Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Acajack

CF Montréal/Impact fans don't hate the Alouettes and the CFL like TFC fans hate the Argos and the CFL. (TFC and Raptors fans can also hate on the Leafs.)

Animus between fans of different sports (and their teams) in the same city seems more acute in Toronto than in other cities.

At worst people in other cities are simply indifferent or passive about the other teams. Not openly hostile.

Yup, only TFC, have never had a problem with Caps or CFM.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

There has been talk here regarding Saputo stadium not having the luxury boxes that other teams have, but when I was watching the whitecaps vs LAFC game yesterday it seemed like not all the luxury boxes were being used, from the brief camera shots of the fans. My eyes definitely could have been playing tricks on me… Are all the boxes spoken for in Vancouver?

it has boxes but not enough only 6% of the stadium is premium seating they need it to be at 12% that is why they are floating the idea of tearing down the north grandstand and building a larger and taller one with more premium seating to get those all important corporate dollars

[elly63]

To the Montrealers, how big of an issue is it having CFM at Olympic Park. Aside from the cramped quarters isn't the Als location ideal?

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by thurmas

it has boxes but not enough only 6% of the stadium is premium seating they need it to be at 12% that is why they are floating the idea of tearing down the north grandstand and building a larger and taller one with more premium seating to get those all important corporate dollars

hackslack was talking about boxes not being filled in BC Place.

Not all the boxes at BC Place have been sold for Whitecaps or Lions games. In fact, quite a few are likely only rented out on a per game basis as they are not able to get companies to agree to multi-year leases. This is one of the many reasons the Whitecaps are at the bottom of MLS in terms of revenues and losing several million per year despite a payroll that is not that big.

[thurmas]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

hackslack was talking about boxes not being filled in BC Place.

Not all the boxes at BC Place have been sold for Whitecaps or Lions games. In fact, quite a few are likely only rented out on a per game basis as they are not able to get companies to agree to multi-year leases. This is one of the many reasons the Whitecaps are at the bottom of MLS in terms of revenues and losing several million per year despite a payroll that is not that big.

oh my bad, yeah whitecaps are struggling to draw I heard the usually lose 10 million a year and were losing 30 million a year during the covid bubble. their owner seems fine with the loses I am not sure at what point does he throw in the towel and sell though.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by elly63

To the Montrealers, how big of an issue is it having CFM at Olympic Park. Aside from the cramped quarters isn't the Als location ideal?

I am not from Montreal but that city's MLS club is somewhat popular here in Gatineau. Akin to people in Ottawa going to Toronto for a Jays game.

Never heard any complaints about the location of Saputo. Even though Molson is probably better it is true. But not as transit (métro) accessible as Saputo, ironically.

Francophones never really complained about the location of the stadium for Expos games, BTW. Take that for what it's worth.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by JHikka

There's a lot of culture in soccer surrounding quality of playing surface, more so than in a lot of other sports. I think hockey fans should understand this concern to some degree.

The grass at BMO doesn't look damaged from Argos games because the grounds crew at BMO are one of the best in North America and work tirelessly to ensure that the pitch is of high enough quality every week. There are good examples in the UK of what can happen when rugby and soccer teams share stadiums, especially during the winter. I think Wigan(?) played at a shared rugby stadium and their pitch was always dreadful - it's more common in Northern England to see these sorts of stadium shares having an effect on the pitch quality.

Since it's currently ongoing, think of it like how the courts at Wimbledon fade from grass to dirt after being used every day. Same idea.

But it's been what, 6 years and by your own account the quality of the field is fine... so what are people still going on about? I mean, I could understand if the turf was constantly torn up and muddy or whatever but if that isn't the case, then what is the issue?

Originally Posted by Acajack

CF Montréal/Impact fans don't hate the Alouettes and the CFL like TFC fans hate the Argos and the CFL. (TFC and Raptors fans can also hate on the Leafs.)

Animus between fans of different sports (and their teams) in the same city seems more acute in Toronto than in other cities.

At worst people in other cities are simply indifferent or passive about the other teams. Not openly hostile.

It is very hard to understand that sentiment. I'm not saying there isn't the odd crank locally here in Winnipeg who hates one of the home teams for one reason or another, but there is nothing like that Toronto factionalism. The vast majority of people here will at least nominally support all the home teams even if they only pay attention to a couple of them.

