RS Posted August 8, 2004 Share Posted August 8, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Daniel It's one block off the highway and surrounded by parking and has a metro station 5 minutes away. It is EXTREMELY accessible, although not central at all (North of the city, not much around). Saputo has repeated that he rather wants 9,000 in a packed stadium than 9,000 in a 20,000 stadium (cough McGill cough). Although the whole point of McGill is to get bigger crowds. Anyways... we're just waiting for a new stadium because adding bleachers is NOT a permanent solution by a long shot. But now that 9000 is the norm, should they be giving more thought towards McGill, at least in the short term while they look at building their own stadium? I'm sure those people sitting on the grass behind the nets yesterday would rather sit on a bench where they can actually see most of the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted August 8, 2004 Share Posted August 8, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Rudi But now that 9000 is the norm, should they be giving more thought towards McGill, at least in the short term while they look at building their own stadium? I'm sure those people sitting on the grass behind the nets yesterday would rather sit on a bench where they can actually see most of the field. Reread the Saputo part. He's calling the shots and it's frustrating because CCR is a rather poor soccer stadium. There's talk of adding more temp stands somewhere. Capacity is 7,500 + 1,000 temp stands = 8,500 Average this season is around 9,100+; even the games in Québec City and Sherbrooke should get 8,000-9,000. A public practice in Trois-Rivières last week attracted 1,500 people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted August 8, 2004 Share Posted August 8, 2004 But now that 9000 is the norm, should they be giving more thought towards McGill, at least in the short term while they look at building their own stadium? Do you really think they want the headache and cost of removing the football lines and CFL ads many times a season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montreal_FC_fan Posted August 8, 2004 Share Posted August 8, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead But now that 9000 is the norm, should they be giving more thought towards McGill, at least in the short term while they look at building their own stadium? Do you really think they want the headache and cost of removing the football lines and CFL ads many times a season? Saputo doesnt like the idea about playinh in a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montreal_FC_fan Posted August 8, 2004 Share Posted August 8, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Montreal_FC_fan Saputo doesnt like the idea about playinh in a Opps pushed the reply buttom to fast [:I] So as i was saying... Saputo doesnt like the idea about playing in a 20000capacity stadium when its going to be half full thats why he prefares to add seats at CCR... Maybe time for a new stadium? [8D] And the lines at McGill arent permenent... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted August 8, 2004 Share Posted August 8, 2004 quote:And the lines at McGill arent permenent.. They certainly don't just come off with water. Thats why for that womens game they held there they just left the ads on the field, too much of a hassle to remove them. Also, Saputo likes being the main tenant at CCR. Impact would be the secondary tenant at McGill. Another big drawback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.