[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by getbak

3 years until construction makes sense, and fits with the "if we announced it tomorrow, it would be five years until we were playing in the new building" answer from King. Almost every NHL arena went from groundbreaking to grand opening in about 2 years. The Bell Centre was the longest construction, a few months shy of 3 years. The Canadian Tire Centre was built in just over 18 months (one advantage of building in the middle of nowhere).

Three years will give them lots of time to make the deals and have the car dealers and Greyhound station move out. Then, they can break ground in spring/summer of 2018 with puck drop in 2020.

Wow, I don't want to be one of the negative nancies looking for anything to complain about, and I guess I kind of knew with that area that construction wouldn't be able to start right away, but not even starting for three years?

I gotta say, that's certainly deflating for me personally. I'm still excited to see it, but unlike most cities that get an announcement I'm going to try to put this out of my mind for a few years after the initial excitement of seeing it.

We're not even close. Pretty crazy to think I'll be 35 when even just the arena is done, haha.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by The Familia

The more I read and hear the more I still have a sinking feeling that this project will be very underwhelming. With the price tag, timeline, physical space, contamination cleanup, etc I think it will come out as very basic and bare bones. I bet we get a bland arena along the lines of Columbus or Colorado. The "field house" won't even come close to the caliber of Saskatchewan's or Winnipeg's new stadiums. The reality is we will get new facilities that beat our old ones, but they will not be groundbreaking or worth a second thought. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to put Calgary back on the map in regards to sporting facilities. Calgary has to start thinking big again.

The reality is no one knows what we will get until Tuesday, and even then it will be a broad overview.

[JBR]

Originally Posted by The Familia

The more I read and hear the more I still have a sinking feeling that this project will be very underwhelming. With the price tag, timeline, physical space, contamination cleanup, etc I think it will come out as very basic and bare bones. I bet we get a bland arena along the lines of Columbus or Colorado. The "field house" won't even come close to the caliber of Saskatchewan's or Winnipeg's new stadiums. The reality is we will get new facilities that beat our old ones, but they will not be groundbreaking or worth a second thought. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to put Calgary back on the map in regards to sporting facilities. Calgary has to start thinking big again.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by The Familia

The more I read and hear the more I still have a sinking feeling that this project will be very underwhelming. With the price tag, timeline, physical space, contamination cleanup, etc I think it will come out as very basic and bare bones. I bet we get a bland arena along the lines of Columbus or Colorado. The "field house" won't even come close to the caliber of Saskatchewan's or Winnipeg's new stadiums. The reality is we will get new facilities that beat our old ones, but they will not be groundbreaking or worth a second thought. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to put Calgary back on the map in regards to sporting facilities. Calgary has to start thinking big again.

Wasn't it you that was complaining in the prior thread that ticket prices are getting too high and a person can't afford to bring their family anymore?

And weren't you also in the 'absolutely no government money' camp?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by T@T

I don't get this field house thing, is it a practice facility or a small stadium? I'm under the impression the stamps need a new stadium more than the flames do.

I'm with The Familia, go big or don't bother at all.

There really isn't a single definition of what a fieldhouse is.

I believe their origin was on University campuses in the States (especially Indiana) where they were literally the house next to the sports field. They contained the dressing rooms for the teams, storage for athletic equipment, and an indoor area for teams to practice. As indoor sports like basketball and volleyball became more popular, the fieldhouse also served as a place for those teams to play, which led to the installation of bleachers for spectators.

The most famous historical fieldhouse is the one at Butler University in Indianapolis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkle_Fieldhouse

The Pacers' arena in downtown Indy was designed to resemble the fieldhouse at Butler. The Colts' stadium is also designed to look like a traditional Indiana fieldhouse, with its high brick walls, large windows, and peaked roof.


In its traditional sense, a fieldhouse is nothing more than a large gymnasium. The Talisman Centre, the Olympic Oval, and Jack Simpson Gym could be called fieldhouses if they wanted to. Even the leisure centres in the city have all the required elements of a fieldhouse.


Some fieldhouses also have indoor turf fields for soccer, football, and track training/events. This new building will have this as well. I suspect that there will be a separate "fieldhouse" practice facility that the Stamps will use, and also be available for public use (just as there will almost certainly be practice rinks that the Flames and Hitmen will use that will be available for public use) and that there will still be a separate 30,000+ seat stadium attached to the fieldhouse that will not be available to the public.


If the Flames/Stamps can spin things the right way to get money from the city by calling the whole facility a "fieldhouse", that's what they'll do. It's like a kid asking his parents for a new computer because it will help him in school, when all he really cares about is what games he can play on it.

[The Familia]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Wasn't it you that was complaining in the prior thread that ticket prices are getting too high and a person can't afford to bring their family anymore?

