Stadiums and Arenas of Canada part 2 - Page 116

Villaggio · #**2301** Posted **Jul 21, 2015, 10:25 PM**

Matrix19 · #**2302** Posted **Jul 21, 2015, 10:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Villaggio

First ice hockey players (pee-wee) in the Videotron Center

the video (featuring Simon Gagné) :

https://youtu.be/Tp2YxP_mtWY?t=1m22s

SkahHigh · #**2303** Posted **Jul 21, 2015, 10:52 PM**

Wow so cool for Quebec City! I remember back in 2012 when they were breaking ground, how 3 years go by quickly...

king10 · #**2304** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 1:13 PM**

I don't think the Bell Centre is any better than the ACC. In fact id say the ACC's exterior is better than the Bell Centres. I've heard that the Bell Centre is cramped on the concourses and views from the upper level are terrible.

Media and freight facilties I'd have no idea about though.

Also QC lookin good.

esquire · #**2305** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 1:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by king10

I don't think the Bell Centre is any better than the ACC. In fact id say the ACC's exterior is better than the Bell Centres. I've heard that the Bell Centre is cramped on the concourses and views from the upper level are terrible.

Yeah, that is probably the biggest single knock on the Bell Centre... that they tried to cram a 22,500 seat rink into an 18,500 seat venue. It is cramped in there.

SkahHigh · #**2306** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 2:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by king10

I don't think the Bell Centre is any better than the ACC. In fact id say the ACC's exterior is better than the Bell Centres. I've heard that the Bell Centre is cramped on the concourses and views from the upper level are terrible.

Media and freight facilties I'd have no idea about though.

Also QC lookin good.

The Bell Centre's North and East facades are okay, the other two are soul-sucking ugly.

I went to see a game against Nashville in the upper levels (nosebleed section as I call it) and it truly wasn't that bad. I've rarely heard people complain about the lack of space/view at the Bell Centre. People complain a lot more about the cost of food and drinks...

Plus the 21,286 is what makes our building so loud

Oilkountry · #**2307** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

The Bell Centre's North and East facades are okay, the other two are soul-sucking ugly.

I went to see a game against Nashville in the upper levels (nosebleed section as I call it) and it truly wasn't that bad. I've rarely heard people complain about the lack of space/view at the Bell Centre. People complain a lot more about the cost of food and drinks...

Plus the 21,286 is what makes our building so loud

MTS is louder

#gojetsgo

Acajack · #**2308** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 2:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

The Bell Centre's North and East facades are okay, the other two are soul-sucking ugly.

I went to see a game against Nashville in the upper levels (nosebleed section as I call it) and it truly wasn't that bad. I've rarely heard people complain about the lack of space/view at the Bell Centre. People complain a lot more about the cost of food and drinks...

Plus the 21,286 is what makes our building so loud

Yeah, the nosebleeds at Bell are true nosebleeds. I guess it contributes to the ambiance as you're right on top of the game even high up.

Ambiance though is part design and part fan demographics.

The concourses at Bell are extremely cramped as others have said.

Though it's nice at Bell to not have to go a very long distance in order to exit onto the street.

ACC exterior is much nicer than Bell IMO.

SkahHigh · #**2309** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 2:45 PM**

^yeah the Bell Centre's exterior is quite a shame. Let's not even talk about the history behind the location

...

esquire · #**2310** Posted **Jul 22, 2015, 2:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

MTS is louder

#gojetsgo

MTS is like the mini-Bell... it's 15000 seats crammed into what should be a 12000 seat building. The actual seats are so cramped that they're a downgrade from the old Winnipeg Arena, and that's saying something. Concourses are tighter during intermissions too.

