Garber's Comments re Saputo Stadium

[brownbear]

Hello all:

I've been a lurker on these boards for a while and finally decided to register. I've been a fan of Canadian soccer most of my life (anybody else remember Tony Chursky? That's how long I've been following Canadian soccer.) and will continue to be. Moreover, I have a very close relative who is very much involved with Canadian soccer. I won't say who he is since he gives me some interesting insights on the scuttlebutt surrounding the glorious game as it relates to events north of the 49th parallel.

Anyway, my relative was in attendance at Stade Saputo and told me that MLS commissioner Garber made it abundantly clear to those with whom he spoke that the stadium (except for the pitch, which my relative claimed was immaculate) was not even close to being up to the standards expected of potential applicants by the MLS.

I'm not saying that to criticize what the Saputos have done, only to let you in on the thinking of the MLS. I don't think that this should stand in the way (at all) of Montreal being awarded a MLS franchise, but if it were to happen, those whose task it is to bring MLS soccer to Montreal will understand exactly the types of stadium upgrades that will be expected of them.

[nolando]

thanks for the inside scoop

[Calgary Boomer]

I don't think that's a surprise. This is why Mr Gillette has been mentioned in any MLS bid. They'll have to address the capacity, the concessions, parking, luxury suites and maybe even concessions etc.

Not at all a big deal...they planned for that kind of growth when they made the plans.

[brownbear]

I don't think you understand the scope of what will have to be done, CB. When Garber was evaluating Stade Saputo and what he would like to see he rifled off the names of stadia that have been, or are being, built in SLC, Colorado, Chicago, etc. In other words, there will have to be a MAJOR revamp of the stadium. That's why Gillett (is it not without an "e" at the end? He's an American, IIRC, not Quebecois) being involved is a good thing, because they will have to pour tens of millions into renovating and upgrading the stadium.

Just compare what Montreal spent to what these other stadia cost to build and you'll get some idea of the amount of money that the team will have to commit to spend on upgrades before being given a team.

Chicago--Toyota Park USD 100 million+

Real Salt Lake--USD 65 million (cheaper state to build than Illinois)

Colorado--Dick's Sporting Goods Stadium--USD 165 million (but that includes infrastructure upgrades such as roads, etc.)

Philly's proposed stadium--USD 115 million.

[Grizzly]

One of the Voyageurs (don't know if he wants to be named) also had some contact with Gerber and said Gerber said the exact same things to Saputo that brownbear is reporting, ie. that the stadium was well below the standard MLS expected. This is exactly what I have been saying all along so I guess I am entitled to say, "I told you so" to all the people that have been disagreeing with me on this. The positives in the stadium are the excellent pitch (which showed its quality by holding together in the pouring rain) and excellent sightlines. The big negative is not the capacity but that two of the stands are closer in design to temporary stands than the type of stand one sees in a typical first division professional stadium. The north stand is built on a previous concrete structure and is more solid. When you are under the other two stands they have support beams running everywhere and the area is completely blocked off to the public other than a small coridor that leads to smaller lanes where you enter the stadium. It resembles a type of Lego construction. Someone on the other thread did a photoshop of the south stand with a second deck but there is no way the present south stand structure could support a second deck. I think what the Saputo's currently have planned as far as expanding the stadium considering their budget is to build more of this cheap to both buy and install type of stand to completely surround the field. I think what MLS is going to want is these stands replaced with more solid and permanent looking stands which will mean tearing down the south and east stands. The positive about this is that both stands look fairly easy to disassemble. The plot of land is also a bit bigger than I remembered from my previous visit during construction so they have a bit of room to work with. I think what MLS will demand from the Impact is not the simple $15 million expansion they had planned but a much more expensive and extensive rebuilding of the stadium.

As usual people will mention Columbus Crew's stadium and some of the crappy temporary stadiums that teams are playing in. Columbus has been in the MLS since the league started in 1996 and have played in their current stadium since 1999. Since they are already in the league they do not have to meet the current higher standards that the league has set. MLS has also shown itself willing to allow a team to play in a substandard stadium if they have plans to build a high quality stadium in the near future. The problem is Saputo Stadium does not meet this standard nor does it seem like it will under the current expansion plans. It is a great stadium for USL but MLS has higher standards. They have raised the bar as far as what type of expansion fee and stadium a club needs to enter into the league which is exactly what they need to do if they want respect on the world stage. It is up to Saputo to decide if he wants to pay the price to join MLS, something they have not seemed very willing to do in the past.

[MegasAlexandros1555362277]

I understand that Garber (and yes it is gArber.. not gErber, the man doesn't sell baby food!) is seeing these new stadia down in the US and in comparison with Saputo Stadium they are of much higher quality in many respects. BUT, I can't help but feel that it is an unfair comparison because most of those stadia have been built with a significant amount of public funds. AEG, Anschutz... etc didn't pour 100's of millions on their on dollars into the construction of their stadiums. So in the category of "put your money where your mouth is" I think Saputo wins hands down. It took a minor miracle to get public funds for BMO... which is to say that here in Canada the different levels of government are not really there to provide infrastructure to professional sports clubs. Garber has to realize that.

