Portland Timbers stadium renovation; you'll need to use your imagination a bit
by Steve Davis on Dec 23, 2009 12:51 PM EST
Email
Print
The Portland Oregonian cooked up a delicious little stew of off-season soccer news with details of the renovation to
Meanwhile, they'll have to get the grounds ready. As I've said before,
The good on PGE Park is its location, right downtown, which will drive the development of an urban core audience, the sort that actually cares about wins and losses and not just about something to occupy a Saturday night. That in itself is a massive benefit to MLS.
As for the grounds, well, we're going to have to wait a bit to see how the renovation shapes the experience. The renderings are a little cold, to be honest. They don't demonstrate the passion, color and pageantry that willconsume the
One thing you won't like about the plans: artificial turf. Timbers officials say that's just the reality of the situation.
So, let the consternation over that one begin in ... 3, 2, 1 ...
44 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I was going to say TFC switched to grass...
But then I read the article and it says there are going to be football games played at the stadium. So long as football is being played there, I don’t know that you got much choice, less you want what happened in Houston in the playoffs this year.
by PeterJH on Dec 23, 2009 2:00 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
TFC has switched to grass
The turf has already been ripped out and the base of the grass field is being laid already. There are rumors that the stadium will also have the CFL Argos playing at BMO in 2011, but it’s looking like that won’t happen and grass will be at BMO regardless. At least for one season, it will be only 2 turf fields (Seattle and New England).
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 23, 2009 9:48 PM EST up reply actions
I guess I was vague...
My point was going to be if TFC switched after a few years, so could Portland and be the envy of the NW. Then I read that football is going to be played at PGE, so there goes that line of argument…
It was more than a rumor about the Argos. They formally made a request to move to BMO, which really got the TFC fans worked up. The CFL commisioned a study into the feasibility of it, and shot it down saying BMO was too small for a CFL field. So that is all, thankfully, dead now.
Yeah
I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that TFC is paying out of their own pocket to put seats above the beer garden now. It just makes it tougher for them to make the field longer if the CFL really pushed for a move.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 24, 2009 3:10 PM EST up reply actions
PGE Park
As a Sounders season ticket holder, I kind of hate to admit it, but PGE is a very nice little field. Some friends and I went to all of the Women’s World Cup games they held there (2002?). I believe we sat on the West side, so we were looking at the temporary stands they had for the East and South sides. You could tell that it was a “repourposed” baseball field, but the feel was very soccer-friendly. I can’t wait to take the train down there for MLS games in ‘11.
The decision for artificial turf is a little surprising (since it was grass back then), but I presume they’re doing it so they won’t be at a disadvantage when they come North to play the Sounders…
won't like?
I’m glad they’re going with Field Turf over some piece of shit grass field.
@PeterJH – And as opposed to Houston, when it rains in Portland (which it does on occasion) the field would be even more trashed.
@Sobchak – The grass for the Women’s World Cup was a temporary installation for that event (as was the grass for the ’97 World Cup Qualifier)
I would prefer grass to turf… no matter how “good” the turf is, there is still a significant difference between turf and grass… but I’d much rather have MLS in Portland on turf than not have MLS here at all.
The Whitecaps will use Field Turf as well, it’s just the reality in the PNW. PGE should be a great stadium, downtown location is absolutely key.
It should be the reality in any shared stadium
because Houston has made it quite clear that their grass can’t handle football and soccer on the same weekend (as occurred in the playoffs). That was a worse pitch than I have ever seen, to include pitches in Kuwait.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
so long as they respect the game...
The football lines in New England don’t look good at all and certainly don’t help the game. Though my understanding is NE is actually, kind of, looking for a location in Boston for a SSS.
So long as Portland and Vancouver understand all this like Seattle does, and I suspect they do, it’ll be fine.
Right
Having the region of the US that most closely matches the climate of England means that you have to use turf.
Just because someone said it, doesn’t mean you have to repeat it.
Correct,it ain't the climate
It’s the football teams.
It is the climate a bit
Seattle itself gets 50% more rain in a year than London.
That, COMBINED with the dual usage, is the issue.
36 in per year for Seattle
37 in per year for Portland
44 in per year for Vancouver
23 in per year for London
24 in per year for Glasgow
ANd if you wanted to look at how many days per year it rains that is different as well, leaning higher to Cascadia. There are two different climate classification systems in the world, while one says that Cascadia is like England, the other says that the US northeast is the same.
But we’ve all seen what Wembley looks like after a single American Football game, and read the numerous complaints in the English press. We’ve also seen what Roberston Stadium, Crew Stadium and others look like after high school and college football. Why in the world should we want more stadiums that have crap pitches?
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
I bet those numbers are reversed
If you compare our playing season with London’s, not the annual numbers.
Vancouver is playing on grass right now(http://www.whitecapsfc.com/stadium/swangard/). They were also not planning on a permanent stay at BC Place (though those plans can change). They have a 5 year lease for BC PLace so will be there at least that long, but there are plans for a new SSS with grass that has a lot of support around Vancouver(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitecaps_Waterfront_Stadium, http://www.whitecapsfc.com/stadium/waterfront/).
