Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I wasn't clear, my mistake. I meant when was it supposed to open (how long is it delayed for?)

The fall of 2020. So about a 6 month delay.

The community rinks are on time.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Are you talking about a different BMO Field than the one in Toronto that has already been expanded by almost 50%?

No. The west stands were built flush with the road. There is ZERO space to another tier... let alone 2 new tiers. The south stands are built flush with the road as well. The north stands have a little bit of space to expand but not much. It's really only the east stands that can expand in a significant way. They added a tier there but it was really the only option available. When BMO Field first went up I was flabbergasted that they could be so stupid.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by isaidso

No. The west stands were built flush with the road. There is ZERO space to another tier... let alone 2 new tiers. The south stands are built flush with the road as well. The north stands have a little bit of space to expand but not much. It's really only the east stands that can expand in a significant way. They added a tier there but it was really the only option available. When BMO Field first went up I was flabbergasted that they could be so stupid.

You were using BMO as an example of a stadium built without thought of future expansion, but it was expanded several years after it was built. The only roads it was built beside were internal CNE grounds roads, and they were actually re-arranged for the stadium. The road at the south end of the stadium now didn't exist before because the old stadium was right there. If there was any need to make the stadium any bigger than it is now, they can just add to it, especially on the north or south sides and move the roads. But I don't think there is anyone that really thinks the stadium needs to be any bigger, other than for the one off events like the ones they put the temporary seating up for previously. The Argos don't even offer one of the upper tiers for sale for their games (I think the east side upper deck).

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by thurmas

https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/ml...y-shareholder/

Bronfman group close to buying a piece of the Rays. This could mean momentum gets started to build the new downtown Expos stadium and will be interesting if they and the new Alouettes owners discuss a possible stadium design that includes the Alouettes?

If we've learned anything in the past quarter century it's that multi-purpose stadiums utilizing baseball don't work all that well.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by JHikka

If we've learned anything in the past quarter century it's that multi-purpose stadiums utilizing baseball don't work all that well.

Well, in the sense of MLB and NFL, they don't work that well. When one team needs 60k seats, and other needs 35k. MLB, MLS and CFL are closer in seating needs, it's just a matter of how you lay it out to convert from diamond to gridiron. I think it's much easier to do when you are looking at those seating numbers. Tampa plans to use their stadium for MLS as well. Yankee Stadium gets used for MLS as well as college football.

[Berklon]

It doesn't matter if it's a smaller venue, using a baseball stadium for soccer or football lessens the experience for everyone.

If Montreal were to get a MLB team again and were building a new ballpark for it, I would think they'd want to ensure it was set up optimally for baseball without the need to sacrifice anything for another sport - especially after all those years in Olympic stadium. They're not going to get a 3rd chance at a MLB team - so the last thing they need is to give fans a reason to stay away from games.

[esquire]

From my perspective as a fan, I had no problem with the old school multipurpose stadiums. I thought they were fine. I mean, I get why team owners didn't like them but the reduced profitability is not really my concern.

But for better or for worse, fan expectations are such that a multipurpose stadium for football/baseball and possibly soccer would be doomed. It would end up with baseball fans being upset over having a baseball field in a big concrete donut football stadium (a la Riverfront Stadium, Three Rivers Stadium, etc.), or you'd have the football field jammed into a baseball stadium as we've often seen in San Francisco, New York, etc. Somebody would be unhappy with the arrangement.

[MalcolmTucker]

I know some don't mind the multi-use stadiums (and SkyDome was better than most with the moving bleachers) but the jewel box parks, where every seat faces the pitchers mound instead of looking out to perpendicular of the base lines, are brilliant to watch games at.

[Wpg_Guy]

BellMTS Place basement level renovation

More than $9 million of venue improvements have been planned for the summer of 2020, highlighted by the addition of on-ice projection, and continuing concourse enhancements started in recent years, including an extensive renovation in the area that is currently The Exchange Restaurant.

https://www.tnse.com/our-company/community-message/

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

From my perspective as a fan, I had no problem with the old school multipurpose stadiums. I thought they were fine. I mean, I get why team owners didn't like them but the reduced profitability is not really my concern.

But for better or for worse, fan expectations are such that a multipurpose stadium for football/baseball and possibly soccer would be doomed. It would end up with baseball fans being upset over having a baseball field in a big concrete donut football stadium (a la Riverfront Stadium, Three Rivers Stadium, etc.), or you'd have the football field jammed into a baseball stadium as we've often seen in San Francisco, New York, etc. Somebody would be unhappy with the arrangement.

I've seen lots of baseball, soccer and Canadian/American football games at Olympic Stadium.

I never hated the stadium provided there was a decent crowd in it.

When I first started following the Expos around 1980 in the Gary Carter/Andre Dawson years, no one was complaining about the stadium. The Big O was even seen by many as a bit of a wonder. It wasn't always full (especially on weeknights) but the crowds were still decent.

For any sport really, I'd estimate you'd need about 25-30,000 people in there to have at least some atmosphere. Anything below 20,000 it felt cavernous and dead.

[esquire]

^ I guess that was at least part of the issue that some people had with multipurpose parks... the fact that you had MLB teams drawing, say, 25,000 fans a game playing in NFL sized stadiums with at least twice that many seats.

But that said, no one seemed to mind that arrangement until the 90s when suddenly the sportswriters and broadcasters began maligning them and repeatedly pointing out their shortcomings. I'm sure the fact that a pile of rich and influential team owners in the US ended up with heavily subsidized new venues they had a monopoly over was just a happy coincidence.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ I guess that was at least part of the issue that some people had with multipurpose parks... the fact that you had MLB teams drawing, say, 25,000 fans a game playing in NFL sized stadiums with at least twice that many seats.