[Mpenza]

quote:

They'll have to address the capacity, the concessions, parking, luxury suites and maybe even concessions etc.

Parking?

There are about 4,000 parking spaces available underground all within a 5-minute walk from the stadium.

quote:In other words, there will have to be a MAJOR revamp of the stadium.

Either that, or build brick walls under the stands to make it look like a real building, like they did in Toronto.

[masster]

I don't get it. Whats the big deal? As long as the stadium is full isn't that all that should matter? Get the capacity big enough, make sure the pitch is good enough (which it is), get bums in the seats and the esthetics should not make a difference.

[Vancouver Fan]

I don't think there would have to be so many upgrades to bring up to BMO Field standards.I guess I'll se for myself in June but from what I've seen here and on TV it's not that far off what Toronto has.

[Mpenza]

You be the judge :

Montreal :

Toronto :

[Footpassion]

Mpenza, I saw the difference! Concrete blocks supporting beams are square in Toronto and round in Montreal!

[Mpenza]

And of course, we all know that according to MLS standards, everything needs to be square. Damn french-speaking bastards with their round stuff.

[youllneverwalkalone]

Earth to Don Garber? Come in Don Garber? You have lost contact with reality. Come back to us Don...

You represent a league with an average attendance in line with the current capacity of Saputo. Even though the Chairman has clearly said a million times that the stadium will be expanded to 17-18k (a good MLS attendance) that's not good enough?

Oh right, we need more parking and concessions. Who cares if you're playing in a cavernous NFL stadium with a plastic pitch and football lines? As long as you have concessions and parking you're a winner!

Newsflash: My secret source told me Tottenham Hotspur applied for MLS and were rejected because they have no parking or concessions!

MLS needs to change its name to PCL - Parking & Concession League. While your at it, if the top of the table wears yellow kits and are called "The Crew," why not change United, FC, and Dynamo to "Impark," "Chili Dog" and "Overweight Fatass American Douche Bag Trying to Create a Fake Football League And Failing Miserably!"

Don Garber you f-cuking poof get your head out of your c-unt! Why is this the beautiful game? Because all you need is a nice pitch and somewhere to put the spectators where they'll be excited. Imagine the atmosphere at BMO if there were no concessions???

[Daniel]

The concessions at SS are clearly not permanent - tents and foldable tables. The idea is that the expansion and refurb will cost as much as the entire current stadium and offices. The "permanent" installations that would probably not be refurbished, and which are the ones that should be compared to current MLS stadiums are the main stand, luxury boxes, media facilities and locker rooms.

Is the stadium up to MLS standards right now? No.

Seeing what $15m has already bought, I can see another $15m going pretty far. They need to start working on the expansion and refurb plans and renders to compare it to an MLS stadium.

We'll have a better idea after Tuesday what the big difference is between BMO and SS.

[Vancouver Fan]

quote:Originally posted by Footpassion

Mpenza, I saw the difference! Concrete blocks supporting beams are square in Toronto and round in Montreal!

That and the nice blue paint.

[Guest speedmonk42]

quote:Originally posted by Vancouver Fan

I don't think there would have to be so many upgrades to bring up to BMO Field standards.I guess I'll se for myself in June but from what I've seen here and on TV it's not that far off what Toronto has.

BMO standards? Honestly don't think that would take much.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by Mpenza

And of course, we all know that according to MLS standards, everything needs to be square. Damn french-speaking bastards with their round stuff.

MLS has standards? Oh yea those "flexible" things that they change at will until it is a pretzel [8D]

SS will be fine with 20-30 mill in additions. That is not unreasonable. I still like Saputo's approach, start with an inexpensive place that can be redone one part at a time.

Once accepted to MLS fix concessions, add more permanent seating, solidify current seating, coverage from weather for fans, luxury boxes. You don't need to do it all at once.

[brownbear]

As the person who started this thread I'd like to respond to a couple of the comments posted up-thread:

First, I agree with many of you that an expanded SS would be a great place to watch an MLS game. While the stadia in SLC, Colorado, etc., are nice (really nice!) they are not necessary, in my opinion, for a great game-watching experience. And isn't that what it's all about?

Second, and notwithstanding the above, the fact is that what we think matters not a whit as to whether the MLS grants Montreal a team and the conditions that the owners must fulfill in order for that to happen. It's MLS' and Garber's call, pure and simple. It's their party and they're in charge of determining the dress code.

Third, many of the stadia built recently in the US have private sector funding (at least partially) but, on the whole, US city, county, and state governments are much more willing to provide public financing for professional sporting facilities than are their Canadian counterparts (which is a good thing, in my opinion).

Finally, I don't think this will hurt Montreal's chances, but as I mentioned earlier, they will have to be prepared to bring some serious dollars to the bargaining table.

