Leiweke and Tobin talk to Sportsnet on BMO expansion, Argos at BMO

[johnmolinaro]

Hey guys,

I spoke to Phil Tobin and Tim Leiweke this week about the whole BMO Field/expansion/Argos moving in issue.

I know this is an issue that's important to you, so I thought you'd be interested in reading my story for sportsnet.ca:

Leiweke soothes Toronto FC fan concerns over BMO Field (http://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/toronto-fc-bmo-field-argos-tim-leiweke-cfl-mls/)

Cheers,
John Molinaro

[Yohan]

Hey guys,

I spoke to Phil Tobin and Tim Leiweke this week about the whole BMO Field/expansion/Argos moving in issue.

I know this is an issue that's important to you, so I thought you'd be interested in reading my story for sportsnet.ca:

Leiweke soothes Toronto (http://www.sportsnet.ca/football/cfl/does-mlse-want-to-buy-bring-argos-to-bmo-field/) fan worries over BMO expansion (http://www.sportsnet.ca/football/cfl/does-mlse-want-to-buy-bring-argos-to-bmo-field/)

Cheers,
John Molinaro
links to an older Arash story

[johnmolinaro]

links to an older Arash story

I'm an idiot! Link is fixed now.

[nascarguy]

I will be done with Toronto fc big name player will not make me stay if argo come to bmo ...

[JuliquE]

Thanks for this, John.

I wish, though, that someone might ask him directly if he's aware of a few specific examples of shared facilities, within MLS (Houston, etc.), and the horror stories that come with it (shredded pitch and what not, despite their best efforts and the climate being on their side). Further, that, despite it being POSSIBLE to wash off lines, it would a) still be visible, if faintly and b) not be good for the grass to undergo such a process, with regularity. Lastly, that any such modifications, especially if funded publicly, would, surely, lend a bit more leverage to those who want to force The Argos into BMO.

For me, these, and other follow-ups, similar, are far more important than the overall, generic topics of whether or not they will keep grass and so on.

[johnmolinaro]

Thanks for this, John.

I wish, though, that someone might ask him directly if he's aware of a few specific examples of shared facilities, within MLS (Houston, etc.), and the horror stories that come with it (shredded pitch and what not, despite their best efforts and the climate being on their side). Further, that, despite it being POSSIBLE to wash off lines, it would a) still be visible, if faintly and b) not be good for the grass to undergo such a process, with regularity. Lastly, that any such modifications, especially if funded publicly, would, surely, lend a bit more leverage to those who want to force The Argos into BMO.

For me, these, and other follow-ups, similar, are far more important than the overall, generic topics of whether or not they will keep grass and so on.

He's fully aware of other venues and problems they have with grass supporting soccer and football. But he honestly believes that you can schedule games so that the effect on the condition of the grass will be minimal. He also maintains you can take out the football lines entirely without noticing they were there in the first place. He also said that MLSE would be fitting the majority of the bill. There will be public money involved, but MLSE is footing the cost for the the majority of the renovation.

John

[PopePouri]

Really hope it doesn't become like Old Trafford. I'm sure many fans have stopped supporting them because of this.

http://i.imgur.com/bo5StQ3.gif

Bush league.

[Stryker]

Heard promises before of completely eliminating football lines and Ive never seen it come true yet. After a year + hiatus I'm just starting to have an interest in this team again now that they've cleaned house of the office douchebags. If they get rid of or mark up the grass pitch Im gone forever and never looking back regardless if they even go so far as to bring in Klopp to coach Ronaldo, Rooney and Lewandowski.

[johnmolinaro]

Heard promises before of completely eliminating football lines and Ive never seen it come true yet. After a year + hiatus I'm just starting to have an interest in this team again now that they've cleaned house of the office douchebags. If they get rid of or mark up the grass pitch U m gone forever and

They're not getting rid of grass. Tim made that perfectly clear today with me. And he said you can remove the lines for TFC and that you'd never know they were there in the first place.

[Shakes McQueen]

Glad to see the RPB President get to air his concerns in a mainstream sports article with TL, but his responses make it sound like his full intention is to eventually have the Argos playing at BMO. His only response to the contrary, was to say that there's no secret deal already in place - everything else was just promises and assurances that the soccer experience wouldn't be impacted if it happened.

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he really believes that - is a week long enough for a grass pitch to fully recover from a CFL game? What about the first time it's rainy or snowy - how do you prevent the grass from turning to mud? What is this alleged technology, that apparently lets CFL lines be removed from the grass completely, and repeatedly?

Unlike some, I'm not opposed in principle to the idea of sharing a stadium with the CFL - taxpayers matter, stadiums aren't cheap to build (and the city owns our stadium) - but I don't presently see how they can do it without significant impacts to soccer, and I don't like feeling like I'm having smoke blown in my face about how everything would be completely fine. Are there any documented cases of both being accommodated with no problems?

- Scott

[Shakes McQueen]

They're not getting rid of grass. Tim made that perfectly clear today with me. And he said you can remove the lines for TFC and that you'd never know they were there in the first place.

That's good that the grass is definitely staying - less so if it's staying, but turns into muddy, permanently scarred garbage after a few weeks.

- Scott

[johnmolinaro]

Glad to see the RPB President get to air his concerns in a mainstream sports article with TL, but his responses make it sound like his full intention is to eventually have the Argos playing at BMO. His only response to the contrary, was to say that there's no secret deal already in place - everything else was just promises and assurances that the soccer experience wouldn't be impacted if it happened.

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he really believes that - is a week long enough for a grass pitch to fully recover from a CFL game? What about the first time it's rainy or snowy - how do you prevent the grass from turning to mud? What is this alleged technology, that apparently lets CFL lines be removed from the grass completely, and repeatedly?

Unlike some, I'm not opposed in principle to the idea of sharing a stadium with the CFL - taxpayers matter, stadiums aren't cheap to build (and the city owns our stadium) - but I don't presently see how they can do it without significant impacts to soccer, and I don't like feeling like I'm having smoke blown in my face about how everything would be completely fine. Are there any documented cases of both being accommodated with no problems?

- Scott

I thought it was important to talk to Phil and give him a forum to voice his concerns, because I know this is an important issue not only for RPB, but for the fan-base in general.

As for the future of BMO Field, Tim did go to great lengths to say fans will be consulted before any final decision is made - which is at least six months away. So you'll have plenty of time to voice your views and concerns before anything is done.

He's now on record as saying that and that the grass will remain. So it's hard for him to backtrack on those two promises now.

John

[JuliquE]

He's fully aware of other venues and problems they have with grass supporting soccer and football. But he honestly believes that you can schedule games so that the effect on the condition of the grass will be minimal. He also maintains you can take out the football lines entirely without noticing they were there in the first place. He also said that MLSE would be fitting the majority of the bill. There will be public money involved, but MLSE is footing the cost for the the majority of the renovation.

John
Thanks for the clarification, John.

Still.. minimal damage to the pitch would be noticeable and certainly worse than "how it is, today," as he is often quoted; when he says they would only go through with these modifications if it improves the football (soccer) experience, it rather sounds like he means one element improving, to the detriment of another, when you examine it. Again, Houston, for example, doesn't have the same climate issues to cope with (colder temperatures making it more difficult for the pitch to recover); I just can't see how that doesn't, already, make this idea a no-go, if, indeed, he's/they're committed to grass -- what is, above all else, of the utmost importance.

I wonder if he's been specifically told that, despite the lines appearing to be washed away, from close up, you're still able to tell they were once there, from the subtle difference between the shades of green, when observed from afar (stands; TV). I also wonder if he's aware that the removal process isn't particularly good for the grass, either.

I still feel that, even without any public money (of which there will be some), it still positions The Argos well, to make a push for BMO tenancy, especially following a Grey Cup hosted there. Do you know if he has specifically been asked about that? If yes, his response to such a possibility would certainly pique my interest.

Again, it just seems like his responses are so generic, with, for me, what appear to be huge holes in the logistics of it all. I really do appreciate that you are making a little noise about this topic, though -- brilliant.

[johnmolinaro]

Thanks for the clarification, John.

Still.. minimal damage to the pitch would be noticeable and certainly worse than "how it is, today," as he is often quoted; when he says they would only go through with these modifications if it improves the football (soccer) experience, it rather sounds like he means one element improving, to the detriment of another, when you examine it. Again, Houston, for example, doesn't have the same climate issues to cope with (colder temperatures making it more difficult for the pitch to recover); I just can't see how that doesn't, already, make this idea a no-go, if, indeed, he's/they're committed to grass -- what is, above all else, of the utmost importance.

I wonder if he's been specifically told that, despite the lines appearing to be washed away, from close up, you're still able to tell they were once there, from the subtle difference between the shades of green. I also wonder if he's aware that the removal process isn't particularly good for the grass, either.

I still feel that, even without any public money (of which there will be some), it still positions The Argos well, to make a push for BMO tenancy, especially following a Grey Cup hosted there. Do you know if he has specifically been asked that? If yes, his response to such a possibility would certainly pique my interest.

Again, it just seems like his responses are so generic, with, for me, what appear to be huge holes in the logistics of it all. I really do appreciate that you are making a little noise about this topic, though -- brilliant.

Like Tim Told me, fans will be consulted before any final decision is made regarding expansion and modifications to BMO Field. So if you have concerns, be sure to raise them.

John

[brad]

Really hope it doesn't become like Old Trafford. I'm sure many fans have stopped supporting them because of this.

http://i.imgur.com/bo5StQ3.gif

Bush league.

I've never heard United supporters even mention the lines on the pitch after a rugby league match. It's a non-issue for them.

[JuliquE]

Like Tim Told me, fans will be consulted before any final decision is made regarding expansion and modifications to BMO Field. So if you have concerns, be sure to raise them.

John
Getting the vibe like I might be beating a dead horse, here.. so, I'll lay off and extend my apologies; it must be, at times, frustrating to act as a messenger, taking some of the heat.

Grateful for your efforts, all the same.

[johnmolinaro]

Getting the vibe like I might be beating a dead horse, here.. so, I'll lay off and extend my apologies; it must be, at times, frustrating to act as a messenger, taking some of the heat.

Grateful for your efforts, all the same.

No, I don't feel, you're beating a dead horse at all, and no need at all for you to apologize. It's all good. :)

Thanks for recognizing my efforts. I honestly often wonder if I'm making any kind of difference and if people even notice or value my work. So nice to see that some do. :)

John

[PopePouri]

I've never heard United supporters even mention the lines on the pitch after a rugby league match. It's a non-issue for them.

Heh. I was trying to be sarcastic.

IMO it's a non-issue as long as the grass stays. I really want BMO to be intimidating so I welcome the expansion.

[levyashin]

Here is someone else who appreciates all of the hard work done by yourself and others who try sometimes without success to get real answers to all of the issues.
My main concern at the moment is /how do we keep LABA.
I do not know how to post a thread but if someone on this site would have a vote type thread posted /asking to make sure we do not give him away.
Just maybe management might listen.
Thanks in anticipation.

[Waggy]

Heh. I was trying to be sarcastic.

IMO it's a non-issue as long as the grass stays. I really want BMO to be intimidating so I welcome the expansion.

As long as grass stays and the stands remain pitchside, I don't hate it. I'd still prefer TFC in a SSS and the Argos in a CFL SS. 30 000 seems too big for TFC right now and too small for the Argos as well. TFC should be looking at 25000 if they want to expand and the Argos should be looking for 35 000. Also, the scheduling thing would really be a problem should both the Argos and TFC make the playoffs and host a playoff game. They happen around the same time... Unless the plan is for the Argos to play playoff games at the Dome still, like in Montreal.

[Flipityflu]

thanks for nailing down some answers from them John.

You know what my issue is with this...we spent $650 million on a multi-purpose stadium back in the day. why do they have to move out of there, especially since its owned by Rogers, who own half of MLSE.

[jimiv]

I've never heard United supporters even mention the lines on the pitch after a rugby league match. It's a non-issue for them.

There is huge difference between rugby lines and CFL lines. I can't wait to see the ball get lost in 20 foot RONA logo for the first time.

Oh wait... I won't be watching.

[ryan]

Glad to see the RPB President get to air his concerns in a mainstream sports article with TL, but his responses make it sound like his full intention is to eventually have the Argos playing at BMO. His only response to the contrary, was to say that there's no secret deal already in place - everything else was just promises and assurances that the soccer experience wouldn't be impacted if it happened.

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he really believes that - is a week long enough for a grass pitch to fully recover from a CFL game? What about the first time it's rainy or snowy - how do you prevent the grass from turning to mud? What is this alleged technology, that apparently lets CFL lines be removed from the grass completely, and repeatedly?

Unlike some, I'm not opposed in principle to the idea of sharing a stadium with the CFL - taxpayers matter, stadiums aren't cheap to build (and the city owns our stadium) - but I don't presently see how they can do it without significant impacts to soccer, and I don't like feeling like I'm having smoke blown in my face about how everything would be completely fine. Are there any documented cases of both being accommodated with no problems?

- Scott

I have to agree with you here. I do think it's fully intended to happen unless they just can't do it from a architectural level.

I'm not entirely bothered by it, SHOULD, things as stated be true. Grass staying, no lines (Rugby is not a fair comparison, the CFL has more lines, all kinds of fucking Tim Hortons ads, logos, yard numbers, etc) and maintaining intimacy. Those are musts.

I would disagree with other comments that 30K is too much for TFC. IF this club maintains a level of quality in talent that they have just acquired, actually wins some fucking titles, 30K will be easy on the regular. I do wonder where these seats will be, all on the East side in a 2nd deck? Will the south grow at all? TFC, even still, has a much higher demand for the South than what's available. A second smaller deck back there would be fantastic for support, perhaps give more options for hanging banners and doing TIFO's. Look at relocation every year, all the fuds like me ask around to the first ones there..."are there any yellows?" and the answer is almost always "nope"....and we don't bother going.


As for the CFL, I have to admit I'm a lifelong CFL fan (of Hamilton, fuck the Argos, the cunts) but still, it's incredibly vital to the health of the league to have a team in Toronto. It hurts the CFL badly that the Argos are the worst supported team in the league. The issue has always been the Skydome. Getting them outside is going to do wonders for their support and the finances of the league. I just don't want it to impact TFC at all.

Side question: Are the Argos, double blue, really going to play in a stadium littered in the color RED? I have to wonder about that.

Side point: Maybe we'll get a few more pissers and bank machines eh? Wouldn't that be something to not have to miss half the game cause you crushed a few too many.

Side BJ: We love all that you do John, keep it up breh.

[brad]

^^ I'd bet the seats would be an expansion on the east side. The south would need to be retractable so I'm guessing (based on my complete lack of Engineering knowledge :-) ) that the South stays small as a result.

I also wondered about the red vs blue seat colors.

[Wagner]

I find it interesting that people want the Argos at BMO.
it was the Argos that got the SkyDome ball rolling.
People didn't like the cold wind and rain off the lake in november....
now they want to go back to the exact same spot.
that wind and rain will be just as cold as it was in the in the 80's (and before that)

[tfcleeds]

I find it interesting that people want the Argos at BMO.
it was the Argos that got the SkyDome ball rolling.
People didn't like the cold wind and rain off the lake in november....
now they want to go back to the exact same spot.
that wind and rain will be just as cold as it was in the in the 80's (and before that)

If only the Alouettes had never moved into Percival stadium or whatever the heck it's called. We probably wouldn't be having this discussion today. True, one of the major factors in deciding to build a domed stadium was the last Grey Cup the old Ex ever held. But once the Argos saw what Montreal had, with its cozy confines and such, all of the sudden Rogers Centre wasn't good enough anymore.

[ryan]

I find it interesting that people want the Argos at BMO.
it was the Argos that got the SkyDome ball rolling.
People didn't like the cold wind and rain off the lake in november....
now they want to go back to the exact same spot.
that wind and rain will be just as cold as it was in the in the 80's (and before that)

Trends. At that time it was cool to be in the big ass ugly giant domes, now, people would rather be outside. Weather is never a problem in other markets, where it's far colder and worse than being down by the lake in Toronto.

