PDA

View Full Version : DeRo to go if grass is a no?



egoodwin
08-21-2009, 10:25 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/soccer/derosario-makes-ultimatum/article1260790/

Shep
08-21-2009, 10:26 PM
:canofworms:

needs an icon.

This has too many angles to even think about right now. I'd hate to question his commitment to TFC, and the city council backup is still a problem.. do you think this could be a PR move to get some focus on the issue?

Suds
08-21-2009, 10:32 PM
:canofworms:

needs an icon.

This has too many angles to even think about right now. I'd hate to question his commitment to TFC, and the city council backup is still a problem.. do you think this could be a PR move to get some focus on the issue?

This is where I was leaning when I read it. DeRo wants grass and if he can turn up the heat a bit by using the media and his interviews; then great.

prizby
08-21-2009, 10:32 PM
globe is crap

MFG1
08-21-2009, 10:35 PM
I say good for him and the cause. Im sure it was discussed open the signing of the contract and I support him 100% Do it right and the city stands to make more money from it as well

wzhxvy
08-21-2009, 10:41 PM
I am sure Dero wants to stay and wants grass but I would not be shocked if he left if we dont get grass...

C.Ronaldo
08-21-2009, 10:47 PM
id hope he does to prove a point

Stryker
08-22-2009, 02:21 AM
I knew this was coming.
I absolutely positively unequivocally knew the day he signed with us that if they didn't get grass in a timely manner he would threaten to walk.

twistedchinaman
08-22-2009, 02:41 AM
^ Well, it had to happen TBH and what a time to have it happen...still, what is the delay?

Shakes McQueen
08-22-2009, 03:00 AM
Sounds more to me like a reporter asked him a very pointed question, and DeRo answered it with something other than an unequivocal "no". My guess is that this is more or less a non-story.

Wow, if turf was affecting the longevity of his career, he would consider leaving? What a scoop.

One interesting bit from this story though, is DeRo's pretty obvious naivete with how municipal politics work:

“They obviously have a contract with the city, which is fair enough, but I think soccer's come to a point where even the city itself has got to say, listen, we've generated so much money, we've created so much outlet for fans and kids and opportunities for kids, let's do it right. Regardless of the contract, let's rip it up and do it right."

That isn't how it works, DeRo. Joey Pants could care less about the "fans and kids". No municipal government is ever going to just "rip up" a contract involving incredibly valuable government land in the heart of downtown, and "do it right" for altruistic reasons.

Anyway, with everything I've heard this season, and with all of the pressure being put on MLSE from supporters and players alike, I'm 90% confident that grass will be done as soon as this winter. Money doesn't solve everything, but it certainly clears most of the political hurdles.

And DeRo won't be going anywhere, even if grass isn't in place for opening day next season.

- Scott

Pookie
08-22-2009, 06:58 AM
"I don't think money's an issue,” he said. “We saw how they put [grass] down for one game against Real Madrid so I don't even want to hear that money's an issue."

That one statement tells me that he is most likely speaking for the entire team in voicing his frustrations with being treated as a second class citizen by his club.

This is a by-product of the Real Madrid treatment. Their careers and health were important enough to truck in grass because of the money generated. The message sent to our guys was loud and clear and they are sending their own message back, publicly.

No issue at all with what is said.

torontocelt
08-22-2009, 07:21 AM
"I don't think money's an issue,” he said. “We saw how they put [grass] down for one game against Real Madrid so I don't even want to hear that money's an issue."

That one statement tells me that he is most likely speaking for the entire team in voicing his frustrations with being treated as a second class citizen by his club.

This is a by-product of the Real Madrid treatment. Their careers and health were important enough to truck in grass because of the money generated. The message sent to our guys was loud and clear and they are sending their own message back, publicly.

No issue at all with what is said.

So did RM pay for the grass or not? I read previous they paid for it out of their appearance fees, is this incorrect? Did they perhaps increase their appearance fee to pay for the grass to make TFC look better?

Pookie
08-22-2009, 07:52 AM
So did RM pay for the grass or not? I read previous they paid for it out of their appearance fees, is this incorrect? Did they perhaps increase their appearance fee to pay for the grass to make TFC look better?

I think any way that the deal went down, it would have spin all over it.

The only real truth is that RM made natural grass a condition of the deal and our side said sure.

Ultimately, both sides figured out what they would make and factored in the cost. I would imagine that if there was to be spin, MLSE would want it such that "RM paid for the grass."

ensco
08-22-2009, 07:54 AM
I don't think he's bluffing.

When DeRo came, I wasn't too sure about him, I don't love the chicken dancing.

But his on field performance, and his leadership on this grass issue, make him a true star, for me. The fact that he's from here is almost incidental, other than the stature it gives him.

It will be a long time before we see his like again, if he leaves.

FluSH
08-22-2009, 08:11 AM
BIG NEWS...