Grass is entirely possible in the PNW.
As long as it isn't a shared stadium
Whitecaps waterfront would be perfect for an grass pitch in this climate.
But I don’t want Seattle to have to build a 250M$ SSS with only 25k seats just so it can have grass.
I kind of like being in a 35k+ situation.
I’ll do the math for the two seasons, probably equal. The key is the dual-usage in a wet climate.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Exactly
If Vancouver had their own stadium, they would have grass. Same goes for Seattle and New England, but while I think grass is far superior to turf, that’s only the case if it’s well-maintained grass. I’ll take turf over torn apart grass any day.
Formerly ryebreadraz
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 24, 2009 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
agreed
If Seattle went for a SSS, it would have to be downtown and seat in the neighborhood of 35-40k+, or it doesn’t make sense.
Reliant stadium has a technology where they can remove the grass from the stadium for events that don’t use it. I don’t know that the Sounders draw the revenue yet to justify going for that on top of the field turf at Qwest, but maybe one of these days as the technology evolves and the costs make sense it would be something worth going for.
The last time I checked there were 1 or 2 teams in the UK that played out of London
Historical Average Rainfall in Portland: 42.1"
Historical Average Annual Rainfall in UK: 44.3"
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/pqr/pdxclimate/pg75.pdf
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/areal/uk.html
Ignorance =/ Bliss
Field turf = a joke in every other professional leagues = MLS being perceived as a joke
Do you want a World Class League or an Arena Football League?
But WHY is it a joke?
Bring up the injury myth and make me laugh.
Scotland, Norway, Switzerland, Russia, Ukraine, Costa Rica all of synthetic surfaces without the field sharing issues.
Unless you think that the pitch when Houston hosted Seattle in the Playoffs is satisfactory? Or Wembley after the annual NFL game, what would your solution be?
Don’t just be a verbal sniper, point out why an MLS team that will get nearly 40,000 annual attendence next year would be better off in a SSS in the suburbs that seats 18,000. Why will MLS be better without the Whitecaps, Timbers and Sounders since they will all have an artificial surface?
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
I kind of follow the EPL, but not that closely...
but off the top of my head: Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs and West Ham are all in London.
Not a major point for the giust of this discussion, though.
One more
+ Fulham = 5 London-based clubs
Hope folks had a good Xmas
by PeterJH on Dec 26, 2009 1:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
yes, you got that one correct ;)
FWIW, this year I attended a UEFA world cup qualifier played indoors on field turf. Yes, it plays different than grass, but it does have enough acceptance that significant matches played on them are being accepted as valid in Europe.
by PeterJH on Dec 27, 2009 4:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Astana Arena. Astana KZ
Kazakhstan 1 – Croatia 2
30,000 seat stadium, only about a third full. Nobody thought it would be close, but the home side gave Croatia a battle and the crowd was rockin. With the roof, it was LOUD.
Really nice stadium, if they fill it up for a big game, the atmosphere would be amazing.
The craziest thing there was all the military and police. They were terrified of what the Croatian supporters might do (ended up being no incidents).
by PeterJH on Dec 27, 2009 8:15 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Khzastan,that's pretty original
You’re more creative at making stuff up for your arguments. ;)
If you are going to post BS
be prepared for people to call you out and stop crying.
Please point out where I “making stuff up”.
"The last time I checked there were 1 or 2 teams in the UK that played out of London"
“Field turf = a joke in every other professional leagues = MLS being perceived as a joke”
So EVERY team in the Premier League plays in London.
Thanks for educating me. I thought Man U, Liverpool, et al. weren’t in London. Bollix to Northerners I guess.
Do you have a reference where Europeans don’t perceive the MLS and field turf as a joke?
The fact that over a dozen European Clubs play on artificial?
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
also creative with spinning what others said
I didn’t say that. The point is you aren’t as in touch with Europe as you seem to believe you are. It’s actually pretty obvious that there is more than 1 or 2 sides in London.
I don’t think the typical European fan really follows MLS at all, and if pressed on it, they know Beckham plays in it and they could name the LA Galaxy as a team, and some might name Landon Donovan, but you wouldn’t get much more than that. They have EPL and other high quality leagues over there. Why would they follow MLS? Do you follow Japanese baseball? And if you don’t, does that mean you perceive it as a joke?
If we are talking players or othe soccer people over there, I think they have a general idea where the level of play is at, and that the game is growing here and there are opportunities. Vancouver recently signes Spurs’ Executive Directory to their front office. His quote, “I have been hugely impressed by the ownership group’s vision for the Whitecaps, and for the significant opportunity that Major League Soccer represents throughout North America.” One of the key things that brought Beckham over was the future opportunity to own a franchise and get in on the ground floor.
