Flames to announce plans to announce arena plans in the... future...

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Missing out on Women's World Cup or U-23 is far from embarrassing. So we aren't set up for soccer, that's all that means. It's one sport / event out of many. If we aren't capable of hosting anything, that would be embarrassing. And I'm not saying the city can't work towards getting more set up for soccer events if it makes sense, but missing out on events that a huge chunk of the population couldn't give a rats ass about isn't embarassing, we need to keep perspective.

It would be embarrassing if the 3rd biggest city in Canada is not part of the Canadian bid to host the World Cup, simply because of inadequate facilities in one of the richest cities on the earth per capita.

You may not think that is embarrassing, but I do and I'm sure there is many out there that share the same sentiment.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I actually don't know what to say about this.

Would I rather live in San Diego, Houston, New York, Washington DC, Seattle, Phoenix, Charlotte, Philadelphia, etc. or Damascus, Cairo, Kinshasa, Mumbai, Islamabad, Karachi, Bangkok?

It's a pretty easy decision and a huge part of it is the quality of the roads, stadiums, public spaces, transit, hospitals, schools, etc.

It's not even close dude, sorry. I actually have no clue where you get your ideas from.

You really like listing war-torn countries as your examples, don't you?

And... have you actually lived in any of those locations you just listed? I would not want to live in Houston, DC, Pheonix, Charlotte or Philly... AT ALL. I'll take Calgary and our crappy stadium over any of those. I was about to list NY since I have a lot of friends from NY (NY/Cali connection) and never want to move back /couldn't wait to get out... but I think NY would be fun to live in, at least for a few weeks.

(Again FTR, I'm partial to public funding and would love to see a sweet arena, despite the fact I don't live in Calgary...)

[Ozy_Flame]

I completely disagree. There is money to be made by allowing a stadium that can host both a CFL and NASL / MLS team in a city the size of Calgary's. I've been playing soccer in Calgary for damn near 25 years and there is most definitely support for another professional sports team, particularly soccer, in Calgary, IF we have the venue to host one. Additionally, we need a proper stadium to attract investors for a soccer franchise - the fact that our city is being overlooked for places like Moncton is a huge detriment to attracting investors and positioning ourselves as a viable soccer market.

Calgary has missed out on the two biggest World Cup events outside of the World Cup itself - The 2007 U-23 World Cup and the 2015 Womens World Cup. I'm not sure how much bigger they get for a single sport other than that.

I believe that "a huge population couldn't give a rats ass" is extremely short-sighted and ignoring Calgary's highly diverse population with a love for a sport that is the most played in the entire world.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I completely disagree. There is money to be made by allowing a stadium that can host both a CFL and NASL / MLS team in a city the size of Calgary's. I've been playing soccer in Calgary for damn near 25 years and there is most definitely support for a professional sports team in Calgary, IF we have the venue to host one. Additionally, we need a proper stadium to attract investors for a soccer franchise - the fact that our city is being overlooked for places like Moncton is a huge detriment to attracting investors and positioning ourselves as a viable soccer market.

Calgary has missed out on the two biggest World Cup events outside of the World Cup itself - The 2007 U-23 World Cup and the 2015 Womens World Cup. I'm not sure how much bigger they get for a single sport other than that.

I believe that "a huge population couldn't give a rats ass" is extremely short-sighted and ignoring Calgary's highly diverse population with a love for a sport that is the most played in the entire world.

No, you need proper investors who want to build a stadium. Building a stadium and then hoping some investors come along to make it worthwhile is definitely not a smart way to do things.

Edit: Unless this is a cornfield in Iowa. In which case build away, they will come.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Muta

It would be embarrassing if the 3rd biggest city in Canada is not part of the Canadian bid to host the World Cup, simply because of inadequate facilities in one of the richest cities on the earth per capita.

You may not think that is embarrassing, but I do and I'm sure there is many out there that share the same sentiment.

Why is it embarrassing. I get that you might want this city to be a part of the World Cup bid, but again, all that's saying is Calgary isn't a soccer city. Personally for you, and many others likely thats upseting. But in isolation, that means nothing about the city of Calgary.