I support DERO 100% on this... he is man enough to place himself in front of the firing squad over this issue.

torontocelt
08-22-2009, 08:24 AM
BIG NEWS...

I support DERO 100% on this... he is man enough to place himself in front of the firing squad over this issue.

I think we all support DeRo on this issue, I wonder how much flack he gets behind the scenes for speaking his mind on this so regularly? It is strange that he is the most outspoken of all of the players. To me it seems as if he is the one left to speak on behalf of the players and their wishes, I would have thought it should be the job of the captain to do this?

FluSH
08-22-2009, 08:30 AM
^^^
When you carry the team like DeRo has this year... he has the right to be outspoken... DeRo is the original Bandelero =P

RedMAN127
08-22-2009, 10:11 AM
So did RM pay for the grass or not? I read previous they paid for it out of their appearance fees, is this incorrect? Did they perhaps increase their appearance fee to pay for the grass to make TFC look better?


PB posted that TFC paid for the grass ... the City seems to be the roadblock not sure why RM and FO get so much hate over this?

ilikemusic
08-22-2009, 10:27 AM
I support DeRo 100% and if it comes down to it and he leaves because of the pitch then I will still support him 100%.

Hes only got a few more seasons left and playing them out on the turf will leave him with even fewer.

Maybe he was promised grass in some kind of verbal agreement.

Either way, gotta love DeRo. Hes like having one of the fans on the team.

kaos197O
08-22-2009, 10:47 AM
PB posted that TFC paid for the grass ... the City seems to be the roadblock not sure why RM and FO get so much hate over this?

Is this for certain? I read in the Toronto papers that OLE OLE paid for the turf!

Redpunkfiddle
08-22-2009, 10:58 AM
Is this for certain? I read in the Toronto papers that OLE OLE paid for the turf!

Search for his post, read it, and then call him a liar if you don't believe him. Its all there.

kaos197O
08-22-2009, 11:50 AM
Search for his post, read it, and then call him a liar if you don't believe him. Its all there.

WOW. Who called anyone a liar? Cheer up eh! NO thanks for your help!

CHEERS!

Shep
08-22-2009, 12:03 PM
Search for his post, read it, and then call him a liar if you don't believe him. Its all there.

Oh is it? You need to calm down and not jump on people, he called no one a liar, and he remembered correctly, read:

"The $250,000 natural grass that Ole Ole Promotions paid for as per Madrid's demand, is going to get pulled up by tomorrow, but will be donated to three Toronto public schools, Keele, Morrish and Harbord Collegiate."

Article here:

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2009/08/08/10398576-sun.html

The permanent grass will cost > 3 million with the heating systems and other work needed to make it permanent and keep it healthy. Much more than 250k for the temp surface.

Brooker
08-22-2009, 12:04 PM
if it isnt a PR move... can I ask why he wanted to come here so badly in the first place?

Shep
08-22-2009, 12:09 PM
if it isnt a PR move... can I ask why he wanted to come here so badly in the first place?

I still think it's PR, but he may have come not knowing the extent to which the turf would effect his health/game. And may have been further put off by the grass coming in for RM.

Carts
08-22-2009, 12:13 PM
Hey, I hope this helps push the city, the team, and everyone else involved in this to get the grass in this year...

I say good for deRo - he's using his weight as our top player to get people going...

I know these can be sticky things (saying I'm leaving if no etc etc etc) but he's pressing the issue for the betterment of the team - that's a good thing IMO...

Carts...

boban
08-22-2009, 12:26 PM
Sounds more to me like a reporter asked him a very pointed question, and DeRo answered it with something other than an unequivocal "no". My guess is that this is more or less a non-story.

Wow, if turf was affecting the longevity of his career, he would consider leaving? What a scoop.

One interesting bit from this story though, is DeRo's pretty obvious naivete with how municipal politics work:

“They obviously have a contract with the city, which is fair enough, but I think soccer's come to a point where even the city itself has got to say, listen, we've generated so much money, we've created so much outlet for fans and kids and opportunities for kids, let's do it right. Regardless of the contract, let's rip it up and do it right."

That isn't how it works, DeRo. Joey Pants could care less about the "fans and kids". No municipal government is ever going to just "rip up" a contract involving incredibly valuable government land in the heart of downtown, and "do it right" for altruistic reasons.

Anyway, with everything I've heard this season, and with all of the pressure being put on MLSE from supporters and players alike, I'm 90% confident that grass will be done as soon as this winter. Money doesn't solve everything, but it certainly clears most of the political hurdles.

And DeRo won't be going anywhere, even if grass isn't in place for opening day next season.

- Scott
He understands how municipal politics works just fine.

You may need the refresher. It's as complicated and simple as one wants to make it. It's that simple. Pantalone wants to be an ass. If he was a cool guy he could look for solutions to make it happen instead of circling the wagons looking for roadblocks.

