News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 388     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 514     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 636     2 

Toronto 2015 Pan American Games

well we have no need for a futuristic/amped-up field hockey stadium. We need infrastructure but we need to pick our spots where we're going to build something amazing and something that is merely functional. Field hockey is one of those areas where functionality trumps everything else.

Also, since when are our local stadiums/fields considered average? The ACC and Skydome are both top notch facilities (Skydome was and is still in some ways ahead of its time). Copps Coliseum was built WITHOUT an NHL team in place (therefore much greater than it needed to be). BMO field was built in a way that TFC's popularity can dictate the future of the stadium (we're already seeing additions being made to it). The recent OHL rinks in Oshawa, Brampton and Mississauga are all top notch. So what are these average local stadiums/fields that you're talking about that we've been building recently?

In all honesty, what were you expecting from the renderings of the field hockey stadium? what could possibly make it better yet plausible?
 
GenerationW said:
Regarding Brampton and Mississauga, two OHL teams in new rinks so close to each other has proven to be a huge mistake.
Click to expand...

Since they are both in separate municipalities there is very little that could have been done about the locations....they both built them where they did for their own reasons. If by "mistake" you mean they have both had attendance problems......as a season ticket holder at one, and regular attendee of the other, I would suggest that has little/nothing to do with their proximity to each other.
 
^ Not only that, but what does it have to do with the quality of the facilities (which was what I was talking about)? I've played in both rinks, and most of the OHL rinks in southern Ontario, and the ones in Brampton and Mississauga are great.
 
jn_12 said:
^ Not only that, but what does it have to do with the quality of the facilities (which was what I was talking about)? I've played in both rinks, and most of the OHL rinks in southern Ontario, and the ones in Brampton and Mississauga are great.
Click to expand...

I would describe Mississauga's (the Hershey) as great and Brampton's (Powerade) as very good.....some fairly significant design flaws in Brampton which I think were just caused by being a bit budget concious.....but from a spectator point of view not bad.
 
I haven't watched a game in Brampton in a while, so I don't remember any glaring issues, but from a playing perspective, the rink is good. The problem is that the 3 pads around the OHL rink were poorly designed (open concept where there's no wall between two of the rinks, which means a whistle in one rink can be heard in the other.
 
TOareaFan said:
If by "mistake" you mean they have both had attendance problems......as a season ticket holder at one, and regular attendee of the other, I would suggest that has little/nothing to do with their proximity to each other.
Click to expand...
Then what would you say are the primary reasons?
 
What happened with the two teams so close to eachother is that Mississauga had their team moved to Niagara and got Toronto's old team, the Majors. Brampton already ahd their team due to expansion in 1998. What happened then was Eugene Melnyk wanted a team back in Mississauga and paid millions to the OHL to get that done.

However, that is not important to this discussion. Having watched games at both arenas numerous times, I can safely say that both arenas are suited for the job. The Hershey Centre is a spectacular new rink both inside and out. The Powerade Centre was thrown up in a hurry to house the Battalion in their first season and therefor is not the most visually attractive building. However, for the games, they could cover up the big wall near the ice surface (which currently shows the Battalion logo) with Toronto 2015 logos and it should be fine.

I think that both arenas are up to the job.

However, one objection I have is the decision by the board to host the bowling event at Classic Bowl. While I am sure the facility is marvelous, I was horrified to find that it is located in a suburban plaza. This is hardly the kind of place for a sporting event of this magnitude. I don't like international sports matches to be played in plazas, regardless of the venue's condition. Anybody else agree with me on this one? And one more complaint (wow, I'm in a mood tonight...) is that I don't like badminton being played at Bill Crothers Secondary School. I know what an incredible school it is but I don't think a competition of this calibre in the Americas should be played in a school when it could be played in a proper stadium or building. How about the nearby Centennial Community Centre being built for the games?
 
Last edited:
jn_12 said:
well we have no need for a futuristic/amped-up field hockey stadium. We need infrastructure but we need to pick our spots where we're going to build something amazing and something that is merely functional. Field hockey is one of those areas where functionality trumps everything else.

Also, since when are our local stadiums/fields considered average? The ACC and Skydome are both top notch facilities (Skydome was and is still in some ways ahead of its time). Copps Coliseum was built WITHOUT an NHL team in place (therefore much greater than it needed to be). BMO field was built in a way that TFC's popularity can dictate the future of the stadium (we're already seeing additions being made to it). The recent OHL rinks in Oshawa, Brampton and Mississauga are all top notch. So what are these average local stadiums/fields that you're talking about that we've been building recently?

In all honesty, what were you expecting from the renderings of the field hockey stadium? what could possibly make it better yet plausible?
Click to expand...

One could argue we don't need anything but the bare minimum anywhere. It is possible to build something nice on a budget - it just takes some creativity.
 
Nice cop out. I completely debunk your notion that all we build are mediocre stadiums and then when I ask what you would have preferred, all you have to say is "creativity". Why even bother replying to me if that's the case?

Besides, saying "we don't need anything but the bare minimum anywhere" isn't true at all. We need a nice stadium in Hamilton because odds are the Ti-Cats will be moving in. We need a nice Olympic aquatics centre because it is the type of facility that is sorely lacking in southern Ontario, plus it would serve a wide range of people, from elite athletes, to locals, to students, to domestic and international events. One field hockey field isn't going to do all of that.

So again I ask: what were you expecting? and what would you have done to make it better?
 
jn_12 said:
Nice cop out. I completely debunk your notion that all we build are mediocre stadiums and then when I ask what you would have preferred, all you have to say is "creativity". Why even bother replying to me if that's the case?

Besides, saying "we don't need anything but the bare minimum anywhere" isn't true at all. We need a nice stadium in Hamilton because odds are the Ti-Cats will be moving in. We need a nice Olympic aquatics centre because it is the type of facility that is sorely lacking in southern Ontario, plus it would serve a wide range of people, from elite athletes, to locals, to students, to domestic and international events. One field hockey field isn't going to do all of that.

So again I ask: what were you expecting? and what would you have done to make it better?
Click to expand...

Why does Hamilton need a nice stadium? Why not something that gets the job done?

Good design has a place everywhere, whether the venue is large or small. I'm not talking about making it flashy either.

From what I see, I don't really care for it; it's a generic and almost disposable looking. I'm going to refrain from anymore comments till we see some larger renders, as my initial ones were premature (as I wrote earlier).
 
As ugly as that is, remember, it is only temporary and money was not spent on making it attractive.
 
savevp said:
As ugly as that is, remember, it is only temporary and money was not spent on making it attractive.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood....I think this is terrific for a temporary stadium.......it provides the basic amenities and the views look great. I wonder why we don't build more of these in Canada until the place we build them proves out the need for something more permanent. For example, the CFL has said for years they would love to expand to Quebec City and/or the Maritimes....but there is no stadium big enough. For $14 million (assuming similar construction costs across the country) they could have one of these 27k stadiums.....if after 5 years or so they had proven the ability to support the team/league it could be replaced with something "nicer"......5 years of taxes and economic activity from a stadium of this size could probably pay it off (+/-).

So, my post was not negative just surprised....I quite like the look of it it looks like one of those old British soccer stadiums that I love.
 
I didn't mean to be negative. I completely agree with all the above statements. To be honest, I just wanted to clarify that this kind of stadium (as proposed for the games) was not meant to be attractive as I suspected that many readers would be against building a stadium like this.

What I should have said was that should we opt to build a temporary stadium, don't be alarmed at the 'uglyness' because if we spend a little on making it attractive, we will create a nice facility.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top