daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old February 5th, 2009, 12:54 AM   #841
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,882
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loranga View Post
lacks 8 m in width?
Sure. It's 60 maybe 62 m wide.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old February 5th, 2009, 08:51 AM   #842
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alx-D View Post
There is no way FedEX Field would be able to host a World Cup. The pitch would only be 55 yards wide!
This is true, it's more of a placeholder. I'm sure that the Redskins will get a new stadium that hopefully isn't as f-ed up as fedex field.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 09:41 AM   #843
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
This is true, it's more of a placeholder. I'm sure that the Redskins will get a new stadium that hopefully isn't as f-ed up as fedex field.
Daniel Snyder wants a stadium in the district as opposed to in Maryland. 2018 is almost assuredly going to England and you can bet that the Skins will have a new stadium by 2022.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 10:22 AM   #844
Wezza
©
 
Wezza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Townsville
Posts: 8,861
Likes (Received): 968

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
The infrastructure is not "already in place" in australia.

The USA could hold the World Cup tomorrow and would have 12 60,00+ stadiums. Australia can't say the same thing.
Lucky it's not happening tomorrow then hey?
Wezza no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 12:19 PM   #845
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Ok.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 08:15 PM   #846
massp88
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,182
Likes (Received): 215

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
I still struggle to see how these NFL venues are supposed to accommodate a full width football pitch. This pitch for instance lacks probably 8 m in width. I really can't see how these additional 8 m could be provided without obstructing the view from thousands of seats significantly.

A World Cup in the USA would once again be a compromise. Narrow pitches to gain maximum profits. I wouldn't be surprised to see even more low-score games over there.
Gillette Stadium is all set. They are home to the Revolution. The Rose Bowl, Qwest Field and Reliant Stadium are also all set as they have hosted various matches as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
Potential Bid from the USA (IMO)

-Assuming they'll use 12 cities, I'd break them up into 3 regions in order to limit traveling. Teams will stay in their regions for the group stage and possibly the 2nd round.

West:

Seattle- Qwest Field (67,000)


San Francisco/San Diego- New 49ers/Chargers stadium, whichever gets build first (about 70,000)



Los Angeles- Rose Bowl (92,000)


Phoenix- Cardinals Stadium (63,000)


Midwest:

Denver- Invesco Field (76,000)


Houston- Reliant Stadium (71,500)


Dallas- JerryWorld (80,000-100,000)


Chicago- Soldier Field (61,500)
image hosted on flickr


East:

Miami- Dolphin Stadium (75,000)


DC- Fedex Field or New Redskins Stadium (91,000)


New York City- New Giants Stadium (82,500)


Boston- Gillette Stadium (69,000)
image hosted on flickr


Average World Cup 2022 Capacity- 75,000

I think you can cut San Diego out of that picture and just run with 12 venues.
massp88 no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 09:16 PM   #847
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryebreadraz View Post
...and you can bet that the Skins will have a new stadium by 2022.
I still don't get the logic behind this. Then again, maybe I'm looking for the wrong then, then, eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
Thirdly, this article doesn't talk about what the US could give to FIFA and to the game of football that Australia, or England, or Russia couldn't give aside from money. Is that really your unique selling point?
What?? You act like that's not good enough!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobH View Post
As I understand it, however, most of the stadiums built since '94 do have wide enough pitches for soccer. This is good becasue if the US gets another world cup, we shouldn't see scenes like the one above.
For everyone, on the topic of suitability of venues: Suspicions of FIFA corruptions aside I think it's safe to say the US wouldn't bid for, and FIFA wouldn't award, the WC if these facilities weren't up to snuff. I think it's pretty clear that competition for bids alone has raised the standard such that really egregious conditions like those shown for Giants Stadium probably won't cut it. So while we may see some compromises on distances from the pitch, accommodations for advertising, etc., that it's unlikely a US bid would feature truly outrageous compromises on actual playing conditions. Bicker all we want, but it's time to give the organizers a little benefit of the doubt and say that just because we don't see WC suitability today doesn't mean it's not there.

I mean, c'mon, if bids from Qatar and Indonesia are given credibility...