Lucky Strike
08-22-2009, 12:29 PM
I still think it's PR, but he may have come not knowing the extent to which the turf would effect his health/game. And may have been further put off by the grass coming in for RM.

I do as well. I think DeRo is making use of his image and stature as the best player on the team AND being from the area to help get grass for the team. Remember how everyone says he so competitive even in practice and hates to lose? Might this simply not be his latest attempt to help the team win? Grass installed means it's easier on the health, easier to play on because players are used to it, easier to attract new players, etc.

I think DeRo would only walk away if there were a grave threat to his health caused by the turf.

RedRum
08-22-2009, 12:48 PM
As always, good on DeRo for not being afraid to open his mouth for the better of the team. Dude wanted to come here. If he is saying this now that tells you something.

Forget blaming the city, grass will happen if MLSE ponies up the cash and takes care of the city's demand for a community use facility and whatever else is needed. If they cheap out we are fucked, no one is gonna come here if DeRo splits.

FO has to step up and treat the players with respect. Since the beginning in year 2 interest has been declining with each passing month. At the rate they are going, without change TFC will be playing in front of 12k within 3 years.

dupont
08-22-2009, 02:38 PM
I wonder if the team assured him grass was coming soon as a stipulation for bringing him to play here and now he is seeing that it might take a longer time to get it installed then they originally promised him.

Shakes McQueen
08-22-2009, 02:40 PM
He understands how municipal politics works just fine.

You may need the refresher. It's as complicated and simple as one wants to make it. It's that simple. Pantalone wants to be an ass. If he was a cool guy he could look for solutions to make it happen instead of circling the wagons looking for roadblocks.

Most things are "as complicated or simple as one wants to make it", and councillors like Joey Pants have pretty clearly shown that they have no intention of making this simple, or easy. And commentary on municipal politics, that starts with "if he was a cool guy...", isn't going to end well.

So go ahead and take my place on that refresher course.

- Scott

Fort York Redcoat
08-22-2009, 02:42 PM
I think most would agree with DeRo using all the clout he has to get our grass but I hope if he leaves it's not for some other MLS outfit.

ensco
08-22-2009, 04:07 PM
This argument about how complicated this is, is utter, total hogwash.

Pantalone just wants what is right - an appropriately located replacement for BMO.

It's always been about the money. MLSE's money.

DeRo is right to worry that MLSE may be blowing smoke about grass.

Frankly, I'm stunned that there are only 32 posts, with many unsupportive, in this thread. It's embarassing that more people haven't expressed support for him on here.

Shakes McQueen
08-22-2009, 04:18 PM
This argument about how complicated this is utter, total hogwash.

Pantalone just wants what is right - an appropriately located replacement for BMO.

It's always been about the money. MLSE's money.

DeRo is right to worry that MLSE may be blowing smoke about grass.

Frankly, I'm stunned that there are only 32 posts in this thread. It's embarassing that more people haven't expressed support for him on here.

Saying "it's easy, MLSE just needs to throw enough money around" isn't simple. MLSE has already suggested Lamport as the replacement, and Joey Pants has already suggested that he doesn't think Lamport is a suitable replacement, because it isn't in as prime of a location as BMO Field is. Joey Pants wants a community use facility, right in the heart of downtown, like BMO. And if such land is even available in downtown TO, chances are it would cost hundreds of millions to buy and develop.

And DeRo himself says he doesn't think it's a matter of money. Even he is blaming the city for the problem, hence the stuff about ripping up the contract.

I'm not unsupportive about the cause for getting grass, and I'm glad DeRo keeps pressing the issue. I just think this "story" is a non-story, likely driven by some intrepid TO reporter asking a very pointed question, to try and make some headlines. Is it supposed to be some kind of revelation that, if DeRo thought the turf was shortening his career, he would CONSIDER going elsewhere?

He just signed a 4-year extension here, and if his staying here was "always" contingent on us getting grass, then surely he's either blowing smoke about any thoughts of leaving, or he's well aware that MLSE are seriously pushing to get the deal done, and he's trying to put pressure on the CITY.

- Scott

wzhxvy
08-22-2009, 05:30 PM
Dero has shown that he really cares about this team and the fans, and as ensco said, I have gained a ton of respect for him as well...

Blizzard
08-22-2009, 06:39 PM
Saying "it's easy, MLSE just needs to throw enough money around" isn't simple. MLSE has already suggested Lamport as the replacement, and Joey Pants has already suggested that he doesn't think Lamport is a suitable replacement, because it isn't in as prime of a location as BMO Field is. Joey Pants wants a community use facility, right in the heart of downtown, like BMO. And if such land is even available in downtown TO, chances are it would cost hundreds of millions to buy and develop.

I believe it was the Lakeshore Lions proposal that was unacceptable to Joey. Lamport is as good a replacement as you can get for the winter bubble as it is most certainly as much in the heart of the city as BMO. They're less than one kilometre apart as the crow flies.