Calgary is one of the few cities in this country that could be set up to host an Olympic games (winter). Are other cities that aren't an embarassement. The point is, you can't site the inability to participate in ONE event as an indication of a lack of world class facilities in the city as a whole. Doing that is plain and simple in accurate.

Calgary is set up to host Olympics, NHL hockey, NBA basketball if needed, CFL football, concerts, etc..... (and a new arean is meant to maintain our position to do the above in the future as the facilities are antiquated).

Calgary is clearly not set up well to host NFL football, Soccer or any form of Baseball.

We absolutely don't need to check everything off that list to be a world class city. This city has hosted Olympics, hosts one of the most world renound festivals in the world, along with plenty of other things. If this city simply never becomes a soccer city, it means nothing in isolation.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by valo403

The major renovation to Spartan Stadium (which looks to have a fairly similar basic setup to McMahon, although I'm not an architect), adding 24 luxury suites, 800 club seats, a "Grand Entrance", 18,000 sq ft concourse, office space, recruiting lounge, bathroom renovations and 3,000 additional seats cost $64mil in 2005. They have since revamped the audio system and installed state of the art video boards at a cost of $10mil. This week they announced plans to construct new locker rooms and media facilities along with more bathroom and concourse space for $20mil. So $94mil for a stadium to be considered well up to par for the Big Ten.

Don't forget - Spartan Stadium has a history and a legacy that McMahon Stadium does not. We've been putting in about $15M only... big difference.

If you're going to put $100M into a renovation of an old facility, you might as well find investors for another $100M-$150M, to build a covered stadium that can allow for larger crowds inside (a necessity for professional franchise growth in Canada given our crappy weather, IMO), make it MLS capable with grass fields, and put an MLS franchise in there. Other events will come as a result.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by valo403

Wait, yesterday you were arguing that those 3rd world places have better stadiums. Today you're saying you'd rather live in those developed cities partly due to their having better stadiums. Make up your mind.

Better stadiums than McMahon. Not better than most US cities.

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

You really like listing war-torn countries as your examples, don't you?

And... have you actually lived in any of those locations you just listed? I would not want to live in Houston, DC, Pheonix, Charlotte or Philly... AT ALL. I'll take Calgary and our crappy stadium over any of those. I was about to list NY since I have a lot of friends from NY (NY/Cali connection) and never want to move back /couldn't wait to get out... but I think NY would be fun to live in, at least for a few weeks.

Cairo, Karachi, Islamabad, Mumbai and Bangkok aren't war torn. They're just crappy places to live.

The choice isn't between Calgary and any of those cities. The choice is between the places I listed. Can you honestly say that DC or Philly suck so bad that you would rather live in Mumbai or Cairo?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I completely disagree. There is money to be made by allowing a stadium that can host both a CFL and NASL / MLS team in a city the size of Calgary's. I've been playing soccer in Calgary for damn near 25 years and there is most definitely support for another professional sports team, particularly soccer, in Calgary, IF we have the venue to host one. Additionally, we need a proper stadium to attract investors for a soccer franchise - the fact that our city is being overlooked for places like Moncton is a huge detriment to attracting investors and positioning ourselves as a viable soccer market.

Calgary has missed out on the two biggest World Cup events outside of the World Cup itself - The 2007 U-23 World Cup and the 2015 Womens World Cup. I'm not sure how much bigger they get for a single sport other than that.

I believe that "a huge population couldn't give a rats ass" is extremely short-sighted and ignoring Calgary's highly diverse population with a love for a sport that is the most played in the entire world.

I think you missed the point, and likely my fault. Not looking to debate whether Calgary has a healthy population of soccer fans or not, now in the future. This city may very well have that, and if we do, certainly justifies consideration of delivering those types of facilities to the city.

