PDA

View Full Version : BMO Field - Naming Rights on our BRAND New ROOF



Technorgasm
07-07-2011, 04:01 PM
ok ok ok . . so, we're not officially getting a roof. . . but. .
with all the talk in the press in Tdot about Naming rights of subways, parks, public spaces. .

seeing as how BMO field is part owned operated by the City, surely BMO field woudl be a PRIME place to run an experiment on these types of initiatives.

Check out St JAMES PARK in Newcastle, and their SPORTS DIRECT.com roof

http://www.stuffbypaulbrown.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/stjamesparknufc5_paulbrown.jpg

Now I would not care if the gorgeous, sound amplifying structure above me plastered with some logo, or painted in corporate colours of some kind, hell even call it the "Molson end" or "Rogers Roof" or whatever.

I hope that MLSE / TFC are looking at further development of the ground.
I woudl think that a roof is Waaaaaay down on the priorities list BUT . maybe an influx of private sector $$ would change that?

Maybe a fan initiative could help in sourcing the funds for a roof / improvements?

(Seeing Red Bull Area last night, really highlighted BMO fields umm. . .. . short falls)

NBS
07-07-2011, 04:12 PM
Just don't hire the folks that worked on FC Twente's roof. Otherwise, it's a great idea.

profit89
07-07-2011, 04:40 PM
A roof would be amazing. I would re-purchase season tickets again.

Dave67
07-07-2011, 04:51 PM
Red Roof Inns should sponsor this.

prizby
07-07-2011, 06:34 PM
thing is with st. james park, there is not official sponsor for the naming of the stadium

bmo field on the other hand is exactly that...i wouldn't be surprised if BMO's rights include not naming sections of the stadiums...thats unfortunately the downfall with naming rights; all these restrictions

Alixir
07-07-2011, 07:56 PM
I cry a little inside evertime I see that pic of St. James Park.

69Chevy396
07-07-2011, 09:01 PM
the way fan interest is plummeting, there would not be any need for a roof cause there won't be anybody around to get cold and wet

kodiakTFC
07-07-2011, 11:20 PM
the way fan interest is plummeting, there would not be any need for a roof cause there won't be anybody around to get cold and wet

TFC Attendance..

Current 2010 Diff All-Time Diff
19730 20497 -3.7% 20122 -1.9%

I think we're over-exaggerating the plummeting fan interest.

razor787
07-08-2011, 01:09 AM
I tried getting a group pack of seats for a game in late August. I was turned away by the rep I talked too, because he didn't have enough seats to give me. I was even willing to split the group up, but he had said they were nearly sold out.

It may not look like the place is full, but the tickets have been selling.

CSO_BBTB
07-08-2011, 02:00 AM
If there were designated away supporters ends in MLS stadia, it would be difficult to beat what Motherwell did in terms of finding a rood ad sponsor over in Scotland:

http://www.scottishgrounds.co.uk/motherwell40.jpg

Was surprised they got away with it given the PC times we live in.

West220Side
07-08-2011, 03:29 AM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2822435715_e62fc8efa2.jpg

Technorgasm
07-08-2011, 06:26 AM
thing is with st. james park, there is not official sponsor for the naming of the stadium



Officially, it is 'sportsdirect.com@StJames'ParkStadium'

They plopped in the north stand without incident. .
thing is a roof is just a needless expense in the eyes of the bottom line. .

Does Toyota park (Chi Fire) have a roof?

and speak of the devil:

Man City rename Eastlands stadium (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/sport1/hi/football/14080388.stm)
Manchester City confirm the City of Manchester Stadium will be renamed the Etihad Stadium, after making a 10-year deal with the airline.

BeninatoTFC
07-10-2011, 08:53 AM
TFC Attendance..

Current 2010 Diff All-Time Diff
19730 20497 -3.7% 20122 -1.9%

I think we're over-exaggerating the plummeting fan interest.

You actually think they average 19000 a game? That's tickets sold. They're lucky to have 14,000 in the park on any given game day. No one gives a crap about the team anymore except for the supporters sections. It use to be the "thing" to go to BMO and catch a game. Now people are better off watching a youth league game than that trash.

