Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
DirtyDeeds

The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, rickross said:

We need a new arena. Period. Watching Friday's game really made me realize how outdated the Saddledome is. It's served its time but that thing looks archaic when compared to Rogers Place. Now I just want a new arena so we can run an absolutely, unneccesarily long opening ceremony prior to a game against the Oilers;)

I think it does seem like that when compared to a brand new one. It still has it's charm, and I'm a bit attached to it tbh. The Saddledome is just an iconic piece of the Calgary downtown view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's one of the most unique structures in sports. Our arena is shaped like a saddle! Even Jerry Jones isn't THAT much of a cowboy! It's a major fixture of Calgary and i hope they don't plan to demolish it if they secure funds for Calgary Next. The city is missing out on a ton of key tours and events because the ol' Dome is too old to facilitate a lot of the new tech and stage props of todays world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, rickross said:

We need a new arena. Period. Watching Friday's game really made me realize how outdated the Saddledome is. It's served its time but that thing looks archaic when compared to Rogers Place. Now I just want a new arena so we can run an absolutely, unneccesarily long opening ceremony prior to a game against the Oilers;)

It can be a tactic to cool down the opposition after the pregame warmup. I wonder how prepared we were for a 45 minute+ break for the ceremony?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DirtyDeeds said:

It can be a tactic to cool down the opposition after the pregame warmup. I wonder how prepared we were for a 45 minute+ break for the ceremony?

 

Or we can build the first ever outdoor rink and really cool down the opposition.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, cross16 said:

Bump. I'm sure this article is not a surprise to anyone but its the first "official" update in a while. CalgaryNext on hold and plan B (a new area on the stampede grounds) being fully investigated. 

 

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgarynext-project-on-pause-says-ken-king

 

It's too bad.  Major League Soccer just announced they want to expand from 20 teams to 28 teams and without an adequate indoor soccer field, Calgary is going to miss out on an excellent opportunity to bring a team here.  I think there would be an appetite in Calgary for an MLS team and we could fill a stadium with at least 15,500 per game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, cross16 said:

Bump. I'm sure this article is not a surprise to anyone but its the first "official" update in a while. CalgaryNext on hold and plan B (a new area on the stampede grounds) being fully investigated. 

 

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgarynext-project-on-pause-says-ken-king

TBH I always thought CalgaryNEXT as to ambitous and unnecessary to have all the sports together in one complex. I don't think anything is going to happen so long as the NDP are in government and the oil industry suffering so they have time to rethink the situation. Personally I would prefer they do a hockey area that can also host major name concerts with great accoustics on the intended site. Keep football up by the University by taking out the baseball diamond and some of the soccer fields. Perhaps a new soccer complex could be accommodated on the new T'suu T'ina commercial area or on a North location, maybe both the way soccer is growing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's too bad.  Major League Soccer just announced they want to expand from 20 teams to 28 teams and without an adequate indoor soccer field, Calgary is going to miss out on an excellent opportunity to bring a team here.  I think there would be an appetite in Calgary for an MLS team and we could fill a stadium with at least 15,500 per game.

The success and popularity of the Calgary Boomers (1980 - 81), Calgary Mustangs (1983), and Calgary Storm (2001) would suggest otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Kulstad said:

The success and popularity of the Calgary Boomers (1980 - 81), Calgary Mustangs (1983), and Calgary Storm (2001) would suggest otherwise.

 

True enough but that was at least 15 years ago.  Demographics have changed much.  Plus, MLS is the highest level of soccer in North America and attracts "some" decent talent.  Depending on how the economy rebounds in the next year or two, i think Calgary could've put in a bid to expand because people here have the money but... too bad.  I don't think we have that opportunity now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2016 at 7:53 PM, The_People1 said:

 

True enough but that was at least 15 years ago.  Demographics have changed much.  Plus, MLS is the highest level of soccer in North America and attracts "some" decent talent.  Depending on how the economy rebounds in the next year or two, i think Calgary could've put in a bid to expand because people here have the money but... too bad.  I don't think we have that opportunity now.  

