Rate Winnipegs New Investors Group Field Stadium

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by Reed Solomon

well we wont be finding out this year how November games would go..

Does this mean the Bombers are decided to "take a knee" and forfeit their final regural season home game on Nov 2 this year?

[bomberjet]

One thing I've noticed this year is that security is rather, what's the word I'm looking for, extreme maybe. They seem to be spending a lot of effort to combat people who are, let's say smoking, outside the stadium. Not cigarettes either. I know, the laws right.

There's people falling down drunk, yelling and screaming, etc. etc. One lady had pissed and shit herself outside there, seriously. Then security with a police entourage comes walking around on dope patrol, kicking everybody and there dog out the door. Hastling people who are just standing there quietly minding there business.

Seems ridiculous to me.

[Cyro]

As time has passed and we are now entering our 2nd season at the Bombers new home, IGF, do you have any new opinions on the Stadium we have now and for the foreseeable future? If new posters or old, have not voted on their IGF experience or commented, where do you think we stand in regards to all the new stadiums being constructed or soon to be constructed?

[esquire]

Still put it at a solid 4. Far better than the bargain basement eastern division venues, maybe not quite as good as some of the new/renovated western division venues. But still a great place to watch a game and solid bang for the buck overall.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by esquire

Still put it at a solid 4.

Far better than the bargain basement eastern division venues, maybe not quite as good as some of the new/renovated western division venues. But still a great place to watch a game and solid bang for the buck overall.

As do I.

Hoping those cities and provinces with stadiums U/C and starting soon will rate/comment on IGF. Especially with our neighbors in Sask. getting a Jem of a facility in the near future.

[bomberjet]

I still put it at a 4 because it is better than the average CFL stadium. Despite all the financial stuff. Obviously some glaring, stupid issues with the buildings design and construction.

Now, the reason I didn't renew season tix is the god awful on field and managerial performance. Turning around this year, maybe. But the front office and fan experience BS is still ridiculous.

[Cyro]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I still put it at a 4 because it is better than the average CFL stadium. Despite all the financial stuff. Obviously some glaring, stupid issues with the buildings design and construction.

Now, the reason I didn't renew season tix is the god awful on field and managerial performance.

Turning around this year, maybe. But the front office and fan experience BS is still ridiculous.

I understand this completely.(bolded)

We can only hope for a better experience for season #2 with the ongoing changes being made.

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by Andy6

It will be interesting to compare (a) the cost of all the upgrading that is eventually undertaken to (b) the amount of federal funding that was gained by building the stadium on campus.

Wow, can't believe it took me a year to find this. Great comment.

[Only The Lonely..]

Originally Posted by esquire

Still put it at a solid 4. Far better than the bargain basement eastern division venues, maybe not quite as good as some of the new/renovated western division venues. But still a great place to watch a game and solid bang for the buck overall.

I still can't come to terms with the stadium's location.

I was always a casual fan that bought tickets on a whimsy.. At the end of each season, I kicked myself for not buying season tickets because I always wound up seeing virtually every game at a much higher price.

When the Bombers played in a central location with easy access by car, bike, transit.. I was inclined to throw $40 on a second deck seat for a lark.

No matter how bad the team was, I was there and paid in full, because it was fun and the old stadium had both character and characters.

Now.. not so much. I just can't see myself going to as many games on a spur of the moment. The facility is too 'sterile' for my tastes, and it's too much of a hassle to get there.

[Danny D Oh]

After a full season, still good not great. We moved our seats, and down 4 price levels too, to actually get a view of the field. The downside of having the seats come basically right up to the field in a bowl is that a good number of rows in the lower bowl can't see any of the play live unless it is right in front of them. I think I'll enjoy the actual football more from the upper deck. Fewer seats between the goal-lines will always be a problem for this design. Concourse will always suck too. Don't know why we copied the Metrodome with our concourse width, and compounded that by not queuing lines for vendors.

IMO, Regina's stadium is damn near a carbon copy of IGF, although it looks to be on a bigger footprint and a notch up the rung of fancy relative to a football stadium. Plus they have people with experience designing and building these types of facilities running the show, so I expect they will have fewer glitches all along the way.

One thing I miss from the old stadium is the sun, but hey, if it ever rains we'll all be dry (assuming there is no wind ).

Location is terrible, and that will always be a problem for the Bombers when selling tickets.

[Cyro]

Any comments from those who voted 2 or 3 and their comparisons to other Canadian Stadiums? Comments from those who find the stadium better than average are common and easy to make, what about those 1 and 2 ratings. Reasoning?

I'm probably one of the few that is OK with the location and I'm positive posters will tell me why the other locations were better suited to this particular development.

[The Unknown Poster]

No one can complain about location if the issue is distance to travel. That is a terrible reason to complain. I used to drive from the south end of Winnipeg to Canad Inns Stadium, sit in unbearable traffic on Route 90 and sit in long lines trying to get out (though it was a lot better when the Arena was demolished as there as a ton of close parking).

I think the location is great minus the issues of getting in and out, which were vastly improved as the season progressed. It will continue to improve as the transit corridor is built. I *do* hope (but sincerely doubt) they would also add secondary roadways and a parkade to the plans for the golf course.

[esquire]

^ Location-related issues could be mitigated, but no one wants to spend the $. I mean, what did the city do to improve transportation capacity? Did they even add a second turning lane from SB Pembina to EB Chancellor Matheson, or was that there before? (Maybe they should have put an IKEA store next to the stadium so that the city would have put a few million towards transportation infrastructure improvements.)

