Montreal 2012 Stadium Situation

Discussion in 'Montreal Impact' started by Chef Medeski, May 11, 2010.

  1. Trident

    Trident Member

    Aug 20, 2007
    Montreal
    There was for us at least... Toronto, not so much of either.
     
  2. 1331Massi

    1331Massi Member

    Aug 7, 2011
    Montreal
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Oh, I know you didn't mean copy BMO Field. But What I would like is if the expand on both the North AND South stands, so that they are the same height. Of course, that will never happen since the North Stand can't be demolished, since it dates back to the Olympics.
     
  3. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    This is exactly what i'm suggesting. To my knowledge the IOC heritage by-laws postulate that there must be a open path from the O to the village. I have (thus far) not heard any mention of heritage protection for the concrete foundation itself.The stands are intact because they did(and continue to do) the job. It would be a waste of money to replace them for either phase 1 and phase 2.

    At this point there is no cheap ways left to expand, all avenues require lots of work, but digging up and replacing the North stands(perhaps including the team offices and assorted team areas inside) is the "easier" way forward.

    But perhaps years from now(when our attendance is not such a disgrace) they would be willing to get serious about this. In that case they can shore up(or abandon) the underground parking lot and build a full second deck on the south side, if not all the way around.

    Anyways, it's a bit premature to consider any major expansions, meaning more than 30,000. Because right now the Olympic Stadium people are coming up with their redevelopment plan. You can find some details here if you search back a few months.

    Part of the plan will(to some extent for certain) be upgrading the interior. I assume they will completely demolish the baseball focused seating layout and make it soccer/football based.The final capacity could be anywhere from 40,000 to 70,000(i'm guessing lower) and the sightlines will be much better. It also will most probably have a more elegant and attractive way to restrict seating, perhaps similar to a BC place model(speculation of course).

    Alongside things like redecorating the inside and upgrading the facilities(don't forget the TV's :)), we'll have a large facility that don't have to be ashamed of. Though I doubt it will ever be a truly desirable locale.


    All i'm saying is, the appeal of Saputo is its "intimacy", no need to ruin that when we have a facility right next door that is anything but.
     
  4. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Why would they ever expand Saputo though?

    For normal crowds 20k seems like a good size and when they expect a match to be marketable to a larger audience, they have shown they can get it done quite well right next door.
     
  5. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    On the short term the team has said they have absolutely no intention of expanding. They want sold out games and a feeling of tickets being "exclusive". Much like the case with Hockey, and sometimes Football.

    But they also said that if such a reality were to take place, they would consider further expansion to some degree. This is what I am speculating about.

    While both facilities work well together, its not an ideal situation. Saputo can certainly be enlarged without sacrificing its atmosphere and a larger soccer specific facility is more interesting for tournaments such as a world cup. (Don't laugh, the 2015 WWC is considered an audition for future events, 2026 at the earliest)

    Speaking of which, where do the Montreal games for the WWC take place? The obvious answer is the O, but as much as I love it, objectively and technically speaking that facility is an embarrassment for many reasons expounded at length previously: sight-lines, facilities, technical systems, age of equipment. All one has to do is ask where in Canada the final match would be?(yet undecided, but BC place seems the consensus choice)

    In my opinion a 25k/50k would be the ideal size for both. Like I said, RIO is studying exactly this, and their report is suppose to be out before the end of 2012. At worst it will be a glorified wishlist, but it should have a concrete list of improvements and renovations that will serve us for marquee games, tournaments and beyond.
     
  6. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    As much as it hurts.....I have to laugh at the notion of a world cup in Canada. It is not going to happen....not now, not in 2026 and not ever (unless, either, 1. FIFA dramatically changes its stadium requirements and/or 2. Canada and the Canadian public dramatically change their views/attitudes on stadium building/financing)....not sure I would support either change (both seem to work fine) but without those changes....we are an observer and (very) ocassional participant in World Cups.
     
  7. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    brazil stadia.jpg


    To expand on that......here is the stadium plan for Brazil 2014.

    What is never answered by those (and I am sometimes one of them) who dream of a Canadian World Cup is how we get this many stadiums of this size/quality in Canada...oh, and to be clear, they are not to be used for any other purpose during the WC Finals (a FIFA stipulation).

    6 of those are brand new.....1 is a knock-down/rebuild (so essentially new) and 5 are substantive renovations/modernisations....so virtually new.
     
