CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I will be sad for one day. After that, the team I will hate more than Edmonton will be the Seattle Flames.

Then I will take a break from hockey for one season max - you know, about the same time that the Calgary Cowboys, or the Calgary Killers, or whatever that new NHL franchise is named. Maybe it will be the Calgary Hurricanes. Maybe I will even change my tune and say that I couldn't be happier that we got Lindholm instead of Monahan.

This comes from a fan of the Flames since 1981. The team is free to move on to another location. I will be free to snap my fingers like Beyonce, and start singing the lyrics to Irreplaceable.

Don't for a second believe that I will be alone. Sad to see the Flames leave? For sure. I will get over it though, you can also be sure of that.

What's nice about this debate is it has made many of us realize that we were giving the Flames too much importance in terms of what really matters in a City.

Also, it seemed like to me that previously stating something like "if the flames leave I will be sad but it isn't worth what they are asking for from the taxpayers, so if it comes to that, that is ok" used to be consider blasphemy, and now, it is a valid opinion.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by getbak

If you read the report to the city from earlier in the year, there really wasn't any opposition from the stakeholders with regards to having a shared-used football stadium/fieldhouse.

I think that no matter what gets done, whether it's CalgaryNext something else, there's a good chance we'll still see the shared-used stadium concept built.

Renovating McMahon to bring it up to today's standards won't be cheap. The price of building one large fieldhouse that can function as Calgary's main stadium will likely not be much more than building the proposed Foothills fieldhouse plus renovating McMahon.

There is no point in putting $100+ million into renovating McMahon. The city of Chicago found out the hard way with Soldier field that this simply is a huge waste of money in the long term.

[Fuzz]

Is King threatening a Flaxit already? Seams early in the negotiating to drop that one.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Is King threatening a Flaxit already? Seams early in the negotiating to drop that one.

Desperate times call for desperate measures

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Desperate times call for desperate measures

These are the kind of things that happen when desperately try to leverage the emotional high of a playoff run with a cocktail napkin proposal because you've done nothing for the last ten years and you realize you've blown the good will window. Straight to the veiled threats!

[harmony]

to hell with this SCAMnext.

[HotHotHeat]

So does their latest rendering include goats on the roof? No expense spared.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I wish we could see some renderings of the arena north of the Stampede grounds since it's more likely than not what we'll be getting. Start getting me excited for that.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Maybe it will be the Calgary Hurricanes.

It would be kind of funny if our next team was also named after a natural disaster with no real connection to Calgary.

[FireGilbert]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It would be kind of funny if our next team was also named after a natural disaster with no real connection to Calgary.

Haha, I get it. Technically the Fire of Atlanta was a non-natural disaster though.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I wish we could see some renderings of the arena north of the Stampede grounds since it's more likely than not what we'll be getting. Start getting me excited for that.

I still think it's more likely the arena will land in Stampede Park (SE of 12th Ave/Olympic Way), not north of it - for the simple fact the City owns it - as beautifully illustrated in this thread's OP. Unless Remington feels like selling their Railtown lands (less likely).

[greyshep]

I am late posting this to this thread but I figured this is relevant as it relates to building a new arena. I am sure others have provided their own reviews of the new building in edm, here is a brief one from my experience...(note I posted most of this in the new AZ arena thread too)

I was in Edm during the preseason and a friend had an extra ticket to a game there. I figured it was a good opportunity to check out the new rink. Yes it was nice and shiny, but I was quite surprised that the bathroom lineups were just as bad as they are at the dome. Concourse crowding was still an issue to a degree as well. One big main cattle call entrance/exit too which I found a bit strange. I found the overall experience really no different than attending a game at the dome. I didnt find that the arena created any extra excitement or atmosphere at all. And this was a Saturday night game vs. Vancouver so you would expect it to have some oomph.

I am not sure if others have noted this, but I did laugh at the ivory tower fishbowl that the GM and other hangers on (McTavish) sits/stands in up above though. (press level)

For all the bluster I dont see a new arena adding anything meaningful to attending a Flames game other than depleting my wallet of more funds. This combined with the terrible location they are pushing for really has put me firmly against the proposal.

[Ducay]

Coyotes will have been in 2 new stadiums in less than half the time we've been in the Dome.

Now that's no excuse to go for the scam that is CalgaryNext, but yikes.

[Mr.Coffee]

I'm sorry why does that matter? Why is it bad?

I think that's more of a condemnation on Phoenix than anything. All I ask is that if these people get their franchise valuation to skyrocket from mainly what amounts to a largely free ride handout from our city or the local community or fans... for the love of god can we make the building last more than 30 years?

I mean that really isn't that long when it comes to hundreds of millions or billions of free money.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

You're happy with the teams performance? spending money obviously doesn't equal success so why exactly do they need a new arena, to make more money to remain competitive?

One area a new arena will make the team more competitive is that it makes Calgary a more attractive free agent destination. It's not about the total dollars spent, but who they are spending them on. In terms of training facilities, dressing rooms.... etc the Saddledome just can't compete with teams with newer rinks, which will be literally every arena in the league once the Wings move to their new rink.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Is King threatening a Flaxit already? Seams early in the negotiating to drop that one.

No, people are simply reading too much into a quote from King.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

One area a new arena will make the team more competitive is that it makes Calgary a more attractive free agent destination. It's not about the total dollars spent, but who they are spending them on. In terms of training facilities, dressing rooms.... etc the Saddledome just can't compete with teams with newer rinks, which will be literally every arena in the league once the Wings move to their new rink.

kool-aid man, 2500 phony extra lower bowl seats and more luxury boxes is the truth here.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

No, people are simply reading too much into a quote from King.

Don't you think that is exactly what he is implying?

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I still think it's more likely the arena will land in Stampede Park (SE of 12th Ave/Olympic Way), not north of it - for the simple fact the City owns it - as beautifully illustrated in this thread's OP. Unless Remington feels like selling their Railtown lands (less likely).

You're OP is still the best layout from a city planning perspective, by far.

I am hearing some chatter that they're taking another look at the Big 4 building site though.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

You're OP is still the best layout from a city planning perspective, by far.

I am hearing some chatter that they're taking another look at the Big 4 building site though.

I think that would be less good. Harder to leverage complementary uses in that location.