|
|
Post by bosshogg18 on Mar 16, 2011 14:20:31 GMT -5
I am curious about the locker room situation at MTS Centre. It appears that currently there is a tunnel from the home bench to the locker room. There doesn't appear to be one for the visitors' bench to the locker room. I wonder why that is? It certainly is a pain the butt for coaches and trainers (carrying sticks and other items) to walk clear across the rink to get to their respective bench.
Does anyone know where the visiting locker room is located?
If the visiting locker room isn't near the bench, then why isn't? Could it possibly be moved?
Also the small capacity of MTS Centre is always questioned. Couldn't more seats be added if the put seats in two of the three corners that have tunnels? What are they all used for? I know you have to have one for the Zamboni, but even big arenas usually only have one tunnel, excluding locker room tunnels.
If one of the tunnels are used for the visiting team to leave the ice, they could put a smaller tunnel behind the visiting bench and add more seats where the existing tunnels are now.
|
|
|
|
Post by shtinky on Mar 16, 2011 14:44:16 GMT -5
I don't know about the locker room issue (good point though), but the zamboni entrance issue has been discussed before. The consensus seems to be that there is no reason why one or more of the entrances couldn't be filled in with seats. It is weird that a rink with a low seating capacity should waste so many prime seating locations on zamboni entrances... the one in the northeast corner (where Wheeler does promos at Moose games) is a huge gap of wasted space... I can't imagine that it wouldn't be filled in once the NHL returned. Think about it - between the two north-end cutouts, you could probably jam at least 75 seats in there. At $7500 a season ticket, that's $562,500 in lost revenue. And for what? To provide room for some schmuck like Wheeler to do the 50/50 draw? Look here: mtscentre.ca/seatingchart/arena_seating_plan.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by bosshogg18 on Mar 16, 2011 16:25:04 GMT -5
Based on that seating map another 98 seats (give or a take 5 or 6 depending on setup) could be added in tunnel between 115 & 116 (unless that is the Zamboni door which I am assuming). If so, the Zamboni door should be moved to the other end. I would think you would want more fans in the end of the arena your team is attacking twice. Another 30 seats could be added to section 123. Another 50 or so could be added between sections 101 & 102. That would still leave a little tunnel for handicapped section. That could be moved altogether up near concourse level and add closer "seats" to the ice. I know often in the U.S. many handicapped seats go unused and is lost revenue. Although, I don't know Canadian laws for handicapped seating. Not to sound insensitive, but they could leave the handicapped section as is and if they aren't claimed by those with disabilities up until game day, the team could put temporary seats and sell to anyone on a first come, first served basis. Another 14 seats could be added in section 109, unless that tunnel is used for players or referees. 7 more seats (14 total) could be added to the front row of sections 124 & 127, unless that is used for media. I know you are going to have to have a Zamboni tunnel and a visitors' tunnel, but even with that you would still add another 100 seats to the MTS Centre without hardly doing, or costing anything. I know 100 seats does not sound like a lot, but all of these 100 seats are down low, close to the ice and would bring at least $100-$120/each per game. That is $410,000-$492,000 per year in just ticket revenue, not to mention concessions/merchandise, parking, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by brent006 on Mar 16, 2011 19:21:06 GMT -5
I'm not 100% familiar with the arena...but you also have to take into account exiting...and exit widths (occupant load of a space is dependant on widths of exists)...For hockey it is not an issue, but it very well might be for things like concerts/conventions that would have a much higher volume of people at "ice level" This may or may not be a reason for those tunnels...Hope that helps a little.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingarthur on Mar 16, 2011 21:45:31 GMT -5
I don't know about the locker room issue (good point though), but the zamboni entrance issue has been discussed before. The consensus seems to be that there is no reason why one or more of the entrances couldn't be filled in with seats. It is weird that a rink with a low seating capacity should waste so many prime seating locations on zamboni entrances... the one in the northeast corner (where Wheeler does promos at Moose games) is a huge gap of wasted space... I can't imagine that it wouldn't be filled in once the NHL returned. Think about it - between the two north-end cutouts, you could probably jam at least 75 seats in there. At $7500 a season ticket, that's $562,500 in lost revenue. And for what? To provide room for some schmuck like Wheeler to do the 50/50 draw? Look here: mtscentre.ca/seatingchart/arena_seating_plan.pdfIs that not the entrance used by semis to get to center ice? I doubt they have a great big tunnel just for the 50/50 draw. |
|
|
|
Post by bosshogg18 on Mar 17, 2011 9:30:38 GMT -5
