Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CDNFootballer

Metro Vancouver CPL Club

Recommended Posts

The thing is how do you own both clubs in Greater Victoria (Langford) & Metro Vancouver (Surrey) ?

Even if it brings an extra team to the league which is great and all

But geografically they would be a rivalry

I see it very difficult to allow it to happen

conflict of interest is the first thing that comes to mind 

Like Dean Shillington even admitted himself that he’s and investor and doesn’t know much about the world of sports (even more so Soccer) so that’s why he got Rob a Friend and Josh Simpson 

It’s a no go 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Watchmen said:

Every time I heard them talking about this, it sounds like their heart and focus isn't really on the Victoria team.  Honestly, they need to stop talking about it.

My thoughts are if they end up owning 2 clubs for whatever period of time that's fine. Its a startup league and as such as we've seen in other leagues there have been owners having multiple clubs in the early years. CPL needs clubs now and Vancouver Island is far enough removed from Metro Vancouver to not conflict the territories.

 

No reason they can't focus on the Victoria area club and continue towards a Surrey club as well if managed right, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Blackjack15 said:

The thing is how do you own both clubs in Greater Victoria (Langford) & Metro Vancouver (Surrey) ?

Even if it brings an extra team to the league which is great and all

But geografically they would be a rivalry

I see it very difficult to allow it to happen

conflict of interest is the first thing that comes to mind 

Like Dean Shillington even admitted himself that he’s and investor and doesn’t know much about the world of sports (even more so Soccer) so that’s why he got Rob a Friend and Josh Simpson 

It’s a no go 

 

Leagues have had owners with multiple teams before, there doesn't have to be a conflict of interest if the teams are  managed independently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CDNFootballer said:

My thoughts are if they end up owning 2 clubs for whatever period of time that's fine. Its a startup league and as such as we've seen in other leagues there have been owners having multiple clubs in the early years. CPL needs clubs now and Vancouver Island is far enough removed from Metro Vancouver to not conflict the territories.

 

No reason they can't focus on the Victoria area club and continue towards a Surrey club as well if managed right, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

If you're league commissioner is busy boasting about "talking to 20 ownership groups" and suddenly you have 1 group owning 2 teams in the same region, that's a bad look for the league.  But further, it's not so much them owning two teams as it is that there's a ton of work to do with the first team and they keep talking about the 2nd team, in the market they really wanted to be in.  That's a problem.  Because if the going gets tough in Victoria, is their heart really in it?  With all their talk about Surrey still, that's the feeling I get from them.  They'd rather be there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Watchmen said:

If you're league commissioner is busy boasting about "talking to 20 ownership groups" and suddenly you have 1 group owning 2 teams in the same region, that's a bad look for the league.  But further, it's not so much them owning two teams as it is that there's a ton of work to do with the first team and they keep talking about the 2nd team, in the market they really wanted to be in.  That's a problem.  Because if the going gets tough in Victoria, is their heart really in it?  With all their talk about Surrey still, that's the feeling I get from them.  They'd rather be there.

Don't think its a bad look for the league at all and if they utilize enough personel and resources both are doable.

If I had to guess though I'd say that when Surrey is a go then Shillington and Friend will transition there and Simpson will be left with Victoria along with new investors to go along with him there. So 2 strong markets the league should be in in the end then, a win win for CPL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, CDNFootballer said:

Don't think its a bad look for the league at all and if they utilize enough personel and resources both are doable.

If I had to guess though I'd say that when Surrey is a go then Shillington and Friend will transition there and Simpson will be left with Victoria along with new investors to go along with him there. So 2 strong markets the league should be in in the end then, a win win for CPL.

I agree and would take it a step further that it's a good look for the league. An ownership group feels so strongly about the leagues potential that they want to double-down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 11:37 PM, Watchmen said:

If you're league commissioner is busy boasting about "talking to 20 ownership groups" and suddenly you have 1 group owning 2 teams in the same region, that's a bad look for the league.  But further, it's not so much them owning two teams as it is that there's a ton of work to do with the first team and they keep talking about the 2nd team, in the market they really wanted to be in.  That's a problem.  Because if the going gets tough in Victoria, is their heart really in it?  With all their talk about Surrey still, that's the feeling I get from them.  They'd rather be there.

There it is.  Maybe reads a bit harsh that "they keep talking about the 2nd team" bit but point taken.  That they're talking about it at all at this point is too much. 

I mean Geez, you haven't so much as bought an office chair or hired a water boy yet.  Keep quiet about that one that got away.  Plenty of time for that is later if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that no one has actually read the guy's statement? All he says is that he would not rule out being part of an ownership group, which simply means he could invest in a Metro Vancouver club. Invest, ie. put some money in. 

Not a word about majority ownership. Nothing about controlling interest. Nothing about having two clubs controlled by the same guy playing each other. We have so many posts arguing about a supposition that is in no way implied by what he was quoted as saying.

