Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Olympic Stadium

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • gmtobehere
    replied
    Originally posted by MC EXPOS View Post
    no reason to spend money on upgrades to a stadium with no permanent tenant, they have 200 million$ just of up keep and necessary renovations that is needed (plumbing, electrical, structural, safety, along with basic upgrades. They gotta get the money for that first. Just for up keep basically.
    I thought the Montreal CFL team played there, no?

    Leave a comment:


  • MC EXPOS
    replied
    no reason to spend money on upgrades to a stadium with no permanent tenant, they have 200 million$ just of up keep and necessary renovations that is needed (plumbing, electrical, structural, safety, along with basic upgrades. They gotta get the money for that first. Just for up keep basically.

    Leave a comment:


  • gmtobehere
    replied
    Originally posted by MC EXPOS View Post
    Those wide gaps are when the field is in "football" or "soccer" configuration. The 1st and 3rd base seats slide towards the mid field or 50 yard line. The side screens are the same, but a new HD screen was installed in centerfield earlier this year
    I understand why the seats are the way they are, but they should be fixed/updated. It looked absurd to have those huge gaps in the corners of the field. Going back 40 years, RFK and Riverfront put seamless temp. seating in around the rotating parts.

    And, at least in the stadium interior, they should cover up all the exposed concrete. It looks like something you would see at an abandoned amusement park.

    Leave a comment:


  • MC EXPOS
    replied
    Those wide gaps are when the field is in "football" or "soccer" configuration. The 1st and 3rd base seats slide towards the mid field or 50 yard line. The side screens are the same, but a new HD screen was installed in centerfield earlier this year

    Leave a comment:


  • gmtobehere
    replied
    In looking at this picture (and on TV), it seems to me that they haven't done thing to improve the stadium since the Expos left. Those bizarre looking seats still seem to be there, and there are still wide gaps in the field-level seating. The scoreboard looks to be the same, too.

    You would have thought that FIFA would have told them that they could have the WWC there, but they had to put some dollars into the stadium.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phantom Dreamer
    replied
    Lady soccer patrons at Stade Olympique in Montreal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blue387
    replied
    1981 NLCS Gm3: White's three-run homer breaks tie
    10/16/81: Jerry White hits a three-run blast in the bottom of the sixth to give the Expos a 4-1 lead over the Dodgers

    Leave a comment:


  • Anubis2051
    replied
    Was at the game Friday, will try and get some pictures up this week.

    Originally posted by NickEsasky View Post
    I didn't bother to educate myself so maybe you all can; who is behind these exhibitions? Is it Montreal or MLB? To what extent does MLB have to "sign off" on it since it is their teams playing in the games? I ask because I don't see the use in having Montreal sitting there as the bait to provoke stadium builds in other cities. The list of teams that haven't already fleeced the taxpayers for a new building is pretty short. If you pick Camden Yards as your point in time to count "new stadiums" (logical because that about 25 years and it also marked a change in the approach to ballpark builds) there are 9 teams that have not gotten a stadium built in that time period. However of those 9 teams 6 of them (Boston, both chicago teams, KC, and both LA teams) have done or are doing major upgrades to bring their facilities up to a current perceived standard. That leaves you with the Rays, A's, and Jays.
    Jays have massive upgrades coming soon - including real grass once the Argos leave.
    Last edited by Anubis2051; 04-08-2015, 02:21 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • NickEsasky
    replied
    Originally posted by Blue387 View Post
    That reminds me of the NFL and Los Angeles.
    I didn't bother to educate myself so maybe you all can; who is behind these exhibitions? Is it Montreal or MLB? To what extent does MLB have to "sign off" on it since it is their teams playing in the games? I ask because I don't see the use in having Montreal sitting there as the bait to provoke stadium builds in other cities. The list of teams that haven't already fleeced the taxpayers for a new building is pretty short. If you pick Camden Yards as your point in time to count "new stadiums" (logical because that about 25 years and it also marked a change in the approach to ballpark builds) there are 9 teams that have not gotten a stadium built in that time period. However of those 9 teams 6 of them (Boston, both chicago teams, KC, and both LA teams) have done or are doing major upgrades to bring their facilities up to a current perceived standard. That leaves you with the Rays, A's, and Jays. Pitting Toronto against Montreal is a non-starter. So that leaves two teams. You really don't need Montreal to motivate either team or city to get stadium deals in either Bay Area. It is really just a matter of clearing the unique hurdles that the A's and Ray's have to clear. The A's will move to San Jose before they move to Montreal, and the Rays will move to Tampa before they move to Montreal. Montreal's only shot is expansion, and personally I think that is a long shot.

