Winnipeg Valour - CanPL

[esquire]

^ I think the way they did it was OK. You couldn't really go much higher with the temp seat grandstands than what is currently feasible with the jumbotrons placed in the ends anyway. The cost of putting up 100 rows+ of temporary endzone seats would probably outweigh whatever revenue you'd bring in from them.

But that said, I agree re: the ribbon board. It's a little lame that they haven't stretched that to the ends of the grandstand. Although in some ways IGF reminds me a bit of MTS Centre when it first opened... MTS Centre was initially finished to a very basic standard and really only went to the next level when the NHL returned.

[buzzg]

You know what bugs me about IGF... that the Bombers seem to not have a CLUE what their shade of blue is.

They painted the entire stadium navy a year before switching back to royal blue (did you really not know it was coming?).
The seats have faded to a weird dark teal.
The moisture seal on the lower concourse wall and loge floors is some hideous neon blue.

It hurts my soul...

[esquire]

^ I agree, it is irritating that a couple years after getting a new facility with colors matched properly to the team, they up and change back to royal blue.

[esquire]

^ That's what they do for Bisons football too. Probably reduces costs as well in terms of staffing, cleanup, etc.

[buzzg]

Originally Posted by WildCake

Interesting find on the Valour FC membership FAQ page. Looks like tickets will be limited to the East side of the lower bowl for season ticket holders. They’re not only restricting seating to the lower bowl, but sectioning off the lower bowl as well. I guess that is how you build crowd density when you have a bit too much stadium for your needs.

Presumably they will open up sections making their way around to the west side as demand increases

https://login.canpl.ca/valour then hit the FAQ button at the top

Originally Posted by esquire

^ That's what they do for Bisons football too. Probably reduces costs as well in terms of staffing, cleanup, etc.

I would actually wager they'd open up the east 200s before going to he other side. Much easier to staff, keeps energy together, and the end zones wouldn't be desirable.

It's pretty widely agreed upon by designers and other people in the sports world that it was a bad idea to go full-bowl in the 100s, as they ended up locating a LOT of seats in the least desirable area. Those really should be the cheapest, but because they're in the lower bowl they're not (need that revenue), and so they often get bought last, which looks especially bad on TV and being there when so many lower bowl seats are empty.

They should have taken a page from Mosaic and CanadInns and kept end zone seating to a minimum, with room for expansion. But we didn't used a stadium designer.

While it would directly effect me so shhh.... the Bombers should really change the pricing structure to make the end zones a little cheaper and the good seats in 200s more expensive. There currently isn't even a difference within most of the 200s sections – gold seats up top just expensive as first row.

I sit 213 – third section from the end– row 2. My seats are fantastic, can easily see the whole field (they're angled in), and they're the CHEAPEST seats in the building. I've sat halfway up in the end zones before and it was brutal, can't believe people pay that much to sit there... although they're usually empty. It's significantly cheaper to sit first row of 200s on the 25 yard line than anywhere on ends or corners of 100s. Makes no sense. Not to mention the end zones aren't covered.

[Goldie]

buzzg said:

Originally Posted by buzzg

I sit 213 – third section from the end– row 2. My seats are fantastic, can easily see the whole field (they're angled in), and they're the CHEAPEST seats in the building. I've sat halfway up in the end zones before and it was brutal, can't believe people pay that much to sit there... although they're usually empty. It's significantly cheaper to sit first row of 200s on the 25 yard line than anywhere on ends or corners of 100s. Makes no sense. Not to mention the end zones aren't covered.

Serious question: Why do you support the Bombers?
They have got to be the worst-run sports team on Earth...

That's my biggest concern with this new soccer team. In the last 30 years or so the Blue haven't done much right... and sadly they OWN this new soccer team *sad face*

[Ando]

Originally Posted by Goldie

buzzg said:



Serious question: Why do you support the Bombers?
They have got to be the worst-run sports team on Earth...

That's my biggest concern with this new soccer team. In the last 30 years or so the Blue haven't done much right... and sadly they OWN this new soccer team *sad face*

Yeah, your credibility is kind of declining rapidly because you seem have crazed chip on your shoulder about the Bombers.

[DancingDuck]

Originally Posted by Goldie

buzzg said:



Serious question: Why do you support the Bombers?
They have got to be the worst-run sports team on Earth...

That's my biggest concern with this new soccer team. In the last 30 years or so the Blue haven't done much right... and sadly they OWN this new soccer team *sad face*

I support them because I like cheering for the local sports teams. Why does it matter? It's not like I have to stop cheering for a team if they're poorly run... Sure having a winning team makes it more fun but that's not the point. Instead of polluting the Winnipeg Valour thread go say this in the Bomber thread

All 5 of your posts have been critical of the organization, did you get cut from the practice roster this year or what? Jeez...

[cutchemist42]

Originally Posted by buzzg

I would actually wager they'd open up the east 200s before going to he other side. Much easier to staff, keeps energy together, and the end zones wouldn't be desirable.

It's pretty widely agreed upon by designers and other people in the sports world that it was a bad idea to go full-bowl in the 100s, as they ended up locating a LOT of seats in the least desirable area. Those really should be the cheapest, but because they're in the lower bowl they're not (need that revenue), and so they often get bought last, which looks especially bad on TV and being there when so many lower bowl seats are empty.

