[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[Vinny01]

Anyone that questions why the Flames need a new building either (A) never go to games (B) only attend gamesnin the club seats or suites or (B) have not been to any other buildings in the league.

Until a few years ago I only had Rexall as a good comparison and the Done was similar. In 2013 I did the Southern California road trip and saw the Honda Centre and the Staples Centre and realized how awful the Dome is (especially compared to Staples).

As a STH I purchased my seats as close to the West Entrance as possible to avoid navigating the concourse. When I get my company seats they are on the other side and log jams occur when a couple people bump into each other and chat in the concourse. Far to narrow, the seats could be more comfortable, and the bathroom situation needs to be vastly improved.

[kevman]

(A) I share seasons tickets
(B) I sit in the bleeds
(C) I have been to GM Place and MSG

I go to hockey games to watch hockey. Is it a pain to leave after a game? Sure. But that 5 mins of walking down the stairs hardly justifies the taxpayers footing the bill so I, a person from a relative point of privilege, doesn't have to spend 5 extra minutes leaving a building.

Bathrooms are solved by the simple commercial break trick. First stoppage of play that isn't icing with 14, 10 or 6 minutes to go is a commercial break. Be ready and you should be able to make it back before the puck drops.

When I'm at a game I've never though "if only I could pay more money my experience would be better". I'm usually thinking about how strong the team has come out, or why they're so flat, or when a certain player is finally going to score again, or what a great game so and so is having, etc. Although to be honest sometimes I wish they'd replace the railings with plexi but that hardly justifies a new arena...

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Bingo

For sure I've figured out the tricks like the next guy. But that doesn't mean it's ideal to do a concrete sprint on a tv time out.

And you don't see a malt line bringing traffic to a standstill in newer buildings.

It comes with a price for sure, so I get that, but finding tricks and nuances in an old building doesn't mean there are no gains from getting a better designed facility.

A game in the Staple Center means you don't wet your pants, you don't have to jog the concourse to get a beer and return in time to see the game, and don't feel like cattle at a slaughter house when the game is over.

However the new Edmonton arena in the cheap seats still has the cattle car affect when you leave and long bathroom and concession lines. I am faster getting concession and bathrooms in the Dome than I was at the new stadium so the difference between old and new is less than the difference between knowing the tricks vs non knowing. In my opinion the upgrade for the cheap seats is much less dramatic then people think.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

However the new Edmonton arena in the cheap seats still has the cattle car affect when you leave and long bathroom and concession lines. I am faster getting concession and bathrooms in the Dome than I was at the new stadium so the difference between old and new is less than the difference between knowing the tricks vs non knowing. In my opinion the upgrade for the cheap seats is much less dramatic then people think.

I agree with this. In the new Building in Edmonton your in game experience only really improves in the lower bowl. I did not enjoy the game I went to in the upper level.

[username]

Originally Posted by kevman

When I'm at a game I've never though "if only I could pay more money my experience would be better". I'm usually thinking about how strong the team has come out, or why they're so flat, or when a certain player is finally going to score again, or what a great game so and so is having, etc. Although to be honest sometimes I wish they'd replace the railings with plexi but that hardly justifies a new arena...

For a lot of people it's not just about the Flames and that's what a lot of people don't seem to understand. When I go to a game I want it to be an enjoyable experience, especially knowing how much tickets are. Is it so much to ask that during an intermission I can go to the bathroom and get a beer without missing half the next period? It's so frustrating that something so essential to a hockey game is almost impossible to do.

Other than watching the actual game, the experience of spending a night out at the Saddledome is terrible. Line ups everywhere, congested concourse, terrible sight lines, no restaurants, very few bars etc.

I actually can't think of one positive aspect the Dome offers other than the fact that it's better than no rink.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by username

For a lot of people it's not just about the Flames and that's what a lot of people don't seem to understand. When I go to a game I want it to be an enjoyable experience, especially knowing how much tickets are. Is it so much to ask that during an intermission I can go to the bathroom and get a beer without missing half the next period? It's so frustrating that something so essential to a hockey game is almost impossible to do.