If Shillington uses his passion and income to help a Vancouver area club get into CPL, fantastic, he'll have done a great service to the league. That is what everyone should be pleased about hearing, not a conflict of interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 6:50 PM, Unnamed Trialist said:

Why is it that no one has actually read the guy's statement? All he says is that he would not rule out being part of an ownership group, which simply means he could invest in a Metro Vancouver club. Invest, ie. put some money in. 

Not a word about majority ownership. Nothing about controlling interest. Nothing about having two clubs controlled by the same guy playing each other. We have so many posts arguing about a supposition that is in no way implied by what he was quoted as saying.

If Shillington uses his passion and income to help a Vancouver area club get into CPL, fantastic, he'll have done a great service to the league. That is what everyone should be pleased about hearing, not a conflict of interest.

Agreed.  Just give me a damn club in the lower mainland so I can start hating PFC!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackjack15 said:

A question for anyone out in BC:

Is Metropolitan Vancouver the same as per say Fraser Valley?

Surrey, Langley, Abbotsford are all quite spread out  

Yup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fraser Valley is disconnected in some ways to the Metro area, but folks still commute in from there and go in for big events etc. The Greater Vancouver Regional District officially includes Surrey and Langley, but Abbotsford, Mission and Chilliwack are not a part of it. Yet they are part of what would be considered the Fraser Valley. The main problem from Chilliwack and Abbotsford is that there is really only one way into Vancouver, highway 1. Which is only 4 lanes for the majority of the drive until you get to Surrey. It is usually bogged down and can take up to an hour and half to get in. However, with no traffic the drive is a half hour. Also, when you get that far out, you drive there is no transit that can take you to Vancouver efficiently. Light rail only goes as far as Surrey. In mission there is the west coast express (old heavy rail) but it usually only runs morning into Van and evening back again.

So...not the same per se (I should've lead with that).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Blackjack15 said:

A question for anyone out in BC:

Is Metropolitan Vancouver the same as per say Fraser Valley?

Surrey, Langley, Abbotsford are all quite spread out  

It's weird. 

To me as an islander it is all part of Metro Vancouver, or "the mainland"/"lower mainland" for us.

When I moved to Burnaby for school I told all my Vancouver friends I lived in Van and they were like "no you live in BURNABY".

Lower Mainland is an odd place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like a lot of metro areas, the downtown of the main city is where people go for lots of entertainment, sports, clubs, food, other social activities. Vancouverites from all over go downtown, even folks from further away, so a day in Van and then walk to BC Place, that is easy enough. 

Technically, for those who do not know, Swangard was more central for the metropolitan area. It has okay transit connections, there was always nearby parking (even suburban streets). It was on the Burnaby side of Boundary Rd, so about 60 metres from Vancouver. There is rather little to do nearby, but it is a good spot in fact.

If you were to consider a team further out, into south Burnaby, New West or Surrey, or in Richmond, you would be displacing the event in a way that most Vancouverites are not used to. You would be specifically thinking about an emerging demographic esp in Surrey, and trying to capture that. It is a hard call, most non-Surrey Vancouverites never go to Surrey for anything, they go to Richmond for the airport and occasionally for food, New Westminster is not a destination, someone might do to Abbotsford for the Air Show or maybe catch a plane, rarely. Exceptions are those students studying in Richmond, Surrey or New West.

A Lower Mainland CPL team in Surrey is possible, with the number projections we are talking about, you could get your 6000 with a proper stadium and game-day experience. But you'd have to do it right and sell it, and recognize most of your fans would not be coming from the Municipality of Vancouver or the North Shore, you¡d be drawing from a demographic clearly shifted south of the Fraser River. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Xavier said:

It's weird. 

To me as an islander it is all part of Metro Vancouver, or "the mainland"/"lower mainland" for us.

When I moved to Burnaby for school I told all my Vancouver friends I lived in Van and they were like "no you live in BURNABY".

Lower Mainland is an odd place.

That's not that odd. Similarly, I grew up 1.5 to 2 hours away from Toronto in a small town. Growing up, every suburb of Toronto was "Toronto" to me. Places as far as Oakville, Mississauga, Brampton, Ajax, Pickering, all basically "Toronto" to me. Note, this is a double barrel situation where I was a small towner, plus also a kid. I don't know for sure if my parents would have thought the same or if it was a matter of me saying "Where is Mississauga?" and they say "Near Toronto", and I assume that means "Toronto".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew up in Burnaby, about 1 km from the boundary (handily enough, Boundary Road) with East Vancouver. If I meet somebody from the Lower Mainland, I say I'm from North Burnaby. If I meet someone not from there, I say I'm from Vancouver. I think this is fairly commonplace as you travel the world. I used to work with a girl in Melbourne who told everybody in the office that she was from Vancouver. For a laugh, I'd correct her and say, 'No, lady, you're from Abbotsford!'

