News: In bid to preserve Earthquakes stadium plan, San Jose agrees to revise land deal

How wide will the field be?

 

Probably full sized like every other SSS and Buck Shaw. Now whether Frank Yallop has them set it up full sized is another matter. He's been shrinking Buck Shaw since day 1 both length and width.

 

Outside of the grass berm and stripping out the luxury boxes, the one design element that Wolff mentioned was that the fans would be as close to the action as possible.

 

Not to get too much into it. But aside from Stade Saputo only holding 13k, it is more or less a really nice highschool football stadium, with one bank of bathrooms, one garden area for concessions, and a bunch of metal bleachers.

Upgrades weren't only for expansion of the seating capcity, it was to improve the stadium to an MLS quality stadium. I'm sure MLS wanted more luxury suites too.

As far as the Christian Vieri statement...it's already been confirmed as complete bullshit, and anyone who couldn't see through the bullshit the second the story hit the interweb really doesn't have the first understanding of how this league actually works.

 

The berm element makes me think the stadium might be built into the ground like many other parks in MLS and not built up like BMO or Red Bull Arena will be.

 

Makes sense in an area that gets earthquakes . During the last big one the stadium in a berm and underground (the Oakland Coliseum) rode out the 7.1 earthquake a lot better than the totally above ground one (Candlestick Park) did.

 

I am not so sure about the stadium being below grade. I thought the water table was pretty high in that area.

 

I find it hard sometimes to understand why there is this expectation that an MLS stadium has to be Emirates Stadium quality right out of the gate in order to be accommodating to fans and at the very least be revenue neutral.

What's the difference between 15,000 fans @ $20 a pop at Crew Stadium compared to 15,000 fans @ $20 a pop at Red Bull Arena? It's still the same income even though they're vastly different facilities, right? Except for paying back the loans, obviously.

Sure, if an owner and a city have the cash to do it up Red Bull Arena or Rio Tinto style then go for it. But if Montreal expanded to 18,000 yet it still had a "high school stadium" feel to it, then whose business is that, as long as the paying fans are comfortable, enjoy themselves and keep coming back. BMO Field is far from being Allianz Arena but it doesn't keep TFC fans away.

I'd much rather see a scaled-down, less expensive version of a stadium that all parties could agree on than see DC United have to move. Many of the great stadiums of the soccer world started with humble beginnings. You can always expand and enhance.

 

Again, this was a long time ago, but at MLS Cup I saw some prelim drawings that Rossetti had done for the Quakes stadium. In those drawings, the top row of seating was at street level. So basically, as I understood it, the entire stadium was dug in. Again, I'm no architecht, and things change a lot in a short period of time, but that's what I've seen.

 

Don't think so. SCU is a few dozen yards to the west and it has many below grade level buildings.

 

Nowhere in my post did I suggest an Emirates style stadium. Nor has MLS suggested an Emirates style stadium. But I would think that MLS wants their stadiums to be a bit nicer than the local high school football stadium too.

I guess you didn't read my post at all either. It's not just expanding the seating capacity. Stade Saputo has 1 area for concessions in the entire stadium. So concessions revenue takes a hit if people don't want to walk around the entire stadium to buy a beer or a hot pretzel. As I understand it, there is also just one bathroom in Stade Saputo, which is already a joke. If you expand seating, you need to expand the bathrooms, which isn't free.

And last, and most importantly. You are right about one thing. 15,000 fans at $20 a pop is the same anywhere. The difference is luxury boxes. 32 corporations paying around $100k per year to own the box is about $3.2 million more in revenue. Stade Saputo can't offer that kind of revenue boost without an upgrade.

And lastly, and this has less to do with you Equus as it does with all the other posters who clearly haven't read this thread.

The stadium will seat about 15,000 and will also include a grass berm on one end that can offer an addition 3,000 "seats". So the stadium will actually have a max capacity of 18,000, they just won't open the berm unless there is a demand for those tickets.

 

But interestingly, Wolff has already said the stadium will not have a large number of luxury boxes. I'm not sure why. His statement is that you can't be smoozing in a luxury box and watch soccer at the same time. Which means that he does understand soccer a little bit better than at least some people give him credit for.

 

Wolf does want a very scaled down stadium. What's interesting is that Fischer (The Gap dude) wants a very elaborate stadium. I'm guessing that the stadium will fall somewhere inbetween, and I'm sure that MLS will insist on at least some luxury boxes. My guess is that it will end up closer to Wolf's vision, but he's going to have to compromise a bit.

