rodfern2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Dismiss the small number of washrooms all you want, but this is a question of public health we are talking about, with serious repercussions if this thing is not properly addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boban1 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by rodfern2007 Dismiss the small number of washrooms all you want, but this is a question of public health we are talking about, with serious repercussions if this thing is not properly addressed. I think they covered that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mpenza Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 CCR had a row of 10-12 pot-o-lets for 6,000 people in the GA section of the stadium. It was a bit short, but it never was a "problem". As far as I know, Saputo Stadium cannot rival with MLS stadiums such as Chicago, L.A., Colorado and so forth. Same thing for Le Mans or Nice in France, who can't obviously rival with Parc des Princes or Stade Vélodrome. They're in the same league and no one gives a crap about whether their stadiums are as good as the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mpenza Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 CCR had a row of 10-12 pot-o-lets for 6,000 people in the GA section of the stadium. It was a bit short, but it never was a "problem". As far as I know, Saputo Stadium cannot rival with MLS stadiums such as Chicago, L.A., Colorado and so forth. Same thing for Le Mans or Nice in France, who can't obviously rival with Parc des Princes or Stade Vélodrome. They're in the same league and no one gives a crap about whether their stadiums are as good as the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza You guys really are strange. Montreal will not get in the MLS because they don't provide enough urinals to the crowd? What a load of crap. We're not building a hotel, we're building a stadium, as far as I know. Nail. Head. I have heard stats on post-peepee hand-washing in Quebec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trident Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Oh no Mpenza, we don't have enough ****ters, get your gun, for anarchy will surely follow! I think I went to the bathroom 1 time at the CCR, 2 years ago. And I bet if we expand for MLS, they'll dig a little hole in the ground to bring us up to par. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza We surely have more washrooms now than we had back at Claude-Robillard and frankly, it wasn't that much of a problem in the old stadium. And what's with your obsession with washrooms and concession stands anyway? It's not a baseball stadium where you're stuck for 5 hours everytime you go to a game. It's soccer. Take a leak before the game and you'll be fine. Now I understand why I am usually fine at games. It had never dawned on me before. Take a lesson everybody else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Obviously the younger set piping up here. Some people need more frequent stops. I suppose Mpenze would recommend D'pends. I remember (not so fondly) the troughs at the old Forum in Montreal. A sensory experience I've only seen equalled by some less savoury spots in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Ed Obviously the younger set piping up here. Some people need more frequent stops. I suppose Mpenze would recommend D'pends. I remember (not so fondly) the troughs at the old Forum in Montreal. A sensory experience I've only seen equalled by some less savoury spots in Europe. We've still got the troughs at Winnipeg Stadium, and in these days of eco-consciousness, such a system should be recommended. The pitch of the trough and the constant flow of urine ensures flushing without wasting valuable water. (As a bonus, the washrooms as the stadium are usually so crowded and provisioned with so few sinks that most don't bother to wash their hands, adding to the water savings). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Ah, yes. Non smoking now. Makes a big difference in trough flow consistency. Excellent discussion here. Bottom line is, nitwits aside, a new stadium needs facilities. To speak otherwise is insulting to those who celebrate World Toilet Day (solemnly observed yesterday). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest speedmonk42 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza You guys really are strange. Montreal will not get in the MLS because they don't provide enough urinals to the crowd? What a load of crap. We're not building a hotel, we're building a stadium, as far as I know. That is not what was said. You guys need to pull the sticks out of your a$$. Read things from the perspective that others in the country actually really want things to succeed there. Forgive us for pointing out a problem at BMO that no one predicted. The reason I pointed it out is that I played on team with a bunch of architects in the summer and asked them why it was done that way. They said it all gets done to code based on numbers. Well those really didn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest speedmonk42 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. Now I understand why I am usually fine at games. It had never dawned on me before. Take a lesson everybody else. This of course assumes everyone is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 I think the problem with judging this stadium is variances in what people are using as a point of reference. The stadium indeed started looking better than I expected once the seats went in. There is no doubt it is a big improvement over CCR. On the other hand I don't think it is all that impressive when compared to the majority of MLS stadiums. The problem with the stadium is that it is still really a university/third division level stadium. It may be a nice university/third division level stadium but it is still pretty far from top notch or even a middle level stadium like BMO. I also don't think this can be changed very easily and the quality of the stadium will not be upgraded even with a new stand to increase capacity. One still has to realize that this was a low budget stadium and in many areas that is quite visible. I think if reaching the MLS was the goal, it was short sighted of the Saputos to build such a stadium. It is still much more a top notch USL facility than a decent MLS stadium. This stadium when expanded may be enough to get us into MLS if other factors are in our favour but it will be with the bare minimum quality of stadium for MLS. I think this stadium gets an awful lot of credit on this board for having natural grass. That is a good thing but its other flaws should not be overlooked because of this. As far as the washrooms go, they really remind me of the Richardson stadium washrooms in Kingston which should be remembered by those who went to the Belize games. Again if the standard of comparison is CCR they are a definite improvement over the porta-potties but still look like the type of washroom one sees in a public park not a major stadium. I am fully aware that many big European stadiums have terrible washrooms especially for away fans but I don`t think that is any reason why we should be doing the same here. The hardcore supporters groups may not be going to the stadium for the washrooms but I think the average fan wants decent facilities. Even the hardcore supporters do like to drink beer and the situation at CCR currently is that one is a bit careful how much one drinks because one really does not want to have to use the washrooms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trident Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Of course this is comparitively bad to a MLS stadium, this is a USL stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Trident