Aerial

The disconnection would have been aesthetically from a visual aspect with the tall stadium creating a visual barrier if you will from the downtown area of James St. N to the waterfront, would have been not aesthetically pleasing at all.  Remember, its a sports stadium built without a tonne of money and as functional as THF is, I don't find it particularly pleasing to the eye.  It would have detracted from true long range planning with lower buildings and not look like basically an eyesore down near the waterfront area, like a THF would look there.  Look at Toronto's waterfront with the Skydome, er Rogers Centre and all the other tall buildings down there, what a total friggin disaster, Toronto should be ashamed of themselves.  Horrible.    

There are far more important things the city should be, and now is, looking at the West Harbour than a Grey Cup every so often and 10 or so football games.  And the CFL could, hopefully not, but could, end up one day close to death like it almost did back in the early to mid '90's.  Who knows.   Hamilton dodged a bullet on this one for a true long range visional planning for a very unique area.  Waterfront so close to a downtown should be one thing where a quite ugly outdoor sports stadium like THF (not just THF, so many stadiums are just ugly type of buildings and many of those cost far more than THF) should not even be considered.  IMHO.  If it was a small 4000-5000 seater, especially baseball where there are so many games, that is different.  Although I suppose a small soccer/football stadium there would have worked as well with high school usage and concerts etc.  But THF is a monstrosity.  

I'm not saying the stadium shouldn't have been built downtown or very, very close, not at all.  There may have been an area suitable.  But just not down at the waterfront area.  Waterfronts are just too precious for "quick fixes" that would be, in this case, almost downright ugly.

Good read here:


Quote
If it were not the case that the economics of sports affects all American citizens, then I could see the rationale behind sports as an escape, a niche, a pastime.  But because sports' economics have been a major public tax issue, then thinking about sports as somehow beyond the ordinary lives of all citizens is incorrect. In fact, American readers of this book have been involved in subsidizing sport while simultaneously sacrificing other and, most would agree, more import forms of public welfare.

How is this the case? The most glaring evidence comes from the construction of stadiums.  Since about the mid-1970s, sports stadiums have been seen as quick-fix remedies for struggling urban centers.  (Like many of the economic problems we have come to articulate with greater clarity over the last decade or so, this problem of stadium construction fits into the arc of the greater political movement of neoliberalism, which dates roughly from the early to mid-1970s on (31))  As soon as we begin to understand what is happening with sports stadiums in America, we immediately see that sports philosophy cannot possibly remain detached from economics.  Here is a somewhat scathing presentation of the problem by sportswriter Dave Zirin:

 During the economic boom of the 1990s, the longest period of economic
 expansion in U.S. history, publicly funded stadiums became the substitute
 for anything resembling an urban policy in this country.  These stadiums,
 ballparks, arenas, and domes were presented as a microwave-instant
 solution to the problems of crumbling schools, urban decay, and suburban
 flight (blight?).  They are now the excrement of the urban neoliberalism
 of the 1990s, sporting shrines to the dogma of trickle-down economics.
 In the past twenty-five years, more than $30 billion of the public's
 money has been spent for stadium construction and upkeep from coast to
 coast.  Though many cities now resist paying the full tab, any kind of
 subsidy is a fool's investment, ending up being little more than
 monuments to corporate greed: $500 million welfare hotels for America's
 billionaires built with funds that could have been spent more wisely on
 just about anything else. (32)
Sport Philosophy Now: The Culture of Sports after the Lance Armstrong Scandal.  McNees, MJ. Romand & Littlefield, 2015.https://www.amazon.ca/Sport-Philosophy-Now-Culture-Armstrong/dp/1442260653

https://books.google.ca/books/about/Sport_Philosophy_Now.html?id=nEMiCwAAQBAJ&redir
"Canadian football does in fact have 4 downs, its just that as Canadians we are very polite and punt on the third down" -John Candy, SCTV

Footballguy

Hammer, imagine the mess if the West Harbour site had a stadium put on it and cleanup/capping was rushed through all in the name of the Pan-Scam Games and it was found out later that the stadium would have to be torn down to remediate and cap the site properly.  My guess is the TigerCats would have been blamed for agreeing to the site, I bet my bottom dollar.


