A way to make cfl stadiums work for soccer

[An Observer]

I know some purists on this forum don't believe its possible but I think a decent 12-15k soccer stadium can be fashioned out of a 30-35k cfl stadium.

Some thoughts:

First let the cfl teams get the mass majority of seats between the goal lines but make sure they are doubled decked with private boxes

in between. That way you can tarp the top tiers like the Oakland A's do for baseball. Only the bottom 2

tiers would be used for soccer. So if you have 25k or so of seats between the goal lines, this would immediately cut the seating down to about 13k or so. To reduce that further by 2 or 3k. You could prevent people sitting in the top 4 or so rows in the lower decks. Then in the 4th row down, you could erect large signage all the way along where you could sell advertising as they do on the side of the pitch. If the signage is sufficient height, it should block the sitelines of the empty 4 or so rows from across the field and from a design point of view, it would act as defining the top of the stadium or seating.

The next thing you need to do is create 2k or so of bleachers in one endzone. They are for soccer supporters (or cheap family seats for cfl). You therefore don't really need seats, just benches. However, the key would be that the bleachers could be rolled forward

for soccer so they sit over top of the end zone and therefore, be directly behind the soccer goal. It may mean the wheels sitting on a track or the turf being pulled up where the wheels would rest so there is no damage to it. Finally, at the other end, you could do a hospitality area similar to what tfc has. This could be on a platform which rolls in and out like the end zone bleachers, and can be used for both soccer and football.

Of course, the field would likely be field turf but for nasl this should be fine. You would need to repaint the lines or find a new technology to convert the field back and forth.

However, you would get a fairly intimate 12 to 15k stadium, with use of private boxes. And pretty low cost. Rolling bleachers, tarps, and additional signage can't cost that much. Besides,

this should be sold as a true multipurpose facility. Without these mods, you can't do soccer well (or even college football) and you end up building a white elephant for 10 cfl matches a year and a few concerts. Local politicians should supprt the minimum additional spend. If cfl teams complain about the additional cost to turn around the stadium, then they can build their own. If they want taxpayer dollars, they need to be somewhat

flexible when it comes to multiple use. You probably also need a cheapish scoreboard on top of the endzone seating. One thing that killed the aviators was the cost of the scoreboard with video.

[Free kick]

I have seen some soccer games in, what you would consider, stadiums that are build to accommodate the CFL and CIAU football. I saw a U20 game involving Canada and the US at the Skydome where we were seated behind the nets. And, I saw the WCQ at Commonwealth whereby we were seated in the 1st row(s) around the middle of the pitch. And games at Varsity and Richardson stadium where, again, we were not behind the nets

Your suggestion would be an improvement in so far as people who are seated behind the nets but you still have the situation of the width of the pitch. With a wider CFL pitch, if you are seated at the lower level for soccer, you still feel far from the action. The SSS stadium affords you better sight-lines if you are in the first 20-40 rows. If you are in an upper deck areas, then its about the same. Looking back at the WCQ versus Honduras, we were in the first row, but it was actually quite far from the action. End result, as far as vantage point, a Canadian football stadium is only slightly better than a stadium with a track.

Also we haven't talked about pitch quality. Artificial surfaces are good for football. And football tends to leave natural grass soccer pitches in poor shape.

You can make a CFL stadium adequate for soccer. But its less then ideal.

[alberta white]

^ have to agree with free kick on that one. The NFL stadia with interchangable 'carpets' such as Quest field seem okay for now but BMO removed its field turf, because it don't cut the mustard for soccer only tendons and cartlidge. Nothing wrong with the surface for NFL/CFL however so im not getting into the Turf bad grass good debate.

My main concern going forward is not CFL stadia in general. Its Commonwealth in perticular. Now that field turf (I beleive) makes it unsuitable for track and field the eight lane running track has to be a significant white elephant. I'm Sure Eskies fans would rather be closer to the action.

[An Observer]

If the seating at the side is the problem, why not stop the CFL seating a bit higher than the pitch (as they do at BC place)....you can then add 2 or 3 rows in front of that for soccer so you bring it down to pitch level and put the front rows closer to the pitch. Not perfect, but better than nothing. And my point about interchangable carpets, is the fact that they are ok for now. Better in my mind to get a NASL side in Ottawa, Winnipeg, Hamilton, etc. playing in a decent intimate as possible stadium, than in some converted baseball stadium (like Portland, Tampa) or a stadium with a track around it (like Claude Robillard used to have). Its not the long term solution...that is more Saputo like stadiums. But its a good start, and if the soccer team can prove viable they can build their own stadium (and use the CFL one only for one off big matches like the Impact use Olympic stadium). Seems a good result to me.