Rapid transit, a couple decently-sized parkades and one more road to connect IGF and Pembina (through the Southwood lands) would dramatically reduce the congestion in the area. A footbridge to South St. Vital would also help, but to a much lesser extent.

The U of M is used to large numbers of people coming and going, but not all that many at once. I'm sure that the situation will improve as people get more and more used to it.

[Danny D Oh]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Location-related issues could be mitigated, but no one wants to spend the $. I mean, what did the city do to improve transportation capacity? Did they even add a second turning lane from SB Pembina to EB Chancellor Matheson, or was that there before? (Maybe they should have put an IKEA store next to the stadium so that the city would have put a few million towards transportation infrastructure improvements.)

Rapid transit, a couple decently-sized parkades and one more road to connect IGF and Pembina (through the Southwood lands) would dramatically reduce the congestion in the area. A footbridge to South St. Vital would also help, but to a much lesser extent.

The U of M is used to large numbers of people coming and going, but not all that many at once. I'm sure that the situation will improve as people get more and more used to it.

Any of those would have minimal effect on football crowds IMO. To the point that it would be a waste of money. The problem with the location is that every vehicle going in or out has to travel on or through one arterial road. The only other option is to drive south off the campus through a residential neighbourhood to the Perimeter, and that's only an option post-game, plus you still have to deal with Pembina traffic to get onto the Perimeter ramp. Adding another access point from Pembina won't do much to alleviate congestion, just transfer it a little bit. This is in contrast to Winnipeg Stadium which had loads of road capacity to get people out in all directions once they got out of the parking lots. The campus for the purposes of the football crowd only has access from the west and north.

If we want to alleviate congestion on campus, encourage people driving to park elsewhere and use shuttles or walk. Of course that means less money for the university. There is loads of free street parking and cheaper parking in church/community centre lots in the Richmond neighbourhood, only the immediate two blocks south of campus have restricted parking.

[esquire]

^ In my experience, the slowest part of the whole trip is getting out of the U of M to Pembina. Once you get to Pembina, traffic generally moves fine... I cannot believe that adding new outlets to Pembina (such as a street and the BRT route) wouldn't speed things up.

[Danny D Oh]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ In my experience, the slowest part of the whole trip is getting out of the U of M to Pembina. Once you get to Pembina, traffic generally moves fine... I cannot believe that adding new outlets to Pembina (such as a street and the BRT route) wouldn't speed things up.

BRT would, because presumably you're taking cars off Pembina and off the campus. The impact of another road between Bison/Chancellor Matheson and University Crescent, adding another intersection on Pembina, negligible at best.

I mean if anyone has a couple hundred million and they want to build some ramps or flyovers to alleviate traffic for 10 football games and 2-3 concerts per year, that could put a real dent in the congestion. But probably isn't worth it in the grand scheme of things.

[The Unknown Poster]

My observations are that traffic off campus is heavier going to the game than leaving (presumably due to a lot less non-game traffic on the roads). I understand people's frustrations at the end of another loss, on a thursday night sitting in traffic on campus when you need to get home. But personally, I parked at the end of Markham and walked. There was minimal traffic issues from that area.

As the season progressed, there were fewer and fewer full parking lots along pembina hwy. A significant amount of people walk from Pembina and as I previously stated, I have no idea how bad it could get once we play football in awful weather (either pouring rain or bitter cold). They better have a significant plan for Grey Cup and NHL.

The construction at Pembina & Bison was underwhelming. They could have done more to ease traffic issues there.

The construction of the Perimetre in Fort Richmond wont help matters either.

[Biff]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

My observations are that traffic off campus is heavier going to the game than leaving (presumably due to a lot less non-game traffic on the roads). I understand people's frustrations at the end of another loss, on a thursday night sitting in traffic on campus when you need to get home. But personally, I parked at the end of Markham and walked. There was minimal traffic issues from that area.

As the season progressed, there were fewer and fewer full parking lots along pembina hwy. A significant amount of people walk from Pembina and as I previously stated, I have no idea how bad it could get once we play football in awful weather (either pouring rain or bitter cold). They better have a significant plan for Grey Cup and NHL.

The construction at Pembina & Bison was underwhelming. They could have done more to ease traffic issues there.

The construction of the Perimetre in Fort Richmond wont help matters either.

Don't forget, last year a lot of people were leaving games in the 3rd quarter because the team was so bad. I don't think we have had a clear indication of what it might be like if the Bombers are actually competitive in a game in the final 2 minutes.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Biff

Don't forget, last year a lot of people were leaving games in the 3rd quarter because the team was so bad. I don't think we have had a clear indication of what it might be like if the Bombers are actually competitive in a game in the final 2 minutes.

Last Banjo Bowl was a full house that stuck around until the end. It wasn't all that bad once you got out of the U of M campus. I remember taking a bus after that game... the drive down Chancellor Matheson took forever, and Pembina was pretty slow going until about Markham. After that it got going without any problems.

That's why I said in an earlier post that there is a need for more capacity to get people in and out of the campus area... things get clogged in a hurry. You can't just expect the road and transit infrastructure that handles maybe a couple of thousand people an hour on a typical day to suddenly start handling 25,000 people an hour. Maybe an interchange is out of the question, but adding a lane to existing streets and building a new 4-lane street in and out of the campus area would certainly help.

[Cyro]

Hmmm..41% + of respondents feel the the facility is better than average? I voted 4, over 1.5 years ago.