2012 MLS Thread

[wpgflamesfan]

Originally Posted by valo403

I honestly question whether or not you've ever been to another football stadium in North America. I've been to dozens, and the only ones that aren't pretty similar to McMahon are NFL stadiums. The CFL is not the NFL. The revenue streams aren't there, the demand isn't there, the need isn't there. Again, look at the stadiums utilized by some of the most profitable NCAA football programs in the country. They are strikingly similar to McMahon, with the only real differences being the size and the enhanced high end/press areas.

I completely agree with you here. I was actually shocked at what Autzen stadium in Oregon was actually like when I went down in October. Sure you always see the redone front entrance on tv which looks unreal.



But once you actually get there you realize that apart from the luxury boxes and maybe a few "prime sections" the stadium isn't really anything special.



It's the same thing at Reser Stadium at Oregon State. Front entrance looks nice and the one side has been recently renovated. Other than that it's not very nice.

[valo403]

Yep, Spartan Stadium is the same. Approach it from the side with the new luxury suites and it looks like a brand new state of the art stadium.



However, go around to the opposite side and you have this



Look familiar?

And look at all those padded seats



Btw, MSU football turned a nearly $27mil profit in 2010-11

[Addick]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

All the previous soccer entries have been in weak leagues, or owned by people with no money/equity, who had to fold before the team could establish a fan base. I suspect NASL may also be too "minor league" to be accepted by the Calgary media and sports fan.

In order to find a level where a club could do this and remain financially sustainable, you'd have to go below NASL. Also, minor league clubs don't need major league attention but rather a solid base to go forward and seek such attention when ready.

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Its at the end of its lifecycle and Calgary needs a facility that recognizes that our climate is not compatible for sitting outside unprotected from March to May and October to December. (even that varies)

Meh. I don't think the benefits would justify the costs and especially if so public funds are required. In addition, shouldn't outdoor sports be played outdoors? Personally, the smell of the grass and warmth of the sun is large part of the atmosphere.

Originally Posted by Thunderball

By that logic, why build a new central library? The Downtown one serves it purpose, same with Central Memorial and the dozens of other locations...

My point is, top venues attract top performers, top events and increase city/province perception. So lets say all $200 million buys is a new soccer tenant and 6 concerts a year. That's roughly 20 more events than before, and the economic spin-off therein.

While I understand what you are trying to say, I think there are two other factors: i) The penny-tax is often geared toward things, often public goods, that might not stand a chance to be privately-financed; and ii) With private ventures that have the potential to generate large private gains, the private stakeholders have to contribute a fair share of the costs and assume a fair share of the risk.

[fundmark19]

Couldn't someone just retrofit one of the new football fields at shouldice to make a suitable soccer stadium? Hellard field sits 2040 and that is just with one side of bleachers. The other 2 smaller fields I'm sure could have a nice intimate stadium feel with not to much money invested since the field portion is all ready there. It wouldn't attract MLS but could easily be suitable for another league

[Addick]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

Couldn't someone just retrofit one of the new football fields at shouldice to make a suitable soccer stadium? Hellard field sits 2040 and that is just with one side of bleachers. The other 2 smaller fields I'm sure could have a nice intimate stadium feel with not to much money invested since the field portion is all ready there. It wouldn't attract MLS but could easily be suitable for another league

I'm not too sure if it would be large enough for an NASL team but I think a park comprised of a permanent grandstand and modular stands like below could work in Calgary:

[fundmark19]

ralihawks and silverbacks are 7k and 5k respectively in NASL. So if they add to the main stadium they are all ready half way there and could add modular seating like your pictures around the field to do the rest

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by valo403

First of all, the comparison to a library is laughable. If you can't grasp the different impacts that a library and a stadium used for professional sports 15 times a year have on a city I'm not sure there's any point having a conversation with you. It's such an absurd strawman argument, and you know it.

The hi-lighted paragraph demonstrates why you think this would be a good idea, because you live in a fantasy land.

First, $200mil for a 40,000 seat domed stadium? Are you expecting to use volunteer labor in the construction or something? That figure is completely out to lunch. LiveStrong Park in KC cost $200mil and seat under 20,000 and is open air. The covered stadium proposed in Regina would cost $400mil, so unless you've got an explanation for that $200mil figure I'd say you're intentionally skewing the picture to suit your argument.

Second, you continue to base this around the addition of a fantasy MLS team when there is absolutely nothing to indicate that Calgary is a desirable market for the MLS. It seems as if you're drawing on a field of dreams style 'if you build it they will come' idea, unfortunately this isn't a movie and there aren't going to be any ghosts strolling out of corn fields. Even if the goal is to attract an MLS team, a $400mil+ 40,000 seat domed stadium is massive overkill.