    Unak78 repped this.
  8. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    You're not wrong, but one of the mission goals of the World cup is to "expand the game", it's part of why Qatar got it despite being a "nation" of 2 million.(corruption aside)

    It's the same reason South Africa won their bid, even though now every single venue there is either abandoned of significantly underused.

    This is also one reason why we are hosting the Women's world cup. The last one in Germany was the largest yet and 2015 is considered to be even bigger.

    All to say that while unlikely, an actual world cup is much more than a dream.

    You forget that Stadiums don't need to be permanent. Almost every Quatari venue will be torn down and donated after their games. You can't blame geography either: the US did it, and as a result of financial uncertainty, there is no single country willing to host Euro 2020, thus the plan is to spread it around all of Europe.

    And the potential infrastructure exists in Canada.

    This has been discussed ad nauseum in the Canada forum, but humor me, i've gone this far:

    FIFA requires ~40k minimum capacity, +70k for finals

    -Olympic Stadium, Montreal, current capacity 61,000, potential capacity 70,000+(assuming rebuilt outfield stands)
    -BC place, Vancouver, current capacity 60,000
    -Commonwealth Stadium, Edmonton, current capacity 60,000, could be significantly expanded
    -Planned Stadium(2014), Regina, capacity 40,000, will be expandable to an unknown size.
    -Investors Group Field, Winnipeg, currently designed to be expandable to 40,000
    -McMahon Stadium, Calgary, currently designed to be expandable to 46,020
    -Toronto... ok I have no idea what they are gonna do... that city is a disaster.... WTF Rogers centre? ugh.
    - Hamilton... Ditto unfortunately, but once the Pan Am games are set we have a better idea of where they stand.
    -Atlantic Canada: Given current trends a CFL team with a 25,000-30,000 seat venue(expandable) is probable


    So as of 2014 we will have 6 venues that meet FIFA standards, if the Horseshoe gets its act together we'll have 8. Maybe 9 with Atlantic Canada.

    For some historical perspective just take a look at France: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_FIFA_World_Cup#Venues
    5 of 10 are under 40,000 and only 2 are above 60,000.


    So FIFA will not have to

    nor does
    OK maybe TO/HAM does, but they have more money and political power than anyone.


    To conclude, this may never happen. But my point is that the barriers are not nearly as unbreachable as many think. We are certainly not starting from scratch.

    Edit: wow, I was answering a question I didn't even know got asked:). Hypothetically, I can't see why the CFL would not mind delaying their season, or the WC could take place in June and not overlap with anything.
     
  9. Trident

    Trident Member

    Aug 20, 2007
    Montreal
    Christ, if the americans got one, with indoor games(!!!) Why can't we?
     
  10. Unak78

    Unak78 BigSoccer Supporter

    Dec 17, 2007
    PSG & Enyimba FC
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Nigeria
    Canada has 4 stadiums above the capacity of 40,000 seats.

    The US,... has 134.

    Two of those are highly outdated and in need of major renovations to host a premier FIFA WC event. Only BC Place, and maaaaybe Commonwealth, I'd consider quality enough to host anything above a Quarterfinal. Alot would have to be built to sustain a World Cup. Or existing stadiums expanded. The US can pretty much just hand FIFA a list and say "take your pick".
     
    TOareaFan repped this.
  11. 1331Massi

    1331Massi Member

    Aug 7, 2011
    Montreal
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Okay, I would like to touch up on a few things:

    The Big O:

    Wasn't the stadium supposed to be returned to the city one the debt was paid off? That happened in 2006.

    Keep the capacity at 66,000 and make it so that it can be artificially reduced to 36,000. Fair enough?

    A potential Canadian World Cup:

    The reason why Canada won't hold a World cup is not a question of stadiums, since temporary ones and large expansions can be accomplished fairly easily with the right amount of cash. It is the fact that Team Canada is god-awful and ranked 68th in the world. The host gets automatic qualification. Canada does not deserve to participate in the World Cup. If the team gets better and starts qualifying, that will be the day a Canadian bid is considered.
     
  12. TOareaFan

    TOareaFan Member+

    Jun 19, 2008
    Greater Toronto Area
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    The right amount of cash?

    Germany, South Africa and Brazil all were dealing with a combination of new and refurbished stadiums (as Canada would be).....it is not just size of stadiums that FIFA looks at but quality.