And weren't you also in the 'absolutely no government money' camp?

Good memory that was me. I still hold on to both of those thoughts very much.

First, ticket prices are too high, way to high. Do you disagree with that? Of course a new stadium or arena will inflate ticket prices higher. Look at Edmonton for a prime example. Their price points are outrageous. But since they will likely sell out every game I guess they have enough followers willing to pay.

Second, I'm still against government funding. I would be OK with the land being given but nothing in terms of dollars for construction.

Here is my point. At the end of the day I feel they are going to build this complex. I also think the government will pay for a substantial amount in the end. If this is the case and they are going to use tax dollars then they might as well go all out. I'd rather they spend tax dollars and build a world class complex that will last for generations than a rinky dink piece of trash. At this stage in the game, what's a few million dollars more? Go big or go home. I'm not a fan of half assed projects of any type public, private, or both.

By the way. I hope I am dead wrong and the project is a stunner. Don't want to be a debbie downer, just the feeling I get. Would happily eat crow!

[Enoch Root]

Well, we'll see next week. But I am more optimistic than you

[Trojan97]

I'm picturing this "fieldhouse" to look similar to the Kibbie Dome in Idaho or the Fargodome in ND only on a larger scale.





The Kibbie Dome holds 16,000 and the Fargodome holds 18,700. I'd imagine the Flames are looking at 25k max. The stadiums in Hamilton/Ottawa hold 24k, Molson Stadium in MTL is at around 25k with the renos. Mid 20's seems to be the trend in the league.

I'm expecting the fieldhouse to be a disappointment for the Stamps and their fans but tremendous for the other sports who will get to use it year round. In the end, the city just doesn't support the team well enough anymore to justify building a huge, beautiful stadium so we'll end up with something new but not necessarily overly nice. And I think many Calgarians will be just fine with that.

[Enoch Root]

And you don't see any contradictions in a) wanting ticket prices to be lower, b) wanting no government funding, and c) hoping (but not expecting) it to 'be a stunner'?

[bax]

I have a really hard time believing that after the complex is built and in use people will be calling it "bare bones" or "rinky dink"

[hockey.modern]

Reading some articles and it seems like this project is going to be similar to the revitalization of East Village

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Trojan97

The Kibbie Dome holds 16,000 and the Fargodome holds 18,700. I'd imagine the Flames are looking at 25k max. The stadiums in Hamilton/Ottawa hold 24k, Molson Stadium in MTL is at around 25k with the renos. Mid 20's seems to be the trend in the league.

I would be extremely surprised if it was 25k max. Every single rumbling on capacity for the football stadium has it being north of 30k, think something along the lines of Winnipeg's new stadium (33k).

Your reasoning is sound, in that CFL stadium capacities are on a downward trend due to all the games being available in HD, but I think you chose three examples that skew the narrative a little.

Montreal shouldn't be included in new stadium capacity trends, as it was tiny for CFL standards, and this was an attempt to expand a very small stadium to something more respectable.

So if you go with just new facilities and look for a trend;

Ottawa: 24k
Hamilton: 25k
Winnipeg: 33k
Saskatchewan: 33k (expandable to 40k)

I think the more accurate conclusion is that yes, capacities are trending downward, but the larger draw cities (Winnipeg, Saskatchewan, Calgary etc) are still going to be building 30k+ stadiums.



I totally get the business model of decreasing supply to keep a full stadium and then generating more revenue with better/more expensive seats/suites, but to put your prediction in perspective;

The Stamps are drawing some of their lowest attendance in decades, and the atrocious fan experience of McMahon Stadium has a lot to do with that. However those low attendance figures are 28-29k.

I would be very, very surprised if the Flames looked at those figures and said "Well, 29k seems to be the new norm in that crappy stadium, so attendance will like jump well over 30k on a nightly basis in a new stadium.......so let's go with 25k because Ottawa and Hamilton did.

Not a chance, imo. We'll see 31 - 34k stadium/fieldhouse, expandable to 40k like Saskatchewan, if I were guessing.

[jayswin]

Also to Trojan97, it sounds like this will be a "fieldhouse" only by name, or because it has other amenities. This will/should be a fairly state of the art, modern looking football stadium.

I highly doubt were getting anything like the outdated, barn looking fieldhouses you posted.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by DirtyMike

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "at or near the top" but I see no way that Calgary is near or at the top of the largest cities in Canada and the United States in 8-10 years.

I can't see Calgary ever getting an MLS team. Calgary sports fans are notoriously fickle, and besides the Stamps and Flames, no other teams have gotten any major support. Even those two have gone through some pretty lean times in the last 15 years.

I said at or near the top 30.

Calgary is already in the top 40 of single municipalities in Canada/US, 10 years is a long time frame, I don't think this years economic conditions will be the only factor that influences Calgarys growth over that time.