thurmas · #**2311** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 3:05 AM**

esquire you cannot make the claim that the seats at Winnipeg Arena were more comfortable than MTS Centre. I know we all have nostalgia but Winnipeg Arena seats were a hodge podge of wooden squeaky seats painted blue and red and 1970's fabric seats on the lower concourse. The aisles between the seats were extremely cramped and permanently sticky from spilt pop, beer and who knows what else and the steps to your seat were for people who had a size 3 shoe size. I miss the old Winnipeg Arena for its atmosphere but to claim it had any comfort is as Lindy Ruff would say" that is the definition of a joke"

esquire · #**2312** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 3:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by thurmas

esquire you cannot make the claim that the seats at Winnipeg Arena were more comfortable than MTS Centre. I know we all have nostalgia but Winnipeg Arena seats were a hodge podge of wooden squeaky seats painted blue and red and 1970's fabric seats on the lower concourse. The aisles between the seats were extremely cramped and permanently sticky from spilt pop, beer and who knows what else and the steps to your seat were for people who had a size 3 shoe size. I miss the old Winnipeg Arena for its atmosphere but to claim it had any comfort is as Lindy Ruff would say" that is the definition of a joke"

Sorry boss, I've sat in both rinks enough times to know. The old arena may not have been as pretty as the MTS Centre, but leg room wasn't much different and the seats at the MTS Centre are really no different when it comes to seat pitch and width.

The only place where you really notice a night and day difference is in the suites... the old arena really didn't have a true modern suite while the MTS Centre's are great.

It has a lot going for it in other ways, but in my experience the MTS Centre really has to rank among the worst major arenas (at least out of the couple dozen that I've been to) for seat comfort.

Oilkountry · #**2313** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 4:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

^yeah the Bell Centre's exterior is quite a shame. Let's not even talk about the history behind the location

...

It's boring and slightly underwhelming but not a "shame" theirs something almost charming about it IMO. Light years better than rogers arena. And aside from the new main atrium of the ACC (which will soon be matched by Bell centre) I really don't think it looks better in anyway. The growing trend seems to be to build these big glass atriums at the front of an older building to give the impression of a newer building.

apples and oranges

Oilkountry · #**2314** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 4:56 AM**

And the bell centre will still look relevant in 20-30 years. That's something ive always like about MTS as well, the mix of glass and brick look is ageless. unlike some other arenas that are barley into their second decade and look like they were built in the 60s.

osmo · #**2315** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 10:53 AM**

United Centre hurts from its mammoth size and context in a see of parking. Aside from that it is a very nice Art Deco inspired building. They did Art Deco better then how the ACC attempted it IMO (aside from the Bay St facade).

Acajack · #**2316** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 1:11 PM**

[QUOTE=osmo;7104697]United Centre hurts from its mammoth size and context in a see of parking.[QUOTE]

Hard to believe that's in the middle of inner city Chicago.

Acajack · #**2317** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 1:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

It's boring and slightly underwhelming but not a "shame" theirs something almost charming about it IMO. Light years better than rogers arena. And aside from the new main atrium of the ACC (which will soon be matched by Bell centre) I really don't think it looks better in anyway. The growing trend seems to be to build these big glass atriums at the front of an older building to give the impression of a newer building.

apples and oranges

In fairness the exterior aesthetics in Montreal are slowly being improved as well.

esquire · #**2318** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 1:40 PM**

^ Considering its era, Bell Centre is actually pretty good in terms of how it looks on the outside. The mid-90s were a somewhat bleak time when it came to new arena design... at least Bell Centre tries to fit into its surroundings somewhat instead of just going with the generic California shopping mall-wannabe aesthetic that was so common at the time.

Oilkountry · #**2319** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 2:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Considering its era, Bell Centre is actually pretty good in terms of how it looks on the outside. The mid-90s were a somewhat bleak time when it came to new arena design... at least Bell Centre tries to fit into its surroundings somewhat instead of just going with the generic California shopping mall-wannabe aesthetic that was so common at the time.

Berklon · #**2320** Posted **Jul 23, 2015, 3:20 PM**

I love American Airlines Center in Dallas. Has that classic old-school look/feel with all that brick and arches. Constructed in the late 90s, so they were ahead of the game in avoiding the modern ugly cliched buildings. Same kind of approach as the Arlington ballpark - classic design.