0.028925&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=17)

The difference is truly palpable. Plus Empire Fields has a "Playland" amusement park right next to it, which is sure to be filled on weekends -- WHEN THE GAMES ARE PLAYED!

(http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Canada+%28Whitecaps+Waterfront+Stadium%29&daddr=601+West+Cordova+Street,+Vancouver,+BC+V6B+1 G1,+Canada+%28Waterfront+Station%29&hl=en&geocode=Fb8K8AIdzo2p-CFktmigb80EUQ%3BCRuN9eYLQgT6Fd0I8AIdWHap-CG57FcDPw7zwCmlVa92eHGGVDG2FV06kgUnSg&mra=pe&mrcr=0&dirflg=w&sll=49.285222,-123.110041&sspn=0.013997,0.028925&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=17)

Toronto Ruffrider
12-23-2009, 08:22 PM
^ you do know that the GO train runs up to places like Aurora, King City, Bradford, Barrie, Etobicoke, Malton, Bramalea, Richmond Hill, Agincourt, Unionville, Erindale, Streetsville, Milton and Markham?

The problem is not that the GO train, or that transit in general, runs to those places. The problem lies in going BETWEEN those places - i.e. Agincourt to King City, Barrie to Malton, or Streetsville to Markham. The common denominator of our transit system is the downtown, and it will remain that way because it is not economically feasible to build expensive transit lines from suburb to suburb.

Kaz
12-23-2009, 09:14 PM
I would hate to see TFC playing in anyplace not easily accessable to the TTC. You can get to BMO with in 2 hours via public transit, from nearly anywhere from Hamilton in the west to Oshawa in the east and Barrie in the North. You move it east or west, then it adds significant time to the 905ers on one side, as well as 416ers.

Downsview and the EX are the ideal locations for Stadiums. BMO is in a fairly decent locations.. Skydome is good too... we could always knock it down, and let BMO be modified for Baseball and Pointyball. MLSE could build a nice 30-35k seat Euro Style stadium on the rubble. (with room for expansion)

Pookie
12-23-2009, 09:52 PM
The problem is not that the GO train, or that transit in general, runs to those places. The problem lies in going BETWEEN those places - i.e. Agincourt to King City, Barrie to Malton, or Streetsville to Markham. The common denominator of our transit system is the downtown, and it will remain that way because it is not economically feasible to build expensive transit lines from suburb to suburb.

I'm not sure that many understand the transit issues faced by folks not on the east west line. There is no direct line to the Ex from the north, north east or north west. Fans who take transit from these areas are generally making their way to Union station and then getting a connection or they are driving down to stations along the way (Guildwood or Clarkson for example) and taking the train in.

The question is, are they taking transit because it is more convenient or because the parking and construction is pathetic?

If they are driving down to stations along the line, it would reason that they would drive to a stadium if it were more convenient.

It's really moot as they are there for at least 16 years. We can't predict traffic, immigration or TTC routes and schedules that far out. What I am saying though is that the possibility of a 905ish stadium in the future might be more welcomed than you might think.

Let me ask this question.

If MLSE can't ever own BMO Field due to regulations regarding the Ex grounds (as highlighted by oldtimer)... IF they ever were to build their own stadium in the future... AND you want it downtown along a transit line.... where would it go?

Dirk Diggler
12-23-2009, 10:44 PM
Just because people drive to the nearest transit station does not mean that they would gladly drive to downtown as well if the parking situation was better. Why do you think the GO stations in the suburbs have absolutely massive parking lots?

All the "issues" that you are mentioning are not unique to BMO Field. Construction, parking etc are ALWAYS going to be issues in a downtown location. I seriously don't see how having a stadium in the north (around York U) would be more convenient for anyone aside from the people in the immediate locale and along the 407. For one, the parking situation is not going to be any better. Ask the Galaxy fans about this ... having a stadium within a university campus is not a convenient situation for a professional team.

The bottom line is that as it stands, BMO Field is on the busiest railway line in the region and in close proximity to the biggest transit hub in Canada. The only ones who will benefit from having the stadium in Vaughn are the ones living in that region ... where as the far bigger number of people residing on the east-west transit line will be left out in the cold.

Toronto Ruffrider
12-24-2009, 12:07 AM
If MLSE can't ever own BMO Field due to regulations regarding the Ex grounds (as highlighted by oldtimer)... IF they ever were to build their own stadium in the future... AND you want it downtown along a transit line.... where would it go?