    4-4-2 magazine had a story about the cost of Brazil's stadiums running out of control ( http://fourfourtwo.com/news/worldcup/98790/default.aspx ) in the story they compared it to the cost of South Africa and Germany.

    So, given our national attitude to financing sports facilities....ask yourself if, in the Canada we know, there will be financing of between $1.5B and $3.7B just for stadiums (forgetting other infrastructure/organizing costs).

    FIFA ranking? Isn't Qatar ranked around 100? The year before they hosted the world cup, was South Africa not ranked in the 80s? What was South Korea's ranking before they were selected to co-host?

    The decision where world cups is held is a complicated formula full of many factors.........we may well be lowly ranked but our biggest hurdle, by far, is the quantity/size/quality of our current stadia and the (lack of) availibility of funds to correct that.
     
    Unak78 repped this.
  13. Unak78

    Unak78 BigSoccer Supporter

    Dec 17, 2007
    PSG & Enyimba FC
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Nigeria
    South Africa was ranked 80th in 2010; and Qatar is currently ranked 98th, have never qualified for a World Cup and won't get much better by 2022. Absolutely not, money and infrastructure mean much, much, much more than how good a national team is as far as hosting choices go. That's the point in granting automatic qualifiers to a host nation, it means that they don't have to deserve a qualifying spot in the World Cup.

    Now I will say this, no matter how bleak the situation seems now, any WC awarded to Canada will likely come with about a decade window or more. It's this fashion of scheduling WC berths that has allowed FIFA more flexibility in awarding berths to new countries. Like S. Africa did, most G20 nations should be able to build the infrastructure required in a decade's time with a WC hosting rights as incentive.

    The question will ultimately be, considering the result of South Africa's economic benefit, will Canada decide that it is worthwhile to make such an investment which could require the building of at least 5 40,000+ capacity stadiums. Granted that FIFA doesn't strictly look at size, but with the demand for WC tickets, size is important for the final. Between Olimpiastadion, Soccer City, and Yokohama International, you had stadiums which were both beautiful and all exceeded 70,000 capacity. On pure aesthetics, I would consider BC Place a shoe-in for a potential final, but it only expands to around 60,000 with extra seating. Unless they can push that to around 65K I think that Canada will need to build at least one 70K+ seater. Besides which, any potential Canadian WC final would likely be hosted in TO or Mtl anyway.
     
  14. 1331Massi

    1331Massi Member

    Aug 7, 2011
    Montreal
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    I was joking, but I see your point. But soccer still needs to -how do I put this- be more important to Canadians to the point that they will want to make a huge investment in it. Even if we did get 70 k+ stadiums, would we be able to fill them? My guess is no.

    On the other hand, can we welcome Nesta to the team? I never thought we would be getting an AC Milan player!
     
  15. phat

    phat Viking

    Feb 13, 2006
    Montreal
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Italy
    700million to take it down.... muahahahahaha
     
  16. Unak78

    Unak78 BigSoccer Supporter

    Dec 17, 2007
    PSG & Enyimba FC
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Nigeria
    That contention is laughable! Of course there will be 70K people at a hypothetical WC Final. Are you crazy??!! The same could have been said about the US in 94. Soccer was even less important here back then than it is in Canada now and we still filled a 91,000 seat final. The World Cup is like the Olympics, noone cares about the sport it's the event that sells. Besides which only 1/3rd, at most, of that stadium will be filled with native Canadians, another 1/3rd by transplants and another 1/3rd by tourists who came to the country for the tournament. Canada can fill a 20,000 seat stadium for soccer games now, and 55,000 people to put buts in seats for big TFC and Montreal games, are you really trying to tell me that you can't get around 25K Canadians to go to a WC Final? C'mon.

    For a World Cup Final, which is a major event, you will probably get closer to 80-100K from across Canada at least who will want to make plans to go to a final, cost pending and another 400-500K from the US, Africa, and Europe who will also want to go. The reason WC Final tickets are so expensive is because you have anywhere from 65-100K seats and about a half a million people who want tickets. There is no size stadium anywhere on the globe that could hold a World Cup Final and have it not sell out.
     
