Stadiums and Arenas of Canada part 2 - Page 330

bkd · #**6581** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 6:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

The designers of Commonwealth Stadium and the new Edmonton arena could sure learn a thing or two from the architects of the Toronto sporting venues.

Did Edmonton kill your dog or something?

Your massive inferiority complex is entertaining, if nothing else.

bkd · #**6582** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 6:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

You can see the perforated metal cladding in the SE corner in this pic I took yesterday.

June 13, 2016

I like the look of that perforated cladding a lot better than the solid cladding.

It's a great looking stadium, regardless. Especially from that view. Can't wait to take in a game there.

Jets4Life · #**6583** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 9:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkd

Did Edmonton kill your dog or something?

Your massive inferiority complex is entertaining, if nothing else.

Actually, I live in Calgary. So no inferiority complex.

Why can you people not accept that some of us consider the new Rogers Arena dreadfully ugly?

FrankieFlowerpot · #**6584** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 10:25 AM**

Because it isn't

king10 · #**6585** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 11:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaskScraper

^^Mistercorporate is paranoid about Prairie CFL fans actually caring about Toronto soccer by thinking they are posting on soccer forums of all things

..& I'm just assuming jets4life is trolling.

Rogers Place I'm Edmonton looks sleek and modern and Commonwealth Stadium has stood the test of time better than any stadium in Canada and it would likely host a Final for World Cup if Canada were chosen to host. I doubt Canada would host the Final in a temp stadium in either Toronto or Montreal and I'm not sure BC Place is quite large enough.

Who said anything about a temp stadium in mtl or toronto for the final? It would be permanent and a new build or extensive reno.

The final would be held in mtl or toronto. The mens final has always been held in the capital or most prominent city. I cannot see the CSA submitting a bid without mtl or toronto hosting the final.

Coldrsx · #**6586** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 1:56 PM**

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x164/coldrsx/coldrsx108/DSC00011_zpsdgtzyq9m.jpg

WhipperSnapper · #**6587** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot

Because it isn't

It's not attractive either.

Both Rogers and MTS are trendy corporate designs. It's hard to gauge which is better. What I would say is MTS probably has more staying power. It blends in better with its environment with decent urban form while Rogers is the primadonna . It's a star without the star architecture but, has the usual poor urban form and integration. (the super wide pedway being the biggest culprit.)

Cyro · #**6588** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:12 PM**

Nice to get a little love for our humble little barn...(exterior wise)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTS_Centre

esquire · #**6589** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

It's not attractive either.

Both Rogers and MTS are trendy corporate designs. It's hard to gauge which is better. What I would say is MTS probably has more staying power. It blends in better with its environment with decent urban form while Rogers is the primadonna . It's a star without the star architecture but, has the usual poor urban form and integration. (the super wide pedway being the biggest culprit.)

Good point, Rogers Place really went all in on the wannabe-starchitect building-as-sculptural-piece design. In my view it looks good now and it's great that it uses a very distinctive design that sets it apart from its more mundane contemporaries, but how will it look 20 years from now?

On a related note, I wish that there was more of an effort made in integrating arenas with the urban fabric. MTS Centre is a fairly modest building as far as NHL arenas go, but its crowning triumph is how well it meshes with its surroundings.

HomerSPC · #**6590** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by king10

Who said anything about a temp stadium in mtl or toronto for the final? It would be permanent and a new build or extensive reno.

The final would be held in mtl or toronto. The mens final has always been held in the capital or most prominent city. I cannot see the CSA submitting a bid without mtl or toronto hosting the final.

To be fair, that's because in most cities around the world the capital has the largest stadium. In Canada, that's not quite the case.

Oilkountry · #**6591** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

It's not attractive either.

Both Rogers and MTS are trendy corporate designs. It's hard to gauge which is better. What I would say is MTS probably has more staying power. It blends in better with its environment with decent urban form while Rogers is the primadonna . It's a star without the star architecture but, has the usual poor urban form and integration. (the super wide pedway being the biggest culprit.)

