Venues For Nov & March WCQ

[paul-collins]

Were people happy with the play of the fieldturf?  Were the players?

[Free kick]

On November 14, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Yohan said:

Vancouver more than earned the right to host more Canada matches. 

I want to see if Mtl can step up too

Yes.  Vancouver did fantastic job.  I was able to make out in November only.  But, from what i saw, the support was strong, the overall organization was perfect and the attendance was great.   

For me, the key thing was that the venue and entire organization of the game (and event) appeared soccer focused (ie: people who understand the game and what a WCQ means).   That was important.  I have been to other world cup qualifiers in canada in past cycles whereby they (for example) had stuck the Voyageurs side by side with an Honduran supporters group.  In that same venue the pitch was grass but it so bumpy (likely from the CFL matches) that it even cost us dearly on key back pass.  

The only problem in Montreal was the fact that so many Honduran supporters showed up, other than that everything everything was fine from an organizational standpoint. 

There is every reason to continue to play canada matches in Vancouver as far as i am concerned. 

 

[dyslexic nam]

As can often be the case here, it seems like there are two ongoing threads of discussion without a lot of common ground.

No one is saying that Vancouver didn't do a great job in hosting the recent games.  I think the general consensus would be that they were very successful in terms of revenue, attendance, support, etc.

But none of that gets at the issue being raised, which is whether or not we would have a greater advantage if we played in a colder climate and made our opponents as uncomfortable as possible.  Just like playing a match in Honduras during the hottest part of the day, or hosting a match at high-altitude Azteca, playing Canada in a colder region at a time of year where the weather will be predictably cold may give is a meaningful edge.  It might not be perfect for our guys, but I suspect it would be far far worse for some from Mexico/Panama/Honduras/wherever.  

We have been eliminated by some very narrow margins in the past.  That kind of competitive advantage could be a difference maker.  They play hot, we play cold.  They turn off the dressing room air conditioning, we turn off the fuckin heater.  Our guys were gassed in Honduras - their strategy worked.  Shouldn't the CSA at least seriously consider the idea of turning the tables?  There may be value in using every possible advantage we have, just like everyone else in our region - even if it means not using a venue that was quite successful for a game or two.

[Ruffian]

I think people are discounting how important a good crowd is for home field advantage. I still support the split between Van, TO and Montreal. If we made the Hex we could still freeze out our opponents in Montreal or Toronto during the November and March breaks. If through market research CSA figures we can get a good crowd in a place like Edmonton on a Tuesday in November then I am all for using that location as a secret weapon.

[Cheeta]

I honestly don't think we can have anywhere near the climate advantage the Central Americans can have.  I think pretty much everybody around here plays/has played the game and I also think most would agree its waaaay  easier to adjust to the cooler temps than the heat.  I guess every bit helps but .....

Vancouver worked this time because of the lead away match in Honduras, otherwise for travel reasons, time zone adjustment and that plastic pitch I'd much rather see the matches played out east.  Hell, if you want to use geography as a weapon than make it as far east as possible.  Halifax, St. John's, Moncton.  Where ever you can find a decent (if small) venue that's a pain in the ass to get to and is 5 time zones ahead of Honduran time.

Shit, we should build an island half way to Iceland.  About the size of a stadium and hotel.  Barely.  No airport.  No runway.  Surrounded by sharks.  Or killer whales.  Or both.

[theaub]

Mexico historically has been bad in the cold against us and looked rather comfortable in BC Place.

Do I really think we could've drawn them if we played in Edmonton or the East Coast?  Not really...but at some point don't you have to start taking advantage of every little thing that you can?

We're at least past the point of scheduling home matches to favour other teams (if only we flipped the Jamaica/Honduras matches in 2008...) but maybe the next step is to go even further to benefit ourselves.  The one advantage we do have over every Central American/Caribbean country is we have many, many more legitimate stadium options to choose from.

[Stryker911]

I think the cold can be a major advantage. Playing in the cold sucks. Every fall hurts, the ball moves differently, muscles get tight, etc...  Admittedly i don't think our players would like it , but at least our players would have played in it more in their lives than our opponents have.

I wonder if the CSA ever looks at population of Canadian cities. I hate watching games in Toronto or Montreal and there are more away fans than Canadian fans there. This would likely not happen in a less diverse, smaller city. I would rather see 20000 canadians at a game then 20000 canadians and 10000 loud, passionate fans of our opponents. 