The point I'm making is, not participating, for example, in a World Cup bid (which I think would be cool) doesn't mean this city isn't world class or embarassing for that matter. It's one type of event. The city doesn't have to be set up to host all types of events to be world class was the point. And sighting inability to host soccer events doesn't really mean anything. Saying something like, the 3rd biggest city in Canada isn't set up to host Olympics, NHL franchise, Soccer events, Concerts, CFL football, etc.... is a problem. But the city doesn't HAVE to have the ability to host everything and anything that might come along to be world class, they need to be able to host a healthy amount.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Muta

Don't forget - Spartan Stadium has a history and a legacy that McMahon Stadium does not. We've been putting in about $15M only... big difference.

If you're going to put $100M into a renovation of an old facility, you might as well find investors for another $100M-$150M, to build a covered stadium that can allow for larger crowds inside (a necessity for professional franchise growth in Canada given our crappy weather, IMO), make it MLS capable with grass fields, and put an MLS franchise in there. Other events will come as a result.

Wait, you can build a covered stadium (retractable roof I assume if you want real grass) with a 35,000 or so capacity for $250mil? And yeah, if you can find investors go for it. Build whatever you want. Build a giant hideous horse themed sculpture behind one endzone that lights up after a touchdown like the home run sculpture in Miami.

Also, is there anything at all to indicate that the MLS is the least bit interested in expanding to a place like Calgary?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Cairo, Karachi, Islamabad, Mumbai and Bangkok aren't war torn. They're just crappy places to live.

The choice isn't between Calgary and any of those cities. The choice is between the places I listed. Can you honestly say that DC or Philly suck so bad that you would rather live in Mumbai or Cairo?

Seeing as how I live in an area that probably has the 2nd highest concentration of people from India in the world (1st being India, of coarse)... I can tell you many of them would prefer to live in Mumbai then Houston (many have lived in Houston, lots of tech hubs there). Some prefer Channai to San Jose. I would take Bangkok over Philly...

As you would say, besides a few shiny buildings and arena's, some of those cities you list sucks...

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

The point is, you can't site the inability to participate in ONE event as an indication of a lack of world class facilities in the city as a whole.

Two events, possibly three (possibly future World Cup), even just for one sport (soccer). Heck, even the Amway Canadian Championship tournament would be a draw just on the fact that both Edmonton and Vancouver are competing with professional teams.

There is money to be made here, especially when the rest of Canada is moving towards a soccer-friendly environment and soccer is taking off in this country.

You cannot deny this.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Why is it embarrassing. I get that you might want this city to be a part of the World Cup bid, but again, all that's saying is Calgary isn't a soccer city. Personally for you, and many others likely thats upseting. But in isolation, that means nothing about the city of Calgary.

Calgary is one of the few cities in this country that could be set up to host an Olympic games (winter). Are other cities that aren't an embarassement. The point is, you can't site the inability to participate in ONE event as an indication of a lack of world class facilities in the city as a whole. Doing that is plain and simple in accurate.

Calgary is set up to host Olympics, NHL hockey, NBA basketball if needed, CFL football, concerts, etc..... (and a new arean is meant to maintain our position to do the above in the future as the facilities are antiquated).

Calgary is clearly not set up well to host NFL football, Soccer or any form of Baseball.

We absolutely don't need to check everything off that list to be a world class city. This city has hosted Olympics, hosts one of the most world renound festivals in the world, along with plenty of other things. If this city simply never becomes a soccer city, it means nothing in isolation.

Are we really ready to host the Olympics still? Our facilities from 25 years ago are not good enough anymore.

I am not sure our facilities are up to Olympic standards anymore. Probably only the Oval and that is probably a stretch compared to some of the recent speed skating Ovals.

McMahon would be a joke for the opening ceremonies, majority on here want a new hockey rink as the saddledome is showing it's age, the bobsled tracks and ski jump are not Olympic quality anymore

We would need a lot of new facilities to be able to hold the Olympics now.

All we are really set up for is NHL and CFL, and fans of both those teams are hoping for new facilities. Concerts don't even count now since we miss out on a lot of those lately due to the saddledome being unable to facilitate the more intricate stage set ups.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Two events, possibly three (possibly future World Cup), even just for one sport (soccer). Heck, even the Amway Canadian Championship tournament would be a draw just on the fact that both Edmonton and Vancouver are competing with professional teams.