    People have to remember that the 90's expansion happened to pay collusion debts. Read this interview (10 years old) from Fay Vincent: http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.p...ball&Itemid=81

    Here's the money quote:

    *************
    BizBall: Florida is currently struggling to get a new facility. While at the same time, Tampa Bay has had a continued run of poor attendance. There is the perception, real or otherwise, that expansion was done to offset the losses incurred over collusion in the ‘80s. What is your perception of that issue?

    Vincent: Well, I think it’s absolutely correct. Indeed, I don’t think there’s any doubt about it. Look, each owner had a $10 million bill and there were about 26 clubs before expansion and 30 at the moment, then $280 million, let’s say $10 million a club – they didn’t have the money. So they did what most would business do, they sold stock, they sold interest in the clubs, in the expansion clubs. In my day two of them - Miami and Denver. And that money, which was vital, paid off their collusion debt. Without it I think baseball would have had a very serious time. Indeed some of the clubs had had a serious time financially, a number of them were in tough shape. I remember we had to subsidize Detroit, which was going under, I think after I left, baseball helped Tampa Bay and I think in Phoenix, and probably other places where I think clubs were in tough shape financially. So there’s no doubt about that, I was there. I suggested that instead of expanding, we move two clubs, one to Denver and one to Miami. Seattle was weak and I thought Houston was another one. There were a number of candidates. We could’ve moved those clubs. I’m glad we didn’t because Seattle turned out to be a great franchise and Houston is all right. I remember one of the owners said, “That’s the single dumbest idea I’ve ever heard!” But what he was really saying is, “We need the money to pay off the union because we colluded.” By the way Selig and Reinsdorf have never admitted that collusion occurred. To this day you can’t find any public statement in which they conceded they did it. Walter Haas, who was the owner of Oakland, told me that he was in the middle of it and he said, “Never, ever feel bad about criticizing collusion simply because I was in on it and it was the presidents of the leagues who were calling around saying, “Make sure you don’t sign anybody since that would be a breach of the understanding.”
    **************

    So the point being these owners dilluted the pool because it saved their own butts. I can't envision any scenario under the current circumstances where owners would decide expansion is a good idea. Not unless something drastic changes and they need another money grab to save their own butts again.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blue387
    replied
    Originally posted by Kronos View Post
    MLB is thinking "Great, a city with a stadium we will be able to use as a relocation threat and blackmail other cities into building stadiums, of course there is no way in hell we want another Canadian team"

    Montreal, the new Washington.
    That reminds me of the NFL and Los Angeles.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chevy114
    replied
    Originally posted by Kronos View Post
    MLB is thinking "Great, a city with a stadium we will be able to use as a relocation threat and blackmail other cities into building stadiums, of course there is no way in hell we want another Canadian team"

    Montreal, the new Washington.
    Ironic that Montreal became Washington too...

    Leave a comment:


  • Kronos
    replied
    Originally posted by Matt The Hammer View Post
    With these attendance numbers, what do you think MLB is thinking? Expansion?
    MLB is thinking "Great, a city with a stadium we will be able to use as a relocation threat and blackmail other cities into building stadiums, of course there is no way in hell we want another Canadian team"

    Montreal, the new Washington.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phantom Dreamer
    replied
    Originally posted by Chevy114 View Post
    Maybe the Mariners should move there and you can have your team colors year round!
    Or maybe the Mariners can be "true" to their own rallying cry #TrueToTheBlue and alter Safeco's color scheme!

    Montreal has averaged over 48,000 the past 2 springs for the 4 games. If they can get an ownership group and ballpark plan, it's a prime candidate for a relocated team. Manfred has said expansion isn't happening any time soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chevy114
    replied
    MLB is thinking crap we have to find a way to make this into nothing so we don't have to deal with a 2nd Canadian team if you ask me. I feel bad for Montreal but I think MLB got out for a few reasons and attendance wasn't the only one, let alone the big one.

    Leave a comment:


  • Matt The Hammer
    replied
    I love Phantom's skills at mentioning the classic (and rightful) colors or his favorite team. It's art.

    With these attendance numbers, what do you think MLB is thinking? Expansion?

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X