[Ruffian]

20 minutes ago, Stryker911 said:

I would rather see 20000 canadians at a game then 20000 canadians and 10000 loud, passionate fans of our opponents. 

This is true, but I question if we could get 20,000 fans to a game in a smaller city on a cold, dark night in November when everybody is starting to hibernate early in the evening.

[Califax]

Everyone shits on Montreal for the game being scheduled against Honduras. They deserve another shot. 

Also, Vancouver did great but I would have loved to see how well they drew on a week day. The El Salvador was sparse but I don't think that it's fair to take that into account considering the circumstances. Vancouver pulled about 20,000 in 2016 on a Friday (with marketing hype) vs Toronto pulling about 16,000 on a Tuesday in 2012. Strikes me as a bit of a wash. 

This isn't a competition but rather a way to figure out where we can maximize both weather advantages, and put butts in seats on a weeknight. There will be three more weeknight games that will be crucial next cycle, Hopefully only one of those lands at home. 

I am a firm believer in weather planning. Summer games in Vancouver. Colder weather needs to be reserved for the many circles of freezing uncomfortable hell other cities can provide. 

[David C.]

Personally, I would love to see all November and March games held in Edmonton (or maybe Winnipeg). Since the weather in other months (June, September, October) probably wouldn't offer any tangible advantage, those could be spread between the ususal Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

[ted]

1 hour ago, Califax said:

Also, Vancouver did great but I would have loved to see how well they drew on a week day. The El Salvador was sparse ...

WTF are you talking about?!?!

El Salvador was on a WEEK DAY!!! It was a fucking Tuesday, the first day back to work after THE long weekend ending summer. It could not have been a more difficult day to get people to a game IMO.

And WTF do you mean, "sparse"?!?!  I was in that stadium when they announced 20,000+ in attendance. The place was pretty fucking full and a great atmosphere so I don't know what game you were watching.

Give you head a shake.

 

[Soro17]

1 hour ago, ted said:

WTF are you talking about?!?!

El Salvador was on a WEEK DAY!!! It was a fucking Tuesday, the first day back to work after THE long weekend ending summer. It could not have been a more difficult day to get people to a game IMO.

And WTF do you mean, "sparse"?!?!  I was in that stadium when they announced 20,000+ in attendance. The place was pretty fucking full and a great atmosphere so I don't know what game you were watching.

Give you head a shake.

 

Agreed. First day back at school too (although half of the boys in my son's grade 2 class were there). The crowd was late arriving though, which led to some bad TV shots in the pre-game. It filled up nicely by about the 15 minute mark.

As a Vancouverite, I would be happy to see Winnipeg get a shot at a Nov / March game some. Nice stadium, good support of the women.

I think we have to be realistic about smaller, more remote venues - unfortunately, I think the CSA needs a decent size gate. It is unfortunate that budgetary and logistical factors enter the equation, but I think that is the reality we are dealing with.

[dyslexic nam]

9 minutes ago, Soro17 said:

Agreed. First day back at school too (although half of the boys in my son's grade 2 class were there). The crowd was late arriving though, which led to some bad TV shots in the pre-game. It filled up nicely by about the 15 minute mark.

As a Vancouverite, I would be happy to see Winnipeg get a shot at a Nov / March game some. Nice stadium, good support of the women.

I think we have to be realistic about smaller, more remote venues - unfortunately, I think the CSA needs a decent size gate. It is unfortunate that budgetary and logistical factors enter the equation, but I think that is the reality we are dealing with.

My only counter is that this gate needs to be compared to a realistic revenue projection of additional funds flowing from an improved chance to make the hex and/or the WC.  Not saying these things are in any way a lock if we use location to our advantage - just saying that there are two sides of this issue to consider if making the economic argument.

[Califax]

2 hours ago, ted said:

WTF are you talking about?!?!

El Salvador was on a WEEK DAY!!! It was a fucking Tuesday, the first day back to work after THE long weekend ending summer. It could not have been a more difficult day to get people to a game IMO.

And WTF do you mean, "sparse"?!?!  I was in that stadium when they announced 20,000+ in attendance. The place was pretty fucking full and a great atmosphere so I don't know what game you were watching.

