The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(08-08-2017 11:23 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  It has been told by those who know about the needs of a soccer stadium that the seating for football will be moved too far back from the sidelines to make room for soccer play. Is this a true problem for a shared venue?

If the make the seats closest to the field retractable it would not be an issue

The USL prefers soccer specific stadiums. Sharing a stadium with a football team does not work. It is an issue to have football and soccer play on the same field, and there is a reason most teams are getting away from doing so.

The USL is a very strong league and it's great that Birmingham is getting a team. I'm still hoping to see promotion and relegation in the lower divisions of soccer in the country, but the MLS is not likely going to participate in that any time soon. Too much money was involved in starting that league up, and the return hasn't been there for the owners yet. Maybe years down the road something will change, but we won't see that anytime soon.

Could this mean UAB football is pushed out of the new downtown stadium in favor of this new pro soccer team? Seems the soccer team would have more pull since it is a professional team with a longer season and would likely pull more out-of-town visitors.

The average attendance at a USL game is about 3,500. Cincinatti and Sacramento are huge outliers at 17k and 11k. I know you probably won't believe this, but UAB in six games is likely going to outdraw anything the new soccer team does, especially in early years.

(08-08-2017 11:23 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  It has been told by those who know about the needs of a soccer stadium that the seating for football will be moved too far back from the sidelines to make room for soccer play. Is this a true problem for a shared venue?

Soccer fields are wider, yes, but the issue is very often overstated. The playing area for soccer just has to be minimum 70 yards wide vs 53'4" for football. Most of that extra width is already going to be there from the football sidelines. For soccer, you hardly need any room on the sidelines at all. If you want fans as close as possible to the football field, a some rows will need to be retractable for soccer. But it's easy to design a fixed stadium that accommodates both sports without sacrificing much for either sport. For Atlanta's new stadium, it makes sense to have retractable seats, because every seat is going to be sold for both sports. For Birmingham, it would make more sense to save the cost and make make it dimensions that will accommodate both. We're hoping to get one stadium, but we're definitely not getting two anytime soon. It would make the most sense to design it for both sports.

Here's what one of the owners told the BBJ:

"We would like to have our stadium decision finalized before the end of the year. Ideally we would like to be coordinated with UAB, we've been in discussions with UAB and others about finalizing on our home," Styslinger said.

(08-09-2017 10:38 AM)hooverblazer Wrote:  Here's what one of the owners told the BBJ:

"We would like to have our stadium decision finalized before the end of the year. Ideally we would like to be coordinated with UAB, we've been in discussions with UAB and others about finalizing on our home," Styslinger said.

That's almost the exact quote the owners of the Nashville expansion team have made...only substitute in Vanderbilt in place of UAB.

Hopefully this issue gets resolved, would love to add a soccer team to the city with the Barons, returning Bulls, and Blitz. Just need to Steeldogs back and a semi pro outdoor football team back.

(08-08-2017 12:42 PM)58-56 Wrote:  Do they have relegation/promotion?

NO :(

(08-09-2017 09:12 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  The average attendance at a USL game is about 3,500. Cincinatti and Sacramento are huge outliers at 17k and 11k. I know you probably won't believe this, but UAB in six games is likely going to outdraw anything the new soccer team does, especially in early years.

Perhaps, but attendance has nothing to do with my question. Would UAB in 6 games pay more in rent than an entire professional soccer season? Even if the stadium is shared, this could absolutely affect our football season schedules even if it is just the early part of the season.

(08-09-2017 09:01 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  The USL prefers soccer specific stadiums. Sharing a stadium with a football team does not work. It is an issue to have football and soccer play on the same field, and there is a reason most teams are getting away from doing so.

The USL is a very strong league and it's great that Birmingham is getting a team. I'm still hoping to see promotion and relegation in the lower divisions of soccer in the country, but the MLS is not likely going to participate in that any time soon. Too much money was involved in starting that league up, and the return hasn't been there for the owners yet. Maybe years down the road something will change, but we won't see that anytime soon.

I think we're probably beyond the appetite for building yet another stadium for someone, so if it were a soccer specific stadium it'd have to be paid for by this team or shared, probably with UAB, and if UAB's soccer field is acceptable, then a shared football facility would've been too big.

I don't buy your argument though, that they can't share. The Falcons and Atlanta United specifically built Mercedes Benz Stadium to be a shared facility, and seem to have pulled it off without too much compromise. We'll see when the first game is played by each team, but having two potential tenants up front before ground is broken gives you a lot of leeway in designing it to be shared.

And MLS isn't going to do promotion/relegation, ever. MLS is structured such that every team is owned by MLS, and the local "owners" just invest in MLS centrally and get to manage their local team. There is never going to be a chance at a Birmingham team getting promoted or added or a new team joining while Atlanta United exists.