Quote
As far as the West Harbour, a break in the serenity for 11 Football games and 2 concerts a year isn't substantial.
Well I understand a lot of people living down by the bayfront area were thinking that a stadium there was not something they wanted at the bayfront.  For good reason if I lived there.

West Harbour IMHO, and we all have our opinions, was the wrong place to put an oudoor sports stadium.  The height of it alone, THF is quite high, would have disconnected the downtown area to the waterfront from simply a sight aspect let alone just the wrong place for a large sports stadium.  Hamilton got lucky the stadium was not built there, extremely lucky.  Again, just in my opinion.  Well and in some others' opinions as well ie:

What now with the west harbour?

Quote
With the future vision of the west harbour that includes a football stadium seemingly a thing of the past, a meeting has been called for residents to discuss other options for the waterfront and the Tiffany-Barton Street area and its buildings.

Longtime North- End resident Shawn Selway has organized an informal gathering starting at 7 p.m. Monday at the You Me Gallery at 330 James St. N.

Part of the focus will be on the future of old buildings in the area, such as the former and now empty Rheem factory.

Selway has invited David Schellingerhoudt, a graduate student at the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture, to speak and present some ideas he has developed for the area.

“I see a diamond in the rough there,” Schellingerhoudt said. “It’s really an interesting area, the location, history, the buildings. The stadium was a bit of a pipe dream, a quick fix. I think now there is room to do great things, take into account all the opportunities that exist to rethink what to do there.”

No registration is required for the meeting. Selway said he’s hoping to get 20 or 30 people to show.
https://www.thespec.com/news-story/2183390-what-now-for-the-west-harbour-/  - Jan. 2011
:oMost stadiums are in the worst part of the city Regina’s is in the worst part cheaper land it makes sense

Iconic SR

Hammer, imagine the mess if the West Harbour site had a stadium put on it and cleanup/capping was rushed through all in the name of the Pan-Scam Games and it was found out later that the stadium would have to be torn down to remediate and cap the site properly.  My guess is the TigerCats would have been blamed for agreeing to the site, I bet my bottom dollar.


Quote
As far as the West Harbour, a break in the serenity for 11 Football games and 2 concerts a year isn't substantial.
Well I understand a lot of people living down by the bayfront area were thinking that a stadium there was not something they wanted at the bayfront.  For good reason if I lived there.

West Harbour IMHO, and we all have our opinions, was the wrong place to put an oudoor sports stadium.  The height of it alone, THF is quite high, would have disconnected the downtown area to the waterfront from simply a sight aspect let alone just the wrong place for a large sports stadium.  Hamilton got lucky the stadium was not built there, extremely lucky.  Again, just in my opinion.  Well and in some others' opinions as well ie:

What now with the west harbour?

Quote
With the future vision of the west harbour that includes a football stadium seemingly a thing of the past, a meeting has been called for residents to discuss other options for the waterfront and the Tiffany-Barton Street area and its buildings.

Longtime North- End resident Shawn Selway has organized an informal gathering starting at 7 p.m. Monday at the You Me Gallery at 330 James St. N.

Part of the focus will be on the future of old buildings in the area, such as the former and now empty Rheem factory.

Selway has invited David Schellingerhoudt, a graduate student at the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture, to speak and present some ideas he has developed for the area.

“I see a diamond in the rough there,” Schellingerhoudt said. “It’s really an interesting area, the location, history, the buildings. The stadium was a bit of a pipe dream, a quick fix. I think now there is room to do great things, take into account all the opportunities that exist to rethink what to do there.”