[An Observer]

Also,

We should bear in mind that CFL fields are narrower (65 yards) versus soccer fields which are 75 yards....most of the space is due to the sidelines use for the players in CFL....still, you could deal partially with that by adding the rows on each side as suggested above....it would get fans pretty close to the match (and certainly much closer than many European sides).

Bigger problem is the length...CFL is 150 yards including endzones....whereas, soccer is 115 yards...hence the need to roll in stands or beer gardens.

[yomurphy1]

You can't make a CFL stadium work unless you can fill it every game otherwise the atomsphere gets killed. Just get public money to build a 8k - 20k stadium depending on your market and work from there.

[Free kick]

Also,

Bigger problem is the length...CFL is 150 yards including endzones....whereas, soccer is 115 yards...hence the need to roll in stands or beer gardens.

Moreso given that endzones are SG areas. And, more than ever, I've come to understand that clubs in North America (Canada and the US) view the SG's as their lifeblood.

[Free kick]

You can't make a CFL stadium work unless you can fill it every game otherwise the atomsphere gets killed. Just get public money to build a 8k - 20k stadium depending on your market and work from there.

True. But thats where the CFL should be at in this day and age. OK, maybe 18-25K instead of 8-20K. Unlike the 1970's, the CFL is no longer a league that operates at a level of capacity that is best suited for a 40-70K seat stadium. There is more entertainment options now, people are more occupied than ever and the NFL is more readily available than it was then. In border towns, the NFL is marketing right into CFL territory. Further more they (CFL) exacerbated the problem by going to an 18 games schedule when demand was stagnant. Meaning, that now they have more inventory (seats) but you just cant shrink the stadiums.

IMO, going to 18 games was the dumbest move the CFL ever did. It was probably done out of desperation at the time when the league was in trouble and was looking, much like an addict, for a short term injection of revenues. That's the problem with many short term fixes. You want to fill the stadiums and stimulate demand? go to a 14 game schedule. That's more than enough for a8-9 team league.

[brettinhalifax]

True. But thats where the CFL should be at in this day and age. OK, maybe 18-25K instead of 8-20K. Unlike the 1970's, the CFL is no longer a league that operates at a level of capacity that is best suited for a 40-70K seat stadium. There is more entertainment options now, people are more occupied than ever and the NFL is more readily available than it was then. In border towns, the NFL is marketing right into CFL territory. Further more they (CFL) exacerbated the problem by going to an 18 games schedule when demand was stagnant. Meaning, that now they have more inventory (seats) but you just cant shrink the stadiums.

IMO, going to 18 games was the dumbest move the CFL ever did. It was probably done out of desperation at the time when the league was in trouble and was looking, much like an addict, for a short term injection of revenues. That's the problem with many short term fixes. You want to fill the stadiums and stimulate demand? go to a 14 game schedule. That's more than enough for a8-9 team league.

Where to start?

First: The CFL has always played 20 games per season. In the 1960's the CFL played a 14 game regular season with 6 pre-season games. In the 70's they switched to 16 regular + 4 pre-season games, then in the 80's they changed to 18 regular season + 2 preseason games. But it has been 20 games a year for decades.

So they didn't increase supply, they kept the same number of games and but shifted the assortment of games and increased the number of valuable games (that people wanted to see/pay for)

As to being a short term solution... well, they went to an 18 game season 25 years ago, so it seems to have been a long-term solution.

Second: The CFL has never been a league that needed 40,000 to 70,000 seat stadiums. The CFL plays in a few oversized stadiums (BC, EDM, TOR, MTL) because they play in whatever is available. The last stadium built for the CFL was McMahon Stadium in 1960. Everything newer (all oversized for the CFL) was built for the Olympics, the Commonwealth Games, Expo 86 or the Blue Jays.

The highest ever CFL league wide average attendance was 30,657 in 1979. That was partly due to the honeymoon effect of new stadiums in Edmonton (1978) and Montreal (1976) The average age of CFL stadiums in 1979 was 21 years. (As a comparison, in 2009 the CFL averaged 28,464 per game despite the newest stadium being 20 years old and the average age of CFL stadiums in 2009 being 52 years.)

In the last 40 CFL seasons, a team has averaged over 40,000 per home game only 23 times. The majority of those have been during the honeymoon period of a new stadium (12 have been the first 4 years in BC Place, Commonwealth and the Big O.)

[alberta white]

^ thanks thats very informative to a new arrival to Canada like me. I had kind of got the feeling from CFL'ers at work in Edmonton that given half the chance they would prefer not to have to rattle about in Commonwealth but would prefer a CFL specific stadium.