The tricky thing is finding a non-winter outdoor facility in which to place the old field turf. It's a shame that the green space around the stadium is insufficient for a permanent field installation. They could have utilized the facilities of the stadium for the new facility but that can't happen. I suppose the parking lot might be just big enough but I can't see the city wanting to give up that revenue.

http://www.insidetoronto.com/article/71967

rocker
08-22-2009, 07:07 PM
too bad they can't put the field over that baseball diamond behind Medieval Times... would have been the perfect spot for the community use in summer.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=43.63172,-79.427156&daddr=&hl=en&geocode=&mra=mi&mrsp=0&sz=18&sll=43.632169,-79.427274&sspn=0.00191,0.005493&ie=UTF8&ll=43.631812,-79.426625&spn=0.003821,0.006899&t=h&z=17

or in this parking lot

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Manitoba+Dr&daddr=&geocode=FaLLmQIdZh5E-w&hl=en&mra=ls&sll=43.63335,-79.423696&sspn=0.00382,0.006899&ie=UTF8&ll=43.633606,-79.422108&spn=0.00191,0.003449&t=h&z=18

Stryker
08-22-2009, 08:32 PM
Frankly, I'm stunned that there are only 32 posts, with many unsupportive, in this thread. It's embarassing that more people haven't expressed support for him on here.
Just for the record I'm very much in support of him. I was just too busy patting myself on the back for having forseen this to mention it earlier.
:D

mighty_torontofc_2008
08-23-2009, 12:21 AM
I knew this was coming.
I absolutely positively unequivocally knew the day he signed with us that if they didn't get grass in a timely manner he would threaten to walk.


well let him walk then..NO one is bigger the the club...grass will arrive when the city,mlse cant find a suitable replacement for BMO's winter use.
and having a player weak threat..is just not acceptable...You dont see Ljunberg in Seattle pulling this shit..if we dont have grass im gone..klets get real...if DeRo wnats to put some money into making it happen faster,
fine, if not dont make idle threats.

Shakes McQueen
08-23-2009, 12:30 AM
well let him walk then..NO one is bigger the the club...grass will arrive when the city,mlse cant find a suitable replacement for BMO's winter use.
and having a player weak threat..is just not acceptable...You dont see Ljunberg in Seattle pulling this shit..if we dont have grass im gone..klets get real...if DeRo wnats to put some money into making it happen faster,
fine, if not dont make idle threats.

Ljungberg isn't playing on turf that has been trampled into the ground a million times over.

We get it. You don't like DeRo.

- Scott

T.O TILL I DIE
08-23-2009, 02:10 AM
i kinda feel bad for the players on toronto fc
while playing on turf it can really hurt ur legs after a short while and the soccer ball+ turf= negative lol
maybe this will give mlse more of a reason to put in grass

ensco
08-23-2009, 08:24 AM
Saying "it's easy, MLSE just needs to throw enough money around" isn't simple. MLSE has already suggested Lamport as the replacement, and Joey Pants has already suggested that he doesn't think Lamport is a suitable replacement, because it isn't in as prime of a location as BMO Field is. Joey Pants wants a community use facility, right in the heart of downtown, like BMO. And if such land is even available in downtown TO, chances are it would cost hundreds of millions to buy and develop.

And DeRo himself says he doesn't think it's a matter of money. Even he is blaming the city for the problem, hence the stuff about ripping up the contract.

I'm not unsupportive about the cause for getting grass, and I'm glad DeRo keeps pressing the issue. I just think this "story" is a non-story, likely driven by some intrepid TO reporter asking a very pointed question, to try and make some headlines. Is it supposed to be some kind of revelation that, if DeRo thought the turf was shortening his career, he would CONSIDER going elsewhere?

He just signed a 4-year extension here, and if his staying here was "always" contingent on us getting grass, then surely he's either blowing smoke about any thoughts of leaving, or he's well aware that MLSE are seriously pushing to get the deal done, and he's trying to put pressure on the CITY.

- Scott

No disrespect intended, but this is 100% balderdash.

You think Pantalone is unreasonable for not supporting Lamport? News flash: the City already owns Lamport. They can build condos there, a high school track facility, anything they want. MLSE has to buy it from them, not get it given to them. DeRo gets it, even if others here don't.

If you don't understand this, ask City Council if they'd mind if you build a for profit swimming pool in a corner of your local neighbourhood park. See how that goes.

Dero saying money isn't an issue? That's not what he said. He said he doesn't want to hear about the money. He's making a very different point.