 

Indeed. What I think he supports more than luxury boxes is the idea of premium on field seating, not unlike what is at Buck Shaw. I wouldn't be surprised if on or both sides of the new stadium have a premium row or rows right at field level with most of the amenities of a skybox (food to your seat, exlusive this and that...) without being far away and cut off from the action.

 

Since it appears that a number of owners are going to end up building a stadium with their own money, I wonder why they don't do what most clubs in other parts of the world do. Essentially, build one stand at a time and make the others very basic to start with.

The one stand should have the roof for shade and for rain protection and the high priced seats (and boxes)... the other 3 stands should be very basic - like Cardinal Stadium for the Fire (though money should be put into a nice grass field surface). Heck, make the other sideline seats (or bleachers) really cheap, to attract crazies onto the sunny/exposed side of the field (this is what the Burn did in their first Cotton Bowl incarnation)... When you have the money, replace them stand by stand.

I know that some would say "who is going to buy the expensive tickets when they can get the seat across the field for peanuts", but that is because we are all crazies on these boards... we will stand and sing in the rain or bake in the sun for hours in the worst "seats" in the house... but, if you look at the first seats in a US stadium to sell out it is the expensive ones... and boxes...

I wish that someone would at least try this model for stadium building, one that has been successfully repeated hundreds of times for most European clubs (including some of what we regard as the "shrines" of soccer)... the reason it is not done here is that, if you are asking a government entity into building something for you, you know you are only going to get one shot at it, so you ask for the moon... and tell them to giftwrap it...

 

Not sure where you are drawing this conclusion from. Here's a list of current stadium construction or stadium plans that I know of.

Red Bull Arena - Red Bull is paying 100% of the construction, but I believe there is government contributions for infrastructure improvements.

Philly - Both state and local government has pledged money to contribute to construction and infrustructure

Kansas City - Government financed construction with some private contributions.

Houston - City and County governments will pay about 25% of construction costs, plus the city bought the land that the stadium will be built on.

DC - United Holdings LLC wants the government to pay for 75% of the construction. Obviously that's not going to happen, but don't expect them to pay for an entire stadium themselves either.

Portland - Public and Private financing will go into the rennovations of PGE Park.

San Jose - As far as I know, the Quakes will pay for the construction, but the government will pay for infrustructure improvements and is selling the land to Wolf for a song.

St. Louis - Obviously a team needs to get put here first, but the stadium plan that is already approved includes plenty of public money for the construction.


So while there are examples of completely privately financed stadiums, they are the exception and not the rule, despite the economy.

 

Most of the recent SSS's have been built with 3 permanent stands and one end mostly undeveloped or with a small stand and a stage or whatever. That's where any further expansion will take place if it is ever needed. Since most SSS's outside of TO don't sell out, expansion is not a big concern to MLS.

 

San Jose is paying market rate for the land the stadium will/may be built upon. It is not a sweetheart deal. San Jose is also obligated to pay for all stadium construction costs due to local laws that require a public vote for any tax-payer paid sports stadium, so infrastructure costs may be on Wolff's tab depending upon how the law is interpreted.

 

His entire post is meaningless bro. He's talking abotu a stadium that doesn't exist yet and complaining that we are (or are not?) selling it out.

Not every post on BigSoccer deserves a response.

 

Reading that after reading three of your comments in a row was kinda funny.

//I know this post... it's like rain on your wedding day

 

Thanks for clarifying (sp). Did not know that about the infrustructure.

 

Quakes are paying full construction costs for their stadium, and are paying for infrastructure improvements on the site, not the city. Also they're selling the land to Wolff at full market value, not "a song". The land was worth 132 million in early 2008 and the team agreed to pay that for the land, the current renegotiation came about because in the land value collapse, the value of the land has fallen to it's current value of 89 million dollars. Wolff and co are only doing what any sound buyer would do, asking to pay the current value of the land, not it's value 14 months ago.

 

Pappa Smurf and Slutty Smurf already dropped this knowledge. Grazie though.

 

As far as I know, the Houston stadium is also going to be built on the owners dime as well. The contribution from the city and county (well, lets hope) is going to be land and infrastructure and will not go up or down regardless of how much or little the stadium costs. That, to me, equates to the same problem as building it all on your own dime... how to maximize what you get for your money... it seems that most clubs in the world (at least up until the last 15 years) have decided to do the buildout stand-by-stand, going very basic on three sides initially (and, yes, building three stands and leaving one end "open" is a variant on this theme)...