Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Re/Max Field Situation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re/Max Field Situation

    You have CTV reporting that Dr. Randy Gregg's plan is put a 2nd WCBL into Re/Max Field as part of his 10 year contract with the City. You have the WCBL coming out and saying they told the City and Dr. Gregg that his idea will not work because Prospects owner Pat Cassidy is protected by territory rights which disallows two teams in the same city. You have John Short on Twitter saying what we all figured that Pat Cassidy would not be a tenant of Dr. Gregg. If you wanted to see the entire WCBL press release it is inside the article which i'm sharing with you but honestly, the meat and potatoes has already been posted.

    https://edmontonsportsfans.ca/2020/0...onton-in-2021/
    http://wincolumnsports.ca

  • #2
    So you have a group that has a stadium and no team and a team that doesn't have a stadium. And the people responsible for awarding teams don't think that the city can support two teams. Makes perfect sense. So the team with no stadium is looking at moving to Spruce Grove and will still hold the rights to the Metro Edmonton area, leaving the team with the stadium still without a team. And Re-Max Field will sit empty even after the Covid pandemic is gone.

    Makes perfect sense.

    ​​​​​​
    Edmonton Prospects heading west to Spruce Grove after losing lease on ball park

    ​​​​​​On Wednesday, the city announced the group, led by former Edmonton Oilers Stanley Cup champion Randy Gregg, secured a 10-year lease on the ball park.

    And on Friday, the Prospects stepped up to the plate with an announcement of their own, following a period of negotiation over revenue-sharing in order to remain in Re/Max Field. And in keeping with the baseball vernacular, there’s a home run, and then there is running to a new home.

    “By 2022, it is our plan to be up and operating in a modern and very exciting venue in Spruce Grove,” read the press release from Prospects managing partner Patrick Cassidy, who expanded on the idea over the phone with Postmedia.

    ---

    ​​​​​​“When people start talking about two franchises when they haven’t even had an official meeting with the league yet, the league gets a little protective,” said Cassidy. “If I was from the outside looking in, I would be saying, ‘Hasn’t the cart been put before the horse a little bit?’ You’re going to sign a 10-year deal with a group who hasn’t necessarily got a team yet?

    “It’s not necessarily how I would handle it, but the city has every right to run their business the way they feel works the best.”

    And that leaves a question of whether that level of baseball will even be played out of Re/Max Field next year.

    “That’s the whole concept behind territorial protection,” said Cassidy, pointing to the 10-fold increase in attendance the Prospects have earned over the years, only to have a new leaseholder ride a new team in on those coattails. “It’s not like there’s this huge untapped market out there, you have to grow the market. It’s not like you just offer baseball and people show up. We’ve grown it organically over the years.

    “At some point down the road, does it make sense for two teams out of the same facility? Maybe.”

    In the meantime, the backwards situation could occur in 2021 where Re/Max Field ends up laying dormant in the summer college circuit, while the Prospects are left looking for other, well, prospects when it comes to playing somewhere else until their new digs are ready.

    https://www.journalpioneer.com/sport...llpark-453128/

    Comment


    • #3
      Update


      Prospects propose to put gem of a ball diamond in Spruce Grove


      Initial renderings were released this week of what is being branded Spruce Grove Metro Ballpark. And if Edmonton has its Ice District, Spruce Grove may very well end up with a Diamond District on the east side of the city where Highway 16A meets Pioneer Road.

      Besides a 2,500-seat ballpark, the 25-acre plot will look to include a surrounding amphitheatre, retail shopping, condominium space and possibly a microbrewery.

      ---

      ​​​​​​Initially, Cassidy’s idea was to start up a second team in Alberta’s capital region. But plans changed this spring when the Prospects found themselves seeking new dugout digs after the lease on Re/Max Field was granted to a group headed by Dr. Randy Gregg, formerly of the Edmonton Oilers.





      https://edmontonjournal.com/sports/b...-83013aac14b2/

      Comment


      • #4
        ^That sounds like a money loser if I ever heard of one.