Give you head a shake.

 

Chill. If you quoted the whole thing you'd be fine.

I said it's not fair to penalize / judge them for attendance given the circumstances you mentioned. We agree. My point was that I would have loved to see how a regular Tuesday game was attended. 

Perhaps it filled in as the game went on. There were tons of empty seats at kickoff. People kept talking about how empty it looked in there. No way did it resemble anywhere near 20,000 people.

 

 

 

 

[ted]

6 minutes ago, Califax said:

Chill. If you quoted the whole thing you'd be fine.

I said it's not fair to penalize them for attendance given the circumstances you mentioned. We agree. My point was that I would have loved to see how a regular Tuesday game was attended. 

Perhaps it filled in as the game went on. There were Tons of empty seats at kickoff. People kept talking about how empty it looked in there. No way did it resemble anywhere near 20,000 people there.

Now you are just being passive aggressive. I was replying to the basic premise of your comments which were factually incorrect and fucking insulting.

"[P]enalize them for attendance"?!?!! That implies the attendance was bad. It was fucking spectacular without any excuses!

And just WTF do you mean by, "a regular Tuesday game"?!?! The CMNT don't have "regular" games. I have no idea what you are trying to say at this point.

Sure, it looked empty before KO but anyone who is making disparaging remarks about the attendance should STFU if they couldn't be arsed to note that actual numbers.

No matter how you try to shit on Vancouver, they supported the team and they did it in numbers no other city has dreamed of in a decade.

That said, and though it means I would have much further to travel, I am happy to see other cities get games. Just don't imply that it has anything to do with poor attendance in Vancouver.

 

 

[Califax]

11 minutes ago, ted said:

Now you are just being passive aggressive. I was replying to the basic premise of your comments which were factually incorrect and fucking insulting.

"[P]enalize them for attendance"?!?!! That implies the attendance was bad. It was fucking spectacular without any excuses!

And just WTF do you mean by, "a regular Tuesday game"?!?! The CMNT don't have "regular" games. I have no idea what you are trying to say at this point.

Sure, it looked empty before KO but anyone who is making disparaging remarks about the attendance should STFU if they couldn't be arsed to note that actual numbers.

No matter how you try to shit on Vancouver, they supported the team and they did it in numbers no other city has dreamed of in a decade.

That said, and though it means I would have much further to travel, I am happy to see other cities get games. Just don't imply that it has anything to do with poor attendance in Vancouver.

 

 

Chill. Is an active verb.

And stop swearing at me. I will clarify what I meant but I don't need your stress release as part of my day, so I'm happy just to block you if you insist on taking out whatever anger you have on me.

A regular Tuesday game means:

A game where we didn't come off a crushing defeat.

A game where everyone wasn't writing the team off after a tough road loss and a mountain to climb.

A game that wasn't attached to a long weekend.

A game where kids didn't have to get up and go back to school.

A game where there were no extenuating circumstances that bring the attendance down to lower numbers that what is ideal and that you can get an accurate reading on how many people would show up in a city on a Tuesday. 

We do disagree on attendance I guess. Don't tell me that attendance is fact. I've been to games at BMO where a sellout is announced for 7 week straight and I could sit in a section by myself. Go watch the first 15 minute and tell me if that stadium looks even in the same ball park as vs mexico. When you are playing a must win game, that is the bench mark. If you are happy with the 17,000 or so that were there for that, cool, I wasn't .

Vancouver attendance was outstanding for 2 games, the last game (with oooooodles of factors out of their control above) was just okay

[The Beaver]

20 minutes ago, ted said:

Now you are just being passive aggressive. I was replying to the basic premise of your comments which were factually incorrect and fucking insulting.

"[P]enalize them for attendance"?!?!! That implies the attendance was bad. It was fucking spectacular without any excuses!

And just WTF do you mean by, "a regular Tuesday game"?!?! The CMNT don't have "regular" games. I have no idea what you are trying to say at this point.

Sure, it looked empty before KO but anyone who is making disparaging remarks about the attendance should STFU if they couldn't be arsed to note that actual numbers.

No matter how you try to shit on Vancouver, they supported the team and they did it in numbers no other city has dreamed of in a decade.

That said, and though it means I would have much further to travel, I am happy to see other cities get games. Just don't imply that it has anything to do with poor attendance in Vancouver.