[Waggy]

I find it interesting that people want the Argos at BMO.
it was the Argos that got the SkyDome ball rolling.
People didn't like the cold wind and rain off the lake in november....
now they want to go back to the exact same spot.
that wind and rain will be just as cold as it was in the in the 80's (and before that)

1) that was 25 years ago already. In this day and age, the shelf life of a stadium seems to be between 25-30 years.
2) the jays are in the same boat. you don't think the jays would love to be in an outdoor stadium on the exhibition grounds? Or at least, almost every Jays fan?
3) The Dome was a great concept that was executed very poorly. CFL in the dome sucks for all the same reasons soccer in the dome sucks. Bad sightlines, too big/cavernous, seats are too far from the action, seats don't slope enough.

But that doesn't mean another multi-purpose facility is the answer. A modified BMO would be better for the Argos than the dome, but a parking lot would be better for the Argos than the dome. The feds WILL spend money on cfl stadiums, just build one beside BMO and have any winter classics there. They can do it on the cheap a-la bmo and in 10 years if it's going well renovate and expand it. Just like BMO. I don't give a crap about lines on grass, that's kind of whatever. As has been pointed out most stadiums are multi-use. The sightlines and the turf are my concerns. I keep picturing Fed Ex field in last years playoffs, or Heinz field in any playoff game, or the stadium in Chicago at almost any given point. The turf is just chewed up. It's bad for football but it'd CRIPPLE soccer. Unless they plan to do an Arizona Cardinals type deal and have 2 sets of turf that come in and out, which isn't practical at ALL in Toronto. And thanks to the Jays experiences over the years with the 'top of the line artificial turf!' I don't believe a word about the half turf/half grass thing working well.

All that being said, MLSE just invested 100 million bucks in TFC. I can't imagine they would jeopardize that investment by pissing off the players and making it more difficult for them to attract other big name players by having a bad pitch. I just don't see it.

[ensco]

John is one of the best (the best?) guys we have.

But ...

No reporter can really deal with the question of reality vs intent. Leiweke can express all the sincerity in the world, and mean it for all anyone knows, but the fact is, the Argos at BMO would inevitably and seriously degrade the TFC fan experience at BMO.

The question is not whether Leiweke has the best of intentions. The question is whether you believe that what Leiweke is saying makes sense to you, and is consistent with your experience, or not.

[Redcoe15]

So Phineas Tim sez he will consult with TFC fans for their input on whether or not they'd like to see the Argos move into BMO Field before they decide if they want to renovate it.

OK, here's this TFC fan's opinion about the whole idea:

FUCK NO!!!

Is that good enough for ya, PT?!! :mad:

[MightyDM]

I've never heard United supporters even mention the lines on the pitch after a rugby league match. It's a non-issue for them.

This was the Rugby League World Cup. Hardly a fair comparison.
To John M: excellent article.
To everyone else: of course we TFC supporters support the CFL and the Argos. We are Canadians. But this stadium was created for soccer, it is the National Soccer Stadium. It was needed because we did not have an adequate soccer specific venue for our national teams or for the U20 world cup. On the other hand, the Argos had $650 million of public funds build them a stadium. My conclusion: if the Argos want to be tenants in a soccer staium, it needs to be clear that that is the deal and soccer has to be protected at all costs. If any more public money goes into BMO it should be on condition that the name reverts to its official name "The NationalSoccerStadium"; that sight lines, grass, etc are not affected, and that the Argos play at the SkyDome once the weather is more risky for grass (after October 1?).
Personally, I would rather we build a football specific artificial turf stadium (see, Kansas City) but if not conditions like the ones I am suggesting need to be achieved.

[CretanBull]

I want to be as open minded as possible with the new people in charge, but historically "consulting" us means giving us an opportunity to vent before they do whatever it is that they were going to do anyway. When it comes down to it, what we think won't ever be an obstacle to their plans and profits.

Most people seem to think that buying the Argos and moving them out of the Rogers Centre is a part of the process that will pave the way for NFL expansion to Toronto. I'll bet my soul that a few thousand soccer fans won't be the fly in the ointment of those plans.

Edit: Once again, thank-you John for covering this team and the issues that surround it better than anyone else does.

[billyfly]

Like I posted in another thread - would you trade winning trophies for sharing with the Boatmen?

[Richard]

Like I posted in another thread - would you trade winning trophies for sharing with the Boatmen?

We shouldn't have to settle with one of or the other.

The Argos messed up and made their own bed, TFC shouldn't have to play charity and give them a home for their screw up.

If TL really wants us to be the mega team of NA he wouldn't consider letting them in, maybe only for 2-3 years until they get a stadium but that's it for me.

I don't really have anything against the Argos, I just think they should get the opportunity to continue building their history in a venue that fosters the tradition of the team.

Anyways I want to hear more from the owner of the Argos and what he thinks.

[billyfly]

He wants someone to take the team off his hands is what he wants.

[__wowza]

if i knew that it wouldn't ruin the environment of the stadium i'd be ok with it, but i don't.

in fact, i know it will. therefore i'm not ok with it.

[johnmolinaro]

John is one of the best (the best?) guys we have.

But ...

No reporter can really deal with the question of reality vs intent. Leiweke can express all the sincerity in the world, and mean it for all anyone knows, but the fact is, the Argos at BMO would inevitably and seriously degrade the TFC fan experience at BMO.

The question is not whether Leiweke has the best of intentions. The question is whether you believe that what Leiweke is saying makes sense to you, and is consistent with your experience, or not.

1) I'm not the best. Neil Davidson of CP is, in my opinion.

2) Re reality vs. intent, I think you're spot on. For what it's worth, I do think Leiweke does have the best of intentions. I really do. What he's saying sounds a bit iffy, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt PROVIDED he specifically and in great detail lays out how he's going to pull this off with no disruption to the soccer experience at all.

My 2 cents.

John

[Phil]

Thanks for the opportunity to talk about this John. It means a lot to the group and fan base.

[billyfly]

As a Torontonian, I love my Argos and my Toronto FC.

I desire for 2 separate facilities but know that we will end up with a shared ground so fight for the most you can get.

[Kaz]

So Tim is saying he screw you to the people of Toronto. Good job.

[Ivy]

So Tim is saying he screw you to the people of Toronto. Good job.
Where did he say that? I must have missed it...

[Shakes McQueen]

John is one of the best (the best?) guys we have.

But ...

No reporter can really deal with the question of reality vs intent. Leiweke can express all the sincerity in the world, and mean it for all anyone knows, but the fact is, the Argos at BMO would inevitably and seriously degrade the TFC fan experience at BMO.

The question is not whether Leiweke has the best of intentions. The question is whether you believe that what Leiweke is saying makes sense to you, and is consistent with your experience, or not.

Like J-Mo says - I actually suspect he probably means what he says, when he says he doesn't want to degrade the soccer experience at all. But have any of us seen an example where this has been the case? I ask that question sincerely.

If he has some foolproof master plan to host football games with no noticeable pitch damage, and no terrible looking football lines intersecting with the soccer lines, then so be it - go to town. But is that possible? What is this secret formula for painting lines, that has no permanent effects whatsoever? And maybe it comes off pretty clean the first 10 times - but what about after 50 times?

Perhaps our drainage system spares us the worst kinds of weather-related damage from playing football on wet or slushy grass, but can we be sure of that?

I want him to be honest with the supporters about how this would work, instead of blowing smoke about how no one will notice any difference. History says that is highly unlikely. As I said before - I'm not opposed to this concept in principle, but I want certain guarantees about the quality of the soccer experience. Not just promises and dubious sounding assurances.

- Scott

[ag futbol]

This is like parents announcing to their kids they are getting a messy divorce on Christmas morning, sandwiched right between the new X-box and PS4. No, no, I’m being totally honest! Just let me give you this news when you’re completely tone deaf.

Here's to hoping this blows up in his face and they have to rough it alone on the stadium front. TFC is never going to reach it's full potential sharing this facility with the Argos.

[Shakes McQueen]

This is like parents announcing to their kids they are getting a messy divorce on Christmas morning, sandwiched right between the new X-box and PS4. No, no, I’m being totally honest! Just let me give you this news when you’re completely tone deaf.

Here's to hoping this blows up in his face and they have to rough it alone on the stadium front. TFC is never going to reach it's full potential sharing this facility with the Argos.

On the bright side - WE GOT AN XBOX AND A PS4. YAYAYAYAYAYAYA.

- Scott

[Blizzard]

I've never heard United supporters even mention the lines on the pitch after a rugby league match. It's a non-issue for them.

Relatively few lines compared to CFL. No hash marks, no lines every 5 yards, no massive numbers, no massive logo's for advertising ... removing all the CFL stuff could be extremely difficult.

Compare that video to this jpeg of Skydome. They would have to rule out any on field advertising IMO. Look at those damned things. It's a lot more than just lines!

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1402887_10151736028997694_1118544427_o.jpg

[Cashcleaner]

To be honest, worrying about lines on the pitch really should be the least thing to complain about. Seriously, it's the last item we should ever bring up in any argument about the issue of groundsharing.

Instead, we should be far more concerned with the issues of a larger playing surface which will place the pitch significantly further away from supporters in the North and South stand and the potential severe damage which could be done to the grass surface or it's possible removal in favour for an artificial surface. The fact is, everything about BMO Field from the size of the playing surface to the layout of seats and internal elements is soccer-centric. THAT's what we have to focus on, and to be honest, we need to convince Argonaut fans of that two.

Groundsharing BMO Field could create some very major drawbacks for both clubs. It's a compromise where both parties lose out of some very important items, and to be honest, that's why I think we're going about this the wrong way by putting up NO ARGOS IN BMO websites and petitions. We need to show people the potential negatives that will affect both teams as a result of a groundsharing scheme and get Argo fans on our side. Any campaign of this sort requires convincing people to get on your side - not creating a divide when there doesn't need to be.

By the way, you know what's going to be a pretty sweet stadium when it's built? Tim Horton's Field in Hamilton. (http://www.timhortonsfield.ca/overview/)

http://cfl.assets.mrx.ca/ham/timhortonsfield/images/gallery/HTCStadium-003b.jpg

And what's so great about it? Well, it's pretty much multi-purpose in name only. Sure, they're going to be holding Track and Field there for the Pan-Am games, but it's very much the epitome of a CFL-specific stadium through and through. The seating, layout of concessions, playing surface - all of it was built to accommodate the Ti-Cats and the Grey Cup in 2015. That's exactly the sort of facility the Argonauts should be wanting for themselves!

[tfcleeds]

Well, personally, lines on the field is a huge issue for me. Maybe it's not as important as having grass and not fooling around with current dimensions, but it totally affects the viewing experience, both live, and on TV. It really is unwatchable at times.

[ensco]

This is like parents announcing to their kids they are getting a messy divorce on Christmas morning, sandwiched right between the new X-box and PS4. No, no, I’m being totally honest! Just let me give you this news when you’re completely tone deaf.

Here's to hoping this blows up in his face and they have to rough it alone on the stadium front. TFC is never going to reach it's full potential sharing this facility with the Argos.

I love this analogy.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Like I posted in another thread - would you trade winning trophies for sharing with the Boatmen?

Absolutely not. I realize I'm in the minority. I thought we were trying to grow past this as a league and STILL this year's playoffs that are supposed to be a big deal to me as an MLS supporter were unwatchable because of the venues that groundshare.


This is like parents announcing to their kids they are getting a messy divorce on Christmas morning, sandwiched right between the new X-box and PS4. No, no, I’m being totally honest! Just let me give you this news when you’re completely tone deaf.

Here's to hoping this blows up in his face and they have to rough it alone on the stadium front. TFC is never going to reach it's full potential sharing this facility with the Argos.

QFT

[Red Rat]

Leiweke is forcing a sugar coated pill of cyanide down our throats!

[Haddy]

That's exactly the sort of facility the Argonauts should be wanting for themselves!

And they're close to getting it ;)

Tim Horton's Field is literally BMO with the west grandstand mirrored on the east side and a longer playing surface. Which is exactly what MLSE is calling for in the upcoming renovation.

#retractableseats #getusedtoit

[Kaz]

Where did he say that? I must have missed it...

I meant that he basically doesn't care about TFC a whole lot as a fan base or organization, just a revenue stream.

[Initial B]

I can understand the desire to bring the Argos to BMO, since that would give greater utilization of the asset. However for me to support such a move, soccer would have to be the primary focus since there would be 17 MLS home games (not even considering CCL play) compared to 9 CFL home games.

I would be okay with Hybrid Grass (Like Desso Grassmaster - if it's good enough for Wembley, it's good enough for us) but not turf. And I do NOT want to see advertisements on the soccer pitch OR on the football field, ever. If they want to use CG to add them in on TV for CFL games, I'm fine with that.

I would be okay with retractible seating in the endzones, but those seats would have to have significant blocks of tickets under direct control of the Supporter's Groups. Potential SSHs in these areas would have to be vetted by the supporter groups in question. Standing, chanting, stamping, banners, and tifos should be expected.

[Yohan]

I can understand the desire to bring the Argos to BMO, since that would give greater utilization of the asset. However for me to support such a move, soccer would have to be the primary focus since there would be 17 MLS home games (not even considering CCL play) compared to 9 CFL home games.

I would be okay with Hybrid Grass (Like Desso Grassmaster - if it's good enough for Wembley, it's good enough for us) but not turf. And I do NOT want to see advertisements on the soccer pitch OR on the football field, ever. If they want to use CG to add them in on TV for CFL games, I'm fine with that.

I would be okay with retractible seating in the endzones, but those seats would have to have significant blocks of tickets under direct control of the Supporter's Groups. Potential SSHs in these areas would have to be vetted by the supporter groups in question. Standing, chanting, stamping, banners, and tifos should be expected.
Hrm. Retractable 'seating' area. GA standing sections?

[FreekAce]

I meant that he basically doesn't care about TFC a whole lot as a fan base or organization, just a revenue stream.

really? not sure based on the moves he's made so far that is the case at all.

like most, i'd rather not have the Argo's at BMO but do not think we'll have any say or influence in the matter with or without us being consulted. in the end its business and i don't think a couple of thousand pissed of football supporters are going to sway MLSE from doing what they want to do. just the reality of things.

also think its pointless to make assumptions on how horrid it will be until we hear about some actual plans for implementing this.
personally i can live with faint lines, not ideal, but it wont be something that'll keep me from supporting the club. i would in the case of this happening like to see the club strike a deal where those awful big ass advertisements on the pitch are prohibited.

[JuliquE]

Leiweke is forcing a sugar coated pill of cyanide down our throats!
I love how we're all trying to one-up ag futbol's initial "Christmas divorce" analogy.

** * **

This is like the relief of cutting the cheese, after a hot chick leaves the room, up until you realize you've sharted.. but, then, anguish turns to relative delight, as you hold back a smile, in anticipation of you're best bud's reaction, when he first catches a whiff.

Too far?

[billyfly]

Looking at the old BMO expansion thread something occurred to me.

When TL mentions all 3 levels of Govt adding to MLSE stadium plans, he might mean for portions directly around the stadium like tie-ins to the Food building and the parking lot b/t BMO and Ricoh etc.

Like is this mockup from before:

http://i.imgur.com/LXIhazr.png

[Cashcleaner]

And they're close to getting it ;)

Tim Horton's Field is literally BMO with the west grandstand mirrored on the east side and a longer playing surface. Which is exactly what MLSE is calling for in the upcoming renovation.

#retractableseats #getusedtoit

I certainly don't think so. The playing surface at Tim Hortons Field is HUGE compared to BMO Field. Remember, it's going to have a running track for the Pan-Am games and areas for other sports as well. Also, the internal construction will include the new location of the Canadian Football Hall of Fame. Perhaps the overall look suggests a similarity, but you're not taking into account just how different it will be with a soccer pitch instead of a gridiron.

Trust me, the stadium will be great for watching CFL, but that layout is not very conducive for soccer.

[GabrielHurl]

Yo Phil - Tim and Sid want you to go on their radio show

[Waggy]

I certainly don't think so. The playing surface at Tim Hortons Field is HUGE compared to BMO Field. Remember, it's going to have a running track for the Pan-Am games and areas for other sports as well. Also, the internal construction will include the new location of the Canadian Football Hall of Fame. Perhaps the overall look suggests a similarity, but you're not taking into account just how different it will be with a soccer pitch instead of a gridiron.

