Vanier Cup location

Its funny you say that as the ownership group of the Knights say it was built too small. ;D

Exactly. Why is being successful in the sporting realm all of a sudden mean that you are doing something wrong and have misplaced priorities? That’s silly.

We here in Canada should strive for 20,000 seat university stadiums (lets worry about high school after :wink: ) across the country, not be ashamed and downplay the achievement. But sadly that appears to be the Canadian way when it comes to sports.

Maybe the CFL should have had the same attitude once the NFL bypassed it economically. They could have just folded the league and built a neighbourhood library where the stadiums once were, and hope that 30,000 paying customers would come out and watch people pursue more academic or “right” type of priorities.

There is definitely a sweet spot for stadium sizes, generally you want to have less seats then what you think you can sell. It’s the classic supply and demand dynamic. Knowing that there is a scarcity of seats will motivate a fanbase to ‘get them while they can’. Better to have 8,000 inside with another 1000 in line outside waiting to get in. Same tactic the bars and clubs use, don’t let many people in early so a line forms outside giving the impression the bar is popular, thus creating more demand.

Also, you can charge more for a seat when there is less of them. Think of the $9.00, 500 level seats the Jays had (other then the two recent playoff years). With only crowds of 20,000, there was something like 20, 000 empty seats. Of course competiveness of the team is a factor, cause when the Jays were good, place was sold out and prices can obviously go up. But unless the Jays know they can be that good every year, they have to expect most years the dome will be well under capacity. A 30,000 seat stadium is probably a better size for the Jays.

I guess that’s what you call going off on a tangent haha!

You’re missing my point, I think the sport landscape in Canada is right-sized. We, as spectators, spend an appropriate amount of time, money, energy and emotion on sport. We don’t eat, sleep and breathe sports. I think we have a healthy relationship with it is all I’m saying, we don’t over-indulge. Think of your favorite team…lets use the Jays, say the Jays finally win the World Series again…amazing!! But now what for next year? They cant get any better, they can only do AS well as they did last year which is to win the WS. Heck, lets say they win the WS 20 years in a row. After a while, wouldn’t it get a little…boring, wouldn’t you even start asking “what’s the point”. I think the importance of sports is more pronounced on long suffering fan bases, because the goal of winning a championshipstill needs to be accomplished.

I have a buddy that thinks fans should sell out stadiums no matter if the team is good or bad, it’s this notion of being a “loyal” fan. I laugh at him because these sports teams are businesses and they got him hook, line and sinker. Why waste your time, energy, money and emotion of a bad team…just because you have to “be a good fan and show support”? And then fans are “bandwagon” when I team improves.

Would you continue going to a restaurant with bad food and service just to be loyal? If you heard of a movie that was getting great reviews, would you be considered a “bandwagon” move goer? Kinda ridiculous when you think of it that way. These same teams don’t ever seem to return the loyalty when threats of relocation crop up when they want the fans (taxpayers) to buy them a new stadium.

Tangent 2 over…

Yes. I often wonder what the Knights could draw if the arena capacity was 15,000 or more.

???

There’s a big problem with your analogy though. Sports, unlike restaurants, is a zero sum game. When one team wins, another loses. So they can’t all be good at the same time.

You’re talking about the mega $ sports businesses in the States though. In the CFL, it’s not about mega bucks, it’s about survival. Being a “fair weather” fan could result in your team not being around long enough to turn things around (and thus export its problen to other teams).

:frowning:

There is no “right size.” Who gets to decide what is and isn’t the right amount of time, money, and emotion when it comes to sporting endeavors? As long as you don’t compromise your immediate health and dont do direct harm to others, it is nobody’s business to decide whether or not the level of fandom is acceptable. Its an individual’s choice.

A sport team cannot be compared to a restaurant as following a team brings with it other intrinsic values to a person that a restaurant has no chance of accomplishing. Your team wins a championship and you feel a part of it and it sticks with you the rest of your life.

You eat a good burger, you aren’t high fiveing the chef in the back and attending a parade for your well prepared sandwich. Its two totally different things. There’s no civic enjoyment for your well enjoyed meal, while a sports team success brings out a community spirit in a city that cannot be duplicated with almost anything else.

