HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1201  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 5:15 AM
Migs Migs is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 3,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
Eskimos is the correct answer to the only team Braley has not helped financially.
Wrong. When has Braley ever given money to the Riders?
     
     
  #1202  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 5:45 AM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Hmm....
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
Wrong. When has Braley ever given money to the Riders?
I believe I read at some point that he has (maybe in the 80s?), but it is miniscule compared to the amount the Riders raised through either telethons (straight cash donations from around the province) or ticket drives - both of which occurred a number of times to prevent the team from collapsing, or bartering for tickets when times were rough in Saskatchewan (e.g. allowing farmers to trade wheat/crops rather than money for tickets), through the forgiveness of loans by the province and a rent-free agreement on the stadium when there were no profits, or creating an annual lottery that was actually needed to help pay the bills when it was first introduced (now it's just a change to pad the bottom line and maybe win some pretty fantastic prizes).

In any case... we're in a better place now... Where a new stadium can be built with ticket surcharges covering ~35%, the team covering an additional ~10%, and grants from various government bodies chipping in for the rest.
     
     
  #1203  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 11:41 AM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
BMO is no longer a SSS.
Haha, you got me there.

Although if you want to get technical, it doesn't cease being a SSS until the Argos move in as a full time tenant for 2016

But yeah, what I really meant was that BMO will be the biggest MLS venue that wasn't built as a football stadium.
     
     
  #1204  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 11:44 AM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,204
It is a Soccer Specific Stadium being modified to accommodate the CFL.

It is now the biggest MLS Stadium specifically built for soccer and the MLS.
     
     
  #1205  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 12:06 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horus View Post
It seems optimistic to think that the Jays will move their grass installation schedule up, even with the Argos news. They've only recently announced the exploratory relationship with the University of Guelph to find out what kind/varieties of grass will work in their facility, and you'd have to think that would take some time to work out.

Jays Blogger Andrew Stoeten is usually pretty good about this kind of stuff. He doesn't think the timeline will move up for installation of grass at the Rogers Centre.
That is correct, I misspoke, confusing the Argos being allowed to withdraw early from the lease with the turf installation timetable.

I should have known better because I have posted a few articles that have stated that growing grass in the RC won't be a walk in the park.
     
     
  #1206  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 12:12 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
In defense of artificial turf: why it's time to destigmatize plastic pitches
The prevailing prejudice against artificial turf fields – a sentiment nowhere more pronounced than in the US – is unwarranted. Here’s why
Graham Ruthven theguardian.com 21 May 2015

Soccer is skeptical of many things. Foreign owners, goalline technology, players that refuse to celebrate against a former team, snoods and perhaps most notably artificial turf fields. But Major League Soccer is generally more suspicious on the latter than most. Ask most concerned who or what is North American soccer’s biggest enemy and it would surely be a toss-up between Sepp Blatter and plastic pitches.

While there are numerous nations around the world that debate the top-level suitability of artificial pitches in soccer, MLS perhaps fosters the fiercest such discussion. Plastic fields are derided as a blight on the North American game – and often as a hindrance to the quality of soccer played in its top-flight. Some of the league’s best players – most famously Thierry Henry – rarely played on it, for fear of picking up an injury. In summary, the artificial turf used at five MLS venues is bad for the quality of the game and the health of its players, or so the rhetoric goes.

But that’s not necessarily the case. In fact, there is increasingly an argument to be made that artificial surfaces actually improve the standard of soccer played on it, with the legitimacy of claims over injury issues caused by such pitches also doubted by medical professionals. North American soccer might have it wrong, and there is precedence for MLS to follow on opinion this too.

In Scotland a similar debate persists. While artificial surfaces were once outlawed in the country’s top flight, now there are two Scottish Premiership teams (Kilmarnock and Hamilton Academical) that play on plastic – with countless synthetic fields in use further down the league structure. However, many in Scotland look at the discussion from an alternative perspective – one that isn’t widely argued in North American soccer circles.

Scottish soccer coaches and figures are now considering whether the use of artificial surfaces could actually produce better players, and what’s more a better sporting spectacle - with no bumps and bobbles to spoil a winger’s dribbling run, divert a cross-field pass or bounce a back-pass over a goalkeeper’s foot. Like certain regions of North America, Scotland’s often adverse weather conditions are not completely conducive to the cultivation of first-rate soccer fields. At some stage the standard of groundskeeping becomes an irrelevance - with the pitchfork no match for gale-force wind, torrential rain and heavy snow. It’s little wonder then that clubs have turned to artificial playing surfaces simply to ensure that their games go ahead. But it’s about more than just functionality.