Third, 6 concerts a year? Again, I'm not sure where you're coming up with these numbers but they seem to be created as a means to make your argument look stronger than it is. There have been a grand total of 6 concerts at Commonwealth since 2007. Unless U2, Bon Jovi, Kenny Chesney, and the handful of other acts that do stadium tours are all planning to tour every year, and include a city that is already off a lot of bands touring plans due to its location, that number is a complete fantasy. You would be lucky to add one additional concert to the city each year.

As for it making CFL games more marketable (I'm not even going to address the idea that this would make CIS football marketable, it's a small time sport with a fanbase consisting predominantly of friends and family) that's all well and good, but why exactly are taxpayer dollars being used to make a professional sports team more marketable? In a situation where a new building is an absolute must, such as with the Flames, I don't have an issue with some taxpayer funding, but that's not the case here.

Now let's get to the "these facilities are good for cities" argument. I don't disagree, but how exactly would this new facility make the lives of Calgarians better? McMahon already offers plenty of recreational use, does this facility somehow expand that? I suppose putting in a dome would do that, but if the payoff is recreational use you could achieve that same result at a minuscule fraction of the cost.

I honestly question whether or not you've ever been to another football stadium in North America. I've been to dozens, and the only ones that aren't pretty similar to McMahon are NFL stadiums. The CFL is not the NFL. The revenue streams aren't there, the demand isn't there, the need isn't there. Again, look at the stadiums utilized by some of the most profitable NCAA football programs in the country. They are strikingly similar to McMahon, with the only real differences being the size and the enhanced high end/press areas.

The bottom line is that McMahon can't really take on more, but it doesn't need to, not for that price tag. A single concert? A pipe dream MLS team? Padded seats for the parents of Dinos players? All for the low, low price of $500mil.

First of all the Library and Music Centre are fine comparisons because reasonable facsimilies exist in the city already that are usable and acceptable at present, and like McMahon, will become less and less useful as time goes on. They would be substantial upgrades to get to with the times. There's obviously some philosophical differences, but the reality is all three projects are non-essentials that governments have discretion over. Calgary doesn't need a new central library because it has one already that isnt in danger of collapse... and it also has 16 other modern locations. Its already one of the best systems in North America. While Libraries are essential, they don't have to be massive, landmark Downtown locations. That's a luxury. (Obviously, Calgary should have a modern destination central library for those philosophical reasons and myriad others.) The argument is the merits of anything that isnt an essential.

Second, I never said it had to be domed. It would be nice of course in a perfect world, but I'm fully aware of limitations. I said it had to protect the fans from the elements. Partial roof to provide wind, rain and snow protection. You know, just like the 33,000 seat Investors Group Stadium in Winnipeg, that happens to cost, ohh... $190 million. So, that number wasnt pulled out from outer space like you seem to think. The $400m project in Regina supposedly has hotel and conference centre attachments to it... but the precedent is Winnipeg. A university/CFL stadium with similar capacity, modern amenities and shared funding between the university, city, province and CFL club. Anything else is irrelevant and were added merely to conflate the numbers.

Third, I see where your 1 or 2 concerts are coming from, but its a guess too based on a smaller city's history with a massive stadium that is never full. Again, a tactic to make your argument stronger than it is.

And don't say, McMahon doesn't see a lot more, so don't expect more, because we both know its because of by-laws and McMahon's general antiquity. We also both know, Calgary is a larger and more attractive tour stop than Edmonton and would beat 6 over 5 years. 6 a year might be pushing, then again with the Saddledome being inadequate, and the new Flames arena likely being booked often, there could be more than you think. 6/year might be high, but 1-2/year may easily be too low. Not to mention international events and tournaments that Calgary could actually bid for instead of looking like a one horse town sitting on the sidelines when major events like the U-20 World Cup and Women's World Cup 2015 come to town.

Either way, the potential for more is only half the argument. The other half is keeping what is there. The Stampeders are already crying foul and sending the public signals they want the City and Province to talk. Lyle Bauer pretty much said that. They see McMahon is a serious long term issue, why don't you? I also don't see how you can say the 30 year old Saddledome is a must to replace, but the 50 year old McMahon is not. (I think they both need to be replaced/massively upgraded, and I do agree that the Saddledome is one of the lousiest 10 arenas in the NHL, but McMahon is far worse). Its not like the city, province and federal governments are not going to see any money over the life cycle of these buildings back in their pocket. Its a lousy investment, but it provides more return than most government funded projects.