(08-09-2017 09:08 AM)imjustafatkid Wrote:  Could this mean UAB football is pushed out of the new downtown stadium in favor of this new pro soccer team? Seems the soccer team would have more pull since it is a professional team with a longer season and would likely pull more out-of-town visitors.

There is no way this pushes UAB out of a new downtown stadium, UAB and other American football events would outdraw this team significantly. There's also zero evidence that it'd pull more out of town visitors than UAB games. How many out of town folks come to Barons games?

(08-09-2017 10:38 AM)hooverblazer Wrote:  Here's what one of the owners told the BBJ:

"We would like to have our stadium decision finalized before the end of the year. Ideally we would like to be coordinated with UAB, we've been in discussions with UAB and others about finalizing on our home," Styslinger said.

Initially this reads like they're going to use UAB's soccer field, but, the "and others" might indicate joint discussions about coordinating around the BJCC stadium

http://www.alabamanewscenter.com/2017/08...dium-bjcc/

Tuesday’s announcement of a professional soccer team coming to Birmingham increases the likelihood of a new downtown stadium, officials said.

Birmingham Mayor William Bell said there is urgency to getting a permanent venue for the team in place. A $174-million, 45,000-55,000-seat open-air stadium next to the Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Complex is the focus.

“It’s our hopes that in the next two or three years that we will have the new stadium ready and they will be part of that venue,” Bell said in an interview following the USL announcement. “We’re close to pulling the trigger on that.”

Quote:There is no way this pushes UAB out of a new downtown stadium, UAB and other American football events would outdraw this team significantly. There's also zero evidence that it'd pull more out of town visitors than UAB games. How many out of town folks come to Barons games?

You are correct that the Barons don't draw out of town visitors, but soccer fans are a little different than minor league baseball fans. If the downtown stadium keeps the Classic and the bowl game, then I agree that those 2 games along with the UAB home schedule is a pretty decent football "package." In that case I'd say football, collectively, would probably draw more out of town visitors.

(08-09-2017 03:07 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  A $174-million, 45,000-55,000-seat open-air stadium next to the Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Complex is the focus.

I'm curious about this statement. They seem to know what the budget would be, but don't have an exact seating number. Does anyone have knowledge of building stadiums who can explain to me why that is? If the budget is set at $174M, then wouldn't we already know how many seats we're looking at? Or are there just no concrete plans in place yet and the $175M number is conjecture?

(08-10-2017 08:36 AM)imjustafatkid Wrote:  

(08-09-2017 03:07 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  A $174-million, 45,000-55,000-seat open-air stadium next to the Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Complex is the focus.

I'm curious about this statement. They seem to know what the budget would be, but don't have an exact seating number. Does anyone have knowledge of building stadiums who can explain to me why that is? If the budget is set at $174M, then wouldn't we already know how many seats we're looking at? Or are there just no concrete plans in place yet and the $175M number is conjecture?

My understanding is it would be 45k permanent seats with ability to expand to 55k via temporary seating for larger events.

(08-10-2017 09:16 AM)hooverblazer Wrote:  My understanding is it would be 45k permanent seats with ability to expand to 55k via temporary seating for larger events.

Good deal. I was hoping that was the answer.

In this AM's debate featuring the top 3 candidates, Bell, Woodfin, and Woods, all seemed to realize the need for the facility. Bell says to expect to hear somnething in the next 2-3 weeks. Woodfin, spent 7 years of talking about it and not getting it done because mayor can't get along w.council; says it should and can be done in conjunction with improvement of basic services as the problem is not the monet but how the money is spent. Woods says not about football but about large scale events; seems to favor MPF.

(08-10-2017 08:33 AM)imjustafatkid Wrote:  

Quote:There is no way this pushes UAB out of a new downtown stadium, UAB and other American football events would outdraw this team significantly. There's also zero evidence that it'd pull more out of town visitors than UAB games. How many out of town folks come to Barons games?

You are correct that the Barons don't draw out of town visitors, but soccer fans are a little different than minor league baseball fans. If the downtown stadium keeps the Classic and the bowl game, then I agree that those 2 games along with the UAB home schedule is a pretty decent football "package." In that case I'd say football, collectively, would probably draw more out of town visitors.

USL fans are not. I posted the attendance numbers for you already.

(08-10-2017 09:33 AM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  In this AM's debate featuring the top 3 candidates, Bell, Woodfin, and Woods, all seemed to realize the need for the facility. Bell says to expect to hear somnething in the next 2-3 weeks. Woodfin, spent 7 years of talking about it and not getting it done because mayor can't get along w.council; says it should and can be done in conjunction with improvement of basic services as the problem is not the monet but how the money is spent. Woods says not about football but about large scale events; seems to favor MPF.

Mayor Bell has been good for Birmingham, but it would be awesome for Woodfin to get elected Mayor. He was one of maybe 2-3 School Board members who wasn't impossible to deal with when I was working with them. 3 being generous.