Trust me, the stadium will be great for watching CFL, but that layout is not very conducive for soccer.

The other dimentional problem is the width of the pitch. A CFL field is 65 yards wide, plus it needs at least 7-10 yards on each side for the respective teams (the CFL wouldn't allow a situation like used to exist in Hamilton where the wall was literally 2-3 yards from the line. it was mega dangerous). BMO field is what, 68 yards across? It'd need to be expanded east/west by at LEAST 15-20 yards in addition to the north/south expanding by like, 70-80 yards.

[CretanBull]

1) I'm not the best. Neil Davidson of CP is, in my opinion.



As Canadians we love modesty, but as great as Davidson is you consistently approach stories and issues from a different perspective than other writers and that's what makes you stand out to us. Even when I disagree with you (like your views on the FA Cup - leave it alone!) I appreciate the fact that you've thought about things in a way most others haven't.

[Beach_Red]

To be honest, worrying about lines on the pitch really should be the least thing to complain about. Seriously, it's the last item we should ever bring up in any argument about the issue of groundsharing.

Instead, we should be far more concerned with the issues of a larger playing surface which will place the pitch significantly further away from supporters in the North and South stand and the potential severe damage which could be done to the grass surface or it's possible removal in favour for an artificial surface. The fact is, everything about BMO Field from the size of the playing surface to the layout of seats and internal elements is soccer-centric. THAT's what we have to focus on, and to be honest, we need to convince Argonaut fans of that two.

Groundsharing BMO Field could create some very major drawbacks for both clubs. It's a compromise where both parties lose out of some very important items, and to be honest, that's why I think we're going about this the wrong way by putting up NO ARGOS IN BMO websites and petitions. We need to show people the potential negatives that will affect both teams as a result of a groundsharing scheme and get Argo fans on our side. Any campaign of this sort requires convincing people to get on your side - not creating a divide when there doesn't need to be.



This is a good point. In fact, it might be possible to get a campaign going for a "Toronto Football" stadium to be used by the Argos, university and high school teams. Make the argument that football deserves its own stadium.

[GabrielHurl]

Here's the size of a CFL playing surface overlaid BMO image from Google Earth

http://i.imgur.com/kDMmIZx.jpg

[Waggy]

Here's the size of a CFL playing surface overlaid BMO image from Google Earth

http://i.imgur.com/kDMmIZx.jpg


That's not quite right. The BMO field pitch is 105X68 (according to google). A CFL field is 150 yards long (plus another 3-4 of space on each end) by 65 (plus another 7-10 of space on each side). It's literally 30-40% larger than the current pitch. That looks to be closer to 130x55


edit: the part of the CFL pitch everyone always forgets is the endzones. The endzones are 20 yards long. So its 55 yards each half (110), plus 40 (20 in each end zone). Then you add the space at the back so players can safely run out the back of the endzone (another 6-8 yards total, 3-4 yards per endzone approx.) and you need about 160 yards north south at a minimum

[Mark in Ottawa]

The endzones are 20 yards long. Then you add the space at the back so players can safely run out the back of the endzone (another 3-4 yards per endzone approx.)
Which was exactly what started a revolt here in Ottawa when the Ottawa Fury FC proposed putting the supporters groups behind the endzone at the new TD Place Stadium.

We made it clear that we wanted as much of a footy atmosphere as we could get and that meant being as close to the pitch as possible. We ended up sideline on one of the goal lines which is all any footy supporters group can expect from seating in a gridiron stadium.

[johnmolinaro]

As Canadians we love modesty, but as great as Davidson is you consistently approach stories and issues from a different perspective than other writers and that's what makes you stand out to us. Even when I disagree with you (like your views on the FA Cup - leave it alone!) I appreciate the fact that you've thought about things in a way most others haven't.

That is very kind of you to say. Thank you. :) John

[Ivy]

Can we talk "meters"? This yard crap is making my head hurt. How many meters is a full sized end to end, side to side CFL field? With space for the teams on the sides and players to run around the back...

[GabrielHurl]

Here you go. CFL pitch is 150yards by 65 yards or 137m x 60m rounding up. I've added that buffer zone (yellow) of 5m at each endzone and 7m to either sideline.

http://i.imgur.com/Z4AxdTL.jpg

[Auzzy]

Thanks John for this interview!

I really don't think the size of the field for CFL is a big deal. It's definitely possible to have the first rows of seats retractable, as many as necessary on each side. The front rows of seats could be just as close to the footy pitch as now.

The stadium would need to be pushed south to accommodate the longer field. (As many have said, the field can't be extended north as easily, due to the proximity of the Food Building, and I believe there is a large foundation under the North Stands, left over from earlier plans to have a stage there for concerts etc.) As a result, the east & west stands would also have to be reconfigured to put the premium seats back at the centre line. That increases the cost.

If it was just the reconfiguration of the stands, with seats still as close to the edge of the soccer field as before -- and if that gets us a roof; insulated pipes & heated washrooms; a fixed up concourse to deal with all the drainage problems, etc. etc. -- and if it takes care of Argos & the Winter Classic -- who cares.

HOWEVER, I believe the real problems are the quality of the grass pitch; CFL lines; and related scheduling issues.

There is obviously a perfect way to deal with that: removable grass pitch as used in Schalke's Veltins Arena & a bunch of other locations around the world. Problem is the cost, and the space needed for that grass pitch outside of the stadium during non-footy events. I doubt that the MLSE, the CNE, and others would want so much of the parking & event space outside of BMO Field to be covered by the grass pitch when it has been rolled out of the stadium.

I think Leiweke is being unrealistic otherwise, especially regarding impact of CFL on the grass. It's hard enough to schedule decent times for TFC games now, considering the broadcasters' schedules & everything else. I'm afraid that sharing with the Argos, and leaving recovery time for the pitch after every CFL game, would mean even fewer summer home games, and more early season home games (when the weather is mostly miserable, and Lake Ontario can easily make the lakefront area 10 degrees colder than the rest of the city).

He's also being unrealistic about the "success" of other shared fields such as in Houston.

I don't think the pitch will ever really recover after a CFL game in pouring rain.

And he's dreaming about scheduling to keep things apart in the fall, when the MLS playoffs overlap with the CFL regular season & playoffs. No way to plan ahead & schedule those games far enough apart for the pitch to recover.

[Cashcleaner]

Here you go. CFL pitch is 150yards by 65 yards or 137m x 60m rounding up. I've added that buffer zone (yellow) of 5m at each endzone and 7m to either sideline.

http://i.imgur.com/Z4AxdTL.jpg

Exactly! Sorry, it was kinda hard for me to put in words. But yeah, not only do you have to take into account the CFL field dimensions, but you need to add auxillary space around it for training/practise areas, larger bench space, officiating space, etc.

[Whoop]

If only the Alouettes had never moved into Percival stadium or whatever the heck it's called. We probably wouldn't be having this discussion today. True, one of the major factors in deciding to build a domed stadium was the last Grey Cup the old Ex ever held. But once the Argos saw what Montreal had, with its cozy confines and such, all of the sudden Rogers Centre wasn't good enough anymore.

Blame Bono and U2.

[Stryker]

To be honest, worrying about lines on the pitch really should be the least thing to complain about.

Umm no its not. It a major issue. I won't even watch an away game againest the Revolution because of what an eyesore the yardage lines are. It fucking horrible and a disgrace to the game. Its just one more reason Euros laugh at MLS.
And no matter what anyone says about lines being completely removable with no ill effects I know its horseshit. There will always be faint traces of lines and colour differences in the pitch after they've scrubbed it away.

The Argos can fuck right off.

[Banjax]

A smaller expansion I really don't mind of course, but the Argos to BMO can absolutely not happen. I don't buy the whole no lines on the pitch and it not being ruined don't see how they will be able to give it the week they say they can give it to recover, there is for sure going to be times when we play twice in a week then the Argos will play on it you can pretty much bet on that, and not to get ahead of myself but what about when the CCL rolls around and we're in it? we going to ask the Argos to reschedule on the fly? I just don't like it, it started out a SSS and it should stay one. If they wanna spend all that money like they said to expand BMO why not spend half on expanding and improving BMO for us and the other half to build the Argos a place to play somewhere and everyone's a winner.

[Cashcleaner]

Umm no its not. It a major issue. I won't even watch an away game againest the Revolution because of what an eyesore the yardage lines are. It fucking horrible and a disgrace to the game. Its just one more reason Euros laugh at MLS.
And no matter what anyone says about lines being completely removable with no ill effects I know its horseshit. There will always be faint traces of lines and colour differences in the pitch after they've scrubbed it away.

The Argos can fuck right off.

So can you answer this truthfully? If the original proposed deal for groundsharing at York University did go ahead as planned, does that mean you never would have become a TFC fan?

http://stadiumdb.com/pic-projects/york_university_stadium/york_university_stadium02.jpg

[Stryker]

Well I wasent raised with soccer nor did I play in my youth like a lot of you. I became a fan watching the 2006 World Cup and have grown to love the sport since. I watched TFC from the first game though and also grew to love them from afar. I never missed a game the first few years even skipping out on work a few occasions to watch games on ethier TV or online.
Back to the original question... would I have become a fan with pointy ball lines covering the field?
I VERY highly doubt it.

[jazzy]

To be honest, worrying about lines on the pitch really should be the least thing to complain about. Seriously, it's the last item we should ever bring up in any argument about the issue of groundsharing.

Instead, we should be far more concerned with the issues of a larger playing surface which will place the pitch significantly further away from supporters in the North and South stand and the potential severe damage which could be done to the grass surface or it's possible removal in favour for an artificial surface. The fact is, everything about BMO Field from the size of the playing surface to the layout of seats and internal elements is soccer-centric. THAT's what we have to focus on, and to be honest, we need to convince Argonaut fans of that two.

Groundsharing BMO Field could create some very major drawbacks for both clubs. It's a compromise where both parties lose out of some very important items, and to be honest, that's why I think we're going about this the wrong way by putting up NO ARGOS IN BMO websites and petitions. We need to show people the potential negatives that will affect both teams as a result of a groundsharing scheme and get Argo fans on our side. Any campaign of this sort requires convincing people to get on your side - not creating a divide when there doesn't need to be.

By the way, you know what's going to be a pretty sweet stadium when it's built? Tim Horton's Field in Hamilton. (http://www.timhortonsfield.ca/overview/)

http://cfl.assets.mrx.ca/ham/timhortonsfield/images/gallery/HTCStadium-003b.jpg

And what's so great about it? Well, it's pretty much multi-purpose in name only. Sure, they're going to be holding Track and Field there for the Pan-Am games, but it's very much the epitome of a CFL-specific stadium through and through. The seating, layout of concessions, playing surface - all of it was built to accommodate the Ti-Cats and the Grey Cup in 2015. That's exactly the sort of facility the Argonauts should be wanting for themselves!

well written, and of course this field although many would accept it for soccer , would shift the seating farther back from the pitch than BMO which is my main worry . Along with grass .

[GabrielHurl]

Just a point there Cash - there will be no track and field at Tim Horton's Field for the Pan Ams - the athletics stadium for that is under construction at York University.

Also, pretty sure Winnipeg are favourites to host the 2015 Grey Cup - Hamilton will get it in 2016.

Here it is in Grey Cup mode

http://cfl.assets.mrx.ca/ham/timhortonsfield/images/gallery/HTCStadium-002.jpg

[Waggy]

Can we talk "meters"? This yard crap is making my head hurt. How many meters is a full sized end to end, side to side CFL field? With space for the teams on the sides and players to run around the back...

Lol. A meter is .92 of a yard IIRC, so 160 yards would be about 144 meters and the 75-80 yard width would be about 70+ meters (though I'm very hungover. you may want to consult a calculator)


Thanks Gabriel. Yeah fitting a CFL field in there really has to fuck up the soccer sightlines. I guess theoretically the soccer pitch could be expanded a bit too, but still. They'd need at least 2 sections that could move in/out .

[Cashcleaner]

Just a point there Cash - there will be no track and field at Tim Horton's Field for the Pan Ams - the athletics stadium for that is under construction at York University.

Also, pretty sure Winnipeg are favourites to host the 2015 Grey Cup - Hamilton will get it in 2016.

Here it is in Grey Cup mode

http://cfl.assets.mrx.ca/ham/timhortonsfield/images/gallery/HTCStadium-002.jpg

My bad. I thought they were putting a track in. Tell you what though, that's still gonna be a great looking facility for the Ti-Cats.

[SoccMan2]

Seriously guys like I posted on another thread that new stadium in Hamilton is one ugly looking stadium looks like a little bigger version of BMO field. I mean it looks no different that the old Ivor Wynne stadium in Hamilton. It looks dated like one of those old CFL stadiums you still see in the CFL in cities like Regina, Calgary and the old CFL Winnipeg stadium. This new Hamilton stadium is to open, compare this new Hamilton stadium too some of the new MLS stadiums and there is no comparison, Red Bull Arena in New Jersey, Sporting KC's stadium in Kansas City, Houston's new MLS stadium these are nice modern designs nicely enclosed, not this old outdated design that is the new Hamilton stadium, like really it's 2014 and this is the best they can come up with really?

[GabrielHurl]

This new Hamilton stadium is to open, compare this new Hamilton stadium too some of the new MLS stadiums and there is no comparison

Newsflash - this Hamilton Stadium isn't an MLS Stadium

[Kaz]

Seriously guys like I posted on another thread that new stadium in Hamilton is one ugly looking stadium looks like a little bigger version of BMO field. I mean it looks no different that the old Ivor Wynne stadium in Hamilton. It looks dated like one of those old CFL stadiums you still see in the CFL in cities like Regina, Calgary and the old CFL Winnipeg stadium. This new Hamilton stadium is to open, compare this new Hamilton stadium too some of the new MLS stadiums and there is no comparison, Red Bull Arena in New Jersey, Sporting KC's stadium in Kansas City, Houston's new MLS stadium these are nice modern designs nicely enclosed, not this old outdated design that is the new Hamilton stadium, like really it's 2014 and this is the best they can come up with really?


You want this design over a Bowl design.. End Zone seating is kinda pointless when the play is moving away from you. It's the same for MLS, end seating is only good if you are supporter who is chanting and carrying on for half the game.

I honestly think it is where it started, early euro watchers got so bored in the ends they started making up chants and doing things to pass the time while the play was moving away from them... eventually others joined in and you have the first supports groups...

(made up history that sounds plausible :) )

[jimiv]

Newsflash - this Hamilton Stadium isn't an MLS Stadium

I'm surprised by the lack of vision this stadium has, this stadium looks like glorified bleachers (or BMO). I can't believe that they still build stadiums without roofs.


(added quote for clarity)

[DOMIN8R]

I'm surprised by the lack of vision this stadium has, this stadium looks like glorified bleachers (or BMO). I can't believe that they still build stadiums without roofs.

Back then there was little budget - 3 levels of government at the table and we were all thrilled to have a soccer specific stadium. How things look today is not how they looked back then. Nobody thought we'd fill that many seats after FIFA u20 - 2007.


Edit: Woops - Jimi was writing about the TiCats Stadium. Please disregard my post.

[Shakes McQueen]

Back then there was little budget - 3 levels of government at the table and we were all thrilled to have a soccer specific stadium. How things look today is not how they looked back then. Nobody thought we'd fill that many seats after FIFA u20 - 2007.

I think he may have been talking about the new TiCats stadium.

- Scott

[TFC07]

Just a point there Cash - there will be no track and field at Tim Horton's Field for the Pan Ams - the athletics stadium for that is under construction at York University.

Also, pretty sure Winnipeg are favourites to host the 2015 Grey Cup - Hamilton will get it in 2016.

Here it is in Grey Cup mode

http://cfl.assets.mrx.ca/ham/timhortonsfield/images/gallery/HTCStadium-002.jpg

How much money did they spend? That stadium looks ugly. It looks more like lower tier NCAA stadium or bigger version of BMO field. No roof, no seats in the corner, small number of suite. Did Hamilton copy BMO field design and made it bigger? I notice there are houses across the street. I hate to be people living there to see stadium and deal with crowd in front their homes.