What I have found as I have moved to different cities in various countries over the years is that the Lower Mainland is broken down into massive geographical units. Burnaby is a single suburb of Vancouver, but covers the same area that would cover 2-4 different named areas in Melbourne or London. I always say I'm from North Burnaby, rather than just Burnaby, because North Burnaby is a distinct neighbourhood from South Burnaby, Metrotown, Lougheed, Cariboo Hill, which are all constituent parts of the City of Burnaby. The City of Surrey covers such a vast geographical area that you could probably fit half of Greater London within that space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kent said:

That's not that odd. Similarly, I grew up 1.5 to 2 hours away from Toronto in a small town. Growing up, every suburb of Toronto was "Toronto" to me. Places as far as Oakville, Mississauga, Brampton, Ajax, Pickering, all basically "Toronto" to me...

More importantly maybe is that these outer suburban cities had massive and relatively recent population growth either through people moving from the inner Toronto core or arriving from other provinces and countries, so it's not like somewhere like the Ruhr valley where separate towns with their own strong identities slowly grew into each other, so you can easily still have Duisburg, Oberhausen, Essen, Schalke (Gelsenkirchen), Bochum, Wattenscheid, and Dortmund all with their own fully pro or close to it teams attracting strong local loyalties passed down through the generations. There is no rivalry to speak of between the likes of Mississauga and York Region, because it's all just basically "Toronto" so the idea of having multiple teams in the GTA with their own followings looks nice on paper but now the NSL 1970s era ethnic clubs have faded away is probably going to be very difficult to achieve in practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

More importantly maybe is that these outer suburban cities had massive and relatively recent population growth either through people moving from the inner Toronto core or arriving from other provinces and countries, so it's not like somewhere like the Ruhr valley where separate towns with their own strong identities slowly grew into each other, so you can easily still have Duisburg, Oberhausen, Essen, Schalke (Gelsenkirchen), Bochum, Wattenscheid, and Dortmund all with their own fully pro or close to it teams attracting strong local loyalties passed down through the generations. There is no rivalry to speak of between the likes of Mississauga and York Region, because it's all just basically "Toronto" so the idea of having multiple teams in the GTA with their own followings looks nice on paper but now the NSL 1970s era ethnic clubs have faded away is probably going to be very difficult to achieve in practice.

That is quite interesting, because I think that if there is any logical division that is emerging in Greater Vancouver, it is the Fraser River. And in Vancouver there are, indeed, rivalry potentials.

There is a real demographic boom on the south side, accompanied by perceived needs for distinction. You could make a case for something more than your old style "new town centre" emerging, especially in Surrey. And then something important: Surrey actually does have a need for symbolic branding, to emerge out of this process with its own clear identity. As is the case with having Kwantlen and the campus of Simon Fraser University. A museum and arts program. Little pieces.

Since it does not touch on Vancouver, has historically been dissed by Vancouverites and made the butt of jokes (still residually present), a soccer team, in a pro league, would be a very interesting piece of its way of remaking itself symbolically. For me, the Rob Friend project made sense for Surrey, I am sure he was dissapointed. A colleague in Van suggested this summer, based on some knowledge, that perhaps the Whitecaps intervened, for reasons I won't go into and do not fully understand. Perhaps electoral timing. But the fact remains: a pro team in Surrey would make sense, and the rivalry with Vancouver as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fraser valley team definitely looked like a good concept, but the stumbling block appears to have been obtaining the land for a stadium free from a municipality given prime locations are also likely to be sought after for other uses as well. If there's a lesson to be learned from Pacific FC so far it appears to be that a less than ideal location can put a serious dent in the level of fan interest, so progress on Halifax style pop-ups is probably not going to be easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surrey is probably the best location in Metro Vancouver for a CPL club, large and growing population that is on track to pass Vancouver City's population by 2030(next door Langley is growing very fast as well), far enough removed from the Whitecaps territory to develop a solid fanbase, and the city has wanted a stadium built for years. Problem for Rob Friends group is making a deal for the appropriate land and the red tape and time it takes to get these things done.

 

When I think of the Fraser Valley I think of the area east of Maple Ridge/Surrey basically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBTB and @CDNFootballer both mention the question of land. I don't think we should overstate that. 

Compared to most places considered for a CPL franchise, Surrey has a lot of available land, and more than even a few options. It is far from being fully urbanised, has semi-industrial and warehouse use that could be reconverted, has currently occupied commercial that is decadent and could be reworked, has parkland and areas on the fringe of parks, has farmland, which most do not. Some school lands could be reorganised as well. 

For me, Surrey does not have an excuse, which is why I think, in an electoral year, the cost would be a problem. And then, you have to include a stadium in any neighbourhood or community plan, and make locals actually accept it. Which is not easy as most residents think a stadium is a bother, when in fact it could be a haven of darkness and silence 95% of the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...