Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
A lot changes over three decades. In 1995 I didn't walk around with a cell phone and never heard of wifi. With the money charged to attend sporting events, concerts, etc I guess the facility should meet a certain standard. Location also plays a role and I believe the current arena is not a great location as it's in no-man's land and not very walkable. That said they just spent $400 million on renovations to Wells Fargo Center so I'm sure the facility would be totally fine for another decade at least.
|
I think that makes sense to a degree but I do think that we have reached a point where arenas can last for a longer period of time. The Well-Fargo Center is the same age as the Bridgestone Arena in Nashville and only 4 years older than the XCel Center in St. Paul and yet to the best of my knowledge there is no discussion about replacing either of those buildings.
I think that the Saddledome needed replacement due to structural issues and the stadium's age, but other than wanting new things, what is the rationale for newer buildings needing replacement? I have been to quite a few NHL arenas, and for the most part, they are pretty similar, with only very minor differences. The biggest issues are associated with traffic flow.
Out of every NHL building I have been in the only one that seemed like it needed replacement was the Canadian Tire Center due to the location as well as the fact that in the Melnyk years absolutely no money was put into the arena and it showed. Other than that they were all very much identical experiences with decent seats, short lineups, and insanely expensive drinks.