[Shakes McQueen]

How much money did they spend? That stadium looks ugly. It looks more like lower tier NCAA stadium or bigger version of BMO field. No roof, no seats in the corner, small number of suite. Did Hamilton copy BMO field design and made it bigger? I notice there are houses across the street. I hate to be people living there to see stadium and deal with crowd in front their homes.

It's being built in the exact same place as the old stadium, so presumably the residents in the area are used to the crowds by now.

Lack of a roof matters less in football, where playing outside in rain and snow is just part of the game. Hell, in the NFL shitty weather is used as a tangible home advantage by teams like Buffalo.

I like the look of it. Corner seats are bad for football - as long as the stadium has the number of seats they need without them, it doesn't really matter. Not everything has to be a concrete soup bowl.

- Scott

[jimiv]

I think he may have been talking about the new TiCats stadium.

- Scott

you are correct sir... I edited my post for clarity. Thank you.

[ryan]

How much money did they spend? That stadium looks ugly. It looks more like lower tier NCAA stadium or bigger version of BMO field. No roof, no seats in the corner, small number of suite. Did Hamilton copy BMO field design and made it bigger? I notice there are houses across the street. I hate to be people living there to see stadium and deal with crowd in front their homes.

That's been the stadium site for...what seems like forever. They make good money letting people park on their lawns and would likely be livid if the site had moved.

There's no money in Hamilton, this was as good as it gets for them. This team is desperately trying to get back in the black, there's no way they can do anything else.

[habstfc]

How much money did they spend? That stadium looks ugly. It looks more like lower tier NCAA stadium or bigger version of BMO field. No roof, no seats in the corner, small number of suite. Did Hamilton copy BMO field design and made it bigger? I notice there are houses across the street. I hate to be people living there to see stadium and deal with crowd in front their homes.
Actually as a new Ti-Cat SSH i am looking forward to the new stadium. Spending 20-30 million bucks for a roof for 9 or 10 games a year makes no sense to me.

[ag futbol]

On the bright side - WE GOT AN XBOX AND A PS4. YAYAYAYAYAYAYA.

- Scott
Have to admit, at this point I am totally drinking the cool-aid on this one.

[glaze]

I don't understand the issue with the grass.
Arsenal, and Tottenham play on a hybrid pitch, Wembley is a hybrid pitch,
The Green bay packers use a field by the same company.
I think we're mistaking turf for the old junk that was in BMO originally, or that is in the Dome now.
If its good enough for Arsenal shouldn't it be fine for TFC?

The sightlines is a major concern. As has been mentioned, you have to figure in the buffer zone, also the first row of seats in football stadiums begins higher up from the field, hence the Argos having to tarp over the first 10 rows or so. Unless TFC goes with a retractable north east and west stand, seats will be further away. Of course, they'll keep the fieldside tables and claim there is no difference.

My other concern is when will this construction take place? MLS begins in March and ends in October. I don't think 3 months is enough time for the kinda of renovation they are talking about.
Whats the solution? A season in the Dome? A season in Hamilton?

[ManUtd4ever]

Leiweke stated on TSN today that MLSE intends to go forth with plans to renovate BMO Field as a multipurpose facility without compromising the sightlines for TFC matches or the integrity of pitch. He also stated that MLSE is planning on financing the bulk of the cost of the project, which will include a roof.

Best line of the interview was "our fans got rained on a lot last season. Larry Tanenbaum attends a lot of TFC games, and Larry got rained on too."

:lol:

[kodiakTFC]

I don't understand the issue with the grass.
Arsenal, and Tottenham play on a hybrid pitch, Wembley is a hybrid pitch,
The Green bay packers use a field by the same company.
I think we're mistaking turf for the old junk that was in BMO originally, or that is in the Dome now.
If its good enough for Arsenal shouldn't it be fine for TFC?

The sightlines is a major concern. As has been mentioned, you have to figure in the buffer zone, also the first row of seats in football stadiums begins higher up from the field, hence the Argos having to tarp over the first 10 rows or so. Unless TFC goes with a retractable north east and west stand, seats will be further away. Of course, they'll keep the fieldside tables and claim there is no difference.

My other concern is when will this construction take place? MLS begins in March and ends in October. I don't think 3 months is enough time for the kinda of renovation they are talking about.
Whats the solution? A season in the Dome? A season in Hamilton?

My guess is its completed in phases over a couple years.

[Shakes McQueen]

I don't understand the issue with the grass.
Arsenal, and Tottenham play on a hybrid pitch, Wembley is a hybrid pitch,
The Green bay packers use a field by the same company.
I think we're mistaking turf for the old junk that was in BMO originally, or that is in the Dome now.
If its good enough for Arsenal shouldn't it be fine for TFC?

The sightlines is a major concern. As has been mentioned, you have to figure in the buffer zone, also the first row of seats in football stadiums begins higher up from the field, hence the Argos having to tarp over the first 10 rows or so. Unless TFC goes with a retractable north east and west stand, seats will be further away. Of course, they'll keep the fieldside tables and claim there is no difference.

My other concern is when will this construction take place? MLS begins in March and ends in October. I don't think 3 months is enough time for the kinda of renovation they are talking about.
Whats the solution? A season in the Dome? A season in Hamilton?

Arsenal play on real grass, that is artificially reinforced. So hybrid, yes, but still essentially like playing on real grass.

Perhaps if the CFL ever came to BMO, that would be the solution to having a pitch that can withstand being torn up by giant football players 9-10 times a year. Of course, I've also read that Arsenal's type of pitch is pretty goddamned expensive.

- Scott

[Shakes McQueen]

Leiweke stated on TSN today that MLSE intends to go forth with plans to renovate BMO Field as a multipurpose facility without compromising the sightlines for TFC matches or the integrity of pitch. He also stated that MLSE is planning on financing the bulk of the cost of the project, which will include a roof.

Best line of the interview was "our fans got rained on a lot last season. Larry Tanenbaum attends a lot of TFC games, and Larry got rained on too."

:lol:

I do have to admit, as much as TL comes off as a bit of a bombastic salesman at times, I really do like listening to his interviews. In all of the interviews I listened to today, he was surprisingly frank in his answers to pretty much any question.

- Scott

[JuliquE]

Arsenal play on real grass, that is artificially reinforced. So hybrid, yes, but still essentially like playing on real grass.

Perhaps if the CFL ever came to BMO, that would be the solution to having a pitch that can withstand being torn up by giant football players 9-10 times a year. Of course, I've also read that Arsenal's type of pitch is pretty goddamned expensive.

- Scott
Swansea also have this sort of pitch; apparently drains much better than your typical grass pitch.

I have my reservations on whether it would hold up against the strains of regular CFL games, never mind ground-sharing with us.

[Prof]

Put the Argos in an expanded and renovated Lamport. Leave BMO for real football.

[DOMIN8R]

Put the Argos in an expanded and renovated Lamport. Leave BMO for real football.

The last plan I heard for Allan Lamport Stadium was to tear down the east side stands and expand the park area to accommodate the growing number of local condominium owners green space.

[brad]

Actually as a new Ti-Cat SSH i am looking forward to the new stadium. Spending 20-30 million bucks for a roof for 9 or 10 games a year makes no sense to me.

You want to talk about crazy - look at the Roughriders new home - estimated cost of $278 million... Great way to use the taxpayers money.

http://www.reginarevitalization.ca/stadium-project/

[brad]

Swansea also have this sort of pitch; apparently drains much better than your typical grass pitch.

Tons of teams do. Man Utd, Man City, Real Madrid, Liverpool, Inter & Milan. It was used in the 2010 World Cup.


I have my reservations on whether it would hold up against the strains of regular CFL games, never mind ground-sharing with us.

Well, it's used by the Packers, the Eagles and the Broncos, so if anyone is really interested in seeing how it stands up to American football that would be a good place to look. With a ground share though, hard to say.

[brad]

I haven't followed the details too closely, but has he said the plan is to renovate for CFL so the Argos can move in? Or is the reno so that they can hold one off's like the Grey Cup to make a boatload of money?

[Hustle]

We need a roof over all the stands to be the serious world class club TL is talking about us becoming. I don't think he is blowing smoke in that regard and I think he truly has that vision which is refreshing. In order to be financially viable and be a storied club, you need the stands full and You need the thousands of casuals to come to the matches and create the experience...day in and day out all season long. Even if we start winning, The shine of the first years is still off and Lieweke gets it. Thus the only way to fill the stadium is to win, AND make the game day experience better for the casuals. Winning with no roof still will not fill the stadium in the off months on a regular basis. Its simple...We play in Canada beside a lake. We need a roof over the stands and closed in corners.

[Stryker]

I can't believe they're gonna put a roof on BMO. A tin can is still a tin can regardless wether the lid is on it or not.
I'd rather wait 10 years and get a whole new stadium.

Now with regards to the pitch, didn't the team always practice elsewhere even before the training facility was built because they wanted to minimize damage to it? If they were worried about half speed soccer drills how the hell can they expect to throw a couple football teams on there going full tilt and say it'll be fine?

[ag futbol]

Yeah I have to say with the money they are investing in the club they are setting themselves up for headaches with this new stadium. They should have a long term vision of a 40,000 seat soccer specific stadium with no expense spared to make it a world class facility. You can find enough other uses for the grounds where sharing a stadium with the Argos becomes pointless.

Anything that fits a CFL sized field is going to have very serious limitations.

[brad]

I can't believe they're gonna put a roof on BMO. A tin can is still a tin can regardless wether the lid is on it or not.
I'd rather wait 10 years and get a whole new stadium.

Now with regards to the pitch, didn't the team always practice elsewhere even before the training facility was built because they wanted to minimize damage to it? If they were worried about half speed soccer drills how the hell can they expect to throw a couple football teams on there going full tilt and say it'll be fine?

I think its due to the fact that they practice multiple times a week, and if that is at BMO it does not give the ground staff the time they need during the week to keep the pitch in order (I beleive they need blocks of continuous time).

If the CFL comes in, you are likely looking at MLS one weekend, CFL the next. A game a week is a different pattern than continuous use through out the week.

[billyfly]

It will be a 30,000 seats stadium with potential to increase above for 1 time events. Roof (covered seating) on the East and West side but not the end-zones allowing the expansion to occur in those two areas.

[Haddy]

It will be a 30,000 seats stadium with potential to increase above for 1 time events. Roof (covered seating) on the East and West side but not the end-zones allowing the expansion to occur in those two areas.

Original York U Stadium drawing for TFC & Argos that never happened: http://stadiumci.com/sci/projects/york-university-stadium/

Aside from the roof, look familiar???

http://stadiumci.com/sci/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/YorkUniv_Stadium_02.jpg

http://stadiumci.com/sci/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/YorkUniv_Stadium_01-615x275.jpg

[MightyDM]

from Glaze: "I don't understand the issue with the grass.
Arsenal, and Tottenham play on a hybrid pitch, Wembley is a hybrid pitch,
The Green bay packers use a field by the same company.
I think we're mistaking turf for the old junk that was in BMO originally, or that is in the Dome now.
If its good enough for Arsenal shouldn't it be fine for TFC?"

The New Wembley pitch is very heavily criticized in the UK. I don't know the details of Arsenal and Tottenham, but the Wigan pitch was always criticized because of the impact of once a week rugby. I think the grass issue is serious. As I have said elsewhere, one solution is to have the Argos play in the dome after the end of September.

[billyfly]

Original York U Stadium drawing for TFC & Argos that never happened: http://stadiumci.com/sci/projects/york-university-stadium/

Aside from the roof, look familiar???

http://stadiumci.com/sci/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/YorkUniv_Stadium_02.jpg

http://stadiumci.com/sci/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/YorkUniv_Stadium_01-615x275.jpg

Yes I knew this but didn't know where to access the pics.

The issue with the roof is the different wind conditions off the lake. That will be the biggest engineer stuff mixed with the code spacing issues with the food building and the City allowing to cut off the road to the south.

[ManUtd4ever]

Is it feasible to lay down artificial turf on top of the grass pitch just for Argo games?

[Haddy]

Yes I knew this but didn't know where to access the pics.

The issue with the roof is the different wind conditions off the lake. That will be the biggest engineer stuff mixed with the code spacing issues with the food building and the City allowing to cut off the road to the south.

The road won't be a huge issue. It only exists because they tore down Exhibition Stadium - city can survive without it or a modified version.


Anyone hear the Leiweke interview on TSN Radio? Made it sound like MLSE is definitely willing to explore the Argos as BMO tenants because they want the city to agree a deal to improve BMO for the soccer team. A necessary evil if you will. That's how he spinned it.

BMO reno starts after 13 minutes: http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/TSN%20DRIVE%20HR2%20Jan%2013.mp3

[TFC07]

Toronto MIGHT bid on 2024 summer Olympic which means government fundings for a new stadium big enough to host Olympics. This could mean a new stadium for Toronto NFL team? If that's case, then it explains everything why MLSE is willing to "let" Argos move into BMO field in short-term. If NFL do come to Toronto for good, then Argos are done. So in 10 years time, we might not have to worry about Argos for good.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/olympics/report-2024-games-would-cost-t-o-3-7-billion/

[GabrielHurl]

Toronto MIGHT bid on 2024 summer Olympic which means government fundings for a new stadium big enough to host Olympics. This could mean a new stadium for Toronto NFL team? If that's case, then it explains everything why MLSE is willing to "let" Argos move into BMO field in short-term. If NFL do come to Toronto for good, then Argos are done. So in 10 years time, we might not have to worry about Argos for good.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/olympics/report-2024-games-would-cost-t-o-3-7-billion/


There's no way the NFL would let the Argos die if in the small chance they allowed an NFL franchise here

[TFC07]

There's no way the NFL would let the Argos die if in the small chance they allowed an NFL franchise here

The way things are going for Argos now, they would be dead if they don't find a new home soon regardless if NFL comes to Toronto or not. I believe they got like 3 years left on their lease at Rogers Centre.

[Waggy]

There's no way the NFL would let the Argos die if in the small chance they allowed an NFL franchise here

Apparently the NFL has told anyone from Toronto looking to bid on an NFL team that a condition of purchasing a team is caring for the Argos. Allegedly that's why MLSE is looking at buying the Argos in the first place. The NFL needs the CFL to exist in a viable way due to anti-trust laws. Every failed football league in the states has tried to sue the NFL, and the NFL has won every case by using the CFL as an example of a football league that can thrive. That's also why the NFL helped keep the CFL afloat when the CFL was in big trouble a while back*.


The olympics thing is a pipe dream, and either way it's an albatross that I hope we don't get.

Those drawings for a stadium are pretty dope. If the grass/turf thing could be worked out, and both one of the north/south stands and one of the east/west stands were able to move in to be pitchside for soccer, I'd be more than ok with it. But those are 2 big ifs.



* As an Argos fan though... an NFL team in Toronto would realistically relegate the Argos to less than an afterthought. They're already an afterthought. I think it'd be better to just fold the team and let the NFL team be called the Toronto Argonauts and absorb the history. It'd be pretty cool IMO. And if the NFL can survive and thrive without a team in LA, why couldn't the CFL survive and thrive without a team in Toronto?

[greatwhitenorf]

So, let's just say sporting prosperity sits on our faces and all three of the Argos, Blue Jays and TFC make the post season at the same time. There's no way the Jays are letting the Argos into the dome to hack up their grass field that could do so much to enhance the appeal of the dome's core product. And soccer has to be consider the core product at BMO Field. So does MLSE let the Argos make a mess of TFC's playoff chances?

Because Tim Leiweke can smooth talk all he wants about preserving everything good at BMO while expanding and enhancing the place, but the post season is where the rubber meets the road. That's what the TFC fans he expresses so much concern for will be going out of their minds to cheer for. If he thinks TFC take a back seat to the Argos in that situation, that's where, ticket-price freezes be damned, the backlash would be permanent.

So, where would the ugly step-child that is the Argos be placed in such a situation? York U's track and field stadium? Lamport? No good answer. Yet the question has to have one because the Jays sure as fork aren't revamping their playing surface to play .500 ball. If BMO Field is getting seriously upgraded, look at how a good season might play out strictly from a soccer business perspective.