Other than watching the actual game, the experience of spending a night out at the Saddledome is terrible. Line ups everywhere, congested concourse, terrible sight lines, no restaurants, very few bars etc.

I actually can't think of one positive aspect the Dome offers other than the fact that it's better than no rink.

I see people say this, but is it just hyperbole? I mean I have sat in a ton of different spots in the Saddledome and if I want to get a beer and use the washroom I might miss 1 or 2 minutes waiting for a whistle. And thats usually when i don't leave right when the intermission starts.

If it takes you longer than 18 minutes to use the washroom and get a beer you need to change up your planning.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by username

For a lot of people it's not just about the Flames and that's what a lot of people don't seem to understand. When I go to a game I want it to be an enjoyable experience, especially knowing how much tickets are.

Then vote with your wallet and spend your money somewhere else. Put pressure on the owners to increase the quality of the product. Why do the taxpayers need to pay for this?

Other than watching the actual game, the experience of spending a night out at the Saddledome is terrible. Line ups everywhere, congested concourse, terrible sight lines, no restaurants, very few bars etc.

There are line ups everywhere these days. What makes an arena any different than any other popular venue? Why does the arena need public financing to alleviate line ups? For instance, have you been to a ski hill on a weekend lately? Last time I was in Revy I had the privilege of waiting for 15 minutes to use a toilet only to wait for 20 minutes to get a coffee and then wait for an hour to get on the gondola. Should the province be buying them a new lodge and lift to help with these lines? Ultimately both venues are used for entertainment to generate a profit for the owners. You all probably scoffed at the idea of a taxpayer buying a chairlift for a resort but what's the difference? Both are expensive to attend and cater to a select few. And I could make a stronger argument for the economic impact of a ski hill to a town like Revy then an arena district to a city like Calgary.

[smalltownref]

I think that the very simple fact that we have to 'plan' to go to the washroom and get a beer says a lot about the Dome. It's just old and either needs a significant update or we need something new.

For those STH's that know the ins and outs of the Dome, how to get to the washroom, get a beer and be back right around puck drop, sure it works great. But for those non-STH's, for those families to one game a year because their budget won't support it, who have to wait in line to use a undersized washroom (because they aren't aware there are larger ones a little bit away) and to get a pop and popcorn and can't make it back to their seats on time... it is a problem no doubt.

Everyone agrees that the main reason why you come to the Dome is to watch the Flames. But if you don't know the ins and outs of the Dome and how to get around quickly, that time you get to spend watching the Flames play can get reduced quite a bit.

For me... its all about trying to get to a point where you don't need to have a 'plan' to go to the washroom, to get your refill on food and drinks etc. during intermission, or even during the TV timeout for that matter too. Where we would all like to get to is that we can all do what we want to do during intermission, and be back in time for puck drop.

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Anyone that questions why the Flames need a new building either (A) never go to games (B) only attend gamesnin the club seats or suites or (B) have not been to any other buildings in the league.

Until a few years ago I only had Rexall as a good comparison and the Done was similar. In 2013 I did the Southern California road trip and saw the Honda Centre and the Staples Centre and realized how awful the Dome is (especially compared to Staples).

As a STH I purchased my seats as close to the West Entrance as possible to avoid navigating the concourse. When I get my company seats they are on the other side and log jams occur when a couple people bump into each other and chat in the concourse. Far to narrow, the seats could be more comfortable, and the bathroom situation needs to be vastly improved.

So let the people who are actually going to use the building foot the bill if they want to. CJAY has a patreon drive going on atm don't they?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I see people say this, but is it just hyperbole? I mean I have sat in a ton of different spots in the Saddledome and if I want to get a beer and use the washroom I might miss 1 or 2 minutes waiting for a whistle. And thats usually when i don't leave right when the intermission starts.

