CO on Fox Football Fone-in tonight - in the next hour - on Fox Soccer Channel. If you end up missing it, it's on again at 10 CST.
Sorry, can't listen or watch anything that has that twat Steven cohen on it. Nick isn't so bad, but I bet wankerboy cohen says something crappy about the MLS!!!
OK someone has some splaining to do--CO just came out and said the Wizards had a good home field advantage because the CAB pitch is small. So, uh, what's the story?
It's not small! It's an optical illu.... wha? Damn, do I have to go back and apologize to all those folks I said it wasn't that small to?
What exactly did he say? I refuse to watch anything with Cohen. But unless he came out and said that it's smaller then FIFA regulations (page 21), there's nothing wrong.
I don't think anyone has ever alleged that it isn't regulation size, only that the club may have padded the official dimensions a bit. As I've said before I think it's at least as wide as Arrowhead was, but I'm not convinced that's true of the length.
Estimating by the field markings I think the field is 70 yards wide. 8 yards for the goal, plus two sets of 18's, plus the 2 hash marks marking 10 yards from the corner, which appear to be 3 yards from the 18. 8+18+18+10+10+3+3=70 yards
And that's in line with what I come up with using the ruler tool in GE. We don't have the advantage of seeing the lines but based on the Wizards own stadium diagram, it's something very close to 70 yards. The long axis looks to be between 105-108 yards but it's difficult to say because the stadium was actually altered since the image was taken. I don't remember where the goals were placed at Arrowhead exactly so I don't know if that's shorter or not. So, say 108 x 70. By comparison, using the same method, with the pitch lines to trace, the Dick measures ~120 x 80, Bridgeview 120 x 75, PHP 117 x 74, HDC 120 x 76, Crew Stadium 115 x 75.
Actually the hash marks are 10 yds from the corner arc which makes them 11 yds from the touch line. So 11x2 + 44 + whatever the distance between the hash and penalty area x 2. See page 11 of the LOTG. But while the field seems to be OK in width, it has to be a bit on the short side lengthwise. Goal kick and punt seem to carry further down field than they do in other stadiums. And it's not because of the elevation.
It's realistically larger than what we had at Arrowhead. I remember everyone always gripeing up a storm a San Jose1 being only 68 wide when Arrowhead was quietly the same width. I think they published 72 but I remember Meola several times saying he would walk it and count 68 everytime. Also Camarohead would've been 106 in length as they painted the top of the box at the 15 yard line leaving a 3 yard spill into the endzone on each byline. Essentially the field should be pretty close to what we always played on at Camarohead minus the drainage crown.
I had it on but was distracted by other stuff and was not listening very closely. They were talking about the new stadium and the current stadium around the same time. Did he say the field was small or did he say the stadium was small?
Mr. Positivity strikes again. CO needs to keep quiet about this subject until all the political BS is out of the way. Once the TIF money is released, THEN he can speculate on when construction will start. Hopefully he is right this time, but it seems once we get past what we think is the last hurdle, another one is put up for us to overcome (except we can't jump it because somebody keeps jerking it out from under us).
he can't control stadium start dates, so don't blame him - he just says what we tell him on that stuff. i bet we start next month/first week of january.
So does this mean we have all the info turned in that the committee needs to make their decision and we are definitely on the agenda in two weeks? Elections are over....hopefully they don't have any more excuses to keep putting this off. The season is going to be over soon, so we need something to look forward to (some stadium porn would be nice, too).