In the foreseeable future, TFC will play 17-18-19? regular season games, plus two Canadian championship games. Maybe a third in a few years? Win that title and here comes Concacaf Champions League play with - let's be optimistic and say we get through group stage for another round - at least four more games. Right now we're up to 24-25-26? games. Let's be as bullish as Big Tim and assume our good form brings a playoff berth. There's maybe two more games. 26-27-28.

And let's say our ambitious marketing deals with Spurs and Roma create opportunities for a couple of friendlies, or even a mini-tournament. Another 2-3 games. We're pushing 30 games and we haven't even touched on potential games for both our mens and womens Canadian national teams. Nor have I added in academy games that often get quietly slipped in as double-headers on MLS match days. What about staging local and regional high school soccer finals there?

It's not inconceivable that a really good year at BMO Field would host 35-40 high level games between late March and late October. That's about 5 or 6 per month. And at some point, TFC have to practice on it just to get angles and trajectories on crosses and set pieces fine tuned. Not a lot, but enough to let players gain enough familiarity that they truly do have a home field advantage. Surely, twice a month would be minimum. Visiting teams would need to practice there as well, especially before internationals, both club and country.

This is the core product. This is where the focus has to be directed in how this stadium is shaped going forward, same as what the Blue Jays are doing at the dome. Less is more. Adding something that will only be detrimental to the core product is counter productive and no matter how Leiweke tries to spin it, there's no way that the effects of 9-10-11? CFL games on grass are going to be anything but detrimental to the playing of attractive, skillful soccer. This isn't Wigan.

Leiweke can't have it both ways. He says he wants to make BMO Field the best it can be for soccer and to grow TFC into becoming a major, world-recognized club. He needs to get out in front of this and declare the CFL option non-viable. The city has put money into the stadium and, so far, it's been well rewarded. If it has more to add to MLSE's funds to help the Argos, then spend it on re-building Lamport Stadium. The potential is there to create a tight little passion pit, the sort of joint that makes the hip flask fashionable and the Argos watchable.

[Auzzy]

So, let's just say sporting prosperity sits on our faces and all three of the Argos, Blue Jays and TFC make the post season at the same time. There's no way the Jays are letting the Argos into the dome to hack up their grass field that could do so much to enhance the appeal of the dome's core product. And soccer has to be consider the core product at BMO Field. So does MLSE let the Argos make a mess of TFC's playoff chances?

Because Tim Leiweke can smooth talk all he wants about preserving everything good at BMO while expanding and enhancing the place, but the post season is where the rubber meets the road. That's what the TFC fans he expresses so much concern for will be going out of their minds to cheer for. If he thinks TFC take a back seat to the Argos in that situation, that's where, ticket-price freezes be damned, the backlash would be permanent.

So, where would the ugly step-child that is the Argos be placed in such a situation? York U's track and field stadium? Lamport? No good answer. Yet the question has to have one because the Jays sure as fork aren't revamping their playing surface to play .500 ball. If BMO Field is getting seriously upgraded, look at how a good season might play out strictly from a soccer business perspective.

In the foreseeable future, TFC will play 17-18-19? regular season games, plus two Canadian championship games. Maybe a third in a few years? Win that title and here comes Concacaf Champions League play with - let's be optimistic and say we get through group stage for another round - at least four more games. Right now we're up to 24-25-26? games. Let's be as bullish as Big Tim and assume our good form brings a playoff berth. There's maybe two more games. 26-27-28.

And let's say our ambitious marketing deals with Spurs and Roma create opportunities for a couple of friendlies, or even a mini-tournament. Another 2-3 games. We're pushing 30 games and we haven't even touched on potential games for both our mens and womens Canadian national teams. Nor have I added in academy games that often get quietly slipped in as double-headers on MLS match days. What about staging local and regional high school soccer finals there?

It's not inconceivable that a really good year at BMO Field would host 35-40 high level games between late March and late October. That's about 5 or 6 per month. And at some point, TFC have to practice on it just to get angles and trajectories on crosses and set pieces fine tuned. Not a lot, but enough to let players gain enough familiarity that they truly do have a home field advantage. Surely, twice a month would be minimum. Visiting teams would need to practice there as well, especially before internationals, both club and country.

This is the core product. This is where the focus has to be directed in how this stadium is shaped going forward, same as what the Blue Jays are doing at the dome. Less is more. Adding something that will only be detrimental to the core product is counter productive and no matter how Leiweke tries to spin it, there's no way that the effects of 9-10-11? CFL games on grass are going to be anything but detrimental to the playing of attractive, skillful soccer. This isn't Wigan.

Leiweke can't have it both ways. He says he wants to make BMO Field the best it can be for soccer and to grow TFC into becoming a major, world-recognized club. He needs to get out in front of this and declare the CFL option non-viable. The city has put money into the stadium and, so far, it's been well rewarded. If it has more to add to MLSE's funds to help the Argos, then spend it on re-building Lamport Stadium. The potential is there to create a tight little passion pit, the sort of joint that makes the hip flask fashionable and the Argos watchable.

Very well written, great points! Send it straight to TL!

[Waggy]

So, let's just say sporting prosperity sits on our faces and all three of the Argos, Blue Jays and TFC make the post season at the same time. There's no way the Jays are letting the Argos into the dome to hack up their grass field that could do so much to enhance the appeal of the dome's core product. And soccer has to be consider the core product at BMO Field. So does MLSE let the Argos make a mess of TFC's playoff chances?

Because Tim Leiweke can smooth talk all he wants about preserving everything good at BMO while expanding and enhancing the place, but the post season is where the rubber meets the road. That's what the TFC fans he expresses so much concern for will be going out of their minds to cheer for. If he thinks TFC take a back seat to the Argos in that situation, that's where, ticket-price freezes be damned, the backlash would be permanent.

So, where would the ugly step-child that is the Argos be placed in such a situation? York U's track and field stadium? Lamport? No good answer. Yet the question has to have one because the Jays sure as fork aren't revamping their playing surface to play .500 ball. If BMO Field is getting seriously upgraded, look at how a good season might play out strictly from a soccer business perspective.

In the foreseeable future, TFC will play 17-18-19? regular season games, plus two Canadian championship games. Maybe a third in a few years? Win that title and here comes Concacaf Champions League play with - let's be optimistic and say we get through group stage for another round - at least four more games. Right now we're up to 24-25-26? games. Let's be as bullish as Big Tim and assume our good form brings a playoff berth. There's maybe two more games. 26-27-28.

And let's say our ambitious marketing deals with Spurs and Roma create opportunities for a couple of friendlies, or even a mini-tournament. Another 2-3 games. We're pushing 30 games and we haven't even touched on potential games for both our mens and womens Canadian national teams. Nor have I added in academy games that often get quietly slipped in as double-headers on MLS match days. What about staging local and regional high school soccer finals there?

It's not inconceivable that a really good year at BMO Field would host 35-40 high level games between late March and late October. That's about 5 or 6 per month. And at some point, TFC have to practice on it just to get angles and trajectories on crosses and set pieces fine tuned. Not a lot, but enough to let players gain enough familiarity that they truly do have a home field advantage. Surely, twice a month would be minimum. Visiting teams would need to practice there as well, especially before internationals, both club and country.

This is the core product. This is where the focus has to be directed in how this stadium is shaped going forward, same as what the Blue Jays are doing at the dome. Less is more. Adding something that will only be detrimental to the core product is counter productive and no matter how Leiweke tries to spin it, there's no way that the effects of 9-10-11? CFL games on grass are going to be anything but detrimental to the playing of attractive, skillful soccer. This isn't Wigan.

Leiweke can't have it both ways. He says he wants to make BMO Field the best it can be for soccer and to grow TFC into becoming a major, world-recognized club. He needs to get out in front of this and declare the CFL option non-viable. The city has put money into the stadium and, so far, it's been well rewarded. If it has more to add to MLSE's funds to help the Argos, then spend it on re-building Lamport Stadium. The potential is there to create a tight little passion pit, the sort of joint that makes the hip flask fashionable and the Argos watchable.

while that is a fantastic post filled with great points, 1 small thing. MLB playoffs are in October. CFL are in November. Game 7 of the World Series MIGHT be within a few days of the first round of CFL playoffs if the playoffs REALLY dragged on but it's pretty unlikely. CFL playoffs would be pretty safely after the baseball season ended.

CFL playoff dates this year were Nov 10, 17, 24th. And because of how home field advantage works, it's impossible to play at home on both the first 2 dates and almost impossible to play in both the last 2 (the last 3 years notwithstanding)

[denime]

So, let's just say sporting prosperity sits on our faces and all three of the Argos, Blue Jays and TFC make the post season at the same time. There's no way the Jays are letting the Argos into the dome to hack up their grass field that could do so much to enhance the appeal of the dome's core product. And soccer has to be consider the core product at BMO Field. So does MLSE let the Argos make a mess of TFC's playoff chances?

Because Tim Leiweke can smooth talk all he wants about preserving everything good at BMO while expanding and enhancing the place, but the post season is where the rubber meets the road. That's what the TFC fans he expresses so much concern for will be going out of their minds to cheer for. If he thinks TFC take a back seat to the Argos in that situation, that's where, ticket-price freezes be damned, the backlash would be permanent.

So, where would the ugly step-child that is the Argos be placed in such a situation? York U's track and field stadium? Lamport? No good answer. Yet the question has to have one because the Jays sure as fork aren't revamping their playing surface to play .500 ball. If BMO Field is getting seriously upgraded, look at how a good season might play out strictly from a soccer business perspective.

In the foreseeable future, TFC will play 17-18-19? regular season games, plus two Canadian championship games. Maybe a third in a few years? Win that title and here comes Concacaf Champions League play with - let's be optimistic and say we get through group stage for another round - at least four more games. Right now we're up to 24-25-26? games. Let's be as bullish as Big Tim and assume our good form brings a playoff berth. There's maybe two more games. 26-27-28.

And let's say our ambitious marketing deals with Spurs and Roma create opportunities for a couple of friendlies, or even a mini-tournament. Another 2-3 games. We're pushing 30 games and we haven't even touched on potential games for both our mens and womens Canadian national teams. Nor have I added in academy games that often get quietly slipped in as double-headers on MLS match days. What about staging local and regional high school soccer finals there?

It's not inconceivable that a really good year at BMO Field would host 35-40 high level games between late March and late October. That's about 5 or 6 per month. And at some point, TFC have to practice on it just to get angles and trajectories on crosses and set pieces fine tuned. Not a lot, but enough to let players gain enough familiarity that they truly do have a home field advantage. Surely, twice a month would be minimum. Visiting teams would need to practice there as well, especially before internationals, both club and country.

This is the core product. This is where the focus has to be directed in how this stadium is shaped going forward, same as what the Blue Jays are doing at the dome. Less is more. Adding something that will only be detrimental to the core product is counter productive and no matter how Leiweke tries to spin it, there's no way that the effects of 9-10-11? CFL games on grass are going to be anything but detrimental to the playing of attractive, skillful soccer. This isn't Wigan.

Leiweke can't have it both ways. He says he wants to make BMO Field the best it can be for soccer and to grow TFC into becoming a major, world-recognized club. He needs to get out in front of this and declare the CFL option non-viable. The city has put money into the stadium and, so far, it's been well rewarded. If it has more to add to MLSE's funds to help the Argos, then spend it on re-building Lamport Stadium. The potential is there to create a tight little passion pit, the sort of joint that makes the hip flask fashionable and the Argos watchable.

Good post,however 1st team will not practice at BMO because they made exact replica size and grass field at Downsview park,so they don't have to use BMO.High school games at BMO,not a chance,and if you look at Playoffs between MLB,CFL and MLS not even close to each other.

TFC will play best case scenario 23-24 games per year,and with grass at Rogers center you can expect few games to be played there too.

[Areathrasher]

Swansea also have this sort of pitch; apparently drains much better than your typical grass pitch.

I have my reservations on whether it would hold up against the strains of regular CFL games, never mind ground-sharing with us.


Swansea also share their ground with the Ospreys rugby team. Between their league and Heineken Cup matches, the Ospreys play around 20 home games a year during the same time Swansea play. I've never noticed Swansea having issues with the quality of their pitch.

[Phil]

Swansea also share their ground with the Ospreys rugby team. Between their league and Heineken Cup matches, the Ospreys play around 20 home games a year during the same time Swansea play. I've never noticed Swansea having issues with the quality of their pitch.

Lets remember that rugby plays all over the pitch whereas CFL / NFL use tracks up and down the filed. It puts a totally different dimension of stress on very specific areas of the grass.

[PopePouri]

Lets remember that rugby plays all over the pitch whereas CFL / NFL use tracks up and down the filed. It puts a totally different dimension of stress on very specific areas of the grass.

CFL / NFL only has approximately 12 minutes of live play though.

[Areathrasher]

I was speaking more to how the hybrid pitches stand up to increased use.

I didnt know Swansea had that type of surface till I read it in here and was surprised. As a Leinster fan I've watched lots of games from the Liberty Stadium and I don't remember there ever being an issue with the quality of the pitch.

[Phil]

[QUOTE=PopePouri;1634609]CFL / NFL only has approximately 12 minutes of live play though.[/QUOT

Oh for sure, its a concern that needs to be looked at. Remember the NFL game at Wembly? It tore the pitch up. Not saything that can't be managed or delt with but it will need a serious amount of attention. If we are jamming CCL games in during the season, that means heavy rotation on the Wed / Sat schedule for us, then pop in the odd Argo game. It could get very dicey.

[Pookie]

[QUOTE=PopePouri;1634609]CFL / NFL only has approximately 12 minutes of live play though.[/QUOT

Oh for sure, its a concern that needs to be looked at. Remember the NFL game at Wembly? It tore the pitch up. Not saything that can't be managed or delt with but it will need a serious amount of attention. If we are jamming CCL games in during the season, that means heavy rotation on the Wed / Sat schedule for us, then pop in the odd Argo game. It could get very dicey.

Why not push for a Friday/Saturday (MLS) game time for TFC and a Saturday/Sunday game for the Argos? Would give 6-7 days for turf repair. V Cup games would be done before the CFL starts. CCL games, if they made it, would require a little juggling.

I'd also push for extended road trips for them during the fall and perhaps for TFC during the summer.

[greatwhitenorf]

@ Denime: Re: High school games at BMO. There were high school games there aplenty when the pitch was synthetic. I was there for some of them. I'm not suggesting in my previous post that there'd be weekly school games, but something like the annual showcase for school baseball or football held at the dome. Given BMO's current usage levels, that's not an arduous addition and it's one many in the high school system want to see. It's also a good marketing tactic for MLSE - get good numbers of fans in from the most desirable demographic.

Not sure how many memories on this board stretch back far enough to remember when the Argos played on grass at the old CNE Stadium. There were some really bad days, including Grey Cups, where the field would come up in big chunks. I remember going down to field level with my dad one year and we brought a two-foot strip home as a souvenir. I realize modern pitch design systems have greatly improved the quality of natural grass fields, but football players are much bigger and stronger than they were in my youth and can wreak all sorts of havoc. If they play on a wet weekend and we have a mid-week game, it's a safe bet we're gonna have trouble keeping the ball on the deck.

And you don't bring on board players like Defoe or Bradley, or even DeRosario, to lump high balls forward for them to win in the air.

We need to remain cynical about all this stadium re-development because it won't be an issue this year. The Argos aren't required to move for another couple of seasons. But this is the year when certain decisions will be made. Leiweke has blown a load of sunshine up our pant legs to get everybody happy in the short term - good new acquisitions, pricing freezes and plenty of blather about improving the 'sakker' experience. At no time has he ruled out football coming to BMO.

What's interesting about him being coy regarding football is that, prior to joining TFC, Leiweke worked for AEG in London and, in turn, with Spurs in helping them with their failed bid to take over London's Olympic stadium site after the gams concluded. It failed mainly due a highly corrupt bidding process that Spurs forced into court to resolve to their satisfaction. Leiweke moved on, and Spurs gained zoning approval to build a new 56,000 seater right next to their current ground.