Of course this is comparitively bad to a MLS stadium, this is a USL stadium. Yes but it is a USL stadium of a team with aspirations to go to the MLS in the near future and that is where the problem lies. If they are content to stay in USL it is a great stadium possibly the best in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mpenza Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 So... first, there was a capacity standard, and now there is a quality standard? Who gives a rat's ass, really? Saputo is proving to everyone that you can build a decent stadium without having to spend tons of money. Ok, it's not Chicago, L.A., Colorado or even Toronto for that matter. But we don't care. We have a stadium, it'll eventually have 18,000 seats, and it'll be perfectly fine. Nobody NEEDS a stadium like the ones you see in MLS. That's just Americans trying to compete with the EPL. We're building a stadium that would be good enough for French Ligue 1 (see Le Mans), and I reallly don't see why it wouldn't be good enough... It really is time to focus on the game rather than on every little detail that surrounds it. Washrooms..... come on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSwede Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 It should be good enough for CONCACAF Champions Cup. I have been to Ricardo Saprissa Stadium in San Jose, and i can say definitively I couldn't find the loo. But the stadium was nonetheless great! The fans and passion made me forget everything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boban1 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza So... first, there was a capacity standard, and now there is a quality standard? Who gives a rat's ass, really? Saputo is proving to everyone that you can build a decent stadium without having to spend tons of money. Ok, it's not Chicago, L.A., Colorado or even Toronto for that matter. But we don't care. We have a stadium, it'll eventually have 18,000 seats, and it'll be perfectly fine. Nobody NEEDS a stadium like the ones you see in MLS. That's just Americans trying to compete with the EPL. We're building a stadium that would be good enough for French Ligue 1 (see Le Mans), and I reallly don't see why it wouldn't be good enough... It really is time to focus on the game rather than on every little detail that surrounds it. Washrooms..... come on... There always was a standards issue with the stadium along with the size for MLS. Get your head out of the sand. To quote Garber : " Saputo needs to think big." Thats not just big in terms of size, but big in terms of quality. This is a great little stadium - its better than nothing. And it gets people thinking that soccer has a place in this country and in that part of Canada. But don't fool yourself into thinking that it should stop there. When Saputo started this whole stadium deal his vision was only USL all along. Now with the success of TFC and a re-awakening of the game in this country things have changed. He needs to adapt if he wants to step up. Hey there is nothing wrong with the stadium if he wants to stay in 2nd tier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza It really is time to focus on the game rather than on every little detail that surrounds it. But this thread is specifically about the stadium, and its little details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mpenza Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here. If you NEED a stadium up to par with Chicago and Colorado to even be considered for MLS, then I want no part of it. This is ridiculous, and obviously not the case. I really don't see where you get the idea that we can't play in the MLS with the current stadium being built. If everyone were to think like you, soccer would have no future on this continent. The only "problem" with this stadium is the capacity. But it has been designed to be rapidly expanded, so it's a non issue, really. It will have 18 000 seats more or less, and it'll take less than three months of work to get there when the Impact decides to go ahead. Saputo's vision was to build a home for the Impact with a possibility to rapidly expand if need be (MLS). Saputo doesn't need to ADAPT to anything, when MLS was considered right off the bat. There's no way montreal would ever need 17-18,000 seats in the USL... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boban1 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza Well, we'll have to agree to disagree here. If you NEED a stadium up to par with Chicago and Colorado to even be considered for MLS, then I want no part of it. This is ridiculous, and obviously not the case. I really don't see where you get the idea that we can't play in the MLS with the current stadium being built. If everyone were to think like you, soccer would have no future on this continent. The only "problem" with this stadium is the capacity. But it has been designed to be rapidly expanded, so it's a non issue, really. It will have 18 000 seats more or less, and it'll take less than three months of work to get there when the Impact decides to go ahead. Saputo's vision was to build a home for the Impact with a possibility to rapidly expand if need be (MLS). Saputo doesn't need to ADAPT to anything, when MLS was considered right off the bat. There's no way montreal would ever need 17-18,000 seats in the USL... Yeah I guess we will have to disagree. I am just re-iterating what Garber said. And Toronto is a grade below the stadiums you mentioned. I didn't say Stade Saputo had to get to Chicago's level. But it does need to step up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mpenza Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 What did Garber say exactly? Do you know? I haven't read a thing about it to be honest. All I heard was that he said the stadium was "too small" in its current shape, which is far from questioning its overall quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boban1 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Mpenza What did Garber say exactly? Do you know? I haven't read a thing about it to be honest. All I heard was that he said the stadium was "too small" in its current shape, which is far from questioning its overall quality. I mentioned it a few posts back.... "Saputo needs to think big." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSwede Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by boban1 I mentioned it a few posts back.... "Saputo needs to think big." Think Big? Sure think big but thats in the long term buddy. The NASL went big to and it petered out. In my opinion, the stadium is appropriate in the short run. In the long run we can think about larger 'fancier' restrooms that would satisfy your every need. I still don't understand why there is fuss over the washrooms. I can say as a traveled soccer fan that many legendary stadiums in the world have crap washrooms but they are still great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boban1 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 quote:Originally posted by CanadianSwede Think Big? Sure think big but thats in the long term buddy. The NASL went big to and it petered out. In my opinion, the stadium is appropriate in the short run. In the long run we can think about larger 'fancier' restrooms that would satisfy your every need. I still don't understand why there is fuss over the washrooms. I can say as a traveled soccer fan that many legendary stadiums in the world have crap washrooms but they are still great. I agree there has been too much of an emphasis on the washrooms. I just used it as an example to draw the point that the standard has to be raised in future expansion. Expanding with the same standard won't due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.