No registration is required for the meeting. Selway said he’s hoping to get 20 or 30 people to show.
https://www.thespec.com/news-story/2183390-what-now-for-the-west-harbour-/  - Jan. 2011
:oMost stadiums are in the worst part of the city Regina’s is in the worst part cheaper land it makes sense
Correction - Regina’s stadium was built on city land at Evraz Place (Regina Exhibition Park) - already owned and operated by the city and used for exhibition and fair purposes. The oldest buildings there were demolished to make room for the new stadium. This entire land parcel and facilities (even before the new stadium) has been THE major trade show and entertainment complex and outdoor gathering space in Regina for decades. It happens to be situated adjacent to a rougher area of the city - but that is not at all the reason why the stadium was built there. Existing facilities nearby, location, suitable size, city owned property, and existing onsite facilities management and staff  - is what made this deal work.

https://www.evrazplace.com/facilities/interactive-facilities-map

brianjoxx

Hopefully not. Give it to cities that wants it and can host 45,000 Minimum. Cheers

Aerial

I doubt that Fred Eisenberger, with his "knowledge" of whatever, even knows what the Grey Cup means.  How this man could be a Mayor of a Canadian city the size of Hamilton, boggles the friggin mind to no end.   In his very limited mind, it's about the Ticats vs the City, Evil vs The Truth.  It's actually very scary, and nothing to do with sports or Grey Cup or that, just about how someone like he can become a Mayor of a large city.    ::)

Fred would fit in perfectly in Schitt's Creek, to a tee.  And his followers.   :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*  Mind you, I do like Schitt's Creek.  hmmm, have to think about this ....

brianjoxx

Guys I'm not familiar with this setting. However some cities build in bad area's to save money.
Example Oilers, Islanders, Ottawa, and many more. Today's thoughts are different. Build in prime land
locations, pay extra, but have a neat new community area that draws well. Example Oilers. Calgary
up coming project. Owners win, City wins, Province wins, after investments.
Cheers

Iconic SR

I doubt that Fred Eisenberger, with his "knowledge" of whatever, even knows what the Grey Cup means.  How this man could be a Mayor of a Canadian city the size of Hamilton, boggles the friggin mind to no end.   In his very limited mind, it's about the Ticats vs the City, Evil vs The Truth.  It's actually very scary, and nothing to do with sports or Grey Cup or that, just about how someone like he can become a Mayor of a large city.    ::)

Fred would fit in perfectly in Schitt's Creek, to a tee.  And his followers.   :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*  Mind you, I do like Schitt's Creek.  hmmm, have to think about this ....
We are only as good as the governments we elect. Obviously the majority wanted this guy. 

KevinRiley2

Hopefully not. Give it to cities that wants it and can host 45,000 Minimum. Cheers
Amen.  Sadly, that is NOT Hamilton.
* Kevin Riley = The moral conscience AND movie reviewer for cfl.ca.  :)
* When in doubt, always ask (WWKD) What Would Kevin Do?
* Forgive me for always taking the High Road.  It's the ONLY Road I know.

CFL Pete

Montreal is the right choice.

Chestmaster

According to Wiki, 'To date, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats are the only club that has publicly expressed interest in hosting the (2019 Grey Cup).'  'Should the Tiger-Cats host the game, temporary seating would be installed with the goal to raise seating capacity to 40,000.'

If the Ticat's host the Grey Cup, they will have 24,000 built in seats.  According to the Ticats, any additional seats will cost about $100 each to install, so they will have to charge north of $100 for each seat just to break even.

I don't believe the Ticats could sell 40,000 seats - if you thought the 2016 Toronto Grey Cup was ugly, Hamilton would be worse.  TBH, I'm not sure they could break 30,000 - especially if they are well priced.

Assuming Hamilton does host, how many seats do you believe they could sell, at what average ticket price, and what kind of profit (if any) would they see?
Ok there captain negative pants youve been hangin out with TPat to much lol.