As for MLS, again, its a non-starter when the city lacks a venue that would even be acceptable on a temporary basis. Its the only major league left that's attainable to Calgary, so it's always going to be the brass ring. Calgary showed potential to be decent NASL market in 1980 with 10-11 thousand fans on average. With half the population of today. The Boomers are the only reasonable comparable, as everything since has been mickey mouse at best. The Boomers themselves were dubious because of their owner, Skalbania. The new stadium wouldn't be exclusively to attract MLS, despite my soccer bias. The new stadium would simply make that a viable option on top of being necessary for the long term health of the Stampeders, and to have a reasonable outdoor/psuedo-outdoor venue.

To answer your question, I've been to a dozen stadiums, including the two Michigan ones you mentioned (not much to do in Windsor...). I also know MSU dumped $75 million into Spartan Stadium, and that supposedly is phase 1. Yes, its mostly benches, and benches are brutal, but the internal components are better. If you think the only difference between McMahon and Spartan is the press area and capacity, you're absolutely crazy. The concessions, the bathrooms, the hallways, the audio, the video screens, the fact that its enclosed around to keep the wind down... its night and day. Even though both the Michigan ones are barns compared to Ford Field, they are still decades ahead of McMahon.


Anyway, Fundmark, you're right. For soccer in Calgary in the next ~10 years, a twinned Hellard would be just fine for NASL, maybe with partial cover and a couple upgrades here in there, which could easily be done for less than a Peace Bridge, and since it would have primary use to minor and amateur sport, it should be an easy cheque for the city and province to sign.

Still doesn't address the fact that Calgary lacks a modern facility seating 20k+, and is about to be left behind by fellow Canadian cities half the size.

[fundmark19]

It takes what 3-4 years to build a stadium and 1-2 years to actually get the process started. If Calgary decided on NASL it would take what 3-4 months to retofit shouldice to work in the meantime until 5-6 years later we get a new football stadium/upgrade. That 5-6 years we can build a brand for the team and then make the jump to MLS once the new/upgraded large capacity stadium is ready.

Worst case scenario soccer again fails and there is not much money wasted on stadium resources. Best case it catches on and grows and we land an MLS team. If anything building NASL brand would help the Stampeders in pushing for a new stadium funding adding a realistic tenant that can help bring in income.

[Ozy_Flame]

The fact that Vancouver and Montreal now have MLS teams should be a big deal to possible franchise owners that want to invest in Calgary. TFC seemed to be a niche Canadian thing; now its expanding and I think, with the diversity we have in this city, the city size and the popularity soccer has at the community level, there is opportunity here to grow. I would venture to say that the 2014 World Cup is going to have a large impact on the Calgary soccer community as well - it seems every World Cup there is, the fans come out more in droves in Calgary.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

First of all the Library and Music Centre are fine comparisons because reasonable facsimilies exist in the city already that are usable and acceptable at present, and like McMahon, will become less and less useful as time goes on. They would be substantial upgrades to get to with the times. There's obviously some philosophical differences, but the reality is all three projects are non-essentials that governments have discretion over. Calgary doesn't need a new central library because it has one already that isnt in danger of collapse... and it also has 16 other modern locations. Its already one of the best systems in North America. While Libraries are essential, they don't have to be massive, landmark Downtown locations. That's a luxury. (Obviously, Calgary should have a modern destination central library for those philosophical reasons and myriad others.) The argument is the merits of anything that isnt an essential.

Second, I never said it had to be domed. It would be nice of course in a perfect world, but I'm fully aware of limitations. I said it had to protect the fans from the elements. Partial roof to provide wind, rain and snow protection. You know, just like the 33,000 seat Investors Group Stadium in Winnipeg, that happens to cost, ohh... $190 million. So, that number wasnt pulled out from outer space like you seem to think. The $400m project in Regina supposedly has hotel and conference centre attachments to it... but the precedent is Winnipeg. A university/CFL stadium with similar capacity, modern amenities and shared funding between the university, city, province and CFL club. Anything else is irrelevant and were added merely to conflate the numbers.

Third, I see where your 1 or 2 concerts are coming from, but its a guess too based on a smaller city's history with a massive stadium that is never full. Again, a tactic to make your argument stronger than it is.

And don't say, McMahon doesn't see a lot more, so don't expect more, because we both know its because of by-laws and McMahon's general antiquity. We also both know, Calgary is a larger and more attractive tour stop than Edmonton and would beat 6 over 5 years. 6 a year might be pushing, then again with the Saddledome being inadequate, and the new Flames arena likely being booked often, there could be more than you think. 6/year might be high, but 1-2/year may easily be too low. Not to mention international events and tournaments that Calgary could actually bid for instead of looking like a one horse town sitting on the sidelines when major events like the U-20 World Cup and Women's World Cup 2015 come to town.