I'm not 100% familiar with the arena...but you also have to take into account exiting...and exit widths (occupant load of a space is dependant on widths of exists)...For hockey it is not an issue, but it very well might be for things like concerts/conventions that would have a much higher volume of people at "ice level" This may or may not be a reason for those tunnels...Hope that helps a little. I am not saying get rid of the tunnels permanently. Many arenas have tunnels for one event and then not for another, they just simply fill in that space with movable seat sections. For instance many NBA teams do this at arenas with a hockey team. There is no need for the huge Zamboni entrance, so they fill it in with seats, therefore increasing capacity, ultimately increasing revenue. This would be really easy to do and very inexpensive...ultimately increasing attendance and revenue. MTS Centre has 3 tunnels, designate one as the Zamboni entrance and fill in the rest. Simple. |
|
|
|
Post by epo on Mar 17, 2011 13:58:48 GMT -5
I don't know about the locker room issue (good point though), but the zamboni entrance issue has been discussed before. The consensus seems to be that there is no reason why one or more of the entrances couldn't be filled in with seats. It is weird that a rink with a low seating capacity should waste so many prime seating locations on zamboni entrances... the one in the northeast corner (where Wheeler does promos at Moose games) is a huge gap of wasted space... I can't imagine that it wouldn't be filled in once the NHL returned. Think about it - between the two north-end cutouts, you could probably jam at least 75 seats in there. At $7500 a season ticket, that's $562,500 in lost revenue. And for what? To provide room for some schmuck like Wheeler to do the 50/50 draw? Look here: mtscentre.ca/seatingchart/arena_seating_plan.pdfIs that not the entrance used by semis to get to center ice? I doubt they have a great big tunnel just for the 50/50 draw. Semis use the Zamboni entrance.  |
|
|
|
Post by CuJo31 on Mar 17, 2011 17:41:13 GMT -5
Many NHL rinks have the away locker rooms located in the endzones and not at the bench. This is not a problem at all, and is perfectly normal. The Locker rooms at the mts centre are located on the opposite corner of the endzone closest to the away teams bench.
|
|
|
|
Post by bosshogg18 on Mar 17, 2011 17:53:48 GMT -5
Many NHL rinks have the away locker rooms located in the endzones and not at the bench. This is not a problem at all, and is perfectly normal. The Locker rooms at the mts centre are located on the opposite corner of the endzone closest to the away teams bench. If that is the case, I wonder why they just didn't build the visiting locker room attached to the visiting bench like the home side is. This just makes much more sense, especially in a "modern" building. Unless they just want it to be a big pain in the a$$ for the visiting team. Plus aesthetically it just looks dumb having a tunnel for one bench and not the other. |
|
|
|
Post by roosta604 on Mar 17, 2011 23:35:23 GMT -5
Unless they just want it to be a big pain in the a$$ for the visiting team. Anyone from the home team opposed to this, raise your hand! Plus aesthetically it just looks dumb having a tunnel for one bench and not the other. That's just your opinion, it makes the focus purely on the team that counts in my opinion. I know thats a weak argument but either way this is relatively unimportant in the grand scheme of things |
|
|
|
Post by CuJo31 on Mar 18, 2011 0:07:26 GMT -5
Many NHL rinks have the away locker rooms located in the endzones and not at the bench. This is not a problem at all, and is perfectly normal. The Locker rooms at the mts centre are located on the opposite corner of the endzone closest to the away teams bench. If that is the case, I wonder why they just didn't build the visiting locker room attached to the visiting bench like the home side is. This just makes much more sense, especially in a "modern" building. Unless they just want it to be a big pain in the a$$ for the visiting team. Plus aesthetically it just looks dumb having a tunnel for one bench and not the other. Why take away some more seats from centre ice to create a tunnel for the away team, when they could use a tunnel in the endzone which would take away a couple of the cheaper seats. Also the entire side that the player benches are on im assuming is full of different rooms for workouts, trainers doctors etc. Makes sense to have all that stuff on the same side as the home dressing room, so there is no room to have the away dressing room there. |
|
|
|
Post by bosshogg18 on Mar 18, 2011 13:58:43 GMT -5
Why take away some more seats from centre ice to create a tunnel for the away team, when they could use a tunnel in the endzone which would take away a couple of the cheaper seats. Also the entire side that the player benches are on im assuming is full of different rooms for workouts, trainers doctors etc. Makes sense to have all that stuff on the same side as the home dressing room, so there is no room to have the away dressing room there. This is actually a good point. That way the Jets could have all of their stuff next to their locker room (workout rooms, training rooms, coaching offices, etc.). I just brought the point up because most NHL arenas have a tunnel leading to the visiting bench. Since this arena is newer, I figured they would have just built it that way. Since this arena is smaller than any other NHL venue, I am sure they just didn't have the space to put two NHL caliber locker rooms on the same side of the arena. As far as making it a pain in the a$$ for the visiting team, I am all for it. In Seattle (Kent, Showare Center), they painted the visiting locker room neon green. It makes you nauseous after 10 minutes in there. Also a good point of creating more center ice seats with the absence of a tunnel...it still looks aesthetically odd from an architectural point of view. |
|
|
|
Post by rtabaracci on Mar 21, 2011 14:47:57 GMT -5
There's a reason for pretty much the entire layout.