__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 10:26 PM   #848
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
I still don't get the logic behind this. Then again, maybe I'm looking for the wrong then, then, eh?
Its simple really...FedEx Field blows, so its time for a new one.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 10:41 PM   #849
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
Its simple really...FedEx Field blows, so its time for a new one.
I've heard that but don't understand HOW it "blows." I can't imagine general site lines could be significantly better for most of the seats, and changes in corporate facilities wouldn't be noticed by 95% of the fans. Is it the location, the concourse amenities, leg room...? Why is it so bad other than not being in DC?

And though I have no real dog in the fight (other than preserving hope that DC United get to build within DC) I would give serious concern to any public money spent to replace this particular venue given its young age and the supposed wealth of the owners.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 11:05 PM   #850
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes (Received): 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
Its simple really...FedEx Field blows, so its time for a new one.
They built it. They should have to deal with it. Unless of course the Redskins want to spend $2 billion of their OWN money on a new stadium.
nyrmetros no está en línea  
Old February 5th, 2009, 11:52 PM   #851
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyrmetros View Post
They built it. They should have to deal with it. Unless of course the Redskins want to spend $2 billion of their OWN money on a new stadium.
Its not going to be as expensive as other stadiums. The new stadium would be built where RFK Stadium is now. That land has been specifically zoned by Congress to hold a stadium. It would take an act of Congress for anything other than a stadium to be built there. Since the new stadium would probably be owned by the government on government land, I dont see the land being all that expensive. Also, the FedEx site in Landover would be sold... the site, although not suited for a stadium, would serve other purposes quite nicely. The Redskins would also put a lot of their money towards the new stadium, but the city wouldnt have as much of a problem spending a bit as well, as the stadium would make a lot of money in return. There are already parking lots built around the site. It actually works perfectly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
I've heard that but don't understand HOW it "blows." I can't imagine general site lines could be significantly better for most of the seats, and changes in corporate facilities wouldn't be noticed by 95% of the fans. Is it the location, the concourse amenities, leg room...? Why is it so bad other than not being in DC?

And though I have no real dog in the fight (other than preserving hope that DC United get to build within DC) I would give serious concern to any public money spent to replace this particular venue given its young age and the supposed wealth of the owners.
FedEx Field was built in a hurry so that owner Jack Kent Cooke would be able to live to see its completion (he didnt). The construction is somewhat poor. Its in a horrible location, even though its only about 5 miles from RFK. It wasnt built on a Metro line (the station that "serves" the stadium is about a mile away). The stadium is quiet because of the design. Sound goes straight up, like at Michigan Stadium. It is one of the most luxurious stadiums in the NFL, but thats only if you are in the club level or in a suite. If you arent, you have to walk around in concourses that look terrible and dirty (and smell). It drives the fans away. The Redskins have gone from having possibly the best home field advantage in the NFL at RFK to one of the worst. The fans havent changed, but the people who attend the games have.

Now heres the worst part. FedEx was built with a capacity of 78,000. Now it seats 91,000. See any major additions, extra decks built? No. To expand, seats have been forced into places not originally designed for seating...like in the picture below. In the picture you can see across the field where the lower bowl ends and a row of suites begins. Originally, on the opposite side of the stadium where the lower bowl ended there was just a wall. Dan Snyder added seats there (its known as the cave) to increase capacity. Those seats are terrible. Its another reason why people would just rather watch on tv. Its just a pain. A new stadium more geared towards the fans and with better transportation (and a retractable roof for other events) would greatly improve the experience and generate a lot of money for the city.

image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 01:17 AM   #852
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,882
Likes (Received): 296

And what's wrong with the other 78'000 seats? I mean if the seats in the cave are considered unsuitable there are still the 78'000 seats of the original design.
And wouldn't it be much cheaper to renovate the concourses of this stadium rather than building a complete new one. Apart from the transport aspect I still don't understand why a new stadium would be better than this one.
__________________
Rippachtal.de