A few months back, Spurs dumped their architects and brought in Populus, a global leader in stadium building, to re-design it. Word leaked out that the re-design was upping capacity to around 70,000 and would feature a retractable playing surface. There was a lot of head scratching about that because proposed housing development on the stadium site left no room for a retractable pitch to move into. However, the housing development may be shifted elsewhere within a broader re-generation scheme because the motive for pitch switching is to allow the stadium to become home field for London's proposed NFL franchise.

Wembley isn't feasible as a long-term permanent home for an NFL franchise. And trying to sell 90,000 seats isn't always a sure thing. But 70,000 is a more manageable number and the NFL likes the optics of a sold out stadium. The biggest problem in getting the stadium built is finding a naming rights sponsor to pony up and start the shovels digging. Pretty much everything else is a go, but it's been a couple of years now and Spurs still haven't found a deal they like.

So here comes Leiweke again, with his new pals at MLSE, to partner up with Spurs and help them on the commercial side of the game. You have to wonder - are MLSE looking to buy into Spurs? Or is there a bigger game to be played?

By helping to create the circumstances that let a vitally important NFL project become feasible in London, MLSE would learn a great deal about life in the NFL and become familiar - more familiar? - with the league's movers and shakers. And, conversely, the league with MLSE. It's quite likely that they'd also be looked upon more favourably should they wish to acquire an NFL franchise for Toronto.

Which raises further questions about the sensibility of re-fitting BMO Field for CFL use. It might work in the short term, but I'm sad to say that Toronto has outgrown the CFL. Just like it has with junior hockey. Ask a Toronto teenager to name 10 CFL players. Or name Ottawa's new franchise. You'll wait a long time to find half a dozen. Do the same with the NFL and you can hardly shut them up. The world's changed and that's just the way it is in Toronto. It's not changing back. We only want the best and if it isn't played on our doorstep, we'll watch it on TV or travel to see it.

I can't imagine for a second that having a fling with Spurs and the impending London NFL team will be enough for MLSE. My gut feeling is that they will want to be involved a lot more and they will want it to happen in Toronto. To match my earlier point regarding newly acquired players, you don't bring in someone of Leiweke's ability and ambition to safely and comfortably manage what you already have. He's walked the biggest stages in sport and he and MLSE want Toronto to be numbered among such sites. The company itself can't own the NFL franchise, but it can build and operate the stadium and use it to house even bigger events than they already do. Far bigger and, more importantly, massively more lucrative than anything the CFL can serve up.

[cmonyoureds]

^^^ wow. just wow. lots of connected dots there. makes too much sense to not be at least a possibility

[ag futbol]

Thought this might be of interest:

http://gosw.about.com/od/sportsandrecreation/ss/cardinalstadium_3.htm

Had no idea such a thing existed. So maybe solutions are available, but certainly not at the $100-150M budget Leiweke is talking about.

DIukkv1Ko0U

[mowe]

I think NFL to BMO is a reach, American football is never coming here. They don't need us, and we're fine without them. I think the main reason BMO expansion talk even started was the desire to host a Winter Classic during the Leafs 100 year anniversary. BMO is the only logical place in Toronto to host it, and it would need a much larger capacity. MLSE wants government to pitch in some money for the considerable cost, which they won't do just for a one off event. BMO also happened to be the most logical destination for the Argos since they aren't getting significant public money to build a brand new stadium.

A reno to BMO makes sense for all parties. MLSE gets to hold big events like the Winter Classic and Grey Cup, Argos find a home for cheap, TFC gets increased capacity and a roof. The only problem is the pitch, but all we can do at this point is hope TL is committed to ensuring it stays in the best possible condition. Because it seems all but guaranteed the Argos are coming to BMO.

[greatwhitenorf]

There's no suggestion that BMO would host the NFL. That would require a stadium on a whole other level. But hasn't Leiweke already stated that MLSE is prepared to take on the costs of expanding BMO without gov't money? I didn't hear him say that but someone else told me that was part of one of his many, many interviews.

The NFL doesn't need Toronto. Doesn't need London, either. But it's going there, that much is clear. What the NFL does want to is grow internationally. They need to do that just to offset the encroaching growth of soccer in North America. London doesn't present any language issues and minimal cultural issues. Toronto would be an even easier fit.

Wherever money accumulates in sufficient numbers, things gravitate to it. There's a lot of money, in many hands, in Toronto and MLSE is well connected to them. The CFL doesn't offer anything close to a proper ROI, let alone an ego stroke, to ambitious investors.

"The only problem is the pitch, but all we can do at this point is hope TL is committed to ensuring it stays in the best possible condition." Uh, no. That's far too passive and compliant an attitude. Are you Tom Anselmi's son? There's a lot that can be said before any final decision is made and a firm, clear statement needs to be made collectively by TFC supporters that having the Argos in is not a desired option. When the core product is sufficient to give MLSE a substantial profit and a clear road to growing that prosperity, you don't entertain bringing in something that will impair the quality of the core product. Simple business logic. Especially when that corrosive additional element shows no likelihood of growing its own game in Toronto.

[Waggy]

There's no suggestion that BMO would host the NFL. That would require a stadium on a whole other level. But hasn't Leiweke already stated that MLSE is prepared to take on the costs of expanding BMO without gov't money? I didn't hear him say that but someone else told me that was part of one of his many, many interviews.

The NFL doesn't need Toronto. Doesn't need London, either. But it's going there, that much is clear. What the NFL does want to is grow internationally. They need to do that just to offset the encroaching growth of soccer in North America. London doesn't present any language issues and minimal cultural issues. Toronto would be an even easier fit.

Wherever money accumulates in sufficient numbers, things gravitate to it. There's a lot of money, in many hands, in Toronto and MLSE is well connected to them. The CFL doesn't offer anything close to a proper ROI, let alone an ego stroke, to ambitious investors.

"The only problem is the pitch, but all we can do at this point is hope TL is committed to ensuring it stays in the best possible condition." Uh, no. That's far too passive and compliant an attitude. Are you Tom Anselmi's son? There's a lot that can be said before any final decision is made and a firm, clear statement needs to be made collectively by TFC supporters that having the Argos in is not a desired option. When the core product is sufficient to give MLSE a substantial profit and a clear road to growing that prosperity, you don't entertain bringing in something that will impair the quality of the core product. Simple business logic. Especially when that corrosive additional element shows no likelihood of growing its own game in Toronto.

The CFL signed a deal with TSN last year that allegedly pays enough that all salaries for players are covered before the first game kicks off. Anything from gates is profit. And 10-12 dates per year of 28-30 000 people plus booze and food isn't exactly nothing. As far as NFL goes the rumor of the city bidding for the 2024 olympics though fits with the timing of the Bills contract in Buffalo ending. I could easily see MLSE waiting for the Province and Feds to pitch half on an 80 000 seat stadium for the summer games to buy and move the team here full time.

As for the Cardinals thing, I mentioned that a few days ago. The reason that can't work here is simple- they drag the grass outside to grow. We can't do that. Grass here needs to be growing indoors outside of a few months in the summer. The only way this can work here is if turf is dropped on top of the grass for CFL games and manages to not kill the grass. Which, while I don't see how it could happen, is I guess theoretically possible.

And yes, CFL (or NFL) mostly works on the hashmarks. Rugby is all over the pitch. There's a reason the natural grass NFL stadiums absolutely disintegrate between the hashmarks by december. They get chewed the hell up

[Waggy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtXou6IVXwQ

[mowe]

There's no suggestion that BMO would host the NFL. That would require a stadium on a whole other level. But hasn't Leiweke already stated that MLSE is prepared to take on the costs of expanding BMO without gov't money? I didn't hear him say that but someone else told me that was part of one of his many, many interviews..

In his latest interviews he mentioned the city will have to pay a part of the reno costs, but MLSE will still cover "the vast majority". And BTW London and Toronto are on entirely different priority levels for the NFL. The former would open a huge market in a place where there is next to no NFL following. The NFL is already very popular across Canada, and while Toronto is a big market, there are several US cities that will need to get teams before we do.

The Argos are coming to BMO, and there is nothing we can do about it. It's the only way the city will contribute anything because it solves the problem of building a brand new stadium just for 10 games or so per year. Just read the article in the first post. I think once the plans are announced there won't be a huge amount of backlash, especially if we have a winning team. The reno will have tangible benefits to TFC fans in the form of increased capacity, a roof, and better facilities. It's not all bad for us. As long as sightlines and grass are maintained, that leaves the ONLY issue being the pitch (yes I know how important it is). It sucks, no doubt about it, but most fans will live with it if MLSE shows a commitment to the pitch with careful scheduling and better technology.

[Auzzy]

As for the Cardinals thing, I mentioned that a few days ago. The reason that can't work here is simple- they drag the grass outside to grow. We can't do that. Grass here needs to be growing indoors outside of a few months in the summer. The only way this can work here is if turf is dropped on top of the grass for CFL games and manages to not kill the grass. Which, while I don't see how it could happen, is I guess theoretically possible.

And yes, CFL (or NFL) mostly works on the hashmarks. Rugby is all over the pitch. There's a reason the natural grass NFL stadiums absolutely disintegrate between the hashmarks by december. They get chewed the hell up

RE the moveable grass field like in Arizona -- sure it would work here, but for a different purpose! Not necessarily to grow, since BMO Field will still be an open-air venue with natural light for the grass. Grass, especially with subfloor heating like BMO, grows fine outdoors in Toronto, for the times it's needed for footy. (Not sure why you said that grass needs to grow indoors in this area? It's actually quite hard to grow grass indoors, and will be a big issue for the Rogers Centre. One reason they will really need to baby it and protect it there; plus baseball puts much less wear on the grass than footy or especially CFL. But you can bet if they install grass in the Rogers Centre, they will leave the roof open as much as possible to get a bit of natural light & ventilation.)

That being said: many grass fields with significant roof structures do also have problems growing grass reliably, since a roof can put too much shade on the grass for it to grow well everywhere. Some venues have special artificial lighting systems ("grow lights") for the pitch as a result, to help the grass grow despite roof shading and poor weather. I'm sure Rogers Centre with grass will need lots of that; and it could help for BMO as well, especially with a new roof over the stands & as the MLS season has gotten longer.

However, the main reason to move the BMO grass pitch outside here would be to protect it during gridiron games & other events (and only during such events). Padding & plastic turf would be installed on the concrete subfloor for CFL when the grass is out. See the Veltins Arena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veltins-Arena), which actually has a full roof:


The Veltins-Arena features a slide out pitch. Supported by 11,400 t substructure, the playing field can be moved in and out of the stadium within 4 hours. This has several advantages:

The grass playing surface can grow under normal outside conditions without suffering from a lack of circulation and light as in other arenas.
The football pitch is not damaged during indoor events such as concerts. [** That's what matters most for BMO Field.]
The floor of the multi-functional hall can be converted and retro-fitted within a short amount of time.
The outside area that is not occupied by the field can be used as parking facilities for buses during football matches.



The biggest problems for that in Toronto are massive extra costs for the moveable pitch; plus that non-footy events (CFL; Winter Classic; CNE) want the space outside for parking, or directly for the events, so it would be hard to put the grass pitch there.

How about this idea, which we were just discussing with some structural engineers & engineering lab techies. They thought this would be possible. CFL will need retractable stands anyway due to the larger field size. That means for CFL events, the lowest available seating rows could start significantly higher than for footy. Instead of putting plastic turf directly on top of grass as Waggy suggested (bad for the grass; too soft for the plastic turf & will slide around) why not have a removable structure that spans the grass field, raising the floor, and provides a sturdy surface for plastic turf to be rolled out & anchored? The structure could be additionally supported by pins and subsurface sleeves within the grass surface, that won't be noticeable & can be filled with small grass plugs during footy games. The structure could even have grow lights on the bottom in case it needs to stay out for a few days for special occasions.

Wait a sec, I'm gonna patent that... ;) Won't be cheap either; but cheaper & easier than a moveable grass pitch. Basically, it's much easier to have removeable plastic turf, than removeable real grass; and CFL won't have as many games as there are footy games overall.

[Waggy]

RE the moveable grass field like in Arizona -- sure it would work here, but for a different purpose! Not necessarily to grow, since BMO Field will still be an open-air venue with natural light for the grass. Grass, especially with subfloor heating like BMO, grows fine outdoors in Toronto, for the times it's needed for footy. (Not sure why you said that grass needs to grow indoors in this area? It's actually quite hard to grow grass indoors, and will be a big issue for the Rogers Centre. One reason they will really need to baby it and protect it there; plus baseball puts much less wear on the grass than footy or especially CFL. But you can bet if they install grass in the Rogers Centre, they will leave the roof open as much as possible to get a bit of natural light & ventilation.)

That being said: many grass fields with significant roof structures do also have problems growing grass reliably, since a roof can put too much shade on the grass for it to grow well everywhere. Some venues have special artificial lighting systems ("grow lights") for the pitch as a result, to help the grass grow despite roof shading and poor weather. I'm sure Rogers Centre with grass will need lots of that; and it could help for BMO as well, especially with a new roof over the stands & as the MLS season has gotten longer.

However, the main reason to move the BMO grass pitch outside here would be to protect it during gridiron games & other events (and only during such events). Padding & plastic turf would be installed on the concrete subfloor for CFL when the grass is out. See the Veltins Arena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veltins-Arena), which actually has a full roof:



The biggest problems for that in Toronto are massive extra costs for the moveable pitch; plus that non-footy events (CFL; Winter Classic; CNE) want the space outside for parking, or directly for the events, so it would be hard to put the grass pitch there.

How about this idea, which we were just discussing with some structural engineers & engineering lab techies. They thought this would be possible. CFL will need retractable stands anyway due to the larger field size. That means for CFL events, the lowest available seating rows could start significantly higher than for footy. Instead of putting plastic turf directly on top of grass as Waggy suggested (bad for the grass; too soft for the plastic turf & will slide around) why not have a removable structure that spans the grass field, raising the floor, and provides a sturdy surface for plastic turf to be rolled out & anchored? The structure could be additionally supported by pins and subsurface sleeves within the grass surface, that won't be noticeable & can be filled with small grass plugs during footy games. The structure could even have grow lights on the bottom in case it needs to stay out for a few days for special occasions.

Wait a sec, I'm gonna patent that... ;) Won't be cheap either; but cheaper & easier than a moveable grass pitch. Basically, it's much easier to have removeable plastic turf, than removeable real grass; and CFL won't have as many games as there are footy games overall.

That's a great idea! I said grass would need to be grown indoors because without the help of heat/water/protection from frost/snow grass wouldn't grow in Toronto in Feb/March/April/Oct/Nov/Dec. It's just too cold and there's too much snow and frost. But that's a WAY better idea. Even if supports are needed at least damage to the actual pitch would be minimal. I'm sure an engineer could figure out how to distribute the weight without damaging the grass below.

[ag futbol]

As for the Cardinals thing, I mentioned that a few days ago. The reason that can't work here is simple- they drag the grass outside to grow. We can't do that. Grass here needs to be growing indoors outside of a few months in the summer. The only way this can work here is if turf is dropped on top of the grass for CFL games and manages to not kill the grass. Which, while I don't see how it could happen, is I guess theoretically possible.

To me, it just shows that you can actually physically move a grass pitch. I'm sure there are other measures that would have to be taken as well to make it work here, but just trying to hold out hope something like that could be used if we are forced into the same venue.

I would still prefer something entirely separate. The playing dimensions of a CFL field just makes it impractical to share with other sports.

[ag futbol]

That's a great idea! I said grass would need to be grown indoors because without the help of heat/water/protection from frost/snow grass wouldn't grow in Toronto in Feb/March/April/Oct/Nov/Dec. It's just too cold and there's too much snow and frost. But that's a WAY better idea. Even if supports are needed at least damage to the actual pitch would be minimal. I'm sure an engineer could figure out how to distribute the weight without damaging the grass below.
The biggest issues with the indoor areas and growing grass is about air circulation and sunlight. I took a tour of Ajax's stadium and they said it's a pretty common problem in all these new relatively closed off facilities. They drag in what look like huge plant lights and fans when the team isn't playing to make sure the surface stays in good shape.

