Montreal Impact planning an SSS

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Maybe the Impact are thinking about what their next step should be if the likes of Toronto, Rochester and Seattle move to MLS given that there are only 12 teams left in the A League?

http://www.rds.ca/impact/chroniques/175828.html

[Vascao]

If Toronto does in fact get a franchise in 07, i´d love to see the Impact make the MLS leap soon after, but Saputo didn´t mention MLS and really has never demonstrated any interest in the league. Granted if Seattle, Toronto and Vancouver move up and are succesful, THEN the Saputo´s might consider bidding on an expansion entry, but that´ll take a good decade, or two...

[DoyleG]

If Toronto does in fact get a franchise in 07, i´d love to see the Impact make the MLS leap soon after, but Saputo didn´t mention MLS and really has never demonstrated any interest in the league. Granted if Seattle, Toronto and Vancouver move up and are succesful, THEN the Saputo´s might consider bidding on an expansion entry, but that´ll take a good decade, or two...

Mentions have been made that the Montreal Stadium wouldn't be big enough for MLS.

[Calexico77]

Mentions have been made that the Montreal Stadium wouldn't be big enough for MLS.


Again, I'm fine with this. Nothing would make me happier - and the MLS stronger - than a stable, even successful USL Div-1 A League, or whatever it's called.

I'd be happy as a little girl with Charleston, Rochester, Montreal, Vancouver, and Atlanta anchoring the old A-league. Solid 9-11K averages, good fans, solid developmental processes, it would be wonderful.

And it would stabilize the living hell out of Pro Soccer in this country. MLS can just add every A-league team with a stadium. It would be bad for MLS, and bad for the A-league. Neither league can exist for much longer playing whack-a-mole with their owners - "Oh, let's let these two fold, and then add these two over here!"

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Mentions have been made that the Montreal Stadium wouldn't be big enough for MLS.

Mentions by whom, Doyle? Claude Robilliard can hold about 9,000 so obviously a new stadium would be substantially bigger than the existing one or why build it? The number I've seen floating around is 18,000 which suggests a stadium that could easily be expandable to MLS SSS proportions if an MLS franchise were obtained in much the same way as the new Paetec Park is in Rochester.

Joey Saputo despite being offered the chance to be part of MLS by Alan Rothenburg back in the early to mid 90s was strongly opposed to the orginal single entity setup with NFL huge stadia approach of MLS because he saw it correctly as a recipe for losing lots of money. At the same time he has always supported an A League based on strong big market teams and once moved the Impact indoors to the NPSL when he was unhappy with the direction it was headed in terms of too many franchises in small markets.

If MLS gets the Metrostars stadium sorted out and franchises start having a shot at being profitable since the payments to cover league losses in places like NY/NJ have been greatly reduced, the Saputos have the financial wherewithall to make MLS happen in Montreal. They have assets into the billions based on a successful dairy business.

[Mattbro]

I'm all in favor of Montreal in MLS, but not with that horrible gimmicky name. Call 'em the Voyageurs or something.

[adega1980]

if olympic stadium kept the roof open and sod was layed,a lower bowl configuration would have a capacity of 22.000 seats.

[canadiansoccerrules redded]

I'm all in favor of Montreal in MLS, but not with that horrible gimmicky name. Call 'em the Voyageurs or something.

Keep the Imapct name, or bring back the Manic name.

[Stan Collins]

Mentions by whom, Doyle? Claude Robilliard can hold about 9,000 so obviously a new stadium would be substantially bigger than the existing one or why build it?

Robillard, having added 1,000 bleacher seats for this season, will seat 9,500. And yes, I would find it hard to believe the new stadium wouldn't be at least 2,000 or so bigger than that (the team averaged 9,200 this season, so 9,500 doesn't seem to be big enough).

Of course, there's a significant difference between a stadium that seats ~12-13k and one that seats ~20k (just ask the Rochester Rhinos).

But you are right about the declining league losses, and finally getting out of that Giants Stadium lease would be the final piece of the puzzle. After that, the 1/14th share (or 1/16th, by the time Montreal would think about joining) of league losses a new owner would have to subsidize would be a trivial concern.