Last edited by flierfy; February 6th, 2009 at 01:55 AM. Reason: elaborated my question
flierfy no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 02:02 AM   #853
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
And what's wrong with the other 78'000 seats? I mean if the seats in the cave are considered unsuitable there are still the 78'000 seats of the original design.
And wouldn't it be much cheaper to renovate the concourses of this stadium rather than building a complete new one. Apart from the transport aspect I still don't understand why a new stadium would be better than this one.
nothing, but these 13k seats just give off the overall feeling that the stadium gives to many fans. Its more than just concourses, its the overall shoddy construction of the stadium...as i said before it was built in a hurry. Thats why the stadium has such a simple design and isnt built with much. I guess its hard to explain, because the stadium can be so luxurious yet so icky at the same time. Unless you know someone that can get you into a suite (which isnt likely) it isnt a pleasant experience. To renovate it in the way that it needs to be renovated would cost more than the original price of the stadium, so why not just build a new one and slap a retractable roof on it. It could host Super Bowls and Final Fours. It doesnt happen often, but sometimes a stadium is just a failure.

I have season tickets to games, and im excited for every game, but the stadium in general is just a downer. Its bad enough to turn one home field advantage that was at once among the best in the league to just...mediocre.

this is what it used to be like...ask fellow NFL fans on the site, they might know what im talking about

http://espn.go.com/page2/wash/s/simmons/020314.html

Sorry Sercan, got a little carried away.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS

Last edited by en1044; February 6th, 2009 at 02:09 AM.
en1044 no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 04:29 AM   #854
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
FedEx Field was built in a hurry so that owner Jack Kent Cooke would be able to live to see its completion (he didnt). The construction is somewhat poor. Its in a horrible location...
Thank you. Now I understand. I do wish the Redskins fans a nice home (even though I'm partial to the Giants for that division), just hope it doesn't become another Nationals ballpark giveaway, fail to accommodate soccer or detract from support for United.

A dome would be cool, though: Improve the bowl game, ACC and NCAA basketball tournaments... Very nice.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 05:06 AM   #855
Bobby3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,267
Likes (Received): 52

Charlotte could host matches, we're big now, look at us!

Please?
Bobby3 no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 06:47 AM   #856
ryebreadraz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby3 View Post
Charlotte could host matches, we're big now, look at us!

Please?
I doubt Charlotte would host. My guess is they would go with 4 pods of 3 and Texas would be thrown in with the southern region. Charlotte wouldn't beat out Dallas, Houston or Miami for a match. Even if they go with 3 pods of 4 and Texas gets thrown in with the midwest, putting Charlotte in the east, they'd need to beat out Miami, NY, Boston, DC and Philadelphia.
ryebreadraz no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 08:38 AM   #857
dwbakke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 57
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post

this is what it used to be like...ask fellow NFL fans on the site, they might know what im talking about

http://espn.go.com/page2/wash/s/simmons/020314.html

Sorry Sercan, got a little carried away.
Man, you're making me miss those days in RFK, with the stands literally bouncing and the fans chanting "We Want Dallas!" And when we used to win Super Bowls. Those were the days.

I'm with you on FedEx, too. It just isn't right.
dwbakke no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 12:01 PM   #858
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by massp88 View Post
I think you can cut San Diego out of that picture and just run with 12 venues.
I'm saying that either San Francisco or San Diego gets to host, whichever gets a new stadium the fastest.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 05:04 PM   #859
G.C.
Registered User
 
G.C.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Belfast
Posts: 907
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
The infrastructure is not "already in place" in australia.

The USA could hold the World Cup tomorrow and would have 12 60,00+ stadiums. Australia can't say the same thing.
Most of which arent wide enough to hold a football pitch.
G.C. no está en línea  
Old February 6th, 2009, 06:31 PM   #860
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.C. View Post
Most of which arent wide enough to hold a football pitch.
Again, to all of you touting this notion: Just stop it. The US organizers aren't so stupid that they don't know the requirements of FIFA and the logistics of their venues. Yes, there are NFL venues that we common fans don't know for sure if they're large enough for a soccer pitch, but while individual venues may certainly be in question this notion that the US doesn't have enough venues that are viable is certifiably unrealistic. The bid organizers wouldn't put forth a multi-million dollar proposal if they weren't certain of what they have to offer FIFA, well within FIFA standards. And even if many venues aren't "wide enough," why can't the US afford to amend those venues when half the bids already proposed are talking about several completely new venues?

Please try for constructive dialogue instead of simply being a hater. Thanks.

Carry on.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
los angeles, united states of america, world cup

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu