New conceptual plan to redevelop area around McMahon Stadium

[getbak]

Originally Posted by hixxes

Am I looking at that rendering correctly that Father David Bauer and Norma Bush arenas are gone?

Yes. In the drawing, the blue building attached to the yellow field house would be a replacement for the Foothills Aquatic Centre and the turquoise building attached to that would be the replacement for the arenas.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by timun

There's no question that CFL in Toronto and Vancouver is hurting (especially the Argonauts), and your reasoning is the CFL is "lower tier" and thus doesn't appeal to residents of those cities for "prestige" reasons, yet the MLS attendance is still pretty light. Toronto draws about 25,000 per game, but Vancouver Whitecaps games at BC Place are just about the same mausoleum-like experience as Lions games: 19,514 vs. 17,803.

Whether deliberate or not I think you've conveniently ignored the elephant in the room that, frankly, makes your line of reasoning contradictory and specious to me: Montreal Impact. They draw a paltry 16,151 people per game. Granted the Alouettes aren't a hell of a lot better (17,574) but if MLS draws flies in the second-biggest and arguably most cosmopolitan city in the country... why would it be any better in Calgary? Especially in light of the fact the Stampeders draw better than any of the Canadian MLS teams already, and in fact would be in the top four in attendance in the MLS overall.

As such I don't think CFL attendance is indicative of the market for MLS. MLS needs to stand on its own, and to do so they'd need a venue that works for soccer. The prudent thing to do in planning a McMahon replacement/reno is to take soccer into account, but I wouldn't necessarily count on an MLS team making the whole thing financially viable. Either way a roof is out of the question: there's absolutely no way to make that work money-wise.

It could be true that CFL attendance may not mean much for MLS, and Montreal's attendance is interesting considering you would assume that would be the strongest city for support of MLS.

Counterpoint however is that because of Calgary having strong CFL attendance, maybe it could do as well, if not better than the other Canadian cities since they have stronger draw numbers for a sport that isn't that popular nationally, while having a smaller population than those metros. And with the growth of soccer interest in the city due to general population interest - especially amongst the ethnic population that continues to grow - it might have a fair chance in being successful relative to Vancouver and Montreal, and maybe even Toronto.

How do the Roughnecks stand attendance wise within their NLL league? Quick glance on wikipedia for the 2020 season shows that Calgary was at the top with an average of 12,677, and lacrosse is significantly less popular than soccer. Perhaps Calgary is a pretty strong sports town overall, and could draw better for the MLS than we may initially expect. Would explain how despite how mediocre the Flames have been for decades, fan support continues to be pretty strong for the franchise.

[timun]

Which one is it, Joborule? Low CFL attendance = high MLS attendance, or high CFL attendance = high MLS attendance? You can't logically argue both.

Truth is there doesn't seem to be any correlation at all, and MLS attendance and overall popularity is somewhat overstated.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by timun

Which one is it, Joborule? Low CFL attendance = high MLS attendance, or high CFL attendance = high MLS attendance? You can't logically argue both.

Truth is there doesn't seem to be any correlation at all, and MLS attendance and overall popularity is somewhat overstated.

I'm just spitballing and not really saying one thing one way or the other. Just using references from other sports in the area to make cases on whether if MLS popularity can make it work here.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by getbak

Yes. In the drawing, the blue building attached to the yellow field house would be a replacement for the Foothills Aquatic Centre and the turquoise building attached to that would be the replacement for the arenas.

Replace as in building 2 new arenas, or replace as in they are gone and replaced with something different. Would be a big loss to the city and amateur hockey to lose them entirely.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Replace as in building 2 new arenas, or replace as in they are gone and replaced with something different. Would be a big loss to the city and amateur hockey to lose them entirely.

2 new arenas. The swimming pool would also be replaced into a better one with a competitive pool and dive tank. So overall an upgrade on what's there currently for the two activities.

[getbak]

You can see here that they're proposing a new twin arena complex...




Keep in mind, that all of this still conceptual to show what is possible more than a prescriptive final plan. What ultimately is (or isn't built) will most-likely not look exactly like this.

[calf]

Wouldn't it make sense to have McMahon, the arena and aquatics building all closer together, sharing spaces like locker rooms and concourses?

[timun]

No.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by calf

Wouldn't it make sense to have McMahon, the arena and aquatics building all closer together, sharing spaces like locker rooms and concourses?

I don't think there's room to do something like that connected to McMahon in its current state -- and relocating McMahon is a whole other conversation.

Also, there's the issue of who owns what, with the city owning everything north of McMahon and the University owning everything south.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Joborule

I could understand if for Calgary's climate, there is no alternative but an indoor stadium for the cooler months of the season.

Is CFL a good base to judge if MLS could do well in Calgary? Vancouver doesn't give a #### about the CFL at all, nor does Toronto. But their MLS teams seem to have pretty good support in relation. I think that you also have the factor in league prestige in those cities. They are selective in what they want to spend their money on since there's lots of entertainment options. So they wouldn't want to spend money on a lower tier league like the CFL since they're more interested in the NFL which is somewhat physically accessible. But MLS is the highest tier for soccer on the continent, so they are willing to spend for that. So is Calgary similar? Would the general population interest in soccer high enough that perhaps MLS could work?

