Jump to content

gromit

Members
  • Posts

    382
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by gromit

  1. Well based on your comments we can never expect the Olympics in the USA again as they will always be offering an inferior product. The State de France was built on host the 1998 world cup final but they still had the brains to future proof it for athletics. The sightlines are as good as the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami which hosts your Suoerbowl. Using the ancient LA coliseum and giving it a lick of paint no longer cuts the mustard.. All stadium have compromises.
  2. The high price for the MetLife was because of where it wasn't being built ... it was because it was being built in the New York City Area. Considering other stadium proposals and developments since .. US Bank Stadium, Mercedes Bank Stadium, nothing has come close. To demonstrate you are losing the argument you use figures based on how much the Georgia Dome and Edward Jones Dome cost to build in 1992 and 1995 respectively - now how much they would cost to build now if adjusted for inflation - in fact the Edward Jones Dome HAD to be significantly upgraded as the terms of the contract stipulated a the Dome in the Top Tier in terms of facilities and amenities - even the 2010 renovations could not accomplish this By 2028 we have no way of knowing if the MetLife will still fulfil the requirements of either the Jets or the Giants? or may need substantial updates to keep the stadium at a never either the Johnson or Mara families demand ... Instead of using figures massively out of date suggest that the proposed St Louis NFL stadium to keep the Rams and not even to get a SuperBowl was budgeted at $1.01bn and you might be taken more seriously. If NYC ever have a serious plan for the Olympics or even the SuperBowl again then joke of having a temporary main stadium is what needs to be forgotten so an alternative stadium which incorporates existing technology would need to be considered Paris does not have a problem with the cockamamie pretense of sliding stands ... maybe once/twice a year it is used, but the stadium is still fantastic for both football and rugby ... NYC could easily do this, hold the Olympics, the World Athletics Championship, the annual Diamond League which laughably has been held at the 5,000 seat capacity Icahn stadium in the past and is currently held at Hayward Field whilst other countries offer significantly better venues. the Stade de France holds an annual Diamond League meeting, 8-10 rugby games (similar to NFL games) and 10-15 football games and yet there is never any problems re: the fan experience ... the only reason the French Rugby Team is moving is for a commercial reason ... the deal they get means they miss out massively on commercial aspects of using the stadium. And if you put the Stade de France in any US city and you'd have NFL teams begging to be the tenant. Why would the Jets and Giants have a lease of only 25 years and respectively a break clause of ONLY 15 years if this incredibly wonderful and perfect MetLife stadium could fulfill their requirements ad infinitum ... Metlife sponsor the stadium .... for about $350m over 25years .... this is shared. Now a single team in control of the stadium would get that exclusively plus all money from amenities, concessions etc. A stadium build with a retractable roof would be able to gain additional revenue from indoor sports such as the Final Four basketball etc. There is always massive financial benefits to a sports team having exclusive use of a sports stadium
  3. And this transformation cost Hampden Park about 8,000 seats from its listed Football Capacity I believe a more extensive modification proposed for the Estadio La Peineta would have resulted in a loss of 12,000 seats from the football stadium though potentially because the stadium would be more rectangular than Hampden's oval design. Essentially if the requirement is minimum 60,000 seats and you don't want a white elephant with no tenant you are looking for a minimum 70,000 seat football stadium
  4. Another possible venue which I note has not been used is the Stade Sebastian Charlety in the 13th arrondissement. At the moment Paris 2024 have no listed venue for Baseball/Softball that I can find. If this sport is there in 2024 (it is back for 2020), then this stadium might be used due to it's oval shape result from incorporating a Running Track. For football, it has 20,000 seats There is also a small arena with a capacity of 1850 which is probably too small for anything
  5. The only potential large facility not currently included is the new French National Rugby Stadium at Ris-Orangis proposed to have a 82,000 seat capacity and sliding pitch/roof option However it is nowhere near any other facility close by currently proposed ... it is 20miles south of the Expo Centre and the AccorHotels Arena ... however it could hold several sports under the same roof and maybe be a Football venue, with the Parc des Princes used for Rugby7s if they wanted a larger capacity
  6. Nonsense? The technology has existed since 1998 with the Stade de France. It has since been further developed with the Singapore National Stadium. These have been built from the start to have this flexibility. The London Stadium and ANZ Stadium have suffered from trying to retrofit the stadiums not originally designed for this purpose. Far more likely than building a massive temporary stadium Why would the Jets move? Lets consider the LA (formerly St Louis) Rams ... the Dome in St Louis was only opened in 1995, had to be renovated in 2010 yet to get to the Rams standards if they stayed required $700m in improvements. Or the Falcons ... the Georgia Dome was only opened in 1992 yet they are moving to the Mercedes Benz Stadium for 2017 ... so the Dome will be demolished after 25 years By 2028, the Metlife will be 18 years old so beyond the point where substantial renovations would be required to be made. By 2031 ... it would be the same duration the Rams waited before moving. Sharing a stadium always makes the Jets the young brother, the 2nd team .... a new stadium mostly funded by others with a city desperate for a legacy tenant would make the Jets a very attractive partner, likely to move the team back to their historic territory between JFK and LaGuardia and the advantage for NY2028 bid team is they can immediately say the biggest facility constructive suffers no chance of being a white elephant