 

I too and skpetical MLS soccer would succeed here. I will grant that that I think the indoor stadium would have given it a better shot than any other previous attempt at Calgary soccer so I think it was a realistic possiblity but one that I dont' think I would base a project around, if that makes sense.

 

That being said, CalgaryNext seemed to be at least 4-5 years away from actually being completed so i'm not sure if that would have jived with MLS plans for expansion. However, where I will agree is that the real unfortuante part about Plan B is that it makes a replacment for McMahon much more difficult and unlikely. I've said before that IMO McMahon is in far worse shape than the Dome and ignorging the fact that Hockey>football/other sports in this town, it technically should be repalced first. Plan B is a serious blow to the Stampeder side of CSEC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plan B accomplishes ¼ of the Calgary Next proposal at 1/2 the cost.  The other ¾ (football, fieldhouse, contamination cleanup) still needs to be done and it wont be cheaper if all done separate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

Plan B accomplishes ¼ of the Calgary Next proposal at 1/2 the cost.  The other ¾ (football, fieldhouse, contamination cleanup) still needs to be done and it wont be cheaper if all done separate.

 

Well to be fair the fieldhouse is a city project that has been planned for years so its not like Flames created that one. also in defence of the city, the West Village is a really bad location for the fieldhouse, needs to be closer to the U of C.

 

It won't be "cheaper" necessairly but King said that building all 3 together saved about 100. Sounds like a lot but in the grand scheme of things it really isn't. That only 10% of the entire project and I would argue the city gives up far more than that in revenue by losing the West Village to the arena rather than cleaning up it and selling it off to developers.  From an economic standpoint, Plan B is a substantially better option for the City, but a big downgrade for the Flames. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Well to be fair the fieldhouse is a city project that has been planned for years so its not like Flames created that one. also in defence of the city, the West Village is a really bad location for the fieldhouse, needs to be closer to the U of C.

 

It won't be "cheaper" necessairly but King said that building all 3 together saved about 100. Sounds like a lot but in the grand scheme of things it really isn't. That only 10% of the entire project and I would argue the city gives up far more than that in revenue by losing the West Village to the arena rather than cleaning up it and selling it off to developers.  From an economic standpoint, Plan B is a substantially better option for the City, but a big downgrade for the Flames. 

 

Rogers Place in Edm was $600M, plan B in Calgary would be no cheaper.  CalgaryNext is estimated to be $1.13B which is double the cost but accomplishes 4 areas of need, not just one.  West Village as it sits is dead, no development will ever occur there, CalgaryNext would kick start endless development there.

The cost savings if all done together would be $330M not $100M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On December 24, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Kulstad said:

The success and popularity of the Calgary Boomers (1980 - 81), Calgary Mustangs (1983), and Calgary Storm (2001) would suggest otherwise.

MLS franchises now cost $200 million. I am not confident that it will survive in this city at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, CheersMan said:

 

Rogers Place in Edm was $600M, plan B in Calgary would be no cheaper.  CalgaryNext is estimated to be $1.13B which is double the cost but accomplishes 4 areas of need, not just one.  West Village as it sits is dead, no development will ever occur there, CalgaryNext would kick start endless development there.

The cost savings if all done together would be $330M not $100M.

 

Not true anymore. Every member of council, and even the mayor, that I have heard interviewed on it has said since they got the report back that they need to clean that up irregardless of CalgaryNext. In fact, i think the main reason why council is asking the Flames to go to Plan B is becuase they don't want to take prime land like the West Village, pay over 100mill to clean it up and then spend a boat load of money to build a big arena complex and they will net very little money off of. I think they want to remeidate the land and sell it to developers becuase then the city stands to make alot more money in that scenario. 

 

The cost savings of 300M is reported by CalgaryNext and Includes "incidentals" related to the construciton of seperate buildings including transit. Plan B does not require any incidentals such as transit as the infastructure is already there so I would suggest they overshot with that number. The 100million, it may have been 150mill, was the number King said they were saving by all 3 buildings being built on the same foundation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

MLS franchises now cost $200 million. I am not confident that it will survive in this city at this point.