But that said, no one seemed to mind that arrangement until the 90s when suddenly the sportswriters and broadcasters began maligning them and repeatedly pointing out their shortcomings. I'm sure the fact that a pile of rich and influential team owners in the US ended up with heavily subsidized new venues they had a monopoly over was just a happy coincidence.

I am sure that less than 10,000 people in a 40,000 seat baseball specific stadium in Miami or Baltimore or Pittsburgh, even if they're "cuter", will not provide a super-friggin-awesome atmosphere either.

[Berklon]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ I guess that was at least part of the issue that some people had with multipurpose parks... the fact that you had MLB teams drawing, say, 25,000 fans a game playing in NFL sized stadiums with at least twice that many seats.

But that said, no one seemed to mind that arrangement until the 90s when suddenly the sportswriters and broadcasters began maligning them and repeatedly pointing out their shortcomings. I'm sure the fact that a pile of rich and influential team owners in the US ended up with heavily subsidized new venues they had a monopoly over was just a happy coincidence.

In the 70s and 80s the public was in awe of huge stadiums in the same way they are still amazed by any other large structure. It was almost like a competition of who can make the biggest skyscraper - so when someone built a huge multi-purpose stadium, it was a big accomplishment... "Look how massive it is! And it can host a baseball AND a football team!".
But it's like the Jurassic Park line: "... were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

The novelty wore off and people were stuck with horrible sight-lines and terrible cavernous atmosphere. A full stadium only helped the atmosphere to a degree.

Camden Yards basically changed attitudes when it opened in '92. People understood how much better it was to watch a game in a more intimate and traditional stadium that was designed for a specific sport. Everyone started using Camden Yards as a model, and it spilled over to other sports leagues where atmosphere was a huge priority. Even a large stadium today can feel more intimate due to it being designed with only that one sport in mind.

If Montreal were to get a new baseball stadium, it would be insanely stupid to accommodate football or soccer.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Berklon

In the 70s and 80s the public was in awe of huge stadiums in the same way they are still amazed by any other large structure. It was almost like a competition of who can make the biggest skyscraper - so when someone built a huge multi-purpose stadium, it was a big accomplishment... "Look how massive it is! And it can host a baseball AND a football team!".
But it's like the Jurassic Park line: "... were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

The novelty wore off and people were stuck with horrible sight-lines and terrible cavernous atmosphere. A full stadium only helped the atmosphere to a degree.

Camden Yards basically changed attitudes when it opened in '92. People understood how much better it was to watch a game in a more intimate and traditional stadium that was designed for a specific sport. Everyone started using Camden Yards as a model, and it spilled over to other sports leagues where atmosphere was a huge priority. Even a large stadium today can feel more intimate due to it being designed with only that one sport in mind.

If Montreal were to get a new baseball stadium, it would be insanely stupid to accommodate football or soccer.

I don't disagree with anything you are saying. But the fact is, if Montreal is limiting itself to being a half-season baseball town (which I personally think is a mistake), they still need to make the economics work for a stadium. They aren't going to have the luxury of building a Camden Yards, which by the way, only hosts the Orioles and no other events. When we took the tour there, they told us under no circumstances were we to touch the grass field when we walked down the warning track from right field to the dugout. That they didn't do any other events there at the risk of damaging the field.

Montreal isn't going to fund a stadium to use for 41 home games and at best, alternate years of playoffs. They will need other events in there. I think they will have to find a way to include other sports. I don't know whether you would get the other teams in there though. The Impact's stadium is owned by the team owner so it's doubtful they would leave it. I'm sure the Als would love to move into a new stadium with, you know, seats and stuff, but whether a baseball stadium suits that, who knows.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by JHikka

If we've learned anything in the past quarter century it's that multi-purpose stadiums utilizing baseball don't work all that well.

Never a truer word has been spoken (or written in this case) All the sliding rails in the world can't fix a bad idea from the start.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Yankee Stadium gets used for MLS as well as college football.

I'll post the photo again (Yankee Stadium), bad idea

[Franco401]

It's generally acknowledged that the split season is a temporary measure designed to fail so the Rays don't have to get bankrupted with fines for leaving their lease at the Trop. As soon as that awful agreement is up in 2027, the Rays are out of St Pete's, for Montreal or otherwise.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Berklon

Camden Yards basically changed attitudes when it opened in '92. People understood how much better it was to watch a game in a more intimate and traditional stadium that was designed for a specific sport. Everyone started using Camden Yards as a model, and it spilled over to other sports leagues where atmosphere was a huge priority. Even a large stadium today can feel more intimate due to it being designed with only that one sport in mind.

Camden Yards = Cookie cutter killer. Remember Skydome was the eighth wonder of the world (or whatever the hell some called it) and Camden Yards rendered it almost instantly obsolete.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Franco401

It's generally acknowledged that the split season is a temporary measure designed to fail so the Rays don't have to get bankrupted with fines for leaving their lease at the Trop. As soon as that awful agreement is up in 2027, the Rays are out of St Pete's, for Montreal or otherwise.

The split season with Montreal allegedly won't happen until that lease expires in 2027 anyway.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by elly63

I'll post the photo again (Yankee Stadium), bad idea

The owners of the Als and Impact would be racing each other to be the first to sign on to that arrangement if they could get crowds like that to watch their sport in a baseball stadium.