Price i dont think will be a huge factor the big factor imo (and maybe this was mentioned already, sorry didnt read the thread) was having Ottawa and Toronto just host one. 
let the GC go west for a few years before hosting 




Posted using the new Blackberry Keyone

PTBO Dave

Montreal is the right choice.
It would be nice to go back to Montreal, but I don't think the Big O can host a Grey Cup in late November. I think they still have issues with the roof and snow.

Grover

Montreal is the right choice.
It would be nice to go back to Montreal, but I don't think the Big O can host a Grey Cup in late November. I think they still have issues with the roof and snow.
The BIG OWE is getting a new roof

While the stadium still hosts the occasional soccer and baseball game, its two major vocations are as tourist attraction and landlord for occasional events and a number of permanent tenants. The main bowl is only usable half the year because the roof risks collapse with even a three-centimetre snowfall. A new roof should fix that.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-owing-never-ends-at-the-big-o-montreals-olympicstadium/article37169871/

Thanks to @Doc_Dave for sig

PTBO Dave

Montreal is the right choice.
It would be nice to go back to Montreal, but I don't think the Big O can host a Grey Cup in late November. I think they still have issues with the roof and snow.
The BIG OWE is getting a new roof

While the stadium still hosts the occasional soccer and baseball game, its two major vocations are as tourist attraction and landlord for occasional events and a number of permanent tenants. The main bowl is only usable half the year because the roof risks collapse with even a three-centimetre snowfall. A new roof should fix that.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-owing-never-ends-at-the-big-o-montreals-olympicstadium/article37169871/
That's good news for the Grey Cup . . . anyone know it'll be done? I didn't see a timeline mentioned in that article.

Edit: apparently they hope to have it done by 2023.

KevinRiley2

According to Wiki, 'To date, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats are the only club that has publicly expressed interest in hosting the (2019 Grey Cup).'  'Should the Tiger-Cats host the game, temporary seating would be installed with the goal to raise seating capacity to 40,000.'

If the Ticat's host the Grey Cup, they will have 24,000 built in seats.  According to the Ticats, any additional seats will cost about $100 each to install, so they will have to charge north of $100 for each seat just to break even.

I don't believe the Ticats could sell 40,000 seats - if you thought the 2016 Toronto Grey Cup was ugly, Hamilton would be worse.  TBH, I'm not sure they could break 30,000 - especially if they are well priced.

Assuming Hamilton does host, how many seats do you believe they could sell, at what average ticket price, and what kind of profit (if any) would they see?
Ok there captain negative pants youve been hangin out with TPat to much lol.

Price i dont think will be a huge factor the big factor imo (and maybe this was mentioned already, sorry didnt read the thread) was having Ottawa and Toronto just host one.
let the GC go west for a few years before hosting
Not being negative.  Just a realist.  The game would bomb in Hamilton.

Remember the `Buy a Large Coffee at Tim Hortons and get a ticket to the Hamilton Grey Cup for $2!!! ', 20 years back?  

I do.

Bob Young struggles to make money with the Ticats.  Let`s not pressure him into hosting a money losing Grey Cup.

Mightygoose

The CFL was in a much different place in 1996. Many said that game would have been the last in the history of the league. Many Grey Cups bombed back then.

I'm sure Young would do just fine hosting but until the legal issues with the stadium is sorted out. Doubt we'll see the game at THF anytime soon.

Mind you it's a municipal election year and the relationship between the team and the city are sour. Any change on that front may moves things forward....hard to say.
 


Users Online

102 Guests, 12 Users (16 Spiders, 3 Hidden)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
Aerial, Augustus67, Caretaker, Oskie18, FootbalYouBet, KennyPowers, Mikefrmthhammer, Grover, KevinRiley2, Google (AdSense) (11), Google (5)

Most Online Today: 175. Most Online Ever: 489 (Nov 26 2017, 08:38 PM)