Stadiums Around The League - Growth of MLS
Saw this today and thought I'd share it with you guys. MLS is at the tipping point of becoming a very professional league with regards to infrastructure. Nearly every team is vying for a stadium within two years. Please feel free to add any news items or pictures of other stadium developments.
I give you: RSL & Grass
http://rslstadium.com/construction.html
Having their own stadium is a key to success for each MLS club, you can make it your own and people want to come to the games in most cases. Sitting in a huge NFL stadium with 10,000 to 20,000 people sometimes just is not that fun.
Remember The Man, The Legend, The Goal 5-12-07 and All That #9 Left On The Pitch, Thanks For The Memories !!!
Like Columbus?Originally Posted by CBlake
Moderator
^ Exactly. A SSS isn't the magic pill so many tend to believe. And again, that's probably why it's not mandatory (albiet encouraged) for newer clubs coming into the league.
Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.
They still have to have a stadium in the works though, don't they?
we thought so....but then came Seattle who have no plans of ever build a SSS and they got a team.
heres a list of teams with SSS
Columbus
TFC
Dallas
Chicago
LA
Chivas
Colorado
Stadiums comming soon:
New York - Fall of 2009
Salt Lake - Fall of 2008
Philadelphia - 2010
Teams trying to get Stadium Deals
DC United
Kansas
San Jose
Teams i havent really herd much from
New England
Houston
Seattle
Soccer specific stadium definitely helps, but if there aren't a lot of soccer fans to begin with (Columbus), then it won't matter. I hope KC gets one soon, they're bringing down league attendance average with there 10,000 capacity stadium.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/stats/a...r=2008&cc=5901
Actually, Houston is close to an agreement. Which should be good.
Moderator
Nope. Like I said, it helps to either have a facility in place or in the works, but it's not essential.
Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.
Well here is some commentary on both DC and Houstan....it looks as though DC's plan is going downhill and Houston's plan is more progressive.
OK...has anyone seen a game in QWEST field in their lifetime? I know Canada played Brazil the other month in Qwest and it looked like a good venue.
Please tell me why Qwest is not a good soccer stadium if the fans can fill it up....at least the lower bowl.
I still have some beefs with the common SSS designs. Namely the U-shaped bowls with pointless roofs that don't hold in noise or protect from the elements. If they're going to build it for 20,000 then why not make it more intimate and intimidating. Something like Brentford's proposed new stadium.
Groningen's Euroborg stadium is another awesome 20,000 seater
As for teams like Columbus and KC. They're support is always going to be small so I think it's almost best if they were in smaller 14,000 seaters like this:
I'm glad Red Bull Park is going in soon so that it can set a high standard for all future stadiums to be compared to. Finally, with one stadium built properly the rest of the teams in the league looking for new stadiums can learn from New York's example.
Those little stads look sweeet.
The thing with RSL's stadium. Aside from the grass there's nothing really "nice" about it. The seats are cheap plastic (not that I care), Everything is cheap metal and concrete.
Ok, looking at that picture, I don't see anything in the bottom tier minus the corner being filled in that is different from BMO. Other then ours being a bit bigger. But this is a 20,000 seater right? Our upgrade would be to put us at 25 000 to 30 000.
Last edited by Marc"2L"; 06-28-2008 at 02:59 PM.
Because there is no need to do so.
-> Owners of stadium own the team -> income is right to them
-> Stadium is downtown
-> Stadium is already built -> make a profit first year sounds good to MLS.
and hell
-> Drew Carey is involved.
He likes this sport enough that he's a photographer for it.
Ok, looking at that picture, I don't see anything in the bottom tier minus the corner being filled in that is different from BMO.
the roof my friend... the roof
I guess you need to see more pics of this stadium. It's nothing like BMO at all. Groningen's is fully enclosed with 2 decks on three sides as opposed to one side at BMO. Not to mention Groningen's has a roof.The thing with RSL's stadium. Aside from the grass there's nothing really "nice" about it. The seats are cheap plastic (not that I care), Everything is cheap metal and concrete.
Ok, looking at that picture, I don't see anything in the bottom tier minus the corner being filled in that is different from BMO. Other then ours being a bit bigger. But this is a 20,000 seater right? Our upgrade would be to put us at 25 000 to 30 000.
So, is the soccer team the #1 tennant and anything else would be second and third? If that's the case, it's not bad.
The reality in North America is that cities have lots of different sports, but seeing soccer move into the #1 spot in a building is pretty cool.
And something we're going to see more.
They're still 2nd fiddle to the Seahawks and will have to play on FieldTurf. To be specific, it's football FieldTurf, not the FIFA 2 star soccer FieldTurf that we have here at BMO. However, I've heard that they're exploring all options to ensure that football lines are covered up for soccer games.
i sure hope so...i cant stand those NFL gridlines all over the place. It really looks amature when you dont even play on a Soccer pitch!
New England are 2nd to the Patriots
Seattle will be most likely second to Seahawks
And Houston is second to the College Football team (not sure what they are called)
It will be interesting to see how the Sounders/Seahawks owners treat the fans when kickoff comes around. The Krafts own the Pats and the Revs in NE and from what I've heard the stadium officials treat the Rev fans like crap. It was as though the Revs and the fans were just fillers until the NFL season starts.
New England is more in need of an SSS than Seattle. The team might be owned by the Krafts but the stadium is out in the suburbs and the attendance is shite. I can deal with Seattle playing at Qwest since it's downtown and they're on pace to fill the 24,000 seat lower bowl regularly. However, the FieldTurf at both is awful.
New England stadium looks brutal. 1 whole side of the stadium is completely empty!
Moderator
^ Agreed. And furthermore, those ugly grey walls behind the nets are an eyesore.
Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.
I still have some beefs with the common SSS designs. Namely the U-shaped bowls with pointless roofs that don't hold in noise or protect from the elements. If they're going to build it for 20,000 then why not make it more intimate and intimidating. Something like Brentford's proposed new stadium.
Groningen's Euroborg stadium is another awesome 20,000 seater
As for teams like Columbus and KC. They're support is always going to be small so I think it's almost best if they were in smaller 14,000 seaters like this:
I'm glad Red Bull Park is going in soon so that it can set a high standard for all future stadiums to be compared to. Finally, with one stadium built properly the rest of the teams in the league looking for new stadiums can learn from New York's example.
ive been to Brentfords current stadium. And man that was a old run down stadium. The roof looks like its gonna fall down and they have a tiny little area where you can drink beer at half and its like your locked in a cage with chain link fence around it thats like 20 feet high. It also still has terrace behind the nets, (tho i prefer terrace to seats).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