[brad]

To me, it just shows that you can actually physically move a grass pitch. I'm sure there are other measures that would have to be taken as well to make it work here, but just trying to hold out hope something like that could be used if we are forced into the same venue.

I had to dig, but I knew I'd heard about this before. It was during the World Cup in Korea Japan - they had a stadium with a retractable pitch. The initial purpose was to get the entire pitch into the sun (grass in large stadiums often suffers due to the stadium blocking sunlight.

It is now used for football and baseball - they swap the pitches. Grass for football, turf for baseball.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapporo_Dome

New to me - Schalke and Vitesse also use the same technology.

[greatwhitenorf]

Sorry Auzzy, but the idea of placing a structure above a stationary grass pitch is not new. London's Wembley Stadium was designed to incorporate such a system. Beneath the grass pitch are a series of metal footings. The plan calls for grass and soil above them to be extracted and metal pilings and support beams installed to form a support system that a steel floor sits on top of. The designed set it high enough that lighting fixtures and fans could be rigged to keep the grass lit and healthy while an event took place topside.

After the event, the floor would be removed, stored and new grass and soil plugs placed back in over the footings. In a small footprint of land, this makes abundant sense, as the floor structure can be dismantled and placed in a relatively compact storage area. The effect on Wembley was to reduce capacity from 90k to about 75k as the raised floor covered about 10 rows of seats. The idea was to make this incredibly over-budget palace viable for other sports, including possibly being the main stadium for the 2012 Olympics.

Sadly for Britain, a series of egos demanded a site that held 80k and the system for Wembley was never implemented. Another incredibly foolish amount of money was then spent to build a new Olympic stadium that, post-Olympics, continues to be a drain on the public purse.

Given the implied costs that would arise to put in the sort of mechanized, movable stands that Leiweke has hinted at, it wouldn't shock me to learn that MLSE would want to stage an annual outdoor Leafs game, regardless of what the NHL does at New Year. Add in the CFL, concerts and it would be a busy little joint, then.

The National Soccer Stadium. Sigh. The seats are bound to be green. The colour of money.

[Waggy]

The biggest issues with the indoor areas and growing grass is about air circulation and sunlight. I took a tour of Ajax's stadium and they said it's a pretty common problem in all these new relatively closed off facilities. They drag in what look like huge plant lights and fans when the team isn't playing to make sure the surface stays in good shape.

I'm sure if any club would know how to best make things grow in suboptimal conditions it'd be Ajax. Why they could grow a soccer pitch in a basement....

[jimiv]

It does seem that the Argos are on their way in, it bothers me to no end that Canada or Toronto can't support a Professional Soccer Stadium, however it leads to 2 new questions...
Will MLSE change the colours of TFC to some sort of Blue to match the Leafs and Argos (so the seats can match all three teams) and... will MLSE purchase new turf for the season that we are forced to watch our beloved team play at the Skydome?

[Bantamfan]

Toronto can support a professional soccer stadium.. The fact is, is that they are not allowed to..
Everyone eelse want a piece of soccer to the detriment of the game.

[TFC07]

Toronto can support a professional soccer stadium.. The fact is, is that they are not allowed to..
Everyone eelse want a piece of soccer to the detriment of the game.

Agreed. It's football (as in gridiron) can't be supported in Toronto. Proof is Argos despite being a winning team who have recently won Grey Cup. CFL TV ratings are great, but like MLS, CFL gets most of their revenue from gates not TV money. Plus, CFL players are excepted to get a raise next year so new TV contract money isn't going to help Argos to make a profit or make attract to sell to investors.

Problem with Toronto is that most of North America cities can't support professional soccer club in the past which left us without a league to play in. But hopefully, MLS can strive for very long time though.

Technically speaking, MLSE don't own stadium and they don't have to do anything to improve BMO field. So if MLSE don't want Argos coming to BMO field, but City of Toronto does, then tell City to pay for renovation. Let's see if City really wants to save Argos or not.

I love it how CFL fans like to point out how BMO field is taxpayer funded (mostly), but not realize that it was build for FIFA Under 20 world cup and Canadian national soccer teams. Argos at the time single handedly almost killed Toronto's chance of hosting FIFA Under 20 world cup when they ditch CSA and government in the last minute to accept Rogers Centre deal. Now they're whining about not having a home. Karma is a bitch,eh?!

Only party we should direct our concerns here is MLSE because end of the day, City of Toronto and Argos aren't going to pay for renovation. Tim Leiweke said in 6 months he will ask TFC fanbase after he done his study with team of engineers on BMO field renovation plans.

[Richard]

I'm wonder what would happen if TL said no to the Argo's idea outright, what sort of backlash could he get from the city. I really wonder how this conversation would be going if MLSE did own the stadium.

[TFC07]

I'm just wonder what happens if TL outright says no to the Argo's idea, what sort of backlash could he get from the city. I really wonder how this conversation would be going if MLSE did outright own the stadium.

There will be no backlash since City hasn't shown any interest of saving Argos or finding them a home.

The real issue here is that MLSE is trying to get all 3 level of governments to fund BMO field and in return, they will accept Argos (so government can make more money in their investment by having another tenant) moving in as long it doesn't affect soccer experience.

Of course, real agenda here is hosting winter classic games for Maple Leafs for once a year.

[Richard]

There will be no backlash since City hasn't shown any interest of saving Argos or finding them a home.

The real issue here is that MLSE is trying to get all 3 level of governments to fund BMO field and in return, they will accept Argos (so government can make more money in their investment by having another tenant) moving in as long it doesn't affect soccer experience.

Of course, real agenda here is hosting winter classic games for Maple Leafs for once a year.

Yeah your right, I totally forgot about the winter classic angle.

[Shway]

Will MLSE change the colours of TFC to some sort of Blue to match the Leafs and Argos (so the seats can match all three teams) and... will MLSE purchase new turf for the season that we are forced to watch our beloved team play at the Skydome?

I definitely wouldn't be surprised, considering they were talking about rebranding the raptors, it makes sense....those are the only franchises that you can rebrand because of a lack of history. Argos no, Blue Jays no, Leafs.....

Come on you blues?

[Joe Kool]

There is some really big posts in here and I will read them when I am sober....holy shit. Just sayin'...

[Waggy]

There will be no backlash since City hasn't shown any interest of saving Argos or finding them a home.

The real issue here is that MLSE is trying to get all 3 level of governments to fund BMO field and in return, they will accept Argos (so government can make more money in their investment by having another tenant) moving in as long it doesn't affect soccer experience.

Of course, real agenda here is hosting winter classic games for Maple Leafs for once a year.

The city and province have tried to help the Argos a BUNCH of times. The Argos keep turning them down/fucking it up. The intent from city hall and the province is there though. They could've come into BMO when it was being built if they invested like 10 million bucks only, said no. Could've had the stadium at Varsity for 25-30 million only, said no. Got offered a similar deal at York U, said no. The Argos business side is arguably among the worst in the continent.

[TFC07]

The city and province have tried to help the Argos a BUNCH of times. The Argos keep turning them down/fucking it up. The intent from city hall and the province is there though. They could've come into BMO when it was being built if they invested like 10 million bucks only, said no. Could've had the stadium at Varsity for 25-30 million only, said no. Got offered a similar deal at York U, said no. The Argos business side is arguably among the worst in the continent.

So in other words: Argos have burned too many bridges to get support from government and universities now. This explains why we haven't heard a word from city or provincial government about Argos lately.

[Waggy]

So in other words: Argos have burned too many bridges to get support from government and universities now. This explains why we haven't heard a word from city or provincial government about Argos lately.


Aren't we only having this discussion because the city/province said the only way they'd kick in cash to expand BMO is if it housed the Argos too? What are we talking about? In the past 3 years the Feds/Provinces have subsidized CFL stadiums in Regina, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Hamilton and Vancouver. You think for a second they wouldn't in Toronto? Also the owners who turned down those opportunities are long gone and a SITTING CANADIAN SENATOR is the current owner. The only way a stadium being built in Toronto in the near future gets a cent of public money is if it's for either the CFL or the olympics. The questions are how badly does MLSE want that free money and how badly do they want an NFL team. If the answers are they'd like it, and a lot, start painting BMO oxford blue now. But don't be ridiculous. The CFL is the only sport in the country that gets a whiff of public money. If the Argos got taken over by someone other than MLSE and they wanted to build a stadium at Varsity or Downsview, believe me the cost to that owner for a brand new 30 000+ seat stadium would still only be in the 20-30 million range for the owner.

[Pookie]

Agreed. It's football (as in gridiron) can't be supported in Toronto. Proof is Argos despite being a winning team who have recently won Grey Cup. CFL TV ratings are great, but like MLS, CFL gets most of their revenue from gates not TV money.

Yep.

And last year the lowest they drew to a game was 18,211. In total, they drew 297,311 fans through 9 home regular season games and 35,418 to a playoff game.

MLSE's deal with the city (for soccer) is that they keep 93% of the gate receipts and 7% goes to the "stadium" or a max of $15k per game. Interestingly, MLSE also gets over $200k annually from the city to "manage" the stadium. One could speculate that the Argo deal would be as lucrative.

Remember this too, the CSA keeps 93% of the gate receipts for games held at BMO.

Why does this matter?

To buy the Argos, MLSE would invest less than what it cost to bring Defoe here. And for that, they get at least 9 rental dates and close to 300,000 tickets sold for which they would most likely keep almost all of the revenue.

To equal that return, TFC would have to draw just under 11,000 additional fans to each of its 19 home games and remember too that the Argos fee would be a one time cost whereas replacing Defoe with the next one is an ongoing premise.

Regardless, you keep saying the city doesn't support the Argos. This isn't about sentiment, this is about booking high yielding events/dates at a venue that MLSE profits in. CSA games mean squat to MLSE. TFC games are maxed out at 19 dates (plus maybe a playoff game). The main way they grow revenue is to increase ticket prices and I'd bet that starts as soon as next year.

CFL games matter. New dates. New revenue. For less than they just invested. It's a no brainer.

[TFC07]

Aren't we only having this discussion because the city/province said the only way they'd kick in cash to expand BMO is if it housed the Argos too? What are we talking about? In the past 3 years the Feds/Provinces have subsidized CFL stadiums in Regina, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Hamilton and Vancouver. You think for a second they wouldn't in Toronto? Also the owners who turned down those opportunities are long gone and a SITTING CANADIAN SENATOR is the current owner. The only way a stadium being built in Toronto in the near future gets a cent of public money is if it's for either the CFL or the olympics. The questions are how badly does MLSE want that free money and how badly do they want an NFL team. If the answers are they'd like it, and a lot, start painting BMO oxford blue now. But don't be ridiculous. The CFL is the only sport in the country that gets a whiff of public money. If the Argos got taken over by someone other than MLSE and they wanted to build a stadium at Varsity or Downsview, believe me the cost to that owner for a brand new 30 000+ seat stadium would still only be in the 20-30 million range for the owner.

Problem is City isn't going to spend a dime on Argos (especially election coming up end of the year) while Provincial government is broke. Federal government aren't spend a dime since they're hell bent to have a surplus by 2015. There are rumours that some of 905 cities are interested in building a stadium with Argos. So that's only taxpayer money I can see where Argos can cash in.

End of the day, it's MLSE who control the situation and possibly fate of Argos.

[TFC07]

Yep.

And last year the lowest they drew to a game was 18,211. In total, they drew 297,311 fans through 9 home regular season games and 35,418 to a playoff game.

MLSE's deal with the city (for soccer) is that they keep 93% of the gate receipts and 7% goes to the "stadium" or a max of $15k per game. Interestingly, MLSE also gets over $200k annually from the city to "manage" the stadium. One could speculate that the Argo deal would be as lucrative.

Remember this too, the CSA keeps 93% of the gate receipts for games held at BMO.

Why does this matter?

To buy the Argos, MLSE would invest less than what it cost to bring Defoe here. And for that, they get at least 9 rental dates and close to 300,000 tickets sold for which they would most likely keep almost all of the revenue.

To equal that return, TFC would have to draw just under 11,000 additional fans to each of its 19 home games and remember too that the Argos fee would be a one time cost whereas replacing Defoe with the next one is an ongoing premise.

Regardless, you keep saying the city doesn't support the Argos. This isn't about sentiment, this is about booking high yielding events/dates at a venue that MLSE profits in. CSA games mean squat to MLSE. TFC games are maxed out at 19 dates (plus maybe a playoff game). The main way they grow revenue is to increase ticket prices and I'd bet that starts as soon as next year.

CFL games matter. New dates. New revenue. For less than they just invested. It's a no brainer.

No way Argos had that many people coming to the games. There tons of empty seats in lower bowls for Argos this season! You know (being a TFC fan) they don't always announce right amount of people at games.

As for their playoff game against Hamilton, half of fans were from Hamilton.

Argo fanbase isn't that big despite TV numbers say, upside owning CFL team isn't worth it to hurt your other assets in the end. So it's no brainer especially if NFL decides to come to Toronto (which will kill Argos despite NFL not wanting to hurt CFL).

[Waggy]

Yep.

And last year the lowest they drew to a game was 18,211. In total, they drew 297,311 fans through 9 home regular season games and 35,418 to a playoff game.

MLSE's deal with the city (for soccer) is that they keep 93% of the gate receipts and 7% goes to the "stadium" or a max of $15k per game. Interestingly, MLSE also gets over $200k annually from the city to "manage" the stadium. One could speculate that the Argo deal would be as lucrative.

Remember this too, the CSA keeps 93% of the gate receipts for games held at BMO.

Why does this matter?

To buy the Argos, MLSE would invest less than what it cost to bring Defoe here. And for that, they get at least 9 rental dates and close to 300,000 tickets sold for which they would most likely keep almost all of the revenue.

To equal that return, TFC would have to draw just under 11,000 additional fans to each of its 19 home games and remember too that the Argos fee would be a one time cost whereas replacing Defoe with the next one is an ongoing premise.

Regardless, you keep saying the city doesn't support the Argos. This isn't about sentiment, this is about booking high yielding events/dates at a venue that MLSE profits in. CSA games mean squat to MLSE. TFC games are maxed out at 19 dates (plus maybe a playoff game). The main way they grow revenue is to increase ticket prices and I'd bet that starts as soon as next year.

CFL games matter. New dates. New revenue. For less than they just invested. It's a no brainer.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/football/report-tsn-and-cfl-agree-on-deal-worth-40-million-a-year/article10053800/

The new MLS deal in the states is worth what, 70 million?

"The deal with TSN, which runs from 2014 through 2018, is worth in the neighbourhood of $40 million per season, according to a league source."

The CFL Salary cap last year was $4.4 million. Next year there will be 10 teams.... the gate/food and drink is pure profit. Let alone the extra ad revenue. These teams are making good money. Even 20 000 people at an average of $35 a ticket plus what, $10 food and drink? $45 a head on 20 000 people is pure profit after the regular employee overhead (and other building costs) for opening a building up on a day it otherwise wouldn't be in use. It ain't chump change. Which is why it's stupid there's any need to combine stadiums. TFC and the Argos can each be very profitable in their own stadiums. The profit margin doesn't really change much from having them share a facility, it's just less initial overhead on purchasing the Argos and saving whatever amounts governments would kick in to upgrade BMO. Which I guess would save MLSE somewhere between 50 and 100 million bucks, depending how much of our money they get. I have a hard time believing that 50-100 mil is worth the kind of potential damage that could be done to both fan bases.

[TFC07]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/football/report-tsn-and-cfl-agree-on-deal-worth-40-million-a-year/article10053800/

The new MLS deal in the states is worth what, 70 million?

"The deal with TSN, which runs from 2014 through 2018, is worth in the neighbourhood of $40 million per season, according to a league source."

The CFL Salary cap last year was $4.4 million. Next year there will be 10 teams.... the gate/food and drink is pure profit. Let alone the extra ad revenue. These teams are making good money. Even 20 000 people at an average of $35 a ticket plus what, $10 food and drink? $45 a head on 20 000 people is pure profit after the regular employee overhead (and other building costs) for opening a building up on a day it otherwise wouldn't be in use. It ain't chump change. Which is why it's stupid there's any need to combine stadiums. TFC and the Argos can each be very profitable in their own stadiums. The profit margin doesn't really change much from having them share a facility, it's just less initial overhead on purchasing the Argos and saving whatever amounts governments would kick in to upgrade BMO. Which I guess would save MLSE somewhere between 50 and 100 million bucks, depending how much of our money they get. I have a hard time believing that 50-100 mil is worth the kind of potential damage that could be done to both fan bases.