[brownbear]

quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph

MLS has standards? Oh yea those "flexible" things that they change at will until it is a pretzel [8D]

SS will be fine with 20-30 mill in additions. That is not unreasonable. I still like Saputo's approach, start with an inexpensive place that can be redone one part at a time.

Once accepted to MLS fix concessions, add more permanent seating, solidify current seating, coverage from weather for fans, luxury boxes. You don't need to do it all at once.

I agree that MLS' standards are so immutable (and without logical foundation) as to be almost non-existent. But, once again, it is we (and I'm speaking here as a fan of Canadian soccer) who would like to have another one of our cities join the MLS, not the other way around.

You have to understand the psychology of Garber and others who govern the MLS. If you know why they would be willing to accept an MLS club playing in Qwest Field (Seattle) but not in Stade Saputo, despite the fact that both--for different reasons--do not meet the putative standards of the league, then you understand the nature of the potential hurdles that the Saputos and Mr. Gillett will have to clear with the stadium in Montreal.

Adding on to a stadium piecemeal--as alluded to above by tmcmurph is how most big European clubs have renovated and modernized their own stadia, but the MLS is US-centric and this ultimately weighs on the psychology of the league's administrators.

[jimmynow]

Garber also likes competetion between potential groups. he'll speak his mind because he wants to make sure teams have higher expectations. The difference between Saputo and letsay BMO or Crew Stadium in infrastructure is pretty significant -- and a very important revenue generator. Anyone who has been to BMO knows that despite having stands that somewhat resemble the two at Saputo, they are not quite designed the same. There aren't as many supporting beams, and more importantly, underneath are huge concourses with washrooms and concessions on either side. You couldn't do that under the stands currently constructed. BMO is not as nice as Real Salt Lake's new stadium but it's what Saputo has to strive for.

What Garber said is correct and whether or not another 30 million will solve the problem is irrelevant to his comments on the stadium at this point in time. He speaks the truth and if Saputo/Gillet are planning to spend that money and make the changes then Garber will approve. Garber has little strategic reason to praise the cute little USL stadium.

[Calgary Boomer]

Grizzly, you're not the only one who talked about the limitations of Saputo Stadium. Lots of people had some doubts about the long term viability of a 13 million dollar facility. And people were all over me when I mentioned in another thread that the stadium wasn't up to MLS standards.

HOWEVER, nothing 50 million of GG's dough can't improve.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

The big negative is not the capacity but that two of the stands are closer in design to temporary stands than the type of stand one sees in a typical first division professional stadium. The north stand is built on a previous concrete structure and is more solid. When you are under the other two stands they have support beams running everywhere and the area is completely blocked off to the public other than a small coridor that leads to smaller lanes

As usual people will mention Columbus Crew's stadium and some of the crappy temporary stadiums that teams are playing in.

When I went there, a couple of months ago, I had some concerns as well. Many were different from yours but I cant disagree with the idea that it looks more like field with big stands than a stadium.

I think that you are underrating Crew stadium. i was there a week before I went and saw saputo stadium. Yes, it shows that Crew stadium was built on the cheap but its still a stadium. Its got some semblance of a concourse with concessions. I didn't see any of that at Stade Saputo. Nor did i see an outer facade.

I think that what Garber wants is a stadium and I am not sure that you can call Saputo a stadium. It does however look like a nice facility for high school football, USL soccer, and some CIAU football.

Stade Saptuto reminds me of a newer version of the facility that i saw in Ft lauderdale ( Lockhart stadium) in that Can-US. But that facility had a 20K seat capacity. It was Home to MLS Miami Fusion.

[Daniel]

Saputo Stadium in April and now did not have the same level of finition, especially under the stands.

Again, we've seen how much can be done with $15m with this group (compare that to any other similarly-priced stadium in Canada/US), so let's wait and see what can be done with another $12m - $15m (which is the number that was advanced).

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Daniel

Saputo Stadium in April and now did not have the same level of finition, especially under the stands.

Again, we've seen how much can be done with $15m with this group (compare that to any other similarly-priced stadium in Canada/US), so let's wait and see what can be done with another $12m - $15m (which is the number that was advanced).

What bugs me about the 15$ million part is the sight of the office area. If you were to ask me where the money went to, from what i saw, its the office. I noted that nice board room overlooking the fielded. So where were the priorities? [}]

Every photgraph that is taken showing that mini office building. In pictures, it enhances the facility.

Interestingly nobody else has mentioned that.

[ken]

I have to think that the parking is a non-issue, the stadium is adjacent to the olympic stadium which for 20 years with the expos outdrawing anything that the mls is likely to draw ( except in the last few years of the expos). Most people who attend the stadium use the metro and not cars, I've attended baseball, football and concerts at the stadium and always used the metro, also avoids drinking and driving. Stands and concession booths cand be built up over time, maybe a new, more direct metro entrance too.