They should have taken a page from Mosaic and CanadInns and kept end zone seating to a minimum, with room for expansion. But we didn't used a stadium designer.

While it would directly effect me so shhh.... the Bombers should really change the pricing structure to make the end zones a little cheaper and the good seats in 200s more expensive. There currently isn't even a difference within most of the 200s sections – gold seats up top just expensive as first row.

I sit 213 – third section from the end– row 2. My seats are fantastic, can easily see the whole field (they're angled in), and they're the CHEAPEST seats in the building. I've sat halfway up in the end zones before and it was brutal, can't believe people pay that much to sit there... although they're usually empty. It's significantly cheaper to sit first row of 200s on the 25 yard line than anywhere on ends or corners of 100s. Makes no sense. Not to mention the end zones aren't covered.

To this day, I will never understand how we got an amateur stadium architect to design something so important when other teams clearly made better choices in their design.

The optics just look so bad on tv, and if I were the Bombers I would give away a huge amount of tickets to those zones. My fave seats in IFG are mostly all upper deck, and watching from the corners is just dreadful.

Out of the modern football stadiums I've been to lately (Mosaic, TCF Bank) the difference in design quality is stark.

[blueandgoldguy]

I don't believe for a second the design quality of TCF is better than IGF...maybe one new side perhaps, and even that side has narrow concourses.

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

I don't believe for a second the design quality of TCF is better than IGF...maybe one new side perhaps, and even that side has narrow concourses.

Haha. Whoops. I thought the poster I was responding to was referring to TD Bank Stadium in Ottawa, hence my comments about "the one new side." My mistake.

TCF in Minny is obviously better, but it's not a fair comparison given all the money behind the NFL and all the public money for this stadium - an amount that would never considered for a pro sports facility here.

[bomberjet]

Standard practice. Reduces everything to one area. Making it easier to manage with less people as Esquire mentioned.

[esquire]

^ The lower parts of the upper deck in the P7 area are probably the best deal in all of pro football. Great views at the lowest price in the building.

I like IGF but I think the one thing that Mosaic has on us is the U-shaped seating configuration. For whatever reason, IGF's proponents latched on to the "NFL-style" full bowl even though end zone seats are way less desirable in Canada due to the size of the field. Plus having an uncluttered end zone makes temp seating expansion easier. Mosaic probably has as much end zone seating as IGF due to the fact that the north end zone there has a lot of rows, but at least the second advantage I mentioned still applies.

[esquire]

I think IGF looks great on TV. Probably the best looking of the new generation of CFL stadiums although without a doubt the remaining NFL-sized venues in the league (BC Place/Commonwealth) have a certain grandeur that is hard to match.

The issue with the empty seats is that the Bombers mysteriously price end zone seats higher than the clearly superior upper deck sections. I'm grateful that they do it because I can get a decent seat for cheap, but yeah, I always thought it was weird... you'd think they'd want to fill the lower bowl to make it look good for TV. For late season games with crappy weather, looking at the endzones reminds me of watching Argos games at Skydome when the place was 2/3 empty.

[Wolf13]

Originally Posted by Ando

Sorry, but the IGF is a fantastic stadium for watching football. The atmosphere is great. You don't like the location but that's the way it is. Let's celebrate the fact that we have a good stadium and not do the usual Winnipeg navel-gazing self-hatred routine. I've already explained to you several times why the soccer team will be playing in IGF. That's where it's going to happen for better or for worse so let's hope its a success. As I said, they don't need 20,000 fans for a successful venture at that level of soccer. It's not THE Premier League. It's the Canadian Premier League.

This

Originally Posted by cutchemist42

To this day, I will never understand how we got an amateur stadium architect to design something so important when other teams clearly made better choices in their design.

The optics just look so bad on tv, and if I were the Bombers I would give away a huge amount of tickets to those zones. My fave seats in IFG are mostly all upper deck, and watching from the corners is just dreadful.

Out of the modern football stadiums I've been to lately (Mosaic, TCF Bank) the difference in design quality is stark.

I've been to those and disagree. Winnipeg had a budget, and I think within that budget, IGF delivers for sure. Great visibility from anywhere, better concourse design than mosaic. Looks nice also. Mosaic is a great place too, but also cost $70M more.

What I concede is that perhaps the whole thing shouldnt be a full loop, but that's nitpicking, because it's probably cheaper to build all the way around than higher if one endzone remained open. Again, $$$. For $200M, IGF is quite good.

[EndoftheBeginning]

Ticket pricing announced. Loges sold out.

Edit-link now dead, sorry

[EndoftheBeginning]

Team kit revealed this week.

Home








Away

[EndoftheBeginning]

And here are all the teams.

[IMG][/IMG]

[pspeid]

Yeah, I'm a "homer", but I really love the look and colours of the Winnipeg team over the others. It may be the best of the group in terms of marketing jerseys to younger fans as well.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by pspeid

Yeah, I'm a "homer", but I really love the look and colours of the Winnipeg team over the others. It may be the best of the group in terms of marketing jerseys to younger fans as well.

I really like the away kit. Simple and sharp.