I can't even name half the starting 11 because it changes so much and to be honest, I haven't caught an entire game this season. And this is coming from someone who was a die-hard fan the first four years. I can't imagine a fairweather fan knowing anyone other than Frei. I miss the first few years where win/lose/draw I didn't care about the result. I wanted to see the players develop. Now, it's still the same crap, and I'm not willing to test my patience.

glaze
07-10-2011, 11:30 AM
As a frustrated member of the gold waiting list, it is annoying to see so many empty seats each gameday. Mainly because I am willing to purchase them as seasons tickets, though apparently, even though they have been empty every game except LA, they are not for sale.
As for the stadium, the only improvement they have made in 5 seasons was putting in grass. And the only reason they put in grass, was they were sitting on all of that transfer money that had to go to stadium improvements. Lets face it, TFC play in a glorified temporary stadium which is quickly becoming one of MLS' worst as other teams move into new facilities. Not to mention, they built the north stand and charge 50 dollars a ticket. Any additional improvements will likely be an excuse to raise ticket prices.

rocker
07-10-2011, 12:26 PM
You actually think they average 19000 a game? That's tickets sold. They're lucky to have 14,000 in the park on any given game day.

Every season since 2007 somebody has come on these boards and said attendance wasn't what it was reported. It's like a broken record.

I think people need to realize that attendance doesn't deserve the attention people are giving it every week. MLS is a revenue sharing league. Teams have survived for 16 years with attendances worse than TFC has ever had.

Don't worry about it.

gomesv
07-10-2011, 12:36 PM
As a frustrated member of the gold waiting list, it is annoying to see so many empty seats each gameday. Mainly because I am willing to purchase them as seasons tickets, though apparently, even though they have been empty every game except LA, they are not for sale.
As for the stadium, the only improvement they have made in 5 seasons was putting in grass. And the only reason they put in grass, was they were sitting on all of that transfer money that had to go to stadium improvements. Lets face it, TFC play in a glorified temporary stadium which is quickly becoming one of MLS' worst as other teams move into new facilities. Not to mention, they built the north stand and charge 50 dollars a ticket. Any additional improvements will likely be an excuse to raise ticket prices.


if you want my advice stay on the gold list......you can go to all the games you want for half about half the price.....and you won't be stuck with any you can't get rid of.....and trust me, you can't get rid of them this year.

james
07-10-2011, 02:41 PM
i think Cardiff City may of been one of the first teams to have adds on there roof back at there old stadium years ago.

james
07-10-2011, 02:47 PM
everyone is freaking out because the support aint what it use to be. and other teams like portland and seattle got better attendence and better atmospheres at there games and we once use to have the best atmosphere and fans want that back.

Technorgasm
09-02-2011, 03:16 PM
I was at Brightons new 22,000 seat atadium. . makes BMO look like the back side of a recycling plant. . .

http://images.football365.com/11/07/800x600/Amex-Stadium-Brighton-and-Hove-Albion-800_2618152.jpg

lerxst
09-02-2011, 03:49 PM
I was at Brightons new 22,000 seat atadium. . makes BMO look like the back side of a recycling plant. . .

http://images.football365.com/11/07/800x600/Amex-Stadium-Brighton-and-Hove-Albion-800_2618152.jpg
Holy shit that's gorgeous. Thanks. Now I'm depressed. :(

lerxst
09-02-2011, 03:53 PM
Here's another view:
http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t231/Fred_Blogs/bha.jpg

vergilg
09-02-2011, 03:53 PM
Back in the day (only 4 years ago!) BMO was apretty decent stadium (or maybe we thought so because it was one of the few SSS). Today, it's like that an old pair of jeans, with a few too many stains, that looks like shite compared to the new fashion out there.

I am extremely jealous of Sporting KC's new park, even though I wouldn't trade my memories from BMO for anything.

BMO could be altered with a roof over each side... but ideally it should be leveled and rebuilt properly. Know any billionaires that can do that? :o

It's a damn shame the city was involved right from the start on this project.
Here in Ottawa, we can't even renovate the football stadium, that will be home to a NASL franchise. And unfortunately, Melnyk's proposal to build a modern SSS near Scotiabank Place was thrown out. Part of a bigger problem in Canada.

vergilg
09-02-2011, 03:54 PM
Here's another view:
http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t231/Fred_Blogs/bha.jpg

Bellissimo!

boban
09-02-2011, 04:02 PM
Back in the day (only 4 years ago!) BMO was apretty decent stadium (or maybe we thought so because it was one of the few SSS). Today, it's like that an old pair of jeans, with a few too many stains, that looks like shite compared to the new fashion out there.

