[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by YYC in LAX

“I still think the Saddledome’s in great shape, I think the Saddledome’s working. Why do we have to rush things right now?” - Joe Magliocca

Rush things?

This is spoken by someone that never attends events there. The Dome is awful the concourse is completely jammed before, during, and after Flames games. The lack of bathrooms is ridiculous. I recall during the playoffs it took me longer to get out of the bathroom than inside as people try and jam there way inside.

How many concerts have to bypass out city and go to Edmonton for these people to realize we need an upgrade. Things will be even more obvious once Rogers Place opens and completely blows the Dome out ifnthe water

[Addick]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Late to the discussion, but does an amateur sports field house need to be downtown? Placing it where McMahon Stadium currently sits makes sense to me (the University can also utilize it).

I'm all for more infrastructure in Central Calgary but I do question if such a large development is the right fit for the area.

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Sorry but PDL won't work here, NASL might if it's marketed as a 'get our feet off the ground to get an MLS team down the line" type thing, but there is no way you're going to pack in thousands for what amounts to third tier soccer in North America (which is already second/third tier soccer).

The PDL has worked here while the NASL/A-League has failed every single time. It seems like every time the sport gets some momentum in this city it is rushed to the next level where it falls flat on its face.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by #-3

So Calgary is 59th on the list.

It's 3-4 years out of date, Calgary is offically 20% larger now. probably having passed about 4 Canadian/American Cities on the list.

There are 17 cities ahead of Calgary on the list that are not in the US or Canada.

Calgary is already the ~38th largest city in Canada/US and still has one of the fastest growth rates among those cities. It's pretty reasonable to think we will be at or near the top 30 in 8-10 years.

Assuming MLS wants to follow the model of top tier North American sports they will probably aim to end up around 30-40 teams eventually. Calgary will never have a NBA, MLB, or NFL team. So 60% of the competition for top tier team sports is out of the question in this market

The MLS is already starting to develop a strong Western Canadian division, largely due to the other two cities sharing many of the same factors.

Really there is no reason to believe that Calgary isn't the prefect type of city, (especially if they build an indoor stadium capable of supporting live grass, like Las Vegas). We will have to see what it looks like, but Muta's post lead me to believe that The Calgary Flames Entertainment Group feel it is worth there while to prepare to bid on an MLS franchise.

Here is a 2012 list of USA metro areas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

Calgary would be around 53 on this list. Most of these areas show growth (except cities around Lake Erie). CMA for Calgary in 2011 was 1.2M.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary_Region

If the price of oil remains depressed long term, the population of Calgary could decrease.

Mexico has a popular domestic soccer league, but I would not rule out MLS looking at some of the big markets there too.

[GirlySports]

so "69 to the fieldhouse' will be a new expression?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by troutman

Here is a 2012 list of USA metro areas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

Calgary would be around 53 on this list. Most of these areas show growth (except cities around Lake Erie). CMA for Calgary in 2011 was 1.2M.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary_Region

If the price of oil remains depressed long term, the population of Calgary could decrease.

Metro Calgary is just under 1.5M now. However, the definition doesn't include Okotoks or High River, which are almost as close as the included Airdrie and Cochrane.

I don't think there's much of a chance of a decerase in population. It never happened in any previous downturns.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by troutman

Here is a 2012 list of USA metro areas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

Calgary would be around 53 on this list. Most of these areas show growth (except cities around Lake Erie). CMA for Calgary in 2011 was 1.2M.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary_Region

If the price of oil remains depressed long term, the population of Calgary could decrease.

Mexico has a popular domestic soccer league, but I would not rule out MLS looking at some of the big markets there too.

From 1985 - 2000, the price of oil traded between $10 and $20. What happened to the population of Calgary during that time?

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Addick

The PDL has worked here while the NASL/A-League has failed every single time. It seems like every time the sport gets some momentum in this city it is rushed to the next level where it falls flat on its face.

PDL works here because a team really only needs about 1000 per game on average, and doesn't have much in the way of player costs. There's about 3 decent (but each with significant flaws) potential venues in Calgary (Hellard, Foothills, Rugby Union) that can accommodate 1-2k people properly. There's easily a few thousand diehards here that appreciate watching the 17-23 year olds develop before moving up. Playing the best the MLS is developing in that age group is a benefit in this respect.