The reporter made it up? Come on - you've got to be kidding. You are totally disrespecting the fact that your star player is taking on his own team, and way out on a limb on this. Obviously without you, and many others, behind him.

tfc2008
08-23-2009, 08:42 AM
The Ros and more players sall leave and nobody care about it because the MLSE dont care people think about it.
They dont care about you of me looked that hockey team.
Solong the stadion is every game sold out , bay inoff drinks and foods there the money come in for them you see it with the hockey and it started also with the soccer.

tfc2008
08-23-2009, 08:43 AM
sorry for my bad englich

prizby
08-23-2009, 08:59 AM
So did RM pay for the grass or not? I read previous they paid for it out of their appearance fees, is this incorrect? Did they perhaps increase their appearance fee to pay for the grass to make TFC look better?

paul b has already answered this question...we (TFC) paid for it

Whoop
08-23-2009, 01:25 PM
Oh is it? You need to calm down and not jump on people, he called no one a liar, and he remembered correctly, read:

"The $250,000 natural grass that Ole Ole Promotions paid for as per Madrid's demand, is going to get pulled up by tomorrow, but will be donated to three Toronto public schools, Keele, Morrish and Harbord Collegiate."

Article here:

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2009/08/08/10398576-sun.html

The permanent grass will cost > 3 million with the heating systems and other work needed to make it permanent and keep it healthy. Much more than 250k for the temp surface.


^^

The promotion company paid for the grass.

Shakes McQueen
08-23-2009, 03:03 PM
No disrespect intended, but this is 100% balderdash.

I think it's funny that a post that starts with "no disrespect intended", is packed with sarcastic dickery. Moving along:


You think Pantalone is unreasonable for not supporting Lamport? News flash: the City already owns Lamport. They can build condos there, a high school track facility, anything they want. MLSE has to buy it from them, not get it given to them. DeRo gets it, even if others here don't.And what you don't get it is, all they want to do is put the bubble over Lamport, for COMMUNITY USE - ie. GOVERNMENT USE. Why would MLSE want to own Lamport outright? All they want to do, is relocate the bubble from one public use facility to another, so it becomes a 365 day-a-year facility, instead of BMO. That has nothing to do with what the City could do with it down the road - you want to demolish it 10 years from now, to build a condo? Fine. It's a matter of whether MLSE have lived up to the stipulations of their deal.

You think it's reasonable to expect MLSE to shell out the hundreds of millions of dollars it would cost to buy Lamport outright, just so they can put a bubble over it? You could build an entire new stadium on the outskirts of Toronto, for the kind of money it would cost to buy land like that in downtown Toronto, if the city was even willing to sell it in the first place.


Dero saying money isn't an issue? That's not what he said. He said he doesn't want to hear about the money. He's making a very different point.Except no, taken in context, "I don't want to hear about money" wasn't his point at all. Here's the full paragraph:

“I don't think money's an issue,” he said. “We saw how they put [grass] down for one game against Real Madrid so I don't even want to hear that money's an issue.
“They obviously have a contract with the city, which is fair enough, but I think soccer's come to a point where even the city itself has got to say, listen, we've generated so much money, we've created so much outlet for fans and kids and opportunities for kids, let's do it right. Regardless of the contract, let's rip it up and do it right."


He acknowledges that the team has a contract with the city, and then hopes that the sport has come to a point in Toronto, where "even the city" will be willing to do what needs to be done to get grass in



The reporter made it up? Come on - you've got to be kidding. You are totally disrespecting the fact that your star player is taking on his own team, and way out on a limb on this. Obviously without you, and many others, behind him.Get a grip. I never said the reporter "made it up" - I said it's pretty clear a reporter asked a very POINTED QUESTION, to try and make some news. That is a far cry from "made it up", if you had bothered to make the distinction.

And as I mentioned before, I fully support DeRo's crusade for grass at BMO Field. I just don't see "I may consider leaving if the surface is shortening my playing career" to be some sort of newsworthy smoking gun that DeRo is out of here if we don't have grass at kickoff next season. He might leave if he thought his career was being tangibly shortened because of the carpet? Shocking I tell you!

There's a gaping chasm of difference between "I don't support DeRo's fight for grass at BMO", and "I think the story of DeRo potentially leaving is a non-issue, if you read the article".

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
08-23-2009, 03:04 PM
^^

The promotion company paid for the grass.

Seems to be a conflict with that story, as Paul B said here that MLSE paid for the grass, not Ole Ole Productions.

- Scott

Lucky Strike
08-23-2009, 03:14 PM
Seems to be a conflict with that story, as Paul B said here that MLSE paid for the grass, not Ole Ole Productions.

- Scott

Maybe it's both. TFC paid for the grass but then Ole Ole gave 250K to the team to be listed as a major sponsor (it was always TFC v. Real Madrid, presented by Ole Ole) which happens to be the same cost as the grass. Maybe the two were arbitrarily linked together, or maybe Ole Ole said something like: "List us as a major sponsor and we'll cover the grass" after it was bought by TFC.

Shakes McQueen
08-23-2009, 03:18 PM
Maybe it's both. TFC paid for the grass but then Ole Ole gave 250K to the team to be listed as a major sponsor (it was always TFC v. Real Madrid, presented by Ole Ole) which happens to be the same cost as the grass. Maybe the two were arbitrarily linked together, or maybe Ole Ole said something like: "List us as a major sponsor and we'll cover the grass" after it was bought by TFC.

That's true, good point.

- Scott

rocker
08-23-2009, 03:47 PM
While I approve of De Ro's speaking out on the turf situation, if he demanded a trade or release i'd call him a quitter and he'd lose respect in my eyes. The team ain't gonna get any better with him quitting, and we would still have to deal with the fieldturf.
If he quit the team it would in no way bring about grass anyways.

nonetheless, I doubt De Ro ever would do it. he loves being here too much to ask to be moved back to the US. Plus he's making enough coin that no other MLS team would ever take on his contract.... nor would he want to give up the $$$$$ I'm sure.

ensco
08-23-2009, 04:26 PM
And what you don't get it is, all they want to do is put the bubble over Lamport, for COMMUNITY USE - ie. GOVERNMENT USE. Why would MLSE want to own Lamport outright? All they want to do, is relocate the bubble from one public use facility to another, so it becomes a 365 day-a-year facility, instead of BMO. That has nothing to do with what the City could do with it down the road - you want to demolish it 10 years from now, to build a condo? Fine. It's a matter of whether MLSE have lived up to the stipulations of their deal.

You think it's reasonable to expect MLSE to shell out the hundreds of millions of dollars it would cost to buy Lamport outright, just so they can put a bubble over it? You could build an entire new stadium on the outskirts of Toronto, for the kind of money it would cost to buy land like that in downtown Toronto, if the city was even willing to sell it in the first place.



I'll be more explicit.

The community today has (i) year round use at BMO and (ii) seasonal use at Lamport. Putting a bubble at Lamport still leaves the community shortchanged 6 months a year.

MLSE has to buy or rent something, somewhere appropriate, and put a summer facility there, to make up the shortfall to the community. Or buy or rent Lamport to make up for the shortfall in community use.

I hope you realize that the position you're taking is one that will lead to fieldturf forever. MLSE will just be able to throw up their hands and say "so sorry, we tried".

Shakes McQueen
08-23-2009, 04:55 PM
I'll be more explicit.

The community today has (i) year round use at BMO and (ii) seasonal use at Lamport. Putting a bubble at Lamport still leaves the community shortchanged 6 months a year.

MLSE has to buy or rent something, somewhere appropriate, and put a summer facility there, to make up the shortfall to the community. Or buy or rent Lamport to make up for the shortfall in community use.

Fair enough, but I've also read that Joey Pants thinks this facility has to be in as central of a downtown location, as BMO Field currently. So we wind up going full circle, back to this idea that it's somehow reasonable to expect MLSE to shell out the hundreds of millions it would cost to buy up prime downtown Toronto land, and build an entirely new facility on it, for the sake of 6 months seasonal community use. You could build a new stadium for TFC on the outskirts of Toronto, for that kind of money. And at that point, it would almost make more financial sense for MLSE to just replace the damn carpet every three years

DeRo is with me on this issue too, apparently: "But I think soccer's come to a point where even the city itself has got to say, listen, we've generated so much money, we've created so much outlet for fans and kids and opportunities for kids, let's do it right. Regardless of the contract, let's rip it up and do it right."

Regardless of the contract, let's do this right, instead of destroying our new professional soccer franchise long term, in a political fight over six months of community use.


I hope you realize that the position you're taking is one that will lead to fieldturf forever. MLSE will just be able to throw up their hands and say "so sorry, we tried".If the city's position is that MLSE has to shell out what would undoubtedly be well over $100m (and likely far more) in buying other land in downtown TO, and building a facility on it, just to change the surface at BMO, I wouldn't blame them in the slightest. They might as well build another stadium for TFC at that point.

Paying to make Lamport a year-round facility is a reasonable compromise in my opinion. People seem to forget, that the city has a stake in Toronto FC being successful too, being that they are BMO Field's major tenant. And if the carpet there is going to cause this franchise to wither and die, something needs to be done about it. And ironically, this is basically exactly what DeRo was saying.

They've created so much wealth, and this great outlet for fans - so it's time for the city to sit down, and make sure we do this right. That means MLSE shelling out some money too, to relocate the bubble, as well as installing grass at BMO, and the related infrastructure, and maybe even a guarantee to develop a new training facility in the next 15 years. But it also means the city compromising to ensure the long-term viability of this new sports attraction in the city.

- Scott

ensco
08-23-2009, 06:20 PM
^Twice you've mentioned "$100 million" (once "likely far more") as the value of Lamport.

I think that's an utterly absurd estimate. Be happy to prove this to you.

Much more likely is something like $1 million a year in rent. And I'm deeply worried that Tom Anselmi has no intention of ever paying anything like that, and will talk about "complexities" so that he can say they tried, when the City doesn't give him the sweetheart deal he's looking for.