Clamor for the installation of plastic pitches across the country’s top-flight - not just for practical reasons, but aesthetic too – is growing. Such calls have been led by the Norwegian manager of Celtic, Ronny Deila, who believes the league’s quality of play has been hampered by narrow-mindedness over the place of artificial surfaces in the modern game. Scottish FA chief Stewart Regan has even defended the perceived injury record of such fields, tweeting: “There is no evidence from recent research to suggest any link between artificial surface and injury,” before adding the hashtag, “#heretostay” in a supplementary message.

“The pitches in Scotland are terrible,” moaned Deila after one game on an especially stodgy field. “If you want to to develop players and get passing football into your team, it’s difficult when the ball is bouncing all the time. It’s much better to play on an artificial surface than to play on this. If we are going to develop good young players in Scotland you need to have a good surface to play and train on. If not, you just get fighters. If you want skills and technique, you have to play on better surfaces. They are much better in Norway where 60% of our pitches are artificial. Nothing is better than a good grass pitch, but if it’s going to be like this then it’s better to play on artificial.”

Of course, to state that Scottish clubs have installed artificial fields purely to produce better players would be disingenuous. There are still many detractors and generally speaking, the allure of generating some extra revenue through the rental of plastic pitches for community uses explains why so many teams have now gone artificial. It is largely a financial decision.

The same goes for many of the MLS clubs that have turned plastic. At CenturyLink Field the Seattle Sounders play on a FieldTurf surface which also serves as a home field for the NFL’s Seattle Seahawks. The New England Revolution and the Vancouver Whitecaps also find themselves in similar situations, sharing their home stadiums with football teams - making the installation of synthetic pitches an arrangement of logistical necessity more than anything else.

Perhaps the Whitecaps and BC Place have made the best compromise. As part of the venue’s $150m renovation a soccer-friendly playing surface was insisted on, with a Polytan field - the same kind European superclubs like Bayern Munich train on - installed. It is the most technologically advanced artificial pitch on the market and, according to many plaudits, plays like a grass surface whilst still delivering the benefits of a plastic one - namely the capacity to play around 200 football and soccer games on it every year.

The discourse over the suitability of artificial fields at the top-end of soccer is particularly pertinent this summer. When the Canadian and Chinese national teams walk out at the Commonwealth Stadium in Edmonton for the first game of next month’s Women’s World Cup they will find plastic blades and rubber crumb beneath their feet rather than a natural grass pitch. However, it’s not just the opening game that will be played on an artificial surface, but every one of 52 fixtures across the month-long tournament, sparking complaints and even legal action over gender discrimination. After all, not a single men’s World Cup match has been played on anything but a grass field.

In this case such protests seem somewhat justified, given that Canada - the competition’s host nation - could quite easily cultivate six well-kept grass pitches in six different host cities over the summon months of June and July. But as a wider concern, the use of artificial pitches - even at the top level of soccer - makes sense, particularly from the standpoint of the continuity it would provide youth ranks of the sport.

Many coaches believe that for teaching the sport’s fundamentals an artificial pitch is best, with over 90% of US Soccer youth development games played on synthetic surfaces. The majority of organized pick-up games, particularly in inner-city areas, are also played on plastic fields, so why is there such a disconnect between the youth game and the sport’s senior level over them? If players are training on artificial pitches why should is it unreasonable for them to play matches on them?

Memories of the NASL’s rock-solid plastic fields, often laid on bare concrete, still linger hard in North American soccer’s collective psyche – but it should be noted just how much progress has been made in the development of artificial playing surfaces in the time since. Spartak Moscow has played Champions League games on artificial turf at the Luzhniki Stadium, with Euro 2008 fixtures also played on Polyan surfaces in Austria. MLS might not like synthetic surfaces, but – as Scotland is coming round to – should accept that in some cases they are the best thing for it, both logistically and aesthetically. The grass isn’t necessarily greener on a grass field.
     
     
  #1207  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 12:47 PM
king10 king10 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 2,776
Oh this is good. FIFA vice president and CONCACAF president gets arrested just before FIFA presedential elections. And we thought our last CONCACAF President was the only corrupt one. Also arrested was the president of traffic USA which runs most major soccer compeitions in the Americas and who is also the chairman of the NASL.



http://en.wikipedia...._FIFA_officials



http://www.football-...icials-arrested
     
     
  #1208  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 2:19 PM
Riise's Avatar
Riise Riise is offline
City Maker
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary | London
Posts: 3,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistercorporate View Post
As nice as Sporting Park (Kansas City) is, it only has a capacity of 18,467.
Quantity and quality are two different things. Additionally, smaller grounds do tend to be more intimtate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
Sporting Park is the best SSS in the league. Take a look at some of the images of it. Quality work on the exterior and they have a large plaza area. General seating is of a better quality, club restaurant/lounge looks fantastic.
That’s why I mentioned that it has received some solid reviews. I wouldn’t mind checking it out one of these days.


Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
In defense of artificial turf: why it's time to destigmatize plastic pitches
The prevailing prejudice against artificial turf fields – a sentiment nowhere more pronounced than in the US – is unwarranted. Here’s why
Graham Ruthven theguardian.com 21 May 2015
Still can’t beat the smell of grass at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon.
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
     
     
  #1209  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 2:22 PM
king10 king10 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 2,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riise View Post


Still can’t beat the smell of grass at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon.
Ha guarantee the next generaiton of turf is made to emit a smell similar to grass.
     
     
  #1210  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 3:49 PM
Oilkountry's Avatar
Oilkountry Oilkountry is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by king10 View Post
Ha guarantee the next generaiton of turf is made to emit a smell similar to grass.
HAHA I actually had to laugh at this one
     
     
  #1211  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 4:38 PM
HomeInMyShoes's Avatar
HomeInMyShoes HomeInMyShoes is offline
arf
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: File 13
Posts: 14,625
It could use scratch and sniff technology.
__________________

-- “We heal each other with kindness, gentleness and respect.” -- Richard Wagamese
-- “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss
     
     
  #1212  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 5:10 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilkountry View Post
HAHA I actually had to laugh at this one
I wouldn't laugh, I believe it. There is/was talk of an artificial turf with embedded fiber op.

Field of Screens
Monte Burke, Contributor Forbes.com 11/10/2006

In a few years NFL gridirons will become their own Jumbotrons. “Turf TV” might put the plasma in the den to shame.

Imagine this: you pull in your driveway after a long day at the office, step out of your car, and suddenly your lawn, yes, your lawn, lights up with a “Welcome Home, Honey!” Or how about this: The military has a runway deep in enemy territory that it wants to keep from getting blown up, so it changes the color of the landing turf to brown to blend in with the surrounding desert. When a plane comes in for a landing, two strips of lights appear. After the plane has landed, with a push of a button the strip reverts to camouflage mode.

Sounds cool, right? This technology will be available soon, making its grand entrance as a National Football League field. Mark Nicholls, the founder and chief executive of Sportexe, the number two maker of artificial turf in the NFL, has patented the process of “tufting” fiber optics with blades of plastic grass. “We will be able to turn the football field into a giant Jumbotron,” says Nicholls.

A field can display a huge American flag during the national anthem. At halftime a sponsor such as Budweiser could cover the field with its logo. During the game, that virtual first-down marker you see on your TV could now be on the field itself before the ball is snapped. And because sensors beneath the fibers can sense when any given blade’s light is obscured, referees can track the footsteps of a player to determine if he was in-bounds or not. Stadium owners would welcome the technology as well, as it would help them get more use out of the field: A few mouse clicks is all it takes to change the field from a gridiron to a soccer pitch. Compare that to the 2.5-hour, $650 process of cleaning and repainting lines on today’s artificial fields.

Sportexe’s interactive field is merely the latest salvo in the escalating artificial turf wars. AstroTurf, that pale green, postmodern creation of the 1960s, loathed by players and TV-viewers alike, is gone from NFL stadiums. It’s been replaced by what’s known as “in-fill” turf systems, which cover a football field with 50 million to 70 million 2.5-inch-tall blades of “grass” made from polyethylene, cushioned by a mixture of rubber pellets and silica that acts as the dirt. The in-fill fields look and feel more like natural grass; one company even supplies a spray that smells like freshly mowed grass.

The new fields claim to be softer and more forgiving than AstroTurf, which was a nylon rug laid over a shock-absorbing pad and concrete. The players like them better, too. But James Bradley, the Pittsburgh Steelers’ chief physician, says not enough research has been done on the new fields to validate a safety advantage. “I’d still prefer to see every game played on grass,” he says.

The in-fill system was patented in 1981 by a former professional golfer named Frederick Haas to make truer hitting surfaces in tee boxes. Its potential for sports fields was realized early on, but AstroTurf so dominated the artificial turf market that it wasn’t until 2002 that the first in-fill field was installed in the NFL, at Seattle’s Seahawks Stadium (now called Qwest Field). All 12 of the 31 NFL stadiums with artificial turf now use in-fill systems. In-fill systems are also found at baseball stadiums and town parks, and were recently approved by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association for World Cup soccer qualifying matches.