Just based off of this article on 2019 numbers. Some spots in high pop. cities don't have the greatest numbers. Granted there's a lot more competing interests. Calgary wouldn't haven't that issue as MLS would immediately be the 2nd biggest league in prestige in the city.

https://soccerstadiumdigest.com/2019-mls-attendance/

I don't think you actually looked at CFL and MLS attendance in these cities before making this post.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I don't think you actually looked at CFL and MLS attendance in these cities before making this post.

According to the article, Toronto was 5th in attendance, and Vancouver 11th in a league of 24 teams. So relative to everyone elsewhere, their attendance figures appears good for MLS.

Whereas for the 2019 CFL attendance based off this page, Toronto was the worst with 12,493 average, and BC was 3rd worst with 17,803. (Montreal was 2nd worst, 17,574). League average amongst the other 6 teams that would be 'smaller market' was 26,396.

So in relativity, Toronto and Vancouver are more supportive of MLS than CFL based on 2019 numbers. It's incredibly simplistic since it doesn't take into team strength and overall numbers over several seasons.

[timun]

Relative shmelative. Actual, raw numbers:

Atlanta United FC 52,510
Seattle Sounders 40,247
Saskatchewan Roughriders 30,723
Edmonton Eskimos 29,341
FC Cincinnati 27,336
Calgary Stampeders 27,027
Winnipeg Blue Bombers 25,414
Portland Timbers 25,218
Toronto FC 25,048
Hamilton Tiger-Cats 23,271
LA Galaxy 23,205
Orlando City SC 22,761
Ottawa Redblacks 22,605
LAFC 22,251
NYC FC 21,107
Minnesota United 19,723
Vancouver Whitecaps 19,514
San Jose Earthquakes 18,781
Sporting KC 18,601
Real Salt Lake 18,121
BC Lions 17,803
D.C. United 17,744
Montreal Alouettes 17,574
New York Red Bulls 17,281
Philadelphia Union 17,111
NE Revolution 16,737
Montreal Impact 16,171
Houston Dynamo 15,674
Columbus Crew 14,856
FC Dallas 14,842
Colorado Rapids 14,284
Toronto Argonauts 12,493
Chicago Fire 12,324


If New York City can't even scrape together enough people to outdraw Stampeders games MLS is frankly not a factor.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

It doesn’t matter whether MLS would draw well in Calgary (it wouldn’t).

It’s all moot because unless their league completely reverses their entire expansion strategy, they will never come to a small market in Canada.

[MegaErtz]

I understand that those figures represent tickets sold, but does anyone actually believe that the Stampeders are averaging 27,000 butts in seats?

[timun]

Does anyone actually believe that the _______ are averaging ____ butts in seats? Do you actually believe 18,751 butts were in seats at Flames games in '19-'20?

Your logic applies pretty much equally to all pro sports teams everywhere.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by timun

Relative shmelative. Actual, raw numbers:

Atlanta United FC 52,510
Seattle Sounders 40,247
Saskatchewan Roughriders 30,723
Edmonton Eskimos 29,341
FC Cincinnati 27,336
Calgary Stampeders 27,027
Winnipeg Blue Bombers 25,414
Portland Timbers 25,218
Toronto FC 25,048
Hamilton Tiger-Cats 23,271
LA Galaxy 23,205
Orlando City SC 22,761
Ottawa Redblacks 22,605
LAFC 22,251
NYC FC 21,107
Minnesota United 19,723
Vancouver Whitecaps 19,514
San Jose Earthquakes 18,781
Sporting KC 18,601
Real Salt Lake 18,121
BC Lions 17,803
D.C. United 17,744
Montreal Alouettes 17,574
New York Red Bulls 17,281
Philadelphia Union 17,111
NE Revolution 16,737
Montreal Impact 16,171
Houston Dynamo 15,674
Columbus Crew 14,856
FC Dallas 14,842
Colorado Rapids 14,284
Toronto Argonauts 12,493
Chicago Fire 12,324


If New York City can't even scrape together enough people to outdraw Stampeders games MLS is frankly not a factor.

Wow, those attendance numbers for MLS are shockingly bad. The way I’ve heard people talk here and elsewhere I thought this league was huge now.

[jayswin]

It's not huge, it's just huge by North American soccer standards. But yeah it definitely has a bit of a trendy following where people love to proclaim that it's taken over North America.

It is impressive what that league has done, though for sure.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

I understand that those figures represent tickets sold, but does anyone actually believe that the Stampeders are averaging 27,000 butts in seats?

I guess, but at the end of the day, who cares? It's still a ticket sold. I guess you lose out on some of the parking revenue / concessions. But other than that, what else do you lose financially, if the person is physically there or not?

[jayswin]

The important distinction isn't so much butts in seats, it's tickets sold vs tickets distributed. The Tampa Bay Lightening used to announce attendance of 17-20k every night but were being paid for like 12-15k. But they actually had 17-20k butts in seats.

Their strategy was to get more people out who would become future fans and season ticket holders, and I like that strategy. It's also worked for them. But many teams just cook their numbers by "distributing" tickets to announce higher attendance numbers.

Colorado was famous for this in the NHL. They had the longest (or one of) active sell out streak until media and fans called them out for blocks of hundreds of empty seats in multiple sections every night. They claimed tickets distributed were 100% of capacity, but once they knew the jig was up they suddenly announced much less and ended their sell out streak.

Many teams do this to an extent, though, and I believe the Flames do, as our sellout streak went on for years in the 2010's when any regular attendee would tell you it's not even close.