I am extremely jealous of Sporting KC's new park, even though I wouldn't trade my memories from BMO for anything.

BMO could be altered with a roof over each side... but ideally it should be leveled and rebuilt properly. Know any billionaires that can do that? :o

It's a damn shame the city was involved right from the start on this project.
Here in Ottawa, we can't even renovate the football stadium, that will be home to a NASL franchise. And unfortunately, Melnyk's proposal to build a modern SSS near Scotiabank Place was thrown out. Part of a bigger problem in Canada.
Dude it was shit from the outset.
Only thing camouflaged it was that people were happy we had anything!
Now that the euphoria has washed off, finally some people are coming to the senses and see how we got hosed on the stadium.

vergilg
09-02-2011, 04:16 PM
Dude it was shit from the outset.
Only thing camouflaged it was that people were happy we had anything!
Now that the euphoria has washed off, finally some people are coming to the senses and see how we got hosed on the stadium.


Dude, read my first sentence - I echo your sentiment.

And if you read a little further, I'm saying it was doomed from the beginning because you had government involved. The design was doomed. We had a carpet instead of grass for playing surface, and I'm not even going to go into specifics like no roof, washroom accessibility, etc.

But hey, better than nothing.... or is it after the performance of the club over the last 4 years?!

Juanito
09-02-2011, 04:28 PM
^^

I think we're stuck with BMO. Where would we move? We can't just demolish the thing and expect it to be ready by the following season. We're stuck with that .... place .... for at least another 10-15 years.

boban
09-02-2011, 05:22 PM
Dude, read my first sentence - I echo your sentiment.

And if you read a little further, I'm saying it was doomed from the beginning because you had government involved. The design was doomed. We had a carpet instead of grass for playing surface, and I'm not even going to go into specifics like no roof, washroom accessibility, etc.

But hey, better than nothing.... or is it after the performance of the club over the last 4 years?!
You can't blame it on the government per se, as a blanket statement. heck it was the various governments that came up with the major bulk of the cash to build. Governments have also been involved in other MLS SSS. Governments are involved in stadiums all over Europe. What we can blame the government for is letting MLSE go cheapo on the final product that came to be.

billyfly
09-02-2011, 05:36 PM
Biggest city in Canada, Top 5 market in N.A. And what we get?

Tin Can

Chevy
09-02-2011, 05:58 PM
^^ What people conveniently forget is that MLSE (Yes, those awful guys!!) took a risk of building our beloved 'tin can' to house a sport that hadn't achieved any level of success in this city, and arguably at the time any success on this continent.

For all their faults, I think they get a pass on BMO.

bgnewf
09-02-2011, 06:11 PM
In a chat I had with Paul Beirne earlier this season down at the stadium the topic got around to the roof and if it was doable.

He told me that they have had engineering studies done on putting up a roof over the south end and that it was a surprisingly huge expense to build one. According to the engineers the fact that the ground is built so close to the lake and is in an area of higher than usual prevailing winds in Toronto means that it is not as easy as putting up something real cheap and simple. And they of course have to build it safe.

In order to make sure that it could deal with the possible wind conditions in the area it would have to be built really massively strong. Paul quoted a figure of roughly $40 million to do it to code. I have no reason to not believe what he told me in an earnest conversation on the topic.

At that price don't hold your breath. I think the club has a few things they probably want to spend money on first, like the Academy, which is going to cost upwards of $20 million I believe.

mclaren
09-02-2011, 06:12 PM
I cry a little inside evertime I see that pic of St. James Park.

I throw-up everytime I see St. James.

GBV
09-04-2011, 07:53 AM
^^ What people conveniently forget is that MLSE (Yes, those awful guys!!) took a risk of building our beloved 'tin can' to house a sport that hadn't achieved any level of success in this city, and arguably at the time any success on this continent.

For all their faults, I think they get a pass on BMO.

. . . and they're kinda doing their best to piss it all away.
100 per cent increase in ticket prices?

Oblio2
09-04-2011, 09:05 AM
$40m?
I call bullshit...sounds like the same people that are charging the Eaton Centre $28m to update their foodcourt.