If it takes you longer than 18 minutes to use the washroom and get a beer you need to change up your planning.

For some bathrooms it's true. At the Montreal game I literally waited 15 minutes in line for the bathroom (which only has 8 stalls btw) and another few minutes for the whistle to blow.

I only missed 5 or 6 minutes of the game in the third but I also was in the bathroom lineup during the second intermission. If I had to grab a beer as well? Easily add 3 or 4 minutes playing time to that. The Montreal factor obviously matters and it's not the same for an Arizona game.

I also realize I was at the west end of the rink just outside sec 227 and other parts are better with more bathroom stalls but where I was at I can easily see someone missing half the third if they have to use the washroom and grab drinks, 50/50 tickets, have a cigarette..etc.

[Torture]

I dunno, if the biggest arguments are bathrooms and missing out on some concerts I still don't see why the City/Province need to contribute a significant portion.

Would I like to see a new building, sure. But there's a lot of other things the City/Province could do with those dollars.

I saw a game in Toronto early this season and yeah there were more ammenities but I don't think it significantly improved the experience. Cupholders were nice I guess. If the Flames need a new arena so that they can make more profit why do we need the various levels of gov't to contribute?

[smalltownref]

I know I have been a big supporter of getting a new arena... but I am also on board with those who are cautious about using tax payer dollars to pay for it.

For me the ideal scenario would be that the owners/investors pay for the arena, and buy up a bunch of the land in the surrounding area so that they can take advantage of any economic benefit that would be indirectly associated with building a new arena. It's a win-win for all... but just a significant investment from the owners/private investors.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

For some bathrooms it's true. At the Montreal game I literally waited 15 minutes in line for the bathroom (which only has 8 stalls btw) and another few minutes for the whistle to blow.

I only missed 5 or 6 minutes of the game in the third but I also was in the bathroom lineup during the second intermission. If I had to grab a beer as well? Easily add 3 or 4 minutes playing time to that. The Montreal factor obviously matters and it's not the same for an Arizona game.

I also realize I was at the west end of the rink just outside sec 227 and other parts are better with more bathroom stalls but where I was at I can easily see someone missing half the third if they have to use the washroom and grab drinks, 50/50 tickets, have a cigarette..etc.

Well if you start trying to do that much then of course you start to push into the next period. 50/50 tickets and a smoke break would add another 7-10 minutes at any arena and the intermission is only 15 minutes long.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

For some bathrooms it's true. At the Montreal game I literally waited 15 minutes in line for the bathroom (which only has 8 stalls btw) and another few minutes for the whistle to blow.

I only missed 5 or 6 minutes of the game in the third but I also was in the bathroom lineup during the second intermission. If I had to grab a beer as well? Easily add 3 or 4 minutes playing time to that. The Montreal factor obviously matters and it's not the same for an Arizona game.

I also realize I was at the west end of the rink just outside sec 227 and other parts are better with more bathroom stalls but where I was at I can easily see someone missing half the third if they have to use the washroom and grab drinks, 50/50 tickets, have a cigarette..etc.

You could walk and use the large bathroom and walk back after faster than waiting 15 minutes for the small one.

[Elmer]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Anyone that questions why the Flames need a new building either (A) never go to games (B) only attend gamesnin the club seats or suites or (B) have not been to any other buildings in the league.

Until a few years ago I only had Rexall as a good comparison and the Done was similar. In 2013 I did the Southern California road trip and saw the Honda Centre and the Staples Centre and realized how awful the Dome is (especially compared to Staples).

As a STH I purchased my seats as close to the West Entrance as possible to avoid navigating the concourse. When I get my company seats they are on the other side and log jams occur when a couple people bump into each other and chat in the concourse. Far to narrow, the seats could be more comfortable, and the bathroom situation needs to be vastly improved.