Either way, the potential for more is only half the argument. The other half is keeping what is there. The Stampeders are already crying foul and sending the public signals they want the City and Province to talk. Lyle Bauer pretty much said that. They see McMahon is a serious long term issue, why don't you? I also don't see how you can say the 30 year old Saddledome is a must to replace, but the 50 year old McMahon is not. (I think they both need to be replaced/massively upgraded, and I do agree that the Saddledome is one of the lousiest 10 arenas in the NHL, but McMahon is far worse). Its not like the city, province and federal governments are not going to see any money over the life cycle of these buildings back in their pocket. Its a lousy investment, but it provides more return than most government funded projects.

As for MLS, again, its a non-starter when the city lacks a venue that would even be acceptable on a temporary basis. Its the only major league left that's attainable to Calgary, so it's always going to be the brass ring. Calgary showed potential to be decent NASL market in 1980 with 10-11 thousand fans on average. With half the population of today. The Boomers are the only reasonable comparable, as everything since has been mickey mouse at best. The Boomers themselves were dubious because of their owner, Skalbania. The new stadium wouldn't be exclusively to attract MLS, despite my soccer bias. The new stadium would simply make that a viable option on top of being necessary for the long term health of the Stampeders, and to have a reasonable outdoor/psuedo-outdoor venue.

To answer your question, I've been to a dozen stadiums, including the two Michigan ones you mentioned (not much to do in Windsor...). I also know MSU dumped $75 million into Spartan Stadium, and that supposedly is phase 1. Yes, its mostly benches, and benches are brutal, but the internal components are better. If you think the only difference between McMahon and Spartan is the press area and capacity, you're absolutely crazy. The concessions, the bathrooms, the hallways, the audio, the video screens, the fact that its enclosed around to keep the wind down... its night and day. Even though both the Michigan ones are barns compared to Ford Field, they are still decades ahead of McMahon.


Anyway, Fundmark, you're right. For soccer in Calgary in the next ~10 years, a twinned Hellard would be just fine for NASL, maybe with partial cover and a couple upgrades here in there, which could easily be done for less than a Peace Bridge, and since it would have primary use to minor and amateur sport, it should be an easy cheque for the city and province to sign.

Still doesn't address the fact that Calgary lacks a modern facility seating 20k+, and is about to be left behind by fellow Canadian cities half the size.

I only have time to address two points.

1. Concerts: 1-2 would be low? Okay, let's take a look at venues in other cities and see how many concerts they'll be hosting this year. Mile High: Kenny Chesney and Warped Tour. MetLife Stadium: Kenny Chesney. Georgia Dome: Kenny Chesney. Bank of America Stadium: Kenny Chesney.

See a trend? There are literally a handful of artists that do stadium tours. Unless U2, Bon Jovi, Aerosmith, Coldplay and the Rolling Stones all go on tour in the same year any city will be hard pressed to host more than one or two stadium concerts in a year, particularly in a cold weather climate. Add in the fact that Calgary is not a desirable tour stop due to its location and you would be lucky to get one big show a year. This is not an argument manipulated to support my point, it's based on what is happening in the marketplace now and what has happened in the marketplace in the past.

2. I'm not sure how hammered you were at Spartan Stadium, but the fact that you think the bathrooms are better than McMahon is absolutely insane, unless of course you found yourself in the luxury box seating.

The bathrooms are ancient, there are maybe 4 sinks in each, there aren't enough of them, and best of all they are exclusively troughs. McMahon's bathrooms aren't great, but they are a hell of a lot better than that.

And yes they spent $75mil, and you see the results of it in the picture above. Guess what that new area is? The exact thing I said was the major difference, press and luxury box seating.

The concessions are virtually identical, although the turkey legs are better than the burgers they have at McMahon. Either way, food is served from holes in the concrete stadium in pretty much the exact same fashion.

The audio and video is much better, and I'd expect that to be the case for a venue that's twice the size and houses a tenant that has much larger revenue streams. I think you may be forgetting that we're talking about a CFL stadium here.

[The Big Chill]

I would love an MLS team here in Calgary. Depending on pricing I would likely go to at least a handful of games each season. I am planning a trip to go see the Whitecaps in a regular season game soon, so I am one fan who will pony up some $ for a team.

There are plenty of soccer fans in this city, but at the same time I am still not completely convinced there are enough out there who would pay to support a team. I really hope it is something that is looked at though.