Roogsy
09-04-2011, 09:31 AM
In a chat I had with Paul Beirne earlier this season down at the stadium the topic got around to the roof and if it was doable.

He told me that they have had engineering studies done on putting up a roof over the south end and that it was a surprisingly huge expense to build one. According to the engineers the fact that the ground is built so close to the lake and is in an area of higher than usual prevailing winds in Toronto means that it is not as easy as putting up something real cheap and simple. And they of course have to build it safe.

In order to make sure that it could deal with the possible wind conditions in the area it would have to be built really massively strong. Paul quoted a figure of roughly $40 million to do it to code. I have no reason to not believe what he told me in an earnest conversation on the topic.

At that price don't hold your breath. I think the club has a few things they probably want to spend money on first, like the Academy, which is going to cost upwards of $20 million I believe.


I have been told my someone at MLSE that this is in fact true and that there is no chance this is getting done.

And considering the political environment right now in the wake of those "outdoor concert" accidents that have caused injury and death, don't count on anything but a surefire safe option being considered, meaning the more expensive type of roof.

It just aint happenin'.

BTW, it was also confirmed to me that there is a concern over attendance. Yes, teams in the past have survived with much lower attendance, but they weren't spending between $4-5million on salaries. They have hired some damage control. I will be interested in seeing what this damage control is. It's all incredibly stupid in my opinion as it was not necessary at all if it weren't for their own incompetence.

canadian_bhoy
09-04-2011, 09:39 AM
^^ What people conveniently forget is that MLSE (Yes, those awful guys!!) took a risk of building our beloved 'tin can' to house a sport that hadn't achieved any level of success in this city, and arguably at the time any success on this continent.

For all their faults, I think they get a pass on BMO.

I don't really agree with this. THe CSA needed to build a stadium for the u-20 WC and the city was scrambling to get it made. We had multiethnic ground breakings at varsity and York, but never got it done.

MLSE saw the opportunity to step in and 'help' get it done. But really and truly, they were in thearket for an MLS team and this way they could get a stadium half paid for.

As part if the 'help' MLSE got the full naming rights and made back the money that they put into BMO as part of the deal.

So basically, they jumped on a chance to get a stadium for free.

MLSE are many things, benevolent isn't one of them.

Parkdale
09-04-2011, 09:41 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't want a roof?

I like games in the rain. I like games in the hot summer sun. I like being outdoors.

plus you think games are cold in the spring and fall now? Try that without any sun. I used to sit in the west stands and on a Saturday evening game, my seats would be in the shade by about 7:00 - and it got COLD!

A roof really wouldn't be worth the money. Even if it only cost $4million bucks, I could think of better ways to spend it on infrastructure. You know, like making the main concourses rainproof, or putting working drains in the washroom.

Parkdale
09-04-2011, 09:47 AM
whoa...

5oXrPYnI5b0

some architecture firm put this video together.... and included the flares. How fun!

PopePouri
09-04-2011, 10:24 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't want a roof?

I like games in the rain. I like games in the hot summer sun. I like being outdoors.

plus you think games are cold in the spring and fall now? Try that without any sun. I used to sit in the west stands and on a Saturday evening game, my seats would be in the shade by about 7:00 - and it got COLD!

A roof really wouldn't be worth the money. Even if it only cost $4million bucks, I could think of better ways to spend it on infrastructure. You know, like making the main concourses rainproof, or putting working drains in the washroom.

This could be solved with a transparent roof.

http://images.feedgrids.com:81/assets/post_images/44a73a01fd4fec378d428765537ebcb2.jpg

billyfly
09-04-2011, 10:44 AM
Wouldn't that turn into a giant magnifying scope?

West220Side
09-04-2011, 11:41 AM
whoa...

5oXrPYnI5b0

some architecture firm put this video together.... and included the flares. How fun!

yes please........ :(:(

Yagbod
09-04-2011, 11:52 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't want a roof?

I like games in the rain. I like games in the hot summer sun. I like being outdoors.

plus you think games are cold in the spring and fall now? Try that without any sun. I used to sit in the west stands and on a Saturday evening game, my seats would be in the shade by about 7:00 - and it got COLD!