There is money to be made here, especially when the rest of Canada is moving towards a soccer-friendly environment and soccer is taking off in this country.

You cannot deny this.

There's money to be made in a lot of things. If there was so much money to be made in hosting soccer tournaments someone would build a soccer stadium.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Why is it embarrassing. I get that you might want this city to be a part of the World Cup bid, but again, all that's saying is Calgary isn't a soccer city. Personally for you, and many others likely thats upseting. But in isolation, that means nothing about the city of Calgary.

Calgary is one of the few cities in this country that could be set up to host an Olympic games (winter). Are other cities that aren't an embarassement. The point is, you can't site the inability to participate in ONE event as an indication of a lack of world class facilities in the city as a whole. Doing that is plain and simple in accurate.

Calgary is set up to host Olympics, NHL hockey, NBA basketball if needed, CFL football, concerts, etc..... (and a new arean is meant to maintain our position to do the above in the future as the facilities are antiquated).

Calgary is clearly not set up well to host NFL football, Soccer or any form of Baseball.

We absolutely don't need to check everything off that list to be a world class city. This city has hosted Olympics, hosts one of the most world renound festivals in the world, along with plenty of other things. If this city simply never becomes a soccer city, it means nothing in isolation.

So Calgary isn't a soccer city because they don't have the proper facility? I disagree with you there. Calgary actually is a soccer city and has always had problems finding enough playing surfaces to field games. There's always a shortage. I'm sure Mango and Ozy can testify to this, too.

And I'm sorry, but if you think McMahon isn't an embarrassment of a stadium, you obviously haven't been to many stadiums. This city has the money to do so much better. Sometimes, you have to make an investment. Would you keep a car for fifty years because you don't feel like spending money on a new one? I sure as hell wouldn't. Millions of people around the world purchase new cars every year - ones that run better, have better technology and are more suited to today's lifestyle. Not sure why arenas don't count here.

Last thing - Calgary wouldn't be able to host another Olympics unless another massive injection of money came in to upgrade the crumbling facilities we have... they're outdated and not suited to today's Olympic standards - McMahon included. This isn't 1988 - that was a quarter century ago.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Seeing as how I live in an area that probably has the 2nd highest concentration of people from India in the world (1st being India, of coarse)... I can tell you many of them would prefer to live in Mumbai then Houston (many have lived in Houston, lots of tech hubs there). Some prefer Channai to San Jose. I would take Bangkok over Philly...

As you would say, besides a few shiny buildings and arena's, some of those cities you list sucks...

Well then that's honestly weird. To each their own I guess.

I've lived in Cairo for over a year and have visited (never lived in mind you) the US multiple times. I would take anywhere in the US over Cairo. That city is truly a dump. Same as Damascus (before the current war, I'm sure it's worse now).

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by valo403

There's money to be made in a lot of things. If there was so much money to be made in hosting soccer tournaments someone would build a soccer stadium.

I'd wager to say one will be built within 10 years. And Calgary will reap the benefits. And it will be with MLS standards.

And no, it won't be another band-aid fix to McMahon Stadium. It will be completely new, even if you aren't in support of such a project.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Are we really ready to host the Olympics still? Our facilities from 25 years ago are not good enough anymore.

I am not sure our facilities are up to Olympic standards anymore. Probably only the Oval and that is probably a stretch compared to some of the recent speed skating Ovals.

McMahon would be a joke for the opening ceremonies, majority on here want a new hockey rink as the saddledome is showing it's age, the bobsled tracks and ski jump are not Olympic quality anymore

We would need a lot of new facilities to be able to hold the Olympics now.

All we are really set up for is NHL and CFL, and fans of both those teams are hoping for new facilities. Concerts don't even count now since we miss out on a lot of those lately due to the saddledome being unable to facilitate the more intricate stage set ups.

As with any Olympic bid, new facilities or upgrades would be required, but our legacy facilities, location and other factors I would say make us much more capable than many other cities interested in the Olympics.

Short answer to your other questions, Yes, we are still set up for NHL, CFL and Concerts. The point I made above in brackets was that clearly updates will be required to maintain that. It's what's started this debate, it is clear that the life span of our current facilities that currently make us capable of hosting NHL, CFL and Concerts is coming to a close. We see this the most right now in concerts, as we miss out on a healthy dose now, but right now as we stand, we still attract a lot of good acts, McMahon is still good enough for CFL, and the Dome is still good enough for the NHL, but we are aware that upgrades or new facilities will be needed a decade from now for this to still be true.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Muta

Exactly. My guess is that if a new stadium is not in place, Calgary will be left off the list of venues.

Games would then be played in Vancouver, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Toronto and Montreal. Perhaps even Regina. And without Calgary, that really could hurt our bid chances given Calgary's international connections.

There's a huge difference between hosting an Under-20 or Women's World Cup than the Men's World Cup. The World Cup is the biggest sporting event in the world, and if Canada ever gets awarded the World Cup, it will require the construction of many new venues around the country, like it does for every country that hosts.

To meet FIFA's minimum standards, you need 10 stadiums of at least 40,000 capacity. If Canada ever won, Toronto would likely get a new 80,000 seat stadium and Montreal a 65,000 seater. BC Place, Commonwealth, and SkyDome are the only existing stadiums that could probably be used. The new CFL stadiums in Winnipeg and Regina would need work to be brought up to FIFA's minimum standards.

If McMahon was still Calgary's primary stadium, it would be an easy decision to build a new 50-60,000 seat "showcase" stadium here. Ottawa and Quebec City would also likely get brand-new stadiums.

It would likely be better for Calgary to not have replaced McMahon if Canada gets the World Cup than if we replace it with something like the new stadium in Winnipeg.


Of course, the US is almost certainly going to win the 2026 WC, which means Canada wouldn't be able to bid again until 2038, at which time, we'd need a new stadium to replace the new stadium anyway.

[Table 5]

There's no way Calgary is setup to host another Olympics at the moment. The Dome is old, the ski-jumps are useless, the Oval is no-longer cutting edge, Olympic plaza is hilariously small potatoes, you need a whole new Olympic village. Most of the venues have the same dillema as McMahon....you would need to spend millions of dollars to renovate them up to par, to the point that it would probably make sense to just stat from scratch. Calgary is no doubt a great location for an Olympics, but there's no way that you could just host one here on the cheap.

One thing that you would definitely want to bring back though is those sweet-ass Sunice Jackets. Everyone needs to be decked out in neon green and hot pink.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Muta

So Calgary isn't a soccer city because they don't have the proper facility? I disagree with you there. Calgary actually is a soccer city and has always had problems finding enough playing surfaces to field games. There's always a shortage. I'm sure Mango and Ozy can testify to this, too.

And I'm sorry, but if you think McMahon isn't an embarrassment of a stadium, you obviously haven't been to many stadiums. This city has the money to do so much better. Sometimes, you have to make an investment. Would you keep a car for fifty years because you don't feel like spending money on a new one? I sure as hell wouldn't. Millions of people around the world purchase new cars every year - ones that run better, have better technology and are more suited to today's lifestyle. Not sure why arenas don't count here.

Last thing - Calgary wouldn't be able to host another Olympics unless another massive injection of money came in to upgrade the crumbling facilities we have... they're outdated and not suited to today's Olympic standards - McMahon included. This isn't 1988 - that was a quarter century ago.

Soccer participation does not equal soccer attendance, that fact has been proven across countless North American locations. I have no idea if soccer would work in Calgary, I used to go Storm games and they were fairly sparsely attended, but that was a lower league. I certainly don't buy the 'if you build it they will come' approach though, there needs to be a demonstration that Calgarians will pay to watch soccer before we start talking about MLS.

And as someone who has been to dozens of stadiums McMahon really isn't an embarrassment. It's not state of the art, it needs work, but there's nothing embarrassing about it.