To be fair, Calgary would end up in the PDL (like Toronto, Seatlle, Vancouver, etc).  Is the same price still the same for a PDL team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On December 28, 2016 at 0:35 PM, cross16 said:

 

I too and skpetical MLS soccer would succeed here. I will grant that that I think the indoor stadium would have given it a better shot than any other previous attempt at Calgary soccer so I think it was a realistic possiblity but one that I dont' think I would base a project around, if that makes sense.

 

An indoor stadium is a difference maker. An MLS season runs from March thru October which means at least half the season would be in potential snow conditions if games were played outdoors in Calgary. It also doesn't "really" clash with the NHL regular season and compete for attendence in that regard.

 

I think Calgary's demographics has changed enough since the early 2000s and there are more diverse cultures and more people hungry for soccer. Also, a lot of those new migrants to Calgary are young professionals who have money to spare and burn.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

An indoor stadium is a difference maker. An MLS season runs from March thru October which means at least half the season would be in potential snow conditions if games were played outdoors in Calgary. It also doesn't "really" clash with the NHL regular season and compete for attendence in that regard.

 

I think Calgary's demographics has changed enough since the early 2000s and there are more diverse cultures and more people hungry for soccer. Also, a lot of those new migrants to Calgary are young professionals who have money to spare and burn.  

 

(re: bolded) then you really haven't been paying attention to, nor been affected by, the current economic climate or the news in this city for the past 2 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Kulstad said:

 

(re: bolded) then you really haven't been paying attention to, nor been affected by, the current economic climate or the news in this city for the past 2 years.

 

I have but had we submitted a proposal for an MLS team under the approval of CalgaryNEXT, that means we wouldn't be playing in the MLS until 2020 and by that time, the economic climate may be much improved.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Gary Bettman slams Saddledome as 'old, antiquated, inefficient building' - CBC.ca

Calgary's Scotiabank Saddledome is an "old, antiquated, inefficient building" that "doesn't hold a candle to what has been done in new arenas," NHL commissioner Gary Bettman said, after touring the facility Wednesday....

"People are going to have to decide what's it worth, what do they want, what's the quality of life in Calgary going to be without a new arena," he said.

 

SInce when is it up to the people of Calgary? Is he directing these comments at the Flames or the City?

No tax dollars should go to this unless a generous return is guaranteed back to the city.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

true they could potentially use a new building, however it is not a "NEED" new building.  
Is it falling down? does it not meet standards?  

What the heck is Bettman doing saying anything about it.
he should have no input into facilities at all, aside from assisting in putting in place minimum regulations regarding ice surfaces and other league wide standards that should be adhered to by all teams.

 

(attempted to post on the main nhl.com on the aritcle, but mysterious error on posting : think they locked the comments on the article)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JustAFlamer said:

true they could potentially use a new building, however it is not a "NEED" new building.  
Is it falling down? does it not meet standards?  

What the heck is Bettman doing saying anything about it.
he should have no input into facilities at all, aside from assisting in putting in place minimum regulations regarding ice surfaces and other league wide standards that should be adhered to by all teams.

 

(attempted to post on the main nhl.com on the aritcle, but mysterious error on posting : think they locked the comments on the article)

 

Bettman's job is to maximize revenues for the NHL. A new building in Calgary, which is definitely needed IMO and does not meet standards, means move money for the NHL. Bettman is doing his job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Bettman's job is to maximize revenues for the NHL. A new building in Calgary, which is definitely needed IMO and does not meet standards, means move money for the NHL. Bettman is doing his job. 

Nothing will happen until the NDP are gone and this Province returns to some level of prosperity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JustAFlamer said:

true they could potentially use a new building, however it is not a "NEED" new building.  
Is it falling down? does it not meet standards?

 

The Dome is at the end of it's life cycle...   It was a great building in it's time, but it needs to be replaced...

 

Standards?...   When I go to drain the lizard and see that the line is well outside, decide to walk around for a few minutes, repeat 3 times and then have to miss the start of a period it is absolutely ridiculous when you are spending that much money to be there in the first place...

 

When concerts either skip Calgary (which they have often done for years) but still perform in Edmonton, or have a scaled back show at the Dome, that say's a lot...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...