Suddenly quite excited about Turner . . . http://www.turnerconstruction.com/corporate/content.asp?d=3793 They're committing to green practices.
Not just an idea, it's for certain. Section 8's permanent home will be on the north side in the Harlem End of the stadium.
Wouldn't the harlem end be the main stand? Looking at the picture, it looks like that side faces Harlem more than any other.
The main stand isn't really an "End". You're sort of right but harlem takes a big bend right off the north of that overhead plan. So, really both the Main Stand and the Harlem end are off Harlem. But "The Harlem End" sounds tough as hell too.
Yes it does. In fact, I actually wanted to do something with it. I decided not to, so as not to step on your toes in any way.
who's stopping you? go to town, man. I appreciate you wanting to keep me in the loop and that's cool but don't feel like i have proprietary rights over these things. Everyone can and should contribute.
Just a shame that whenever anybody hears Harlem they think of New York. I don't want us to sound like NY wannabees.
Just to augment Kenn's numbers a bit: including all matches played by the Fire at Soldier Field (old & new) - 102 matches 28 matches > 20k 74 matches < 20k but 37 of those matches were weekday matches (of which 5 were > 20k) and we all know that generally, matches during the week do not draw as well as on the weekend so, all weekend matches by the Fire at SF - 65 23 matches > 20k 42 matches < 20k 35%, more than a third, of the weekend matches played by the Fire at SF have had attendance > 20k also there have been 6 double headers and they all have drawn > 20k - one of them was mid-week ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To me, these numbers suggest that a 20k capacity is not sufficient to adequately serve the demand that exists. If you end up turning away people a third of the time, it doesn't sound like you are serving your fanbase as well as you could.
You sound like a guy who would tell his wife he would worry about another bedroom after the triplets are born.
I don't think the situations are equal. The Fire's stadium is more like a 2 bedroom house with an unfinished basement. Yeah right now it can only house a few, but the capability is built into the stadium to quickly augment its capacity. They are thinking about maybe eventually needing a higher capacity, sure. But They want to make sure they can sell out what they've got first. Plus, it will redistribute crowds a little bit - we'll be capped at a little over 20k for weekends but we may drive more people looking to attend a game to weekday and cup matches; or at least a good percentage of them. This also enables a push for home tv broadcasts as well. It also will be excellent if somewhere down the road Chicago were to get another team. Two teams in one city with a small stadium (or two) is probably better long term than one with a huge stadium. There is a line of thought that I don't necessarily share but I think is interesting: That MLS should have started with teams in small markets and in large markets doubled up on teams in 10k seat or so stadiums with roughly the same amount of overall teams. i.e. a Columbus, Dallas, and Kansas City team - but two LA area, two NY area, two Chicago area teams. talent level and salaries probably would have been lower but I don't think you can deny ther would have been a little more oomph to league matches than there is now. I think the original decision was based more on the feeling The owners had coming in that MLS was going to be a tv revenue league - which means maximising your media markets and only having one club per city.
Soldier Field has tremendous excess capacity, which actually serves to keep ticket prices somewhat affordable. The Fire will not be turning away thousands of fans. Rather, we can expect an increase in ticket prices at the Bridgeview Firehouse. There will more season ticket holders and far more advanced sales, since walkups would be more likely to be turned away. As such, there will be fewer walkups. We'll probably see the kinds of seats that go for $30 selling for $40 and the cheapest, which are currently $15, going for $20. Thats a 20-25% increase in ticket prices, and I think I'm being too optimistic about the affordability, actually. I suppose the new stadium will be a cool enough environment to justify some of that expense, but if they want to charge that and still field a team with Captain Headband, they might have trouble getting 20K. Hopefully the 2006 Fire will deserve what looks to be a fantastic new home.
Good points, the important objective should be to keep the fans close to the action, and avoid the "Bowl" effect. Madjeski (Reading) does a pretty good job of that:
Even if prices for comparable seats didn't change, there will be a revenue effect. Because they will end up selling a higher ratio of higher priced seats. Take me for example. I get Supporters flex vouchers now, and I'm planning to move to full season tickets in more expensive seats in the new stadium. I'll probably purchase the same number of tickets over the course of the season (e.g. 2 tix for 15 games vs 5 tix for 6 games), but at a higher price point. Ideally I will find someone to get 2 adjacent season tickets, so we can swap for some games and I can have 4 for some and 0 for some. I'm pretty sure I'll end up talking someone who isn't a season ticket holder into taking the other 2.
I think the prelim drawings look great! As to the 20,000 +/- debate, understand that 20,000 people IS a lot of people for an event. It's apples and oranges, but the United Center is slightly over 20,000 and is actually under if you take out the suites. In your mind's eye, kind of flatten out the UC and expand the ice into a soccer field, and keep the full house. That would be a pretty awesome display night after night. With consistent sellouts, they will add seating, so for now just buy your seasons and enjoy. Liam makes an excellent point on home tv as well. I use to be a Blackhawk season ticket holder in the last great hay day at the old stadium. It was not possible to go to every game, but it pissed me off to no end to have to listen on the radio knowing that I had a ticket to the game, and that there was not a seat available. I am confident that PW will not make the same mistake as Senor Wirtz, so consistent sell outs could very well mean most home games on tv. People who haven't become fans yet will see the packed house and the phenomenal atmosphere, and will want to go check it out.
Actually, that raises a question for me. I remeber going to the old Chicago Stadium for Hawks and Bulls games and buying standing-room only (SRO) tickets. Wrigley used to do the same thing.. don't know if they still do. Anyone know if design accomodates some SRO overflow beyond the 20K? My own personal bent on this is that simply being in the packed house will be enough fun to attract more walkups. I think this will quickly feed itself and 20k will not be enough. Maybe it's hope... but my 2cents worth. Plus, with only 20k, we will not be able to host international friendlies or games like the Mexican exhibitions we just hosted - these pull closer to 40k. Will anyone besides me be disappointed when we get a big soccer event to come to Chicago and have to go to SF to host it, instead of on our new world-class pitch?
I don't think that's the case at all. There's potentially a better revenue pool for having some of these game in BV. I think we'll see the same or more friendlies come to Chicago (both SF and BV) as a result. I wouldn't worry about conflicts either as Mexico and US int'l games are usually managed by SUM.
Even more optimism from the Trib: http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...1oct22,1,2131529.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
I drove past the site - I think - yesterday. On the west side of Harlem just north of the 1st light south of the bridge (71st). Very funky area. Down and out industrial area with some small poorer class homes just north of the area. It is pretty far from the Stevenson (about 2 miles) and at least the same from I294. No public transportation. The only current restaurant around there is a funky Mickey's beef and hot dog joint on Harlem. It appears that the planes landing at Midway won't bother the concerts since they appear further south - near 79th. I hate to burst any bubbles. But no one in their right mind is going to go near that place unless they are forced to. It ain't no Wrigleyville, Soldier Field area or even a Sox Park. I guess the Fire got it cheap. But wait. The Fire isn't paying for it at all! So I guess St. Phil didn't risk any of his money! So stick it to the good burgers of Bridgeview!