FieldTurf in Montreal (revenue: $235 million), run by a former Canadian Football League quarterback, is the market leader with eight stadiums, including Ford Field in Detroit, host of last year’s Super Bowl, the first ever played on an in-fill surface. FieldTurf says it has built 1,900 sports fields and 150 fields in town parks. The town of Redding, Calif. recently built four in-fill fields. Sportexe, in Fonthill, Ont. (revenue: $50 million), is the distant number two, with 300 fields, 2 of them for the NFL.

But Sportexe, 40% owned by former Baltimore Ravens owner Art Modell, believes the future of turf is interactive. Here’s how its “turf TV” works: A computer sends an image to the field, where it is distributed among 1,750 interconnected square trays, 7.5 feet on a side, that host their own light processing circuitry. Thousands of blades of polyethylene grass, blended with optical fibers, reflect light upward from the trays. It’s like a computer monitor that you can walk on. A football field would have 128 million pixels, which works out to 1,280 per square foot. In pixels per square foot it can’t hold a candle to your television set; in total pixels it’s well ahead.

Unlike your flat screen at home, this display is equipped to withstand the impact of a 380-pound lineman. The blades are conducting light, not electricity, so athletes can’t be electrocuted on rainy days, even if they’re losing badly.

At $1.5 million, the purchase price of an interactive field will be three times that of an unilluminated in-fill field and eight times that of a natural grass field. But Sportexe’s Nicholls points out that the ten-year maintenance bill on grass can approach $1 million, 20 times the cost of maintaining an in-fill field. A stadium owner may be able to pay the mortgage on the interactive grass with ad revenue or host more events if the field lines can be changed so easily and rapidly.

Nicholls says the lit-up fields are still two years away from commercialization. The technology, though, is already being employed, most notably on artificial Christmas trees.

“The technology isn’t really that amazing,” he says. “It’s just that no one’s done it on a field yet.”
     
     
  #1213  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 5:14 PM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,717
The eye test doesn't fail. Soccer looks goofy on artificial turf. The ball bounces different and the players move and pace differently on it versus on grass, It makes the game faster but not in a good way. Soccer is just better on grass. No shilling goes on for baseball as it has established that turf is no good for the sport, why is soccer not privy to the same?

Good on the article to reference nobody Scottish clubs, when top flight AAA teams make the switch then we will get somewhere, until then its all bogus talk IMO. The only sport that has benefited from modern turf is football. It is ironic as old turf technology was no good for football and destroyed players in the process but was way more common then the good turf with sand and pellet fill you have in modern times.

For share of usage football and soccer get along fine. Well American football. The USA by default has some of the best "soccer stadiums" around as it can turn 40 world class NFL or NCAA stadiums into soccer pitches overnight. What MLS sought in not using many of these already existing stadiums to seek revenue controls and demographic catchment in targeting the suburbs in many markets. Aside from your MLS the USA still has many great GRASS "pitches"
     
     
  #1214  
Old Posted May 27, 2015, 6:52 PM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63
In defense of artificial turf: why it's time to destigmatize plastic pitches
The prevailing prejudice against artificial turf fields – a sentiment nowhere more pronounced than in the US – is unwarranted. Here’s why
Graham Ruthven theguardian.com 21 May 2015
Great article - thanks for posting that.
     
     
  #1215  
Old Posted May 28, 2015, 1:57 AM
Villaggio Villaggio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Ville de Québec
Posts: 236


Source: Facebook
     
     
  #1216  
Old Posted May 28, 2015, 2:01 AM
Berklon's Avatar
Berklon Berklon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,145
^ Well at least the interior looks great.
     
     
  #1217  
Old Posted May 28, 2015, 3:08 AM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berklon View Post
^ Well at least the interior looks great.
I have to hold judgment till its 100% done, until then it looks best at night with no lights on it.
     
     
  #1218  
Old Posted May 28, 2015, 3:13 AM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,480
I don't see what everybody's beef is... I think it looks good.
     
     
  #1219  
Old Posted May 28, 2015, 3:29 AM
Berklon's Avatar
Berklon Berklon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by osmo View Post
I have to hold judgment till its 100% done, until then it looks best at night with no lights on it.
Sounds like the women I date.
     
     
  #1220  
Old Posted May 28, 2015, 5:06 AM
Oilkountry's Avatar
Oilkountry Oilkountry is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,868
it looks 40 years old.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:09 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.