However, playing in your own stadium and drawing >10k in the A-League/DivI is probably something of a licence to print money, if only in $1 bills at a time ($1 to Paul Schmidt). So there might be something of an incentive not to 'aspire to anything higher' at least intially, especially when if it would come (and it probably would) at the additional infrastructure cost of expanding the stadium you just built.

[Vascao]

How about Molson stadium? I think it ranges between 25k and 28k. Do the Alouettes still play there?
The Impact drew over 12k for the A-League final, and still had to turn people away at the gate - don;t think there are other A_League teams that can make that claim. Well, maybe Rochester

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

How about Molson stadium? I think it ranges between 25k and 28k. Do the Alouettes still play there?
The Impact drew over 12k for the A-League final, and still had to turn people away at the gate - don;t think there are other A_League teams that can make that claim. Well, maybe Rochester

Think the problem with Molson Stadium is that the Alouettes of the CFL, who were never keen on having unpainted fieldturf in the first place to accomodate soccer, now have a lock on the place.

The "Big Owe" is still used a lot for trade shows etc so I don't think a redesign for soccer is on the cards.

[ToMhIlL]

How about rebuilding/expanding Stade Claude Robillard? There's one big stand on one sideline, and if you built a similar sized (or even slightly larger) stand ont he opposite side and used transportable bleachers across the end zone, it could get up to close to 20,000 fairly easily. They still use the place for track meets, so the end-zone stands would have to be removable, but it could be done.

Tom

[Mattbro]

Oh man, Manic is an even stupider name than Impact. Who comes up with these names anyway?

[DoyleG]

How about rebuilding/expanding Stade Claude Robillard? There's one big stand on one sideline, and if you built a similar sized (or even slightly larger) stand ont he opposite side and used transportable bleachers across the end zone, it could get up to close to 20,000 fairly easily. They still use the place for track meets, so the end-zone stands would have to be removable, but it could be done.

Tom

Stadium would still be under city control.

[nyrmetros]

Any word on the Montreal Ultras ?

[Vascao]

Any word on the Montreal Ultras ?


Here's there website:

http://www.ultrasmontreal.com/

[Stan Collins]

Robillard, having added 1,000 bleacher seats for this season, will seat 9,500. And yes, I would find it hard to believe the new stadium wouldn't be at least 2,000 or so bigger than that (the team averaged 9,200 this season, so 9,500 doesn't seem to be big enough).

Of course, there's a significant difference between a stadium that seats ~12-13k and one that seats ~20k (just ask the Rochester Rhinos).

But you are right about the declining league losses, and finally getting out of that Giants Stadium lease would be the final piece of the puzzle. After that, the 1/14th share (or 1/16th, by the time Montreal would think about joining) of league losses a new owner would have to subsidize would be a trivial concern.

However, playing in your own stadium and drawing >10k in the A-League/DivI is probably something of a licence to print money, if only in $1 bills at a time ($1 to Paul Schmidt). So there might be something of an incentive not to 'aspire to anything higher' at least intially, especially when if it would come (and it probably would) at the additional infrastructure cost of expanding the stadium you just built. I just noticed how many "however" or "on the other hand"-type comments I made in this post. I guess disagreeing with yourself four times is one definition of a balanced post. ;)

[PJohnson]

[QUOTE]Claude Robilliard can hold about 9,000 so obviously a new stadium would be substantially bigger than the existing one or why build it?

It's all about increasing stadium revenue. And to do that you must create a professional venue that is controlled by the team. A professional venue should have the following attributes. Theater type seating, good restroom facilities, quality concessions with good food and adult beverages. And it must have a regulation pitch with good sight lines. (no track)

I've only seen Claude Robilliard on TV, but It does not look like a pro venue to me. Blackbaud Stadium in Charleston has all of the things that I described above in a 5,000 seat stadium. And it is a great place to watch a match. A truly professional atmosphere and a quality experience for the fans.

[Stan Collins]

Agreed, but once they do so, they have every reason to build it to handle a larger audience than the 9,200 they averaged last season. I'd be shocked if it didn't seat at least 10.5k and pretty surprised if it didn't seat at least 12k.

[nyrmetros]

Here's there website:

http://www.ultrasmontreal.com/

thanx mate!