I have gone to Sounders games with Eurpoean (English,German) friends who have loved it and gone back regularly. The Sounders are a fixture in the British pubs here. The press from over seas that I’ve seen seems to be positive:
http://www.soundersfc.com/media-library/Videos/Features/2009/11-November/091130-BBC-Feature.aspx?svt=0
http://www.soundersfc.com/media-library/Videos/Features/2009/03-March/090330-Futbol-Mundial.aspx?svt=0
The Sounders play on fieldturf. I’m sorry, I’m just not seeing the equation you proposed above being born out in reality.
Finally UEFA is allowing it. Not everyone likes it obviously, but fieldturf isn’t solely an MLS issue.
No Question There Is Potential and I like your comparison to Japanese baseball
The point was they play on Field turf because its cheaper than maintaining grass, not because they have too. Some of the comments indicated you have to have turf because of the weather which is ludicrous. Maybe North of the Arctic Circle, but not anywhere else. My statement was that not every club in England plays in London where it is not a wet as many parts of England and there are more than 1 or 2 teams in England outside of London where it rains more. Its pretty irrelevant because it should be apparent to anyone with modicum of commons sense that where grass grows naturally, you can play on natural grass. It was pretty funny how some people took such offense at challenging these “accepted” premises.
These aspects of the game must absolutely be respected. Having a pure product is important because the quality is already limited by the money available. There are things the MLS can’t control: having the same revenue as European clubs, and there are things the MLS can control: field conditions, playoff structures, etc., so things they can control, they should do a better job of making sure the quality is there. Being compared to Kazakhstan is not a positive (sorry Kazakhstan) even if its in “Europe”. But I like your points, I just think you should think your expectations for the league should match your optimism for its potential.
You compared a NATION
to a city for annual precipitation
That’s clearly just making stuff up.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
A nation vs. a city. Whoooaaa, sorry. I didn’t believe comparing those two broke a convenant.
I guess I’ll just concede that it rains more in the Pacific Northwest more than anywhere professional soccer is played and give in to the ignorance.
Comparing a nation to a city is purely irrelavent
Would the amount of rain in Eastern OR have any bearing to Portland’s field conditions?
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
But why compare a NATION
to a city?
Especially for weather, it isn’t logical, and it blurs the issues.
You know what I have never seen with Turf by the way? Cancellations due to frozen pitch, but in Scotland, England and Italy that has happened dozens of times in the last 8 days.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Doesn't have to be
I know for at least one of matches the cancellation was due to conditions not being safe outside the stadium. The grass field was fine. They had some sort of heating system underneath the surface, so the technology does exist for grass to work in freezing conditions.
by PeterJH on Dec 27, 2009 9:36 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Wigan
Was the one where they couldn’t clear the streets and parking lots.
But even with heaters under the grass, there have been cancelations.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
There may be something to learn here
They didn’t play when field conditions don’t allow a legitimate game.
We do play with American football lines on the pitch and third rate repairs on fields ravaged by the same sport. We’re at least at the point we realize this is wrong.
We need to get to the point we view it as unacceptable and understand it hurts the integrity of the game.
by PeterJH on Dec 28, 2009 4:04 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
BTw
Example with heaters under the grass?
by PeterJH on Dec 28, 2009 10:55 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
And turned on
Cardiff doesn’t count. ;)
by PeterJH on Dec 28, 2009 11:56 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
wow...
… I can honestly say I am a worse person for having read almost that entire discussion string! I make no attempt to hide my support for synthetic surfaces (aka “Fieldturf”) largely because of my experiences of a life-time of playing on unimaginably bad fields growing up and living here in the greater Seattle area. I am just left to wonder how many of the adamant “fieldturf” deniers have spent any appreciable amount of time playing on the stuff. I think its fantastic, mainly because I KNOW THE PITCH WILL BE IN GOOD CONDITION, regardless of weather and who/how many people have used it before me… when synthetic fields began to become prevalent around the area in the early 2000’s, I thought it was absolutely the best thing to happen to the local soccer scene in my lifetime.
I simply have nothing to say to those who would attempt to discredit the MLS due to synthetic pitches. Okay, no one is making you follow the MLS, frankly, I didn’t a whole lot before 2009. Before my Sounders arrived on the scene I was perfectly content watching EPL and Champs. Lge. for my fix. I think we all understand that the quality of play “over there” is greater than here at home, so I don’t think you need to “invent” reasons not to like MLS.
I suppose the peanut gallery will attack me because I am merely a recreational player, and don’t expect nor warrant the highest quality pitches the professionals get, and that is a fair criticism. I would also point out the debacle that the Dynamo and Sounders played on in Houston for the playoffs — the MLS allowed a playoff match on that!!! — but I could also be discredited as a bitter Sounders supporter.
Do with my opinions what you will, I just get a little worn out by the “grass-snobbery” and a part of me is CONVINCED it is only a matter of time before synthetic surfaces are more widely accepted. Not everyone is as quick to adapt to change…
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Dec 29, 2009 3:25 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