We'll just disagree on what DeRo thinks. I think DeRo believes what I believe, based on the sum of his public statements and actions, before, during and after his acquisition by TFC. Parsing that statement of his above is not productive: DeRo has zero ability to put pressure on the City, his threat to leave is directed 100% at his employer. This could not be more obvious.

Shakes, obviously there's no changing your mind, but I am speaking really to everyone else: Pantalone and other city officials may be jerks and stuffed shirts, but do not let MLSE off the hook here.

Seeing this as something the City should make concessions on, is wrong. The optics of doing anything are bad for the City from the get go: that's a lot of public money invested at BMO.

It's MLSE who has the problem with the current setup, not the City. It's MLSE who have to pay to fix the setup. Full freight.

Framing it any other way gives MLSE a free pass and is antithetical to what we all want/need to achieve.

Dirk Diggler
08-23-2009, 06:30 PM
To cite the cost of Lamport (whatever it maybe) as a legitimate reason why MLSE is unable to go through with this is ridiculous. They are reaping the benefit of operating a facility that the government paid for in a similar location. If they are unwilling to pay for Lamport than that is fine with me... it just means that they are not as serious about the playing surface as they want us to believe. MLSE officials like to beat their chests about how they have a stadium in the downtown core yet they seem unwilling to pay for a similar location. I guess this is one of the reasons why other ownership groups in the MLS who did not get a sweetheart deal from their cities decided to build their stadiums in the suburbs.

Shakes McQueen
08-23-2009, 07:42 PM
^Twice you've mentioned "$100 million" (once "likely far more") as the value of Lamport.

I think that's an utterly absurd estimate. Be happy to prove this to you.

I'm not talking about the value of the facility, I'm talking about the value of the land it sits on.


Much more likely is something like $1 million a year in rent. And I'm deeply worried that Tom Anselmi has no intention of ever paying anything like that, and will talk about "complexities" so that he can say they tried, when the City doesn't give him the sweetheart deal he's looking for.

How does MLSE paying to rent Lamport, solve the loss of 6 months of community use though? You keep shifting the goal posts here. That still doesn't change the fact that we've got one facility that can be used 12 months a year, instead of two facilities that can be used a combined 18 months (or so) per year. It just means MLSE are paying to "rent" Lamport, which solves nothing.

If this issue seriously ends up coming down to paying $1m a year in rent for Lamport, then you bet your balls I will be all over Anselmi to pay that money. However, I've seen no information anywhere indicating that $1m a year to rent Lamport is what's at stake here.


We'll just disagree on what DeRo thinks. I think DeRo believes what I believe, based on the sum of his public statements and actions, before, during and after his acquisition by TFC. Parsing that statement of his above is not productive: DeRo has zero ability to put pressure on the City, his threat to leave is directed 100% at his employer. This could not be more obvious.

Ah, so now I'm "parsing" his words, by quoting exactly what he said. DeRo wants grass. DeRo felt disrespected that we brought in grass for Real Madrid, but not for the actual team. DeRo also apparently recognizes that we have a contract with the city, and hopes that both parties will come to some agreement to "do the right thing". I'm not parsing anything - I'm assuming he meant what he said, and said what he meant. Seems like a pretty simple standard to me.


Shakes, obviously there's no changing your mind, but I am speaking really to everyone else: Pantalone and other city officials may be jerks and stuffed shirts, but do not let MLSE off the hook here.

I'm not. In fact, I've specifically advocated keeping pressure on Anselmi in other threads about this issue, to make sure he comes through on his grand promises and statements of a few months ago.


Seeing this as something the City should make concessions on, is wrong. The optics of doing anything are bad for the City from the get go: that's a lot of public money invested at BMO.

The optics aren't bad at all, if they get to announce that MLSE are paying to renovate Lamport to a year-round facility, and that BMO Field is going to be turned into a top-class football facility. I don't see how the "optics" are any worse, than any time the city announces they are going to support a private project with public money.


It's MLSE who has the problem with the current setup, not the City. It's MLSE who have to pay to fix the setup. Full freight.

And as per DeRo's words (which I'm "parsing"), he thinks ripping up the contract and "doing the right thing" makes more sense.

Actually, I'm sure MLSE would be fine to keep using field-turf. It's the fans that have a problem, and it's the fans that should be putting pressure on everyone involved to reach an agreement. That includes MLSE, but it also includes the city, as DeRo explicitly seems to understand in his statements.

- Scott

RedMAN127
08-23-2009, 08:05 PM
Don't forget TO is making a ton of cash off this venture too -parking, concessions, tourism, etc.,- and would be idiotic to push MLSE out of this venue.

Not sure how bad the access is to fields for community use in that area, is this a bit of a red hering here?

ensco
08-24-2009, 09:32 AM
Important point for those who might care: land value of Lamport, which IMO could/will be a critical point in MLSE/City negotiations, is $10-20 million. Maximum. Please ignore claims that say it's $100 million or more.