You're forgetting to add that player salary is going up next season. TV money is going to increase $2 million more, but so CFL players salaries (no one knows how much yet). Argos haven't made a profit despite playing for free in Rogers centre in years. Operating their own stadium is going to be add more costs to Argos which will hurt their bottom line or barely make a profit at most.

So I can see why being owned by MLSE and sharing with TFC would be a good idea for them.

[ensco]

I still don't really understand the why.

Why is Leiweke so focused on renovating/expanding BMO? What is the big interest? It's not critical to TFC, and why does he care about the Argos problems? It does nothing for the NFL idea (which I consider absurd personally).

I don't really see how MLSE gets a return on the $100M (or whatever this would cost them) other than, possibly, outdoor hockey. Which only matters if he moves a lot of games outdoors. Which seems unlikely.

I feel like we are all missing something obvious.

[Pookie]

^ I too have a raised eyebrow. I get why the Argos makes sense. I don't get why the stadium investment makes sense.

BMO was built so that it could be expanded to accommodate the Argos as per the original agreement. I believe there was also agreement around the fact that if the Argos moved in, that MLSE would not be responsible for the renovation costs.

Particularly since that level of investment would be in a building that they technically do not own and the management agreement ends in 13 years. It would be like renovating a rented apartment.

Unless.... the investment were to be leveraged for eventual ownership of the building and perhaps the deed to the land around it... and/or enable the construction of a development complex around the stadium (condos, hotels, etc). Then the millions would be seen in the context of other millions that enabled them access to a very large development.

That's a scenario that could make sense.... couldn't it?

[TFC07]

I still don't really understand the why.

Why is Leiweke so focused on renovating/expanding BMO? What is the big interest? It's not critical to TFC, and why does he care about the Argos problems? It does nothing for the NFL idea (which I consider absurd personally).

I don't really see how MLSE gets a return on the $100M (or whatever this would cost them) other than, possibly, outdoor hockey. Which only matters if he moves a lot of games outdoors. Which seems unlikely.

I feel like we are all missing something obvious.

Maybe TL wants to host major soccer games (having major clubs and countries playing at BMO field during the summer)? Maple Leafs is obviously another big reason why TL wants spend $100 million on BMO field. Let's face it: ACC is too small and I am sure Maple Leafs are looking to play a game outdoors at least once a year where they can make more money. Argos thing is more about getting government money (which isn't going happened based on current reality) while TFC is all about rewarding current fanbase while attracting suits to come to BMO field to watch TFC play.

[TFC07]

^ I too have a raised eyebrow. I get why the Argos makes sense. I don't get why the stadium investment makes sense.

BMO was built so that it could be expanded to accommodate the Argos as per the original agreement. I believe there was also agreement around the fact that if the Argos moved in, that MLSE would not be responsible for the renovation costs.

Particularly since that level of investment would be in a building that they technically do not own and the management agreement ends in 13 years. It would be like renovating a rented apartment.

Unless.... the investment were to be leveraged for eventual ownership of the building and perhaps the deed to the land around it... and/or enable the construction of a development complex around the stadium (condos, hotels, etc). Then the millions would be seen in the context of other millions that enabled them access to a very large development.

That's a scenario that could make sense.... couldn't it?

There will a lot of backlash from locals if MLSE or someone else started building condos and hotels on Exhibition grounds and Ontario place. We all know what happened with casino idea when someone wanted to set up a casino there.

[Beach_Red]

^ I too have a raised eyebrow. I get why the Argos makes sense. I don't get why the stadium investment makes sense.

BMO was built so that it could be expanded to accommodate the Argos as per the original agreement. I believe there was also agreement around the fact that if the Argos moved in, that MLSE would not be responsible for the renovation costs.

Particularly since that level of investment would be in a building that they technically do not own and the management agreement ends in 13 years. It would be like renovating a rented apartment.

Unless.... the investment were to be leveraged for eventual ownership of the building and perhaps the deed to the land around it... and/or enable the construction of a development complex around the stadium (condos, hotels, etc). Then the millions would be seen in the context of other millions that enabled them access to a very large development.

That's a scenario that could make sense.... couldn't it?

But there is an extra layer of burocracy at the Exhibition isn't there? If the land in question was just city-owned it would be different. This is a lot of government to be dealing with, a lot of levels that just don't like each other.

It is going to be interesting to see what plays out here.

[Haddy]

There will a lot of backlash from locals if MLSE or someone else started building condos and hotels on Exhibition grounds and Ontario place. We all know what happened with casino idea when someone wanted to set up a casino there.

HK Hotels are building a hotel at the CNE right now. It's being built in time for the Pan Am event there.

There will be a Toronto military exhibit incorporated into the facility. Apparently they found some artifacts digging up the parking lot.

http://urbantoronto.ca/database/projects/hotel-x-was-hotel-garden

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/property-report/new-hotel-at-cne-to-tell-story-of-early-toronto/article5664040/

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2013/09/07/contaminated_soil_slows_exhibition_place_hotel_dev elopment.html

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/files/imagecache/display-default/images/projects/6113/urbantoronto-6113-19556.jpg

[Haddy]

BMO was built so that it could be expanded to accommodate the Argos as per the original agreement.

I'd love to dispute this, but the south stand was never built to last. If they were 100% committed to a permanent south stand at the current dimensions......the building structure of the west stand would have been wrapped around. But once the Argos dropped out, money became a real issue - too many unsure about a very unfamiliar MLS at the time. So they decided to strip it down to bare-bones and reach their ultimate goal in phases.

The door might have been closed on the Argos for a bit. But it was never locked.

[Haddy]

I still don't really understand the why.

Why is Leiweke so focused on renovating/expanding BMO? What is the big interest? It's not critical to TFC, and why does he care about the Argos problems? It does nothing for the NFL idea (which I consider absurd personally).

I don't really see how MLSE gets a return on the $100M (or whatever this would cost them) other than, possibly, outdoor hockey. Which only matters if he moves a lot of games outdoors. Which seems unlikely.

I feel like we are all missing something obvious.

I can't remember if I read or heard this from TL - paraphrasing - something about the extra 10,000 seats over the long haul will go a long way to balancing the books for TFC.

I'm not sure if that helps you.

[ensco]

There's definitely a big real estate deal in this somewhere.

Could they have their eye on something much bigger involving the Ontario Place site as part of this? They're virtually tearing BMO down to make it work for football, could the real game involve moving the stadium? Winning the Ontario Place redevelopment might make all this worth someone's time.

[Pookie]

There's definitely a big real estate deal in this somewhere.

Could they have their eye on something much bigger involving the Ontario Place site as part of this? They're virtually tearing BMO down to make it work for football, could the real game involve moving the stadium? Winning the Ontario Place redevelopment might make all this worth someone's time.

AEG was involved in casinos. Speculation of course but that was rumoured for the Ontario Place site.

The value of the redevelopment wouldn't necessitate a casino for it to be mega profitable. Just found it interesting.

[ensco]

I can't remember if I read or heard this from TL - paraphrasing - something about the extra 10,000 seats over the long haul will go a long way to balancing the books for TFC.

I'm not sure if that helps you.

I don't believe 10K of extra seating for TFC, and the odd hockey game, is worth this kind of money, or political capital. There has to be a bigger objective imho.

[Pookie]

I'd love to dispute this, but the south stand was never built to last. If they were 100% committed to a permanent south stand at the current dimensions......the building structure of the west stand would have been wrapped around. But once the Argos dropped out, money became a real issue - too many unsure about a very unfamiliar MLS at the time. So they decided to strip it down to bare-bones and reach their ultimate goal in phases.

The door might have been closed on the Argos for a bit. But it was never locked.

True. It was also included in public documents related to the construction of the stadium. For example, this was from a policy document published by the City of Toronto regarding the project:

(ii) 20,000-seat stadium (capable of expansion to 30,000 seats and capable of conversion to a
football format) with luxury viewing suites, premier seating, FIFA specifications
including artificial field turf, food and beverage concessions and an air supported winter
field structure

There was also discussion of an "Argos Clause"

6. Argos Clause: The “favoured nations clause” restrictions on the Argos shall
include the stipulation that in no event shall an agreement with the Argos result in
MLSE having to make additional capital cost contributions or fund capital cost
shortfalls. The Argos shall not receive a share of parking revenues from their games
which is as favourable or more favourable than that enjoyed by the Team. The Argos
may participate in suite or sponsorship revenues where such are incremental
revenues derived from the Argos’ use of the Stadium, provided that the sharing shall
not result in an adverse effect on receipts allocated to the Team or Stadium.

The above is interesting because, as ensco points out, this rumoured investment of $100M doesn't have to happen.

MLSE does not have to make an investment in the stadium to fit the Argos as long as ownership of the team doesn't change. If MLSE buys them, then presumably they would be responsible for the renovation costs. The issue is that they could do this very inexpensively as the stadium was designed to accommodate them.

Paying $100M, if that is in fact their intention, would be a choice and businesses don't invest money they don't have to without a return. I've got to think it is going to be used for leverage related to real estate or some share of the intended use of the grounds in or around it. Just pure speculation on my part but there is a puzzle piece missing.

[Waggy]

The real estate thing would make a lot of sense. And forget a casino, we know what MLSE really wants to do is build an NFL stadium. Which would require a LOT of land. And I'm sure they'd like it to be downtown, as close to real sports/the acc/the dome and BMO as possible. I've heard worse ideas than a huge freaking stadium on the Ontario Place grounds. Then they could build a 'real sports west' for Ricoh/BMO/el grande stadium. Hell. The Dome is getting old, Rogers may even have an eye towards a new baseball stadium in the next decade...

[Beach_Red]

^ Is Bon Jovi a good enough front man to get them into the incredibly private club of the NFL? And why would Bell want a stadium and a team when they already have the rights to the entire league? What would eight home games get a media company? Would NFL ratings be noticeably higher with a last-place Toronto team in the league?

MLSE used to build condos but that market seems too competitive for them now. Bell also like to be in areas that don't have foreign comoetition, what's left?

[Haddy]

True. It was also included in public documents related to the construction of the stadium. For example, this was from a policy document published by the City of Toronto regarding the project:

(ii) 20,000-seat stadium (capable of expansion to 30,000 seats and capable of conversion to a
football format) with luxury viewing suites, premier seating, FIFA specifications
including artificial field turf, food and beverage concessions and an air supported winter
field structure

There was also discussion of an "Argos Clause"

6. Argos Clause: The “favoured nations clause” restrictions on the Argos shall
include the stipulation that in no event shall an agreement with the Argos result in
MLSE having to make additional capital cost contributions or fund capital cost
shortfalls. The Argos shall not receive a share of parking revenues from their games
which is as favourable or more favourable than that enjoyed by the Team. The Argos
may participate in suite or sponsorship revenues where such are incremental
revenues derived from the Argos’ use of the Stadium, provided that the sharing shall
not result in an adverse effect on receipts allocated to the Team or Stadium.

The above is interesting because, as ensco points out, this rumoured investment of $100M doesn't have to happen.

MLSE does not have to make an investment in the stadium to fit the Argos as long as ownership of the team doesn't change. If MLSE buys them, then presumably they would be responsible for the renovation costs. The issue is that they could do this very inexpensively as the stadium was designed to accommodate them.

Paying $100M, if that is in fact their intention, would be a choice and businesses don't invest money they don't have to without a return. I've got to think it is going to be used for leverage related to real estate or some share of the intended use of the grounds in or around it. Just pure speculation on my part but there is a puzzle piece missing.


Definitely something missing. If I recall correctly, the original CNE stadium plan that included the Argos (before York and Varsity) included a hotel. Perhaps they are still interested along those lines? Condo maybe. Lord knows, Liberty Village is filling up.

I agree with you and Ensco. What does MLSE get out of this?

[Waggy]

^ Is Bon Jovi a good enough front man to get them into the incredibly private club of the NFL? And why would Bell want a stadium and a team when they already have the rights to the entire league? What would eight home games get a media company? Would NFL ratings be noticeably higher with a last-place Toronto team in the league?

MLSE used to build condos but that market seems too competitive for them now. Bell also like to be in areas that don't have foreign comoetition, what's left?

Because allegedly the NFL has been telling people from Toronto if they want an NFL team one of the conditions is taking care of the Argos and keeping them viable. Also why wouldn't Bell want to pay itself to show its own games? That's why Rogers bought the Jays right? And NFL doesnt care about ratings. Their ratings are untouchable. They care about having new stadiums and selling merch. If Toronto builds that stadium, we'll have a team. If LA builds that stadium, they'll have 2 teams. If London builds that stadium etc. etc. How do you think cities like Jacksonville got a team? Build a stadium and the NFL will be there. Stadium becomes outdated and you won't build another one? Ask LA Raiders/Rams or Cleveland Browns fans how that goes.

Also the thing with Toronto is that the Bills ARE moving. The only question is where they move to. The NFL considers Toronto to be inside the Bills current area, so moving to Toronto wouldn't interfere with any other regional TV deals, national TV deals or infringe on any other teams territory. The only way the Bills dont come to Toronto by the 2022 deadline (or whenever their lease at Ralph Wilson expires) is if we don't build a stadium. So basically if MLSE want the team need to A) get to work taking care of the Argos and b) get to work building that stadium. The ownership group will take care of itself between Bon Jovi, Tannenbaum, Leiweke and a few other big rollers in the GTA (hell, maybe even Drake), the 49% corporate part will be MLSE for sure. To me those are the dots that are connecting if the Argos thing also includes a real estate deal on the Exhibition or Ontario place grounds. Then they could build a high end hotel, lobby for a casino, build another epic sports bar etc. And have 3 of their 5 properties within a few hundred meters, and sharing parking. It all makes sense

[Kaz]

I don't believe 10K of extra seating for TFC, and the odd hockey game, is worth this kind of money, or political capital. There has to be a bigger objective imho.

I don't disagree with this at all.. if you spent $100m adding 10,000 new seats each seat would have to generate $10,000 in new business to break even. If you add in 9 Argo games, a winter classic every year and the TFC seats. Average $40 a ticket for a Argos game sold out every year will only net what 10 million. a single Winter Classic game with 40k seating at a $100 average is only 4 million, and the extra 10k seat sold out at a TFC game are lets say at $20-$40 a ticket is $3.7-7.4 million that is 18.2-21.4 million if you sell out every single game that is still 5 years to break even. Though if you add in Merch, and concession maybe they can make it all back in 5 years.

But at that point you really do need the Argos in the stadium, the money they are talking about just doesn't happen with out them. However TFC will be the ones bringing in much of the gate in that situation. (assuming a winning team)

[Haddy]

I don't disagree with this at all.. if you spent $100m adding 10,000 new seats each seat would have to generate $10,000 in new business to break even. If you add in 9 Argo games, a winter classic every year and the TFC seats. Average $40 a ticket for a Argos game sold out every year will only net what 10 million. a single Winter Classic game with 40k seating at a $100 average is only 4 million, and the extra 10k seat sold out at a TFC game are lets say at $20-$40 a ticket is $3.7-7.4 million that is 18.2-21.4 million if you sell out every single game that is still 5 years to break even. Though if you add in Merch, and concession maybe they can make it all back in 5 years.

But at that point you really do need the Argos in the stadium, the money they are talking about just doesn't happen with out them. However TFC will be the ones bringing in much of the gate in that situation. (assuming a winning team)

At that math, five years of paying off the debt followed by a couple decades of debt-free gate revenue. Sounds like a good deal to me. Better than any mortgage I've seen.

[Haddy]

Then they could build a high end hotel, lobby for a casino, build another epic sports bar etc. And have 3 of their 5 properties within a few hundred meters, and sharing parking. It all makes sense

The city's master plan of the CNE calls for another hotel to be built directly east of BMO. This is the second phase, after the boutique HK Hotel is completed (currently under construction) south of the automotive building.

[Waggy]

^ Is Bon Jovi a good enough front man to get