I can't think of another city in North America that has that dynamic except for the obvious intercity rivalries like Cubs vs. White Sox, Yankees vs. Mets, etc.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

T



It is very hard to understand that sentiment. I'm not saying there isn't the odd crank locally here in Winnipeg who hates one of the home teams for one reason or another, but there is nothing like that Toronto factionalism. The vast people here will at least nominally support all the home teams even if they only pay attention to a couple of them.

I can't think of another city in North America that has that dynamic except for the obvious intercity rivalries like Cubs vs. White Sox, Yankees vs. Mets, etc.

It's worth noting that the fans in Toronto who tend to most hate on others are those who are into the two most fashionable, globally ascendant sports: soccer and basketball.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

But it's been what, 6 years and by your own account the quality of the field is fine... so what are people still going on about? I mean, I could understand if the turf was constantly torn up and muddy or whatever but if that isn't the case, then what is the issue?

.

One thing that is really hard on grass sports fields is using them in late fall and early winter, and also early spring. On this front, TFC is out there a lot more during those potentially damaging times of the year than the Argos are.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by esquire

But it's been what, 6 years and by your own account the quality of the field is fine... so what are people still going on about? I mean, I could understand if the turf was constantly torn up and muddy or whatever but if that isn't the case, then what is the issue?

In 2019 they replaced the Kentucky Bluegrass with perennial ryegrass mixture and brought in a hybrid grass system to deal with the weather in the spring and the multiple tenants throughout the year. The combination of both made for a bumpy pitch at times, and the hybrid field plays more naturally for soccer. Generally, anyway.

The pitch is fine by my account because they have such an experienced and devoted team working on it at all times, repairing it between matches to ensure it's up to snuff. Once you starting getting in a specific quality of player they expect even and consistent surfaces.

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's worth noting that the fans in Toronto who tend to most hate on others are those who are into the two most fashionable, globally ascendant sports: soccer and basketball.

This is simply anecdotal. For every one of these fans there's an equal amount, if not more, hockey fans who dismiss other sports for a variety of reasons (soccer is soft, baseball is boring, etc.).

Originally Posted by esquire

It is very hard to understand that sentiment.

It's more indifference than hate.

[elly63]

Time to clear up the myths

Tony Stones, Head Groundsman, Wembley Stadium (start at 53 sec on video)

"We find most damage is caused by football (soccer) players digging in, turning quick, whereas an NFL game it's all solid, it's crunching together, Desso likes that, holds together well, it's when they're doing quick turns, your Rugby Union you get a bit of quick turning in that as well and a bit of scrummaging so you get a bit of mess from that but I'd say most damage comes from football (soccer)

It's warmups, football (soccer) warmups that are the worst thing, that's where we get the most damage from, especially the goalkeepers that will not use his portable goal, they insist on using his main goal that creates us some serious trouble"

So if I interpret this correctly, the order of most to least damaging sport to a reinforced turf is:

1 Soccer
2 Rugby
3 Football

• Video Link

[elly63]

At the 2015 MLS draft (held as a part of the American National Soccer Coaches Association Conference)
January 17 from TweetDeck

John Torres, the head groundskeeper at Phillidelphia's PPL park hosted a seminar called "Playing Surface Management" This was by an expert talking to other experts in the field with no discernible financial stake.

PPL Park is also interesting in that it hosts Football, Lacrosse, Rugby and other random events.

John Torres, PPL Park's head groundskeeper, went to Ohio State then worked for the Crew - whose field quality has long been highly-regarded. Torres has been part of the groundskeeping crews for the last three U.S.-Mexico games in Columbus.

Torres says that, though it surprises some people, soccer does the most damage to a playing field of the sports he's worked with.

Torres says they are going to try to have bluegrass, renowned for its high quality, in PPL Park, but weather is a challenge.

A question about the benefits of grass over artificial turf: Torres, with a wry smile: "It's a very controversial topic."

Nobody wants to play on synthetic turf, but there's a certain need for it at a certain time," Torres says.