The zamboni/semi entrance had to be where it is (the south-west corner). The tunnel that leads down there from street level starts at the CTV building. They couldn't have semi's driving down that tunnel and then all the way around the arena or something, so there's the reason for that one.
Because the semis come in at that corner, and need room to park/move, space along the west side of the arena is limited. The Moose dressing room, the coaches room, the gym facilities and various team lounges and offices take up all of the remaining space as well as the north west corner, if I remember correctly.
In the north end, underneath the main entrance, you have The Exchange restaurant. I believe this is only accessible to club seat ticket holders and people in the suites during games. It's directly below the John Labatt Lounge. You also have some concessions, washrooms and the main access to the floor area for concerts. This stuff obviously occupies this area of the basement to make use of the main entrance.
This basically leaves the east side and the south end for visiting locker rooms, green rooms, kitchen facilities and all sorts of building operations/mechanical stuff. Obviously they don't want the visiting team coming out of the north side, they'd have to skate right through the home team during the pregame skate. This leaves them with the south east corner/south end. It's quite seriously the only place you could fit it in there. It's also easily accessible from the tunnel, where the team bus would be dropping them off.
As for filling in the gaps. The gap in the north west corner is pointless. They use it for the pregame presentation to the game sponsor and sometimes the anthem singer. Use the zamboni entrance or something. They should also try and find a way to put retractable seats in the north east corner. It needs to be open for concerts, but there should be a way to fill it in for hockey. It's a big gap
|
|
|
|
Post by Steener25 on Mar 21, 2011 15:06:42 GMT -5
If they get rid of the Exchange Restaurant I wouldn't miss it. I have been there twice and disappointed twice. I feel like I am eating in a windowless basement. With Moxies there and now 4Play why do we need a restaurant with no view of the ice or Portage Ave? I say convert it to the Visitors dressing room if that is structurally feasible.
|
|
|
|
Post by rtabaracci on Mar 21, 2011 15:35:55 GMT -5
wouldn't make any sense. They'd still have to cross the rink, only this time, they would have to go through the home team during the pregame skate. I don't think that would even be allowed
|
|
|
|
Post by bosshogg18 on Mar 21, 2011 15:48:03 GMT -5
I also find it odd that the Zamboni door is on the same side the home team shoots at twice, therefore having less fans at that end. I know most would rather sit at the end their team shoots at twice (if end seats are their only option, or preference). That part was NOT well thought out. If the Zamboni has to go outside to dump snow on that particular side of the arena, the Moose/Jets could simply switch benches & tunnels and ultimately shoot the other way. This would move the visitors ice exit in northeast corner.
The southeast corner can be filled in with seats as well as the northwest corner. Any promotions could easily use the Zamboni door, or the visiting team tunnel for this.
|
|
|
|
Post by CuJo31 on Mar 21, 2011 21:35:05 GMT -5
Not to mention the Moose/Jets eat their pre game and post game meals at the restaurant im pretty sure. Im sure they would like to keep the restaurant there.
|
|
|
|
Post by 22Neufeld28 on Mar 22, 2011 1:10:47 GMT -5
The semi entrance may need to be open for fire/paramedic reasons,who knows maybe one day an ambulance may need to head out onto the ice during a game.
These open areas could be used for handicapped or wheelchair seating areas.Not sure where those seats/areas are currantly in the lower level.
|
|
|
|
Post by shtinky on Mar 22, 2011 9:46:19 GMT -5
I also find it odd that the Zamboni door is on the same side the home team shoots at twice, therefore having less fans at that end. I know most would rather sit at the end their team shoots at twice (if end seats are their only option, or preference). That part was NOT well thought out. Good point. Why do the club seat patrons not get the benefit of watching the Moose attack twice instead of just once? |
|
|
|
Post by epo on Mar 22, 2011 23:43:00 GMT -5
JLL tickets would be more expensive and the other side cheaper. They probably think they can make more selling the two separately, to different types of fans.
|
|