[brettinhalifax]

I once read a Terry Jones article where he mentioned that Commonwealth's capacity for the Commonwealth Games in 1978 was in the 40,000's and it was expanded to 60,000 for Universiade in 1983.

He thought that the Universiade expansion was a mistake and made Commonwealth too big.

[brettinhalifax]

alberta white

In my experience, most Eskimo fans think Commonwealth is God's gift to stadiums.

Anyway, here's the article, and he actually even recommends downsizing Commonwealth.

Smaller is better

The time has come to downsize Commonwealth Stadium

By TERRY JONES

At the time it seemed like a good idea. And several times since, it has been. But the time has come to downsize Commonwealth Stadium.

For both the Edmonton Eskimos and the FIFA U-20 World Cup of Soccer, the big stadium is creating perception problems which have become a negative for Edmonton's image and an environment which is less than it could be.

The timing is right to return the stadium to something resembling the 43,000-seat gem it was back when it was built for the 1978 Commonwealth Games.

LOOKS LIKE A DISASTER

What the world television audience is seeing from here in the U-20 World Cup looks like an unmitigated disaster.

Thousands of empty seats here are contrasted by full stadiums in Toronto, Victoria and Burnaby, where the capacities range from 19,500 to 10,000.

Edmonton drew 26,804 for the quarter-final, 24,687 for a round of 16 game and 31,579 and 32,058 for two Canada games (with half the fans unable to get into the stadium due to the ticket fiasco and rain and the Canadian team running most of them off after half time in the other game).

The event has already sold more than 217,385 tickets for eight games and Edmonton is being viewed as the one host city in Canada in which the event hasn't had fans in the stands.

The Eskimos face the same perception.

This year, in addition to putting tarps over 8,000 endzone seats and closing down an endzone bar where hundreds of people used to stand to watch a game, the Eskimos are also draping green and gold tarps over seats in the four upper-deck corners.

"We've done it to tighten up the stadium," said Eskimos CEO Rick LeLacheur.

LeLacheur knows what has happened here to some extent with 33 C temperatures and 5:45 p.m. starts for the soccer, which not only brings fans to the stadium late for mid-week games, but hot.

"People want to sit in the shade. The shade side of the stands is the west side. That's the non-TV side. The west side stands always have more fans than the TV side."

But the bottom line is the stadium is mostly just too damn big.

FLAGSHIP FRANCHISE

Back in 1982, when the Eskimos were winning five Grey Cups in a row and the city could tap into three levels of government money toward the hosting of Universiade '83, somebody got the bright idea to expand the joint to 60,000. Eskimos season-ticket numbers soared to over 50,000. It was a success.

Edmonton was the flagship franchise of the CFL.

Edmonton's Grey Cup games have attracted crowds of 62,531, 60,431 and 60,081. The Eskimos have drawn as many as 62,444 for a regular-season game and have had six crowds over 59,000.

The park was close to full for 10 days of the IAAF 2001 World Championships In Athletics. Brazil drew 54,000 in their last soccer game here prior to going south and winning the USA '94 World Cup. The stadium was sold out of tickets for the final of the ballistic FIFA U-19 Women's World Champions.

But looking back ...

"Personally I think they made a mistake back in 1982 when it was 43,000 seats," says LeLacheur.

Remember that stadium? Grass inclines in the corners and endzones to frame the field. Eye candy to TV sports viewers.

"The size of our stadium is a good thing and a bad thing," says LeLacheur.

"It really has been a really great thing on a lot of occasions. But most days it's a bad thing. So many times, it makes the stadium look empty."

The Eskimos deal with it all the time. They draw 40,000, as they likely will Friday night against Saskatchewan, and you still see a lot of empty seats.

Meanwhile Montreal sells out a 20,202 seat stadium and it's a success story.

CHEAPER TICKETS

"There has been a benefit for our fans because our tickets have been cheaper," said LeLacheur.

But he'd rather have a tough ticket. If the stadium still sat 43,000, LeLacheur is confident that the Eskimos would be sold out and events like the soccer championship would build to sellouts as the event progressed.

So much is added to the environment with a packed stadium. And there are a lot more reasons to buy advance tickets to events and Eskimo season tickets.

"Being back to 43,000 would be perfect," said LeLacheur. "It would be full every time and for most events."

But what do you do? Knock the wings off the stadium? Replace the grass in the corners and endzone?

One thing to reduce the size would to be to build the Eskimo's offices and dressing room on the north end of the stadium.

That's been looked at, but hasn't gone anywhere.

New seats are desperately needed in the 29-year-old stadium. Wider seats with cup holders would bring the capacity down. But they price out at $275 a seat and LeLacheur figures they'll have to be replaced in stages.

First, a plan is needed to downsize the stadium. It's time.