 

 

Not to pile on, but I was at the game, and at kick off I would say there were about 15,000 fans seated.  But barely 5 minutes into the game I turned to my brother and said, "Hey, this placed has filled up pretty nice!" Indeed, by that point the entire lower bowl looked mostly full, comparable to a Caps game on the weekend, which is always in the 20K range.

 

I, too, have no issue with moving games to other venues, for whatever array of strategic reasons. But to be fair, the turn out in Vancouver for ALL three games was damned impressive.  Especially for the last game, where our lives hung by an improbable thread. Most of the time Canadians--not just Vancouverites--would have said "Fu.ck it! They do not have a hope in hell. I'm not going." Not so in Vancouver on Tuesday.  Credit where credit is due, no?

[The Beaver]

5 hours ago, Ruffian said:

I think people are discounting how important a good crowd is for home field advantage. I still support the split between Van, TO and Montreal. If we made the Hex we could still freeze out our opponents in Montreal or Toronto during the November and March breaks. If through market research CSA figures we can get a good crowd in a place like Edmonton on a Tuesday in November then I am all for using that location as a secret weapon.

Yes, and the additional kernel of wisdom here is that we need to hear from our players and coaching staff on the sorts of conditions that matter to them most. What do THEY feel are the set of conditions that will give THEM as best a shot of succeeding as possible. One cannot, as you say, discount a proper home field advantage.  And travel. And weather.  From what I understood, the players wanted to continue playing in Vancouver. But if they could play in front of 20,000 rabid fans in Winnipeg in May, just say, then that SHOULD be doubly to our advantage. Mind you, climate change might fu.ck us over on that front, too. Does Mont Vic have any sway over global warming? Nunavut, here we come!

[The Beaver]

5 hours ago, Cheeta said:

I honestly don't think we can have anywhere near the climate advantage the Central Americans can have.  I think pretty much everybody around here plays/has played the game and I also think most would agree its waaaay  easier to adjust to the cooler temps than the heat.  I guess every bit helps but .....

Vancouver worked this time because of the lead away match in Honduras, otherwise for travel reasons, time zone adjustment and that plastic pitch I'd much rather see the matches played out east.  Hell, if you want to use geography as a weapon than make it as far east as possible.  Halifax, St. John's, Moncton.  Where ever you can find a decent (if small) venue that's a pain in the ass to get to and is 5 time zones ahead of Honduran time.

Shit, we should build an island half way to Iceland.  About the size of a stadium and hotel.  Barely.  No airport.  No runway.  Surrounded by sharks.  Or killer whales.  Or both.

There's a little scab of an island off the coast of Greenland that we are fighting the Danes over, and I am pretty sure it is large enough for a FIFA sanctioned field--with field turf.  Only accessible by boat or float plane. Lots of icebergs in the vicinity. More belugas than sharks, mind you.

[Soro17]

2 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

My only counter is that this gate needs to be compared to a realistic revenue projection of additional funds flowing from an improved chance to make the hex and/or the WC.  Not saying these things are in any way a lock if we use location to our advantage - just saying that there are two sides of this issue to consider if making the economic argument.

I get it, unfortunately, I think that the CSA is living paycheque-to-paycheque so to speak and are forced to make decisions based on the short term and not the long term. Obviously the gate revenue from the Hex, or heaven forbid World Cup revenue, would dwarf the extra 10,000 fans in Vancouver vs. Wostok, Alberta or Port-aux-Basques, NL (or some other cold, remote place).

[ted]

2 hours ago, Califax said:

We do disagree on attendance I guess. Don't tell me that attendance is fact. I've been to games at BMO where a sellout is announced for 7 week straight and I could sit in a section by myself. Go watch the first 15 minute and tell me if that stadium looks even in the same ball park as vs mexico. When you are playing a must win game, that is the bench mark. If you are happy with the 17,000 or so that were there for that, cool, I wasn't .

1) Fact is fact whether your opinion may be.

2) The Mexico game was a bonus where they opened the upper deck which allowed for over 50,000.

3) I never claimed a sellout, I saw empty seats and quoted the actual number announced which was over 20K and which no credible source is disputing.

4) It matters not one bit that everyone was not in their seat before kick-off. It was a work day and people got their when they could. That does not change the fact that over 20,000 tickets were sold and over 20,000 people were in the stadium when Canada scored.

