I have a question about the HDC and hope to get a response from everyone without getting ripped apart. I have never been to a stadium in europe but from what I have seen on television, it seems like the fans are right on top of the action and on field level. When I was watching the LA/COL match the only thing I could really see was about a ten foot green wall. It sort of remined of an NFL staduim that have six to ten foot walls surrounding the field. Other than the wall I thought every thing about the HDC was fabulous. But my question is, is it better when the best seats are at field level, similar to Old Trafford, or is better when the best seats are 10 feet above field level like the HDC?
I wouldn't be suprised if that college played its football games in the Home Depot stadium. The elevated stands are so you can see over the 40 fat guys that waddle along the sidelines at a football game. it's the way all stadiums in the US are made. From my experience at Giants stadium the wall cuts off the corner of the pitch when you're seated in the upper deck.
The college doesn't have a football team. I think it was built with football in mind, but the only games I see played there are the CIF championships in December. I believe the Chargers will use the track & field stadium for a scrimmage.
hopefully it will be kept soccer only and they won't have to resort to playing football on it to pay the bills.
i already talked about my experience in another post on the lars board i think. that school has no teams in general. most state schools besides 2 that i know of that are csu's the universities of cali like ucla and cal have teams. wait 3 do, i think? sdsu, san jose state, and fresno state. cal state dominguez hills will never have a pointy ball team i gauruntee it! that stadium is all ours!!
from the looks of it the stadiums like you have mentioned the fans were much closer to the feild. don't feel too bad, that was one of the comments that i had made too. with that said, its an absolutely amazing facility, can't say enough good things about it. it looks a LOT like a european stadium, it just too bad they didn't put the fans right on top of it. not that too bad though ')
It's a tradeoff. Personally, I don't like the look of walls and prefer the fans right down to pitch level. But of course this makes the view from the first few rows a lot poorer.
I don't know anything specific but here is my guess: The fact that the wall is a few feet high and there is a lot of space along the sidelines, makes me think that it was built that way to accomodate any future expansion of the seating. It's one thing to add 5,000 cheap seats and something completely different to add 500 really expensive ones. The return on investment is a lot higher in the latter. Giants Stadium did this after the 1994 WC. They added a few rows of seats in the front which shrunk the possible field size. I think they'd have to tear them out to ever host another WC match there. I've also seen Yankee stadium do this recently when they added more seats down low and shrank the foul territory. Regardless, I prefer to be elevated to the field of play than be at ground level. I can follow the action more easily. I've sat courtside at a NBA game and (besides the thrill of players possibly landing in your lap) it wasn't very easy to follow the game. I prefer to sit with my body around rim level. Murf
With regards to the wall's around the stadium,they appear to be around 6' feet along the sidelines and a little lower behind the goals. I don't think that they're 10' feet tall. The stadium seems to have good sightlines. I personally would like the wall's to be a little lower to the field like Columbus's stadium.
I was down at the wall behind the South goal before the game and the wall is maybe 5 ft. high. The stands are right on top of the field, although I could see the addition of a few rows of really expensive seats along the touch line opposite the benches. The field is a legit 78 yds. wide with an extra 25 ft. on the East side of the field.
Did I hear them right when they said the field was 118x82? I don't think I've heard of a field that wide anywhere in the world. As it relates to Giants Stadium, a Fieldturf representative was on Angles, a news magazine show on the MSG Network. He said that part of the installation was the removal of a track along the walls. He mentioned that it was done specifically to widen the field for the MetroStars. God them nickname sucks.
Soccer specific means it is built to meet the needs of a regulation soccer field. That doesn't mean it cant be used for other sports as well. One thing against the field for American-style football is the topography. A football field is generally crowned in the center, so the quarterback is a little bit elevated and can get a better view of the sidelines action. Victoria Street (as befits a soccer stadium) is virtually flat - no crown in the center.
I believe that football fields are crowned for drainage purposes. Most fields are old, or cheaply made, and so the crown lets rain water run off to the sides. The more modern fields have underground drainage, so there isn't as much a need for a crown on the field.
I would not be too surprised to see HDC as a venue for some big HS football games..it's a great size for that, PLUS it is a private venue and needs events in the house to make money........