  17. Unak78

    Unak78 BigSoccer Supporter

    Dec 17, 2007
    PSG & Enyimba FC
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Nigeria
    No but you do have millions living in your country and only a percent of those need to attend a one-off event to make it a sell-out. That's a lousy argument. Your dearth in population didn't prevent 50K showing up to multiple TFC and Mtl one-off events and this is 100 times bigger than that.

    And how is that different from the US? Outside of hockey, soccer's probably more competitive with football in Canada than it is with our no 2 sport of baseball here. And that doesn't take into account hockey, basketball and auto racing.

    Are you seriously going to compare the Gold Cup to the World Cup? That's a tournament that we barely care about here except that it grants us a chance to play Mexico, yet we can't even get our fans to outnumber or even equal theirs in our own country. I don't see that happening in a Mexico-US World Cup Final. There's a difference in the interest that would be generated by a World Cup and one of the least attended confederation championships in the world. It's like comparing the Pan Am games to the Olympics. There's a different level of media exposure and historical significance. Every single moment of a hosted WC will be all over every sports network, every commercial, it's much like we see with the Olympics right now even though none of us are hosting. Non-soccer fans go to World Cup games. They did in '94 and they'll do it now.

    This isn't about soccer's popularity, it's about the World Cup. Canada isn't the only country in the World where soccer is not the most popular sport, but there is no country (including Canada, Australia, India, the US) that cannot fill a 75K seater for a WC final. Just not going to happen. Even in the extraordinary event that no Canadians went, it would still be filled. Is there some type of wall surrounding your country that noone else can get in? No matter how small your country is, you can't assume that you do not have 70,000 immigrants in your country that wouldn't be interested in going. I'm pretty sure that you have more than 70,000 immigrants who would go to a freaking WC Final. I'm also pretty sure that there are 70,000 Americans who would cross the border to go to a WC Final in Canada. Just like there are 70,000 European, Africans and Asians who would cross the ocean to take those tickets if there are no Canadians, Mexicans, Americans or South Americans who don't trek north to take them up. They may lower the price if no Canadians attended to keep the fans from other countries who have lost around, but they'd stay to watch the final if they could.

    The point is that there is no scenario that you could come up with that a Canadian World Cup final does not require a large stadium to meet demand. That would be FIFA allowing Canada to host and still leave money lying on the ground. This isn't some Gold Cup game or a TFC game. Use your heads. We're talking about 70,ooo tickets for a World Cup final. You could hold it in Antarctica and it would still sell out. A bigger stadium than BC Place will be wanted and expected to award Canada a World Cup Final. Period.
     
  18. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    OK, I am just going to leave this here... you can bask in my awesomeness later.

    Canadian Soccer Association to bid for 2026 World Cup


    http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/opi...er-association-to-bid-for-2026-world-cup.html

     
  19. 1331Massi

    1331Massi Member

    Aug 7, 2011
    Montreal
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    This is great news! But let's just hope our friend from 24 Sussex Street actually are willing to put the money required into this project, unlike Québec 2022. It seem the major problem is money, now doesn't it?
     
  20. 1331Massi

    1331Massi Member

    Aug 7, 2011
    Montreal
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Instead of continuing to get off-topic here, the link to the thread:

    https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/canada-to-bid-wc-2026.1947759/
     
  21. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    I noticed something weird. The game last week had a reported attendance of 20,531, I thought this was a typo, but it looks like yesterday (September 25th) someone edited wikipedia and changed it there as well, though unsourced.

    Anyone know if they actually added standing room somewhere? or is this a typo that's spreading as fact.
     
  22. Trident

    Trident Member

    Aug 20, 2007
    Montreal
    132 is standing room, is why. Less space for seats, more space for people
     
  23. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Obviously, but that's been the case all year. The official stated capacity all year was 20,341. though until now it didn't come up because the new end stands remained incomplete.

    the KC game was the first game with full complete stands. So either the new number is a typo, or they somehow added 200 seats there. It's just weird that there was no announcement of any kind.
     
  24. Trident

    Trident Member

    Aug 20, 2007
    Montreal
    Any number of things. They could have potentially just updated all their numbers to include the 132 difference, could be a typo, could be something else.
     
  25. fuzzx

    fuzzx Member+

    Feb 4, 2012
    Brossard
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Sure, could be many things, but it can't be 132, each section has 400-800 seats.

    Anyways they count tickets sold, 132 has been counted since the beginning.
     

Share This Page