1) Serious zoning and density issues at that location.

2) The market for raw, undeveloped sites at the periphery of established neighbourhoods has totally cratered.

3) Major capacity coming onstream in Parkdale (Jameson Avenue coop conversions, many more Liberty Village units) have developers very concerned about the health of the market there

C.Ronaldo
08-24-2009, 09:46 AM
there is no reason lamport cant be turned into something like the hershey soccer centre in mississauga, well except for money.

they can even build condos above the indoor soccer facility if they wanted to, parking underground, etc..

God knows the neighbourhood needs the revitalization.

DOMIN8R
08-24-2009, 10:00 AM
The land is actually owned by the province on a long term lease.
Liberty Village proper (not the condo areas surrounding it) is zoned an employment area (very rare designation) and as such new residential development is unlikelly even if it were to proceed to the OMB level.
In 2004/5/6 there was a ground swell of concern when developpers/investors began making noise to acquire all or a portion of the Lamport lands including the parking lot. At that time, Lamport was an grossly underutilized City asset. The BIA, rate payers association and other stakeholders went through a planning exercise with the City and sponsored first by Councilor Sylvia Watson and then by Councilor Gordon Perks. It included a charette, etc. at the end it was decided that the City would invest in Lamport and make it more "usable" to the community. Thus the investment in 2008 in the new turf. That near 3 million investment is not going anywhere soon. The cost to retrofit Lamport to make it "bubble ready" is very high and complicated for reasons I don't want to list in this post.
In the last year several stakeholder groups including the local BIA have made it clear that developing the parking lost side for commercial use would be acceptable as long at the stadium was kept as a community asset for health and wellness purposes.
The City Ec/Dev group, who would likelly lead the charge, the City land-holding corporation was been disassembled last year and is presently being reborn as the new and improved Invest Toronto Corp. This group is not quite ready to take on this battle IMHO. Maybe in a nother year or two.
None of the above is relevant to us as supporters, of course. All we want is grass at BMO. The rest is noise - including all of the above. Let the City and MLSE work out the details. Lamport or not. Community use or not. I don't think, as supporters, we should let our message be diluted by the details. We want grass. Period. Full stop.

ensco
08-24-2009, 11:08 AM
I agree with your fine post 100% Domin8r.

Those issues with retrofitting for a bubble, I'll PM you about that.

My only fear is that, because these issues are complicated, the complexity can be used to mask an unwillingness to spend the required dough, wherever it's needed.

Belfast_Boy
08-24-2009, 11:29 AM
I still think it's PR, but he may have come not knowing the extent to which the turf would effect his health/game. And may have been further put off by the grass coming in for RM.


If I was DeRo i'd be pissed about the Madrid grass! they come for one game and "POOF" there's grass.... they go and "POOF" that plastic shit is back! Shows what they think of him and the rest of the team. He's been vocal more and more about the surface. Will he go? I hope not. Can he legally go? he's still got a contract.
PR or not, it's good that he continues to talk about this and press the issue.
The green stuff under a socccer ball is supposed to be GRASS!!! NOT PLASTIC!!!

Shakes McQueen
08-24-2009, 02:11 PM
The land is actually owned by the province on a long term lease.
Liberty Village proper (not the condo areas surrounding it) is zoned an employment area (very rare designation) and as such new residential development is unlikelly even if it were to proceed to the OMB level.
In 2004/5/6 there was a ground swell of concern when developpers/investors began making noise to acquire all or a portion of the Lamport lands including the parking lot. At that time, Lamport was an grossly underutilized City asset. The BIA, rate payers association and other stakeholders went through a planning exercise with the City and sponsored first by Councilor Sylvia Watson and then by Councilor Gordon Perks. It included a charette, etc. at the end it was decided that the City would invest in Lamport and make it more "usable" to the community. Thus the investment in 2008 in the new turf. That near 3 million investment is not going anywhere soon. The cost to retrofit Lamport to make it "bubble ready" is very high and complicated for reasons I don't want to list in this post.
In the last year several stakeholder groups including the local BIA have made it clear that developing the parking lost side for commercial use would be acceptable as long at the stadium was kept as a community asset for health and wellness purposes.
The City Ec/Dev group, who would likelly lead the charge, the City land-holding corporation was been disassembled last year and is presently being reborn as the new and improved Invest Toronto Corp. This group is not quite ready to take on this battle IMHO. Maybe in a nother year or two.

None of the above is relevant to us as supporters, of course. All we want is grass at BMO. The rest is noise - including all of the above. Let the City and MLSE work out the details. Lamport or not. Community use or not. I don't think, as supporters, we should let our message be diluted by the details. We want grass. Period. Full stop.

That's actually a good point DOMIN8R - the details aren't ours to work out, anyway. We should just be putting out our message as forcefully as possible, to everyone involved.

- Scott