  7. As someone who has watched Football and Rugby at the Stade de France, track and field is definitely compatible with the former sports if consider as part of the original design plan. And Stade de France - which works is 18 years old The KSS Group (UK) have this design which incorporates a variety of technology to create a concert/T&F/football & rugby venue adaptable for the differing requirements and with a 80,000 seat capacity http://www.kssgroup.com/projects/japan-national-stadium/
  8. New York City The MetLife has a 25 year lease agreement but one team can leave after 15years and then after every subsequent 5 years if they given 12months notice .. the other team would have to stay for the duration but of course have the benefit of exclusivity. Apparently this arrangement was at the request of the Jets. Therefore the earliest date would be 2026 and then 2031. If you consider the London Stadium it took about 3 years to convert for football (2013-2016) we are looking at 2028 Olympic Stadium likely to be available for an NFL Team in 2031, Unlike London, if the stadium was designed to be converted from the start with movable stands and in 15 years this technology would likely be further advanced, then NYC will have a central stadium, post games usage (Jets or Giants) and the warm-up track could easily be converted into a permanent 15-20,000 stadium as a legacy
  9. No. Bit like Canada joining with the USA
  10. Even without expanding some of the existing large stadium, the stadium capacity of any English bid would be sufficient Wembley 90,000 seats One of Emirates 60,400 seats, new Spurs Stadium 61,000 seats or Olympic stadium 54,000 seats and then Newcastle 52,500 seats Sunderland 49,000 seats Old Trafford 75,000 seats Etihad Stadium 62,700 seats Liverpool 58,500 seats Villa Park 42,500 seats Southampton and Leicester currently 32,000 seats but designed for easy expansion for 50,000 seats Milton Keynes 30,000 seats but easy temporary expansion to 44,000 seats Elland Road 37,914 seats but easy adaptable to over 40,000 seats as is Hillsborough currently at 39,732 seats That's 12 stadiums before we even consider FIFA's ability to fudge with Kallingrad at 35,000 seats and Doha having 6 stadia !!!
  11. If you had any idea about football in England outside of the Premier League you'd realise the building of football stadiums in England does not create white elephants as you put it. Last week a team in the third tier of the game had a higher attendance than the MLS. When the MLS has an attendance level to routinely fill your NFL stadiums then the USA deserve to host over a country where it is the No1 sport not the fifth rated sideshow. To use Alaska and Hawaii is a nonsense as even at its extremes England has one time zone minimising impact on teams and fans alike.
  12. Comparing Alaska and Hawaii with the West Country and East Anglia ... jaw drops in astonishment ... no-one in Europe really cares if the USA hosts the World Cup with its excessive commercialisation and attempts to Americanise the language of football (not soccer) Most bidding nations attempt to extend such events to all corners if possible. At present (which means now) there are 17 odd stadiums which could meet the FIFA criteria with no that difficult alteration. There is the possibility that Bristol might extend Ashton Gate beyond the 27,000 seat current plans, or Norwich might replace Carrow Road This is a topic about England and most of the rest of the world have absolutely interest in the USA. If you want to talk USA 2026 start a new topic
  13. Even with a one stadium per city rule we're talking 12 stadiums with Southampton replacing Portsmouth and Leicester/Derby replacing Nottingham. Geographical areas potentially missing out are the West Country and East Anglia.
  14. On 30th May, the FIFA Executive Committee decided that any country could bid for the FIFA World Cup providing their association had not hosted the previous event. European countries are now officially allowed to bid for the World Cup in 2026. 2 months earlier, on 24th March, Greg Dyke, the chairman of the Football Association had announced a possible bid for 2026 provided Sepp Blatter was no longer FIFA president. This will now be the case. Could England now be the favourite? The only two confirmed bidders are Canada (sufficient infrastructure?) and Mexico (hosts in 1970 and 1986). Advantages that England would have include: No competing sporting or cultural events Games held in one time zone Multiple facilities of proven quality for training, accommodation etc Proven ability to host a multi event and multi team event (Olympics, Cricket, Rugby etc.) Multi cultural society with proven ability to support multiple teams throughout such an event Excellent infrastructure Purpose built football stadia already in place with guaranteed full usage after the event and minimum modifications required if any at all FIFA delegates will hate one nation even more than England for exposing their levels of corruption Potential stadiums Newcastle Sunderland Liverpool Manchester - Old Trafford, Manchester - Etihad Stadium, Leeds Sheffield Derby Leicester Birmingham - Villa Park Southampton Milton Keynes London - Wembley London - Emirates Stadium London - Stamford Bridge London - New White Hart Lane London - Olympic Stadium All are built/building and have been designed to temporarily/permanently exceed the minimum 40,000 seat capacity
  15. Not the Asia confederation. It only goes back one tournament now instead of two, allowing Europe to bid
  16. I would suggest expanding the Mount Smart stadium in South Auckland. It has some infrastructure in place, as an 'athletics' footprint, have warm up track, is in an area that could be redeveloped like East London, and post games could be a home for an oft mentioned South Auckland Super Rugby franchise
  17. As of 30th May, England can now officially bid
  18. Miami It may not be the largest USA city but it is one which has that international name recognition. Major tourist destination and cruise ship terminal so hotel rooms shouldn't be a problem. Plenty of sporting arenas. Possible tenant for an Olympic Stadium if designed properly in the U of Miami Hurricanes. Undoubtedly there are multiple reasons why Miami might not be a suitable location, but with stadia stretching from Fort Lauderdale down the coast, water transport might be a decent way of temporarily overcoming infrastructure issues?