How about the Portlands? There's plenty of land available in this under-utilized area just east of the downtown. Transit lines to this area have been in the planning stages for some time, including a waterfront east dedicated streetcar line running out of Union Station, and a possible downtown relief line.

Pookie
12-24-2009, 09:57 AM
Just because people drive to the nearest transit station does not mean that they would gladly drive to downtown as well if the parking situation was better. Why do you think the GO stations in the suburbs have absolutely massive parking lots?

Because there is no parking downtown and the congestion is terrible ;)


I seriously don't see how having a stadium in the north (around York U) would be more convenient for anyone aside from the people in the immediate locale and along the 407. For one, the parking situation is not going to be any better. Ask the Galaxy fans about this ... having a stadium within a university campus is not a convenient situation for a professional team.

Don't get hung up on York. A yet to be built stadium on a yet to be confirmed parcel of land could conceivably include a plan with ample parking and be located within a number transit options.

That MoveOntario 2020 plan includes a number of rail improvements including subway service into Vaughan and Richmond Hill, a GO train into and through Bolton and a crosstown line from Weston Road through to Pickering.

Why are they expanding service? Could it be that businesses are moving to the burbs? That people are moving to the burbs? All of which are in significant enough numbers to justify a $17.5B investment.


The bottom line is that as it stands, BMO Field is on the busiest railway line in the region and in close proximity to the biggest transit hub in Canada. The only ones who will benefit from having the stadium in Vaughn are the ones living in that region ... where as the far bigger number of people residing on the east-west transit line will be left out in the cold.

I'd agree. It is probably in the best location it could be in right now. It was the least costly option and got us our team.

16 years from now, coupled with expansion of the 905, with no potential for MLSE to own it, the Argos Clause still in place and with a new transit infrastructure, I can't argue that the EX will always be the best location.

That goes for fans and for the team itself.

james
12-25-2009, 12:34 AM
Just because people drive to the nearest transit station does not mean that they would gladly drive to downtown as well if the parking situation was better. Why do you think the GO stations in the suburbs have absolutely massive parking lots?

All the "issues" that you are mentioning are not unique to BMO Field. Construction, parking etc are ALWAYS going to be issues in a downtown location. I seriously don't see how having a stadium in the north (around York U) would be more convenient for anyone aside from the people in the immediate locale and along the 407. For one, the parking situation is not going to be any better. Ask the Galaxy fans about this ... having a stadium within a university campus is not a convenient situation for a professional team.

The bottom line is that as it stands, BMO Field is on the busiest railway line in the region and in close proximity to the biggest transit hub in Canada. The only ones who will benefit from having the stadium in Vaughn are the ones living in that region ... where as the far bigger number of people residing on the east-west transit line will be left out in the cold.

agreed:hump:

james
12-25-2009, 12:47 AM
All of MLS' attendance darlings have their stadiums in the city proper. TFC, DC, Seattle, Houston.

Compare these attendances with the suburban based teams: Colorado, Dallas, New England, even RSL in their shiney new stadium struggle to sell out. Chicago is a bit of an exception but they don't sell out like clockwork by any means.

We'll see what kind of numbers Philly can maintain with an out of the way stadium.

We'll also see how mobile a good fan base can be if/when DCU gets their situation settled.

well LA gets anywhere from 18,000 to 27,000 fans a game in the suburbs which is pretty good. With 12 million people in the LA metro area, a nice stadium, and big names like Beckham and Donavan tho you would really exspect them to get that many fans a game. I think any team would get that many fans with a nice stadium and big names.

Chicago is a hit and miss. They sell out some games while other games get 11,000 fans. I think the stadium being far outside of Chicago not being the easiest place to get to some fans only show up for the more inportant games.

DC does pretty well for the most part, they have had one of the highest attendence for many years, there stadium is a bit run down however and to big for an MLS team. They had a few games this year where attendence was rather low such as 13,000-14,000 range. A better performance on the field and a new stadium built within the city would be guaranteed sell outs tho.

Any other teams in the suburbs seem to never sell out. Unless maybe Galaxy and BEckham are playing.

Macksam
12-26-2009, 04:47 PM
We have this argument in Toronto that says the stadium needs to be accessible by transit. I'll bet there would be cries of joy from thousands of people if they actually built BMO Field in the 'burbs and they didn't have to endure parking and downtown construction headaches.

Negative. There would be cries though. Cries from the nimbys who will whine and bitch about the noise and "mob like" atmosphere.

I like downtown. I also have no qualms with taking the Go Train to go to Union, and then the Streetcar to Exhibition. I don't have to deal with any parking and construction headaches as a result.