Middle Class fan here (typically site in upper level). I've been to multiple stadiums/Arena's in multiple sports and had the odd box/club experience when I got comp tickets. Oiler's fan living in Calgary so haven't been a season ticket holder at any point.

Been to the following NHL Arena's, Dome, Rexall, Rogers Place, Rogers ?(vancouver), Philly, Florida, Newark, ACC, Honda, MSG pre renos, Nassau, Joe Louis and the Old Igloo.

If the Dome was anything like Nassau Terrible site lines (banners were blocking the jumbotron) , no boxes etc. I would agree that it needs to be replaced but that is not the case.

Unless you really care about an aesthetically pleasing concourse with marble floors vs concrete. Compared to the rest the Dome is completely fine . I've been to Roger's 5 times now since its opened and I'm very disappointed by the experience and I don't think it was worth the change. I was at the game last night and a few fans around me were talking about how disappointed they are in the new arena and wish they still played at Rexall and I had to agree.

I'm sure it's been captured before but really the benefits of Rogers vs Rexall vs. the increase in cost isn't worth it for me as a fan and almost prefer to just watch the games on TV then go to the games compared to when they played at Rexall.

The biggest benefit to Rogers is the actual location of the arena is downtown now vs middle of nowhere run down northside of town. Which a new arena in Calgary won't change.

Beer lines/Washroom lines are just as bad, can barely pee and grab a beer during intermission without missing the start of the period.

Food selection is better but for me I typically don't eat at games anyways and not worth the extra 20%+ in ticket prices and tax dollars.

Sight lines are marginally better (Rexall and the Dome have always been decent)

Scoreboard is larger but I am at the arena to watch the ice, If I wanted to watch the scoreboard, I'd just watch at home on a comfy chair vs the Seats which are just as tight in the upper bowl.

Line for escalator at end of game is like cows going to the slaughter, I'm guessing 5 minutes wait to get to the main level. (I take the stairs).

As this is a Flames message board i'm sure the sentiment is that well Calgary won't screw it up like Edmonton did I'm sure the architects will be the same or of similar quality so that's a poor assumption to make.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Agreed if you don't eat anything, or ever have to go to the bathroom

In the new arena in Edmonton the lines for food and drink are the same or worse for upper bowl fans.

I'm not 100% sure that will be the case when Calgary builds a new rink, but the cynic in me says that the focus of the new rink will be on the customers that pay the premium prices.

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by smalltownref

I know I have been a big supporter of getting a new arena... but I am also on board with those who are cautious about using tax payer dollars to pay for it.

For me the ideal scenario would be that the owners/investors pay for the arena, and buy up a bunch of the land in the surrounding area so that they can take advantage of any economic benefit that would be indirectly associated with building a new arena. It's a win-win for all... but just a significant investment from the owners/private investors.

The other issue is that even if the project was 100% privately funded, the proposal as it currently stands sucks. The original point of this thread was the 'plan B' project in Victoria Park, which would make far more sense than what the owners are trying to demand the city to approve.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Well if you start trying to do that much then of course you start to push into the next period. 50/50 tickets and a smoke break would add another 7-10 minutes at any arena and the intermission is only 15 minutes long.

I don't smoke or drink and it still took me 15-20 minutes from the time I entered the bathroom lineup to the time I was back in my seat. Intermissions are 18 minutes now as well.

This isn't an argument for a new building just a reply to someone who called another post hyperbole.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Weitz

You could walk and use the large bathroom and walk back after faster than waiting 15 minutes for the small one.

And what if everyone did that? Guess which lineup is now longer? The amount of people in the dome does not get smaller and the bathrooms don't get bigger if you go to the bigger one, it just creates more traffic and time at the bigger one and a longer wait time for the other people.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I don't smoke or drink and it still took me 15-20 minutes from the time I entered the bathroom lineup to the time I was back in my seat. Intermissions are 18 minutes now as well.

This isn't an argument for a new building just a reply to someone who called another post hyperbole.

Didn't know about the intermission length, thanks.