A roof really wouldn't be worth the money. Even if it only cost $4million bucks, I could think of better ways to spend it on infrastructure. You know, like making the main concourses rainproof, or putting working drains in the washroom.

Agree 100%. A roof would not stop the games being called in rough weather, which is my only problem with the weather at matches.

Huyton
09-04-2011, 11:55 AM
One of the proposals made in 2003 for a Soccer Specific Stadium had a roof on the west side.

http://inlinethumb30.webshots.com/45917/1082250366029182859S600x600Q85.jpg

bgnewf
09-04-2011, 07:06 PM
Agree 100%. A roof would not stop the games being called in rough weather, which is my only problem with the weather at matches.

A roof would amplify the sound coming from the south end massively. cover from the weather and the direct sun from time to time is simply a bonus.

billyfly
09-04-2011, 07:20 PM
We' ve had this debate a million times across multiple threads.

It is at a point where at games I look around and daydream about what the stadium should look like.

Make the west side curl around, join the east and south end (The plumbing and metal bracing is there already) is the least they could do.

Super
09-04-2011, 08:46 PM
A roof would amplify the sound coming from the south end massively. cover from the weather and the direct sun from time to time is simply a bonus.

This. It should certainly be important to any atmosphere contributing fans that we get a roof so we can MASSIVELY improve the atmosphere. Also, I'm sick of thousands of people staying home when it rains. And personally, I don't think our stadium LOOKS like a football stadium. Maybe "the other kind of football" stadium. A high school version. :facepalm:

Brooker
09-04-2011, 09:05 PM
I always thought the number one reason for wanting a roof was sound....

Actually, I can't think of any other reason I'd want to have one. I love the singing in the rain but would trade it for the roof in a second.

LesH
09-05-2011, 04:44 PM
In a chat I had with Paul Beirne earlier this season down at the stadium the topic got around to the roof and if it was doable.

He told me that they have had engineering studies done on putting up a roof over the south end and that it was a surprisingly huge expense to build one. According to the engineers the fact that the ground is built so close to the lake and is in an area of higher than usual prevailing winds in Toronto means that it is not as easy as putting up something real cheap and simple. And they of course have to build it safe.

In order to make sure that it could deal with the possible wind conditions in the area it would have to be built really massively strong. Paul quoted a figure of roughly $40 million to do it to code. I have no reason to not believe what he told me in an earnest conversation on the topic.

At that price don't hold your breath. I think the club has a few things they probably want to spend money on first, like the Academy, which is going to cost upwards of $20 million I believe.

40 million is a ridiculous price for just a roof.
In some places there were built whole stadiums, including roof, about the same capacity than BMO for that price!

bgnewf
09-05-2011, 05:10 PM
40 million is a ridiculous price for just a roof.
In some places there were built whole stadiums, including roof, about the same capacity than BMO for that price!

Due respect, but are you a structural engineer? If you are then I might put stock in your assertion that the quoted price is way off.

Remember this stadium has already been built. It would definitely be easier and without a doubt cheaper to integrate a roof structure into a new stadium off the drawing board but that is not the reality as i see it.

james
09-06-2011, 02:10 PM
well noise is are main reason most supporters want a roof.....but putting roofs around all the stands and filling in corners with more seats and a roof could also keep the wind out a bit, we must have the windest stadium in MLS. Also many fans dont show up for rain games, it could help keeping fans coming to BMO field no matter what the weather. Also the stadium would just plain out look bigger and look more inpressive to the eye. People even just driving by the QEW might cath there eye, make them curious to waht stadium is that and go check it out.

123 elite
09-06-2011, 08:24 PM
nobody has mentioned that roofs cause problems with the surface. 4 roofs over BMO would create issues with the grass because it would reduce sun exposure. We get pretty bad winters that kill grass and very wet springs and cool temps that with even more reduced sunlight would be harder to drain. The proximity of the stands to the field are another issue because roofs could keep the sun off the surface for most of the season. Perhaps the best roofing solution to BMO would be not to roof the west stand where the bulk of the sun gets on the grass however not covering your highest paying seats could be another issue.

Derko
09-07-2011, 04:55 AM
And I thought everyone was apalled at increased ticket prices, bad product on the field, now they are crying about the Stadium, good lord If I want my ticket prices to go through the "ROOF" no pun intended, I want better play on the field, not a fucking roof.

Brooker
09-07-2011, 05:15 AM
And I thought everyone was apalled at increased ticket prices, bad product on the field, now they are crying about the Stadium, good lord If I want my ticket prices to go through the "ROOF" no pun intended, I want better play on the field, not a fucking roof.

We were bitching about a roof over the south end long before people bitched about ticket prices and better onfield product.

Technorgasm
09-07-2011, 07:49 AM
I'm coming from a standpoint that this is our NATIONAL stadium, the pinnacle of the sport in this country. Not just the home of MLS team Toronto FC.

I was recently at Brighton Hove Albions new ground, 22,400 capacity. nad it looks like apiece of art compared to our tin can. I would assume that the ground will be imporved over time, as the sport grows and our national and club sidess have better success.

We get FAR more sun then brighton does, and they have a fantastic roof.

http://dawnmurden.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/amex21.jpg

http://dawnmurden.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/amex11.jpg

SEAAAGGULLLLS ~!!!!

NCNS-pdkogw

Super
09-07-2011, 10:19 AM
Oh well, guess we're stuck with our shit stadium. We're not the first club to have an embarrassing stadium, so I guess I can learn to live with it. It's just a shame, really. We're not exactly a poor club, and yet teams with far less money in our league have far superior stadiums - and with roofs (the way a football stadium SHOULD look - in my opinion). But I guess the way they fucked up the stadium made it impossible to put a roof on there for less than 40 million bucks. Seems a bit silly to me, but anything is possible with these clowns running the show.

bgnewf
09-07-2011, 10:37 AM
...But I guess the way they fucked up the stadium made it impossible to put a roof on there for less than 40 million bucks. Seems a bit silly to me, but anything is possible with these clowns running the show...

revisionist history there me thinks.

The stadium was built for the Under 20 World Cup and to be the national soccer stadium for the CSA. MLSE then jumped on with money and the promise of a new MLS franchise.

With the government involved you were never going to get much more than a bare bones stadium. And without th stadium being committed to there might never have been a TFC existing in the first place.

And other than a roof or three I am for the most part pretty satisfied with BMO. It is not supposed to be Stamford fucking Bridge people! It does not need a day spa to be be a good enough soccer stadium. Yes it can be better, but it is good enough.

Super
09-07-2011, 10:42 AM
Fair enough, MLSE did not build the stadium, but I'm lumping MLSE in with the city when it comes to building/maintaining/improving the overall look and experience of the stadium. I understand that there are many people who are quite satisfied with the stadium as it is right now, or who would be satisfied with a few changes. I'm not one of them. The stadium is just very odd and I'm disappointed that we'll likely never have a proper stadium to call home - especially with other teams building real beauties.

I'm okay with not having Stamford Bridge as our home. But at least make it LOOK like a football stadium.

PopePouri
09-07-2011, 11:38 AM
Wouldn't that turn into a giant magnifying scope?

I'm sure that's a massive concern for SKC fans. There are hotspots all over the stadium and some of them have close to spontaneously combust.


Fair enough, MLSE did not build the stadium, but I'm lumping MLSE in with the city when it comes to building/maintaining/improving the overall look and experience of the stadium. I understand that there are many people who are quite satisfied with the stadium as it is right now, or who would be satisfied with a few changes. I'm not one of them. The stadium is just very odd and I'm disappointed that we'll likely never have a proper stadium to call home - especially with other teams building real beauties.

I'm okay with not having Stamford Bridge as our home. But at least make it LOOK like a football stadium.

TFC is only 5 years old. As long as MLS continues to grow, it will all come with time.

brad
09-07-2011, 12:08 PM
I could care less what the stadium looks like. I care about what's on the pitch, not what's around it.

Super
09-07-2011, 12:33 PM
I could care less what the stadium looks like. I care about what's on the pitch, not what's around it.

Very true. What's ON the pitch is definitely far more important than what is OFF the pitch. Still won't stop me, and others, from wishing we had a nicer stadium. Maybe some day. One dare dream a dream!

billyfly
09-07-2011, 12:43 PM
I'm sure that's a massive concern for SKC fans. There are hotspots all over the stadium and some of them have close to spontaneously combust.



TFC is only 5 years old. As long as MLS continues to grow, it will all come with time.

You joke about the power of the sun?