        Comment


        • #5
          You mean as opposed to booting out a paying tenant in order to give control to someone who doesn't have a team to play in the ballpark?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kkozoriz View Post
            You mean as opposed to booting out a paying tenant in order to give control to someone who doesn't have a team to play in the ballpark?
            You have to wonder if somehow, someone will eventually stop this insanity. Neither the team without a stadium and the people who have the stadium with no team are in a particularly strong position.

            Perhaps both are hoping the other side will fold first. It sort of seems like mutual self destruction.

            Comment


            • #7
              The group without a team are led by ex-Oiler Randy Gregg. Of course they're going to defer to him. The problem is that Gregg went after the stadium before talking to the current team or the league. The league has made it clear that the Prospects own the rights to the Edmonton Region which includes Spruce Grove. Unless Gregg can get the team to agree to let him bring in another team, Gregg will either have an empty stadium or need to find another league to give him a team. A cart before the cart situation on his part.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Dave View Post

                You have to wonder if somehow, someone will eventually stop this insanity. Neither the team without a stadium and the people who have the stadium with no team are in a particularly strong position.

                Perhaps both are hoping the other side will fold first. It sort of seems like mutual self destruction.
                you mean sort of like the downtown arena/northlands great arena debate with no winners, only losers?

                (ps. don't get me wrong, i'm still a big downtown arena supporter, it's just that the final deal wasn't as good for anyone - including katz group- as it could have been).

                "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                  you mean sort of like the downtown arena/northlands great arena debate with no winners, only losers?

                  (ps. don't get me wrong, i'm still a big downtown arena supporter, it's just that the final deal wasn't as good for anyone - including katz group- as it could have been).
                  I think the downtown area won that one and play continued on throughout the dispute even though it was drawn out and at times messy and tiresome. Perhaps the last part will be the similarity.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                    you mean sort of like the downtown arena/northlands great arena debate with no winners, only losers?

                    (ps. don't get me wrong, i'm still a big downtown arena supporter, it's just that the final deal wasn't as good for anyone - including katz group- as it could have been).
                    How do you see it being better for Katz if Northlands stayed open?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by kkozoriz View Post

                      How do you see it being better for Katz if Northlands stayed open?
                      from my perspective, there was an opportunity to keep the coliseum open even if it was operated by the katz group. it would have made for a second tournament venue, it would have made for a second community rink, it would have accommodated events that noone - including the promoters - wants to hold at rogers place. it would have remained available to host larger events (in conjunction with expo hall) that we can host without such a combined venue (as opposed to split venue where you can't walk between the two). it would have anchored the potential retail and commercial uses being proposed for exhibition lands increasing their value to the city and decreasing the amount of time it will take to develop the site.
                      "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I agree with you on all those things except for the fact that Katz didn't want to operate a second arena. By keeping Northlands open, they would have seen it as competition, not something complementary.

                        City Council should have told Katz that the co compete clause was a deal breaker. But in Edmonton (and other major sports cities) what the team wants is seen as more important than what's good for they city, and by extension, the citizens.

                        Circling back to the topic, if anyone other than a former Oiler had shown up without having even a hit of a tenant in hand, do you think that the Prospects would be moving to Spruce Grove? They were planning a second team to play there, which is why these plans came together so fast. If Randy Gregg had talked with them, he might have been able to come on board as a partner. But Dr. Gregg knew that the cachet of being an Oiler overrode rationality. Same sense of entitlement that Katz had and has to this day.
                        Last edited by kkozoriz; 25-06-2020, 03:23 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          all parties ended up getting some things they wanted, not getting some things they wanted and having to accept some things they may not have wanted. taking over the coliseum so that no-one else would be able to use facility to complete with the new arena might well have been in that third group but the time to that was along with the first two if what you say is true about it not being wanted. from my perspective it seemed to be more that northlands wasn't prepared to give it up and ended up overplaying everyone's cards as a result.
                          "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Very few communities can support two large arenas, so keeping two facilities open usually results in under utilization in one or the other (or both) and extra cost to operate and maintain both. The newer, larger facility is probably generally going to be the winner. We got around 40 years out of Northlands, so I don't think that worked out so bad.

                            With the two ball parks here it is a little harder to clearly say how it will go - they are located much farther apart and much smaller size, but with only one team I don't see having two working either.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X