Torres says he's tried to use washable paint for football, rugby, etc. "I've probably tried two or three different ones and they don't work"

"These paint companies need to step it up,"Torres says. He knows those residual leftovers look bad.

Let the narrative spinning and revisionism begin.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Acajack

One thing that is really hard on grass sports fields is using them in late fall and early winter, and also early spring. On this front, TFC is out there a lot more during those potentially damaging times of the year than the Argos are.

The most important thing is to allow a freshly laid surface the time to "bed-in". If that isn't allowed to happen for sufficient time, trouble begins. The issues around usage are far more critical than the particular sport itself when it comes to permanent damage. Events have to be spaced out to allow the turf to repair itself (which seems obvious) I believe you can have grass growing in three days, so if you have at least a week between events that is sufficient, obviously the longer the better.

[Acajack]

I've been following sports in North America and around the world for a long time, and of course many stadiums have fields used by multiple sports.

95% of the drama over the condition and use of a field I've heard in my life concerns BMO Field in Toronto.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Acajack

95% of the drama over the condition and use of a field I've heard in my life concerns BMO Field in Toronto.

And by only one team's "fans" who seem to think TFC owns the stadium and not the city. The same stadium that was meant to be multipurpose in it's original guise and written in the city council's minutes as such.

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by thurmas

oh my bad, yeah whitecaps are struggling to draw I heard the usually lose 10 million a year and were losing 30 million a year during the covid bubble. their owner seems fine with the loses I am not sure at what point does he throw in the towel and sell though.

They likely need their own facility where they have full control of all the revenues. The problem is land is a fortune in Vancouver and a stadium would cost at least $200 million.

[JHikka]

If the rumours are to be believed then the Whitecaps are currently on year 13 of a ~15-20 year lease agreement with BC Place. There's been rumours of a Whitecaps stadium for forever, but Hastings Racecourse is the most recent location that has any sort of legs AFAIK. The CPL effort in the area will be located in Langley, and Whitecaps' L1BC team plays out of UBC.

Given the slew of recent stadium builds across MLS it seems reasonable to expect any sort of Whitecaps stadium to come in at around $250-400M. 20-25K.

[esquire]

Why wouldn't the Whitecaps just stay at BC Place? They can save themselves the 9-figure pricetag and have a better location and probably better amenities while they're at it. It's hard to believe that the PNE site would be a better draw than the very central BC Place.

A new Whitecaps stadium makes sense only if someone else is footing the bill, and you have to wonder what the chances are of that happening.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by esquire

Why wouldn't the Whitecaps just stay at BC Place? They can save themselves the 9-figure pricetag and have a better location and probably better amenities while they're at it. It's hard to believe that the PNE site would be a better draw than the very central BC Place.

The lease agreements with BC Place involve ticket surchages for the Lions and Whitecaps. It's a certain % above a certain amount on ticket revenue (ie if the Whitecaps hit $XM in yearly ticket sales BC Place gets a cut, IIRC). It's cheap on rent but chews into other revenue channels for the teams. IIRC BC Place also takes in all revenues from food and beverage.

A lot of it would come down to having control over the venue. For the Whitecaps it would mean being in a right-sized facility, able to dictate ticket revenues and controlling supply/demand, without having to jump hurdles on ticket surcharges. It would also provide more flexibility on scheduling, and the potential for better admin and training setup at a new venue.

Originally Posted by esquire

A new Whitecaps stadium makes sense only if someone else is footing the bill, and you have to wonder what the chances are of that happening.

There's money to be found either through medium-to-long term loan agreements, aside from the fact that the combined networth of the owners is north of $2B. It would be a tough sell to convince public money to be involved given that they're leaving a fine enough venue, so a lot of it will likely be coming from either the Whitecaps themselves or through loan arrangements with MLS.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by JHikka

It's cheap on rent but chews into other revenue channels for the teams. IIRC BC Place also takes in all revenues from food and beverage.

The same thing goes for the Lions and I assume that includes whatever parking there is.

Amar Doman was talking about that recently when Pavco was unable to accommodate the demand for extra tickets at the Lions opener (on three days notice). Doman is saying he wants to negotiate a change to that agreement (getting the Lions a cut) but he also understands the province has to get some money back from the stadium as well. They did build, own and maintain it.