three LA football stadium concepts released

[B_Mona 0]

I like the one in City of Industry better. It just looks more exciting.

[gueman 0]

Hard to make a judgment from so few illustrations. But football stadiums are not so "historically" tied the way baseball stadiums are. No one talks glowingly about historic football stadiums. So flash and glam are ok. And what better city to flaunt flash and glam than LA. Face it, in LA it will be about the EVENT not the game.

[thirt13n 0]

I like all three stadium designs for varying reasons. One thing, though...L.A., stay away from my Vikings.

[gueman 0]

I like all three stadium designs for varying reasons. One thing, though...L.A., stay away from my Vikings.

Well build them what they want...or else you will meet Baltimore, St. Louis, Cleveland and Houston's fate...and lose your team for a few years.

If you are like Cleveland you can cry and scream and get a shiny new NFL funded stadium asap, or be like Houston and get a team a few years later. You don't want to be like Baltimore or St. Louis and become part of the NFL's dog and pony show called expansion only to have lesser cities given teams at your expense, then have to find some troubled franchises to lure to your cities. So if they do go...play the Cleveland "woe is me" game to the hilt. Face it the snow popped roof could have been a blessing...

[thirt13n 0]

I like all three stadium designs for varying reasons. One thing, though...L.A., stay away from my Vikings.

Well build them what they want...or else you will meet Baltimore, St. Louis, Cleveland and Houston's fate...and lose your team for a few years.

If you are like Cleveland you can cry and scream and get a shiny new NFL funded stadium asap, or be like Houston and get a team a few years later. You don't want to be like Baltimore or St. Louis and become part of the NFL's dog and pony show called expansion only to have lesser cities given teams at your expense, then have to find some troubled franchises to lure to your cities. So if they do go...play the Cleveland "woe is me" game to the hilt. Face it the snow popped roof could have been a blessing...

With the Metrodome being nearly a decade over it's expected 'lifespan', I figured we would've had a new open-air stadium by now, bringing back some Norris to our NFC North division. Unfortunately, politics gets in the way. Wasn't the problem with many of the other moves having to do with fan support, though? We've been continually selling out for almost 17 seasons.

[gueman 0]

I like all three stadium designs for varying reasons. One thing, though...L.A., stay away from my Vikings.

Well build them what they want...or else you will meet Baltimore, St. Louis, Cleveland and Houston's fate...and lose your team for a few years.

If you are like Cleveland you can cry and scream and get a shiny new NFL funded stadium asap, or be like Houston and get a team a few years later. You don't want to be like Baltimore or St. Louis and become part of the NFL's dog and pony show called expansion only to have lesser cities given teams at your expense, then have to find some troubled franchises to lure to your cities. So if they do go...play the Cleveland "woe is me" game to the hilt. Face it the snow popped roof could have been a blessing...

With the Metrodome being nearly a decade over it's expected 'lifespan', I figured we would've had a new open-air stadium by now, bringing back some Norris to our NFC North division. Unfortunately, politics gets in the way. Wasn't the problem with many of the other moves having to do with fan support, though? We've been continually selling out for almost 17 seasons.

Well...no...all of them were because of stadium issues. In Baltimore we thought by NOT supporting the owner by NOT showing up it would force him to sell. We had no idea that he would move the team. After that...no other city should be surprised when the team moves. If you can't protest with the pocketbook you are effed. Now all of those stadiums had issues and were the driving force behind the teams wanting to move.

I think though the Vikes might be safe...they have shown support and have a history. Now JAX should worry...they should never have gotten the team anyway. Sorry all you Jags supporters...

[thirt13n 0]

I'm pretty sure we'll be safe as well. Thanks for the history lesson concerning Baltimore.

[Gothamite 24,992]

No one talks glowingly about historic football stadiums.

I wouldn't say "no one."

http://www.lambeaufield.com/home/

You're right that it's not like baseball parks. But that's because the notion of a league playing in dedicated football stadiums, each built specifically to house an NFL team, is a relatively recent one.

And your larger point is well taken; hard to judge anything from colorful but precise renderings such as these.

[winghaz 1]

Why does L.A. want a retractable roof? To keep the smog out? Sheesh, if there is any city that should have an outdoor-only stadium, it should be ... well, L.A. is up there.

[BigMac12 12]

Why does L.A. want a retractable roof? To keep the smog out? Sheesh, if there is any city that should have an outdoor-only stadium, it should be ... well, L.A. is up there.

According to another user, they want to convert the field to a large convention center.

[crashcarson15 2,552]

out of curiosity, what are the material flaws at Lucas Oil?

I should've been more clear. The flaws of Lucas Oil are shared by most buildings made nowadays--made to look like brick structures when they're not. The main idea of the stadium is to evoke an early twentieth-century factory like the ones you find around Indianapolis and the midwest in general, and while I think that idea could work, it ended up looking like a Camden Yards knockoff and didn't attempt to get away from its basic barn wireframe.

The football side of this argument is that while the RCA Dome was a barren relic of the "Dome-rush" era (thanks, Houston), Lucas Oil can't give the Colts the same kind of home-field crowd it once had. Anyone trying to build a stadium now needs to take crowd noise (acoustics) into top consideration when designing these things. Ask anyone who has been to Arrowhead Stadium or the Metro Dome: it's loud in there.

thanks for that expansion. for me Lucas Oil accomplishes its goal that you mentioned, even knowing its not brick it looks good, but im no architect. maybe thats a detail that goes over the heads of the laymen in the same way that as a designer i can recognize most fonts/typefaces i see but non-designers never notice.

you're right about it not being as loud as the RCS dome, but it was also designed in mind to host high school band competitions, concerts, possible NCAA basketball games, and other events. i dont know how much that would play into acoustics design or different from "football noise" though

LOS' acoustics for actual music sucks too. I think it was Kenny Chesney who opened the place and pretty much came out and said how much the acoustics suck. Additionally, the concertgoers were pretty pissed off if I remember correctly and there really aren't many actual concerts that go on in the place.

Additionally, I'm pretty sure that LOS' architecture builds off of the Pepsi Coliseum and Hinkle Fieldhouse here a bit. The windows reflect Hinkle well, and the shape of the stadium is Pepsi Coliseum-esque. That's what I always thought of LOS. I like Lucas Oil Stadium, but I still prefer the RCA Dome (mainly for nostalgic reasons).

[Still MIGHTY 3,835]

Why does L.A. want a retractable roof? To keep the smog out? Sheesh, if there is any city that should have an outdoor-only stadium, it should be ... well, L.A. is up there.

It's so it can also be used as a large events center for conventions, exhibitions, Final Fours, etc.

The LA Convention Center is getting beat out by other places for those type of events, and the only way to bring those type of events back to LA is to get that type of events center built.

[Punch 7]

I mean the new Meadowlands stadium is NICE but still a stadium for EXPLOSIONS AND FOOTBALL. So I guess this is the best, but something else would just be better.

I don't think I understood a single word of your post.

Ok, So yea I don't blame you for being confused by my teenage filled explosive rant. In plainer words, all three stadiums feel too fashionable, like those World Cup ideas for Qatar. I go to all the Redskins home games and I love to get on my feet, with my Redskins jerseys, hats, gloves, shirts, boxers, blankets, and yell, cheer, hit things to make noise, etc. I love the feeling of going to a stadium that may not be great on the outside looking in, design and all that, but when your in that stadium and the crowd is going crazy after a (sparse) Redskins touchdown, its the best. Everybody is in a jersey, the place is loud, and you sent the Cowgirls packing. All three designs look like Glamour and all that, where the team can suffer from a situation that can plague some football teams. At FedEx, in the club section (where I unfortunately sit) a lot of people are there through their companies tickets, etc. and they show up in suits and sit inside usually, watching on the TV's. Down in the lower bowl is where the real fans are, and where I wish I was. I feel like a stadium like that in LA would be filled with suites, not jerseys. The second one as a real problem, it looks like it contains art, not a stadium. One is the best option because it actually looks kind of like a stadium. Three looks like a glam palace with those flashy lights. What football player would want to play in a place where it mattered more who was watching them than the other way around? (Woah, that was deep). Football is about those big hits, third down stops, beating a huge rival on National TV as you can see the stands shake just a little with everyone jumping up and down. It's the random people who you high five and hug in the stands because you both are wearing the same color jersey. Hope that clears it up, or maybe I'm just a sad fan reliving the hope in Week 1 that the Redskins wouldn't be the same old Deadskins.

Here is a diagram that shows DeFrank's thoughts:

[Gothamite 24,992]

Ah, now I get it. Thanks, Punch.