I will agree however that the affection fans show to teams is far too often not reciprocated.

Thanks, we all know that, but the Knights ownership group are stating that their “sweetspot” would be another 3,000 seats in their building.So they are ststing that their is more demand than they have supply. So they are saying they have 9,000 butts in seats with another 3,000 wanting to get in. Thats 30% of their customer base.

Again, the Jays are a totally different animal because they have WAY too much supply in their seating capacity rather than not enough. Nobody is complaining that their stadium is too small. (if anything its the reverse).

Always better a bit too small than a bit or more too big IMHO. BMO is turning out to be a bit too big for the Argos, they would probably be perfect in a THF stadium.

Boston Red Sox, have it right as well, they have added about 3 or 4 thousand seats over the years, now at about 37,500 and every game is virtually sold-out. Perfect, bingo! Ask most baseball fans and they’ll tell you as I’ve heard over the years, going to Fenway is so much better than the Rogers Centre.

Again, Fenway didn’t add that many seats because they thought it was enough, but rather the building’s almost ancient footprint didn’t allow them to add more without drastically changing the look of the ballpark. The new Fenway they were pushing for about a decade ago would have had closer to 45,000 seats.

According to that logic, MLSE should have built an arena at least that holds as much as the Bell Centre in Montreal, but they didn’t do it, went much smaller, 18,800 seating compared with Bell 21,300, speaking hockey. Now why didn’t MLSE go as big as Montreal?

You always want to go smaller from the beginning IMHO. It’s unfortunate the Argos couldn’t have got into BMO when it was in the low 20,000’s, wrong timing. When in doubt, go smaller. I’ve heard that the people in Edmonton admit they went way too big for Commonwealth.

You create demand when supply is limited which can creat a demand of sorts if there is enough fan base of course, and then you can go bigger if really necessary when the arena or stadium becomes obsolete. But moving into a new arena or stadium you want that baby with shorter supply than demand. Again, all has gone wrong with the Argos moving from RC to BMO, unfortunate.

Sure the Red Sox can say they want a bigger stadium but believe me with how they spend on salaries, they are doing quite fine right now in the smallest or one of the smallest stadiums in MLB.

London should have done what McMaster did with a football stadium, they simply got it wrong.

Problem is MLSE didn’t plan or build ACC. It was built as an arena for the Raptors by their original ownership group with only basketball im mind.

MLSE bought the ACC and Raptors halfway through its construction. So it’s actually a basketball arena retro fitted for hockey. That’s why you have those end zone seats in thr upper bowl that have no view of the near net area.

Montreal built to big, they don’t sell out in bad years… look at that, a fanbase that’s stays away when the team sucks, smart!

That strategy/behaviour doesn’t look so smart if and when teams end up folding. If fans everywhere pursued that strategy, the number of teams in a league would trend asymptotically to one.

:frowning:

My thoughts are speaking exclusive of the CFL. I realize it’s not a money making leauge for the most part.

That's why you have those end zone seats in thr upper bowl that have no view of the near net area.
SteelCity, didn't know that about the ACC, er Scotiabank Arena.

A pox on all those corporate name thingies!

:frowning:

Oh jeez, I hope that doesn’t mean im one of those learned old guys now lol

No, it just means you have knowledge of some aspects of sports in this country that, in this case compared with me, you have greater knowledge. :wink:

The NCAA is a business on it’s own merits.

U Sports is too small to be on it’s own.

Why avoid the NFL. And honestly Sunday games in a middle of a heat wave is probably not wise even if the games are in the evening.

So you’re saying that you want to watch more NFL and the CFL is stopping your enjoyment even though they rarely have Sunday games.

Remember a November Grey Cup and Vanier Cup pairing would be a better selling point for TSN than the other option.

The NHL playoffs are more competitive in the first round, then it tapers off. CFL Football games can be scheduled in the afternoon while Conference Finals and Stanley Finals are played during prime time hours in the evenings. Both CFL and NHL games being played on the same day becomes a sports fan dream.

The CFL avoids the Winter starting in May. No more Grey Cup Games with -30 C conditions like the '91 Grey Cup Game.

I’m all about growth, globally.

1 Like