Edit: After looking at the 'Caps season tickets prices I can say there is a very strong chance that I would be a STH for a Calgary MLS team.

[Muta]

The Big Chill - you can buy Whitecaps season tickets for $400. That is INSANELY good value for that product. I'm going to make it out there 2-3 times this year - such good value and such great fun.

MLS is only getting bigger and bigger, and it's gaining alot of credibility around the soccer world. Beckham, Keane, Boyd, Donovan, Henry... their presence attests to this.

As for the stadium, I'm not sure you need to spend copious amounts of money for a decent soccer facility at this time (although you would for a stadium to include a football team franchise). Here's my logic:

My firm is currently designing the new Calgary Soccer Centre, and it's value is apprx. $9M. It contains 4 indoor soccer fields, lots of room and peripheral space and is a pre-fabricated structure.

I'm not a huge fan of pre-fabs, but you could concieveably get a regular soccer pitch, surrounded with 4k -5k seats around it for, let's be on the high end for argument's sake... $30-40 M.

$30-40 M is not that much money for a sports facility (to put it into perspective, the new Rec Centres in Calgary will be apprx. $100 million each). You could plunk an NASL franchise in there, and you could rent that space out completely throughout the summer and winter when the team is not playing. Soccer demand for space - and GOOD space - is high in this city. That facility would be packed year round.

Attach a restuarant in there, and conference space to rent out, and you've got yourself a multi-purpose sports facility.

IMO, putting an NASL franchise in a roofed facility like this would give us a fairly accurate read on how viable MLS could be one day in the future.

[cheevers]

Originally Posted by Muta

The Big Chill - you can buy Whitecaps season tickets for $400. That is INSANELY good value for that product. I'm going to make it out there 2-3 times this year - such good value and such great fun.

MLS is only getting bigger and bigger, and it's gaining alot of credibility around the soccer world. Beckham, Keane, Boyd, Donovan, Henry... their presence attests to this.

As for the stadium, I'm not sure you need to spend copious amounts of money for a decent soccer facility at this time (although you would for a stadium to include a football team franchise). Here's my logic:

My firm is currently designing the new Calgary Soccer Centre, and it's value is apprx. $9M. It contains 4 indoor soccer fields, lots of room and peripheral space and is a pre-fabricated structure.

I'm not a huge fan of pre-fabs, but you could concieveably get a regular soccer pitch, surrounded with 4k -5k seats around it for, let's be on the high end for argument's sake... $30-40 M.

$30-40 M is not that much money for a sports facility (to put it into perspective, the new Rec Centres in Calgary will be apprx. $100 million each). You could plunk an NASL franchise in there, and you could rent that space out completely throughout the summer and winter when the team is not playing. Soccer demand for space - and GOOD space - is high in this city. That facility would be packed year round.

Attach a restuarant in there, and conference space to rent out, and you've got yourself a multi-purpose sports facility.

IMO, putting an NASL franchise in a roofed facility like this would give us a fairly accurate read on how viable MLS could be one day in the future.

Somewhat off topic, but why is there not a full field that is indoors in Calgary. You have to think if they built a few of those they would be huge revenue generators as everyone would want to use them. It would be awesome to be able to play real football year round and not crappy, terrible indoor soccer.

[fundmark19]

Good question. I know the lacrosse community just got some land by Ogden that will have a full lacrosse field which is same size as soccer. I know that the nw soccer some has a field not sure of it is full size though

[Ozy_Flame]

Not to mention the South Soccer Centre is routinely booked up. If any one of our facilities can barely handle capacity (that being the two soccer centers), we need more space. I'm tired of having to get pushed down to 10:30 at night games because its adult league.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Not to mention the South Soccer Centre is routinely booked up. If any one of our facilities can barely handle capacity (that being the two soccer centers), we need more space. I'm tired of having to get pushed down to 10:30 at night games because its adult league.

Futsal, it's the future.

[shermanator]

Sportsnet.ca has good previews of the Whitecaps, Impact, and Toronto FC, as well as FC Edmonton on a weekly soccer podcast. It's a good listen...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/podcast/scgtas/index.php

[The Big Chill]

The 'Caps have been fantastic so far this preseason. I hope they can manage to carry some of this through to the regular season. Le Toux, as expected, is playing quite well thus far.

[mac_82]

TSN.ca is streaming the Walt Disney Soccer Classic Final between TFC and the Whitecaps. It starts at 6pm mt.

The TFC squad will be made up of academy players and trialists. Every TFC player eligible for the Champions League game this week is already back in Toronto.

4 more sleeps till Champions League!

[GirlySports]

The match tonight is sold out. 45000 at the SkyDome!