5) I am swearing because you are making false statements and refusing to acknowledge that you made a grievous error. All you need to do is admit you made a mistake and we can move on. Until and unless you do nothing you say on this topic is credible.

 

[Free kick]

10 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

 

But none of that gets at the issue being raised, which is whether or not we would have a greater advantage if we played in a colder climate and made our opponents as uncomfortable as possible.  Just like playing a match in Honduras during the hottest part of the day, or hosting a match at high-altitude Azteca, playing Canada in a colder region at a time of year where the weather will be predictably cold may give is a meaningful edge.  It might not be perfect for our guys, but I suspect it would be far far worse for some from Mexico/Panama/Honduras/wherever.  

We have been eliminated by some very narrow margins in the past.  That kind of competitive advantage could be a difference maker.  They play hot, we play cold.  They turn off the dressing room air conditioning, we turn off the fuckin heater.  Our guys were gassed in Honduras - their strategy worked.  Shouldn't the CSA at least seriously consider the idea of turning the tables?  There may be value in using every possible advantage we have, just like everyone else in our region - even if it means not using a venue that was quite successful for a game or two.

I stand by what i have always said in the past and as Ruffian said.  Its a bigger advantage to play in a good environment (like Vancouver) where fans and organizers know and understand the sport and how this event needs to be deliverred and presented.   As opposed to playing in city where WCQ is really touted like another show in town that contributes to economic activity during the slow period of the year when there is no hockey around.   

Never understood this notion of the supposed weather advantage of playing in a place like edmonton.    Many of our players grew up, live or work in places where climate is moderate. Like Europe, Southern ontario, the west coast or others.   Playing in colder cities does not provide any where near the kind of advantage to canada that the hot, humid and high altitudes climates will give to sides that are accustomed to those conditions.  Its not the same.  In the cold you can put on an extra layer of clothing but you cant counter as easily the high altitudes and scorching humidity if you are not accustomed to it. 

[Califax]

1 hour ago, ted said:

1) Fact is fact whether your opinion may be.

2) The Mexico game was a bonus where they opened the upper deck which allowed for over 50,000.

3) I never claimed a sellout, I saw empty seats and quoted the actual number announced which was over 20K and which no credible source is disputing.

4) It matters not one bit that everyone was not in their seat before kick-off. It was a work day and people got their when they could. That does not change the fact that over 20,000 tickets were sold and over 20,000 people were in the stadium when Canada scored.

5) I am swearing because you are making false statements and refusing to acknowledge that you made a grievous error. All you need to do is admit you made a mistake and we can move on. Until and unless you do nothing you say on this topic is credible.

 

Nice!

We are at the itemized list portion of the Internet fight. Was hoping for 1-9 but 1-5 should tide me over until the next time I'm not crystal clear / someone else misreads a comment.

Until then! Keep the Internet safe from shades of grey. That's where dreams go to die.

[masster]

As somebody that is the in the stadium every other week to watch the Whitecaps, there were indeed 20,000 people there. Remember that there were none of the Whitecaps tarps that cover seats at the top of the sections. So the capacity in the lower bowl was larger than a regular Whitecaps game, thus more empty seats.

Also, the Vancouver crowd is traditionally a late arriving crowd. Regular MLS games usually kickoff at 7:05-7:07. Because this game was synced with Mexico, the player walk out happened at 6:53 and the game kicked off right at 7. So the late arriving crowd was later than usual. The crowd during the anthems was pathetic. By the 30 minute mark of the first half, it had filled in.

[RJB]

30 minutes ago, masster said:

As somebody that is the in the stadium every other week to watch the Whitecaps, there were indeed 20,000 people there. Remember that there were none of the Whitecaps tarps that cover seats at the top of the sections. So the capacity in the lower bowl was larger than a regular Whitecaps game, thus more empty seats.

Also, the Vancouver crowd is traditionally a late arriving crowd. Regular MLS games usually kickoff at 7:05-7:07. Because this game was synced with Mexico, the player walk out happened at 6:53 and the game kicked off right at 7. So the late arriving crowd was later than usual. The crowd during the anthems was pathetic. By the 30 minute mark of the first half, it had filled in.

I'm also told there were some issues with skytrain and transit which exacerbated the problem.