  19. Interesting there is an athletics stadium which did successfully convert to a football type stadium Manchester's Commonwealth Games Stadium, aka the Etihad Stadium Here they took a 38,000 seat horseshoe configuration and after the games, removed the track, dug down a level, filled in the horse shoe and brought the other end in, to leave a 48,000 seat football stadium, now being expanded to 62,000 seat. What you might to do is scale this up so built a 65,000 seat athletics stadium with the notion of converting it into an 80,000 seat football stadium?
  20. In 2002-2003, Chicago spent $632million updating Soldier Field so the Bears using any Olympic Stadium is a non-starter. The 2016 stadium was to be downsized to a 10,000 seat community athletics stadium. Realistically to convert post games you either compromise the ideal athletics view or the ideal football/gridiron view
  21. Realistically the only North American city that can host is LA. Despite all the lovely comments from the IOC, without a main stadium you are doomed. Look at London 2012. A main stadium of 80,000 ready to be downsized to 25,000 turns into a 54,000 seat stadium with a regular football Tennant and available for athletics into an Alpha+ city where the previous largest capacity for athletics was 17,000 for a Diamond League regular. Unless you can do a Hampden Park and put a deck in reducing the capacity but still leaving you the minimum 60,000 you are going to seriously struggle. The Chicago model of building a 80,000 capacity stadium downsized to 10,000 post games leaves you with the worlds most expensive seat per capacity stadium which would beat the now abandoned Tokyo stadium hands down. There's the cost of building it, of the reducing it and then having a capacity so small the income to recoup money is minimal, all done without public subsidy. Therefore you are left with a city with a large enough central stadium to accommodate decking like Dallas or Miami as decking takes at lkeast 14,000 seats if following the approach was pursued. Unless a NFL franchise or college football team can be persuaded to be a resident in a large but compromised stadium, despite all of the honey talk from the IOC, North America's realistic hopes begin and end in LA
  22. The Tennis Centre? You mean Wimbledon? You can also add Twickenham for the Rugby7s, the o2 Arena, the Excel Centre, Wembley Arena ... the only facility not in place is one for Squash
  23. Name any global event when the subsequent event is held in the same confederation unless there is an absent of bidders like in 2022 Winter Olympics .... save the IAAF World Championships in Athletics, a bi-annual event. That is why China and Australia would be ruled out. And nobody has yet answered why would the English Football Association, the oldest in the world and always likely to be a contender if they chose to bid for the hosting rights for a World Cup, have even voiced the possibility of bidding for 2026 UNLESS there was a clear indication that such a bid would be admitted? We are not talking about some press officer making an error, we are talking about the chairman of the Football Association And so far has the USA even declared that they will bid for 2026? Confirmed bids have come from Mexico, Canada, and Colombia
  24. "Football Association chairman Greg Dyke has revealed England may consider a bid to host the 2026 World Cup finals." "Fifa's executive committee are no longer responsible for the final say on which country is awarded a World Cup. Instead, they will establish a shortlist before the 209 member nations of Fifa cast a vote for their preferred choice. 2026 will be the first tournament to be decided under the new system - a final decision will be made in May 2017 at Fifa's annual congress in Kuala Lumpur." "Aren't the USA favourites for 2026? Yes. Having narrowly lost out to Qatar for 2022 there are plenty of people connected to US soccer who feel they deserve to be awarded 2026. And given Fifa's previous policy of rotating the World Cup around its confederations there is a school of thought which says only countries from Africa or North America, Central America or the Caribbean can bid. If such a policy was adhered to - Concacaf president and Fifa vice-president Jeffrey Webb certainly thinks it should be - then the field of eligible candidates narrows dramatically.....But China would also love to host the World Cup, as would Australia" http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32045238 For FIFA rules don't exist. The rule say one city can't host no more than 2 stadiums ... except Doha has 6. Or that it is a summer tournament ... except it will be held Nov-Dec 2022 causing huge revenue loss to leagues and clubs that pay the players
  25. and considering the absolute screw up that FIFA made regarding Qatar and the huge disruption it is going to cause to the European leagues, a sop to a UEFA member to bring the footballing community is something that can't be ruled out. Remove UEFA from the World Cup .... and there is no World Cup
×
×
  • Create New...