If Calgary isn't within a few spots of #30 on the list of largest municipalities in Canada/US in ten years come find this post and rub it in my face.

The idea of Metro areas is a good point. But the US being more dense makes a difference there too. Calgary is the Largest city within a 12-13 hour drive in any direction, and there are only 1 or 2 other large cities within that bubble. So I would argue our sphere of influence is much bigger than a place like the twin cities with Chicago, and KC a few hours away. For that reason I think comparing metro areas is less important for a place like Calgary, and looking at Calgary as one of the 38 largest municipalities in English North America says allot.

Mexico is a good point too, The MLS looks at a Mexican division could be one of biggest challenges to Calgary getting a team, it would open up a bunch of big markets with better soccer cultures that Calgary.

[The Familia]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And you don't see any contradictions in a) wanting ticket prices to be lower, b) wanting no government funding, and c) hoping (but not expecting) it to 'be a stunner'?

I'm probably going to lose on all three. Ticket prices will go up, the government will pony up money, the facility will be mediocre. Ticket prices will never come down (new facility or not) so my complaining is moot on that one. I'd be very surprised if the government does not contribute anything. So I'm going to have to expect government handouts. My only hope is that if prices are going to go up, and the government is gonna pay up, at least make the complex a 'stunner'. I'll be happy with just one of the three (lower price, no government funding, stunning complex). If the project comes out mediocre I'd rather they keep riding out the current buildings for the next while until they can do it right. Hoping to be pleasantly surprised!

As a side note, Edmonton really upped the stakes. Unfortunately they required government funding and they got it. Not happy about that. At least they went all out with their funding. If the same thing is going to happen here I hope we get the same result.

[johnnybegaudreau]

Originally Posted by Addick

When the Storm folded, they had already moved from the PDL up to the A-League. My points remains that the PDL provides a level where it is much easier to establish financial stability and a foundation upon which a club can be built.

Was both actually. The Storm had 3 tiers. Calgary Youth Development team which played in Calgary Minor against the original big four DIV 1 sides. Blizzards, Foothills, Chinook, etc. The PDL team which played at broadview fields and the A-League team played out foothills ... the idea was that each level was suppose to be a feeder for the next. So graduates of the Div 1 dev team would go on to continue in the PDL league and PDL players could be called up and used for the A-League. was a good idea in conception but there was a bunch of shady shenanigans going on in the backroom with presidents/directors taking money from the program for their own pockets.

[tete]

I'd say there's about a 99% chance that the new arena will have 1) larger concourses, 2) more washrooms 3) better concessions 4)better access/egress before and after games. I honestly do not care what it looks like as long as it has those four improvements on the current Saddledome. FWIW, someone mentioned the Columbus arena being awful, I personally liked it - same with Minnesota's. I'm excited to see what they're pitching, especially since I'll still be within walking distance of it if it goes into West Village.

[Chingas]

I hope that the new rink will be fashioned similar to Mtl or LA. i love the vertical seating feel to those rinks and the great atmosphere that it creates. For a hockey game you can't beat the feeling that everyone is towering over the ice.

For example, I personally prefer the Dome to the rink in Anaheim. The pond or whatever they call it these days feels cavernous and opens too wide at the top. The crowd has something to do with it but the rink in Anaheim will never replicate the feeling of the staples center. I hope that we can capture that feeling in our new rink.

[hockey.modern]

If I recall K.K said the arena will be two tiers with the lower bowl having more capacity. We should probably expect it to be similar to Pittsburgh and Edmonton.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Trojan97

I'm picturing this "fieldhouse" to look similar to the Kibbie Dome in Idaho or the Fargodome in ND only on a larger scale.





The Kibbie Dome holds 16,000 and the Fargodome holds 18,700. I'd imagine the Flames are looking at 25k max. The stadiums in Hamilton/Ottawa hold 24k, Molson Stadium in MTL is at around 25k with the renos. Mid 20's seems to be the trend in the league.

I'm expecting the fieldhouse to be a disappointment for the Stamps and their fans but tremendous for the other sports who will get to use it year round. In the end, the city just doesn't support the team well enough anymore to justify building a huge, beautiful stadium so we'll end up with something new but not necessarily overly nice. And I think many Calgarians will be just fine with that.

Maybe you are right but I highly doubt this would be the case as both of those examples first of all are nowhere near $200k stadiums and 2nd of all at 25k it would not be able to host a Grey Cup or any large scale even such as say an Olympics opening ceremonies as really only outdoor stadiums can be expanded. Not to mention it would make direct competition for concerts with the new arena given the small seating and size. Just doesn't make a lot of sense if you are the Flames/Stamps owners. I would expect seating in the range of 30-40k if it has a roof which is perfect size.