I have to disagree with one thing you're saying. Rogers place's will bend in almost flawlessly considering it's surroundings is literally being built around it. Shiny glass buildings will surround it in every direction either than a 100 year old few brick buildings (and the apartment beside it) just 2 or 3 days ago another building announced than you have all of phase 2 behind it. I wouldn't say it's out of place or won't age gracefully at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyro

Nice to get a little love for our humble little barn...(exterior wise)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTS_Centre

As it should. In a country rich of underwhelming (or sometimes ugly) sports stadiums and arena's, MTS centre has a look that should be thought after. Almost perfect balance of brick and glass. By far the best looking arena in Canada pre and post rogers place IMO. But to call rogers place ugly ?!??!?!

speedog · #**6592** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomerSPC

To be fair, that's because in most cities around the world the capital has the largest stadium. In Canada, that's not quite the case.

Start a movement to get Toronto named as Canada's capital?

Coldrsx · #**6593** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:44 PM**

I like both for very different reasons... MTS to me is a mini-me of Nationwide.

https://www.delawarenorth.com/~/media/de...ationwide-arena_t1.jpg?h=350&la=en&w=804

Rogers is KC and QC's offspring.

http://www.mortenson.com/~/media/images/...-downtown-arena-1.ashx?h=451&la=en&w=680

http://assets1.sportsnet.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/quebec_arena-1040x572.jpg

Acajack · #**6594** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:50 PM**

I like MTS and Nationwide the best out of the lot.

JHikka · #**6595** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomerSPC

To be fair, that's because in most cities around the world the capital has the largest stadium. In Canada, that's not quite the case.

2014 World Cup Final - Rio - Not Capital - Not Largest City - Largest Stadium
2010 World Cup Final - Johannesburg - Not Capital - Largest City - Largest Stadium
2002 World Cup Final - Yokohama - Not Capital - Largest City (Not Metro) - Largest Stadium
1994 World Cup Final - Pasadena/LA - Not Capital - Not Largest City - Largest Stadium

For this exercise Largest Stadium is stadiums used in tournament.

esquire · #**6596** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:52 PM**

^ Sprint Center is another one that is meant to stand alone as opposed to being well integrated with its surroundings, but I'd let it off the hook since it looks so good. Really original arena design (so far as I'm aware, unless it's modelled on something abroad?) and attractive lines all around.

While we're on the subject of nice-looking arenas without major league teams, here's Tulsa's 19,199 seat BOK Center. Home of the minor league affiliate to Winnipeg's minor league affiliate. Possibly the only case where the ECHL team has a more impressive rink than the NHL and AHL clubs. A gorgeous building in spite of the fact that it really cuts itself off from its surrounding area... although its spiritual descendant Rogers Place is not quite as nice as this joint on the outside, I'd say Rogers certainly beats it when it comes to integration with the urban environment.

source:thelostogle.com

Acajack · #**6597** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 3:02 PM**

I guess I do like arenas that look like just another building on the city street that they are on - albeit a massive one.

bkd · #**6598** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 3:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

Actually, I live in Calgary. So no inferiority complex.

Why can you people not accept that some of us consider the new Rogers Arena dreadfully ugly?

I really couldn't care less about your opinion of Rogers Place. I think it's an incredible looking arena and so do plenty of other people, I'll take its exterior over any other arena on the continent. Some people don't like it, and although you seem to be part of a very small minority, you're entitled to your opinion as well.

You lost all credibility when you declared that Commonwealth stadium was ugly and could learn something from Toronto's (lol) sporting venues, however. Maybe the first time I've ever heard those words uttered.

Migs · #**6599** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 3:30 PM**

New Mosaic Stadium to deliver a more connected experience.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/saskatoon/new-mosaic-stadium-technology-1.3642212

eemy · #**6600** Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 4:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHikka

1994 World Cup Final - Pasadena/LA - Not Capital - Not Largest City - Largest Stadium

The Rose Bowl isn't the largest stadium in the US, or even the largest stadium in LA. Presumably, though, FIFA wouldn't be thrilled by the prospect of hosting the World Cup final in Ann Arbor or Tuscaloosa despite their stadiums being significantly larger.