NASL/USL/A-League requires attendance around 4-6k to survive. Calgary has (and has not had since Mewata) any potential venue that accomplishes this. The teams that we've had were forced into the fatal mistake of going to McMahon, where even 5k people looks like an empty stadium, and soon found themselves with attendance around 1000 because of the poor experience of playing in an empty stadium.

NASL will only work in Calgary if new stadium/additional new venue can be reduced/expanded to 10k. Venue is key otherwise the experience will sour people. MLS has enough natural cache to get to 15-20k right off the bat here.

Even so, like corporatejay said, say we don't get MLS and get NASL... unless NASL is marketed as MLS try-outs to prove the vitality of the market (and bear in mind NASL and MLS are not on great terms, so NASL wont like this much), this city will not embrace NASL beyond the die hard soccer fans, the majority dismissing it as yet another minor league team.

Calgary Foothills is on record saying the way to MLS is through USL-Pro (and have refrained from even mentioning NASL), which will be even tougher... its one thing to get a thousand die hards out to watch PDL U-23s, but I don't think the average Calgarian will fill a 10-20k stadium, or even a 5k one to watch Calgary's "pro" team play Vancouver, Seattle or Portland's reserves.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This is spoken by someone that never attends events there. The Dome is awful the concourse is completely jammed before, during, and after Flames games. The lack of bathrooms is ridiculous. I recall during the playoffs it took me longer to get out of the bathroom than inside as people try and jam there way inside.

How many concerts have to bypass out city and go to Edmonton for these people to realize we need an upgrade. Things will be even more obvious once Rogers Place opens and completely blows the Dome out ifnthe water

They haven't even asked the city for money yet and the councillors are bitching. #### me, it's like some people just have a position on something without actually objectively reviewing it.

[CroFlames]

I believe that MLS could survive under certain circumstances, namely a suitable stadium. At this point in time, I'm not overly concerned about MLS in Calgary, just mostly pumped about the arena and surrounding district, promised to knock our socks off.

But, for MLS to work, the stadium needs to be able to accommodate smaller crowds without feeling empty - that is the key. I don't love BC place for many reasons, but the way they accommodate whitecaps for roughly 20k spectators is done very well.

I think a Calgary MLS team would get 20k supporters for the first year, and dwindle to a regular crowd of 12-15k. Which is a great number for MLS. Soccer has global appeal, and the number of immigrants arriving to Calgary grows. And MLS is CHEAP compared to hockey.

I think if they test the market with a semi-pro league, the numbers will be abysmal. It really needs to be all or nothing for it to work IMO. The best league (MLS) or no league. It's easy to get behind a team when it's best on best, and you have major stars like Giovinco, Kaka, Villa, Pirlo and others coming by. Becks should come out of retirement, he could probably attract an extra 5,000 female (male?) fans per game alone

[heep223]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

They haven't even asked the city for money yet and the councillors are bitching. #### me, it's like some people just have a position on something without actually objectively reviewing it.

I think council has seen the entire plan though and informally have seen the financing strategy. Could be wrong.

[saillias]

Aren't we past the stage of even questioning the need for a new arena? These were common talking points of 2012, 2013. Long way to go if that's still an opinion of city councilors.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

They haven't even asked the city for money yet and the councillors are bitching. #### me, it's like some people just have a position on something without actually objectively reviewing it.

Yeah its a bit concerning. Though the mayor has not said anything yet and he alone is half the battle.

I think the success of this project will hinge on
- Can the flames get people talking about the whole development, not just the arena. If people connect public contribution mostly to millionaire hockey players the flames are in trouble
- have they found a way to make a win for council and esp the mayor.

To me the flames need to line up all the amateur sports, arts opportunities etc and start parading them around to council and media. Make it clear the arena is being built with private money only, and keep the discussion about the rest. Of course, that would have to be true as well.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This is spoken by someone that never attends events there. The Dome is awful the concourse is completely jammed before, during, and after Flames games. The lack of bathrooms is ridiculous. I recall during the playoffs it took me longer to get out of the bathroom than inside as people try and jam there way inside.

How many concerts have to bypass out city and go to Edmonton for these people to realize we need an upgrade. Things will be even more obvious once Rogers Place opens and completely blows the Dome out ifnthe water

I wonder what Magliocca's comment is aimed at? If it is a prelude to opposing public funds, does he not realize that the rumours are that the Flames will fund the Saddledome replacement themselves? It's the McMahon replacement that city is being asked to help pay for - by marrying it to the already planned Foothills fieldhouse.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by YYC in LAX

“I still think the Saddledome’s in great shape, I think the Saddledome’s working. Why do we have to rush things right now?” - Joe Magliocca

Rush things?

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I wonder what Magliocca's comment is aimed at? If it is a prelude to opposing public funds, does he not realize that the rumours are that the Flames will fund the Saddledome replacement themselves? It's the McMahon replacement that city is being asked to help pay for - by marrying it to the already planned Foothills fieldhouse.

They are aimed at "money".

I put money in quotation marks, because I think he sees himself as a defender of the public purse, saving us all our money, consistently finding efficiency and effectiveness, etc etc.

Not saying right or wrong, but that's likely the angle I am guessing. (I live in his riding).

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

They are aimed at "money".

I put money in quotation marks, because I think he sees himself as a defender of the public purse, saving us all our money, consistently finding efficiency and effectiveness, etc etc.

Not saying right or wrong, but that's likely the angle I am guessing. (I live in his riding).

And I am quite certain you are right.

But in this case, he's just being a caricature. If the Flames are only asking for something the city is already planning to spend, then it's just silly. If they ask for more, then start crowing.

[Weitz]

I still think city council would have issues contributing to a "field house" where the Stamps play out of and the Flames Organization controls.

^^ and to you Resolute, I think there is a major difference in the City building and owning a field house and them giving money to the Flames Organization to build and own a field house.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

And I am quite certain you are right.

But in this case, he's just being a caricature. If the Flames are only asking for something the city is already planning to spend, then it's just silly. If they ask for more, then start crowing.

Yes, but "money"! "efficiency"! "taxpayers"!

anyway, sorry, no more derailing this.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I still think city council would have issues contributing to a "field house" where the Stamps play out of and the Flames Organization controls.

^^ and to you Resolute, I think there is a major difference in the City building and owning a field house and them giving money to the Flames Organization to build and own a field house.

There is a major difference, yes. But the devil will be in the details. One of those details, of course, is that the city would have to find a way to fund the fieldhouse.

Also, don't assume the Flames will own it in this case. That could become the intention, but at the same time, the city owns the Saddledome while the Flames manage and maintain it. No reason not to believe that that arrangement could not work in a new facility as well. But we will see how this all shakes out as details start to emerge by Tuesday.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I still think city council would have issues contributing to a "field house" where the Stamps play out of and the Flames Organization controls.

^^ and to you Resolute, I think there is a major difference in the City building and owning a field house and them giving money to the Flames Organization to build and own a field house.

I don't think that the Flames would be sking for $200 million from the city without providing any benefit to the city. I think it's more that the Flames knew the city was already talking about a similar project, and it a matter of pooling resources so that the city still gets what it was planning, and the Flames don't have to build redundancy - they just have to pay the incremental cost to make the facility big enough to suit the Stamp's needs.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

There is a major difference, yes. But the devil will be in the details. One of those details, of course, is that the city would have to find a way to fund the fieldhouse.

Also, don't assume the Flames will own it in this case. That could become the intention, but at the same time, the city owns the Saddledome while the Flames manage and maintain it. No reason not to believe that that arrangement could not work in a new facility as well. But we will see how this all shakes out as details start to emerge by Tuesday.

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

I don't think that the Flames would be sking for $200 million from the city without providing any benefit to the city. I think it's more that the Flames knew the city was already talking about a similar project, and it a matter of pooling resources so that the city still gets what it was planning, and the Flames don't have to build redundancy - they just have to pay the incremental cost to make the facility big enough to suit the Stamp's needs.

Both solid points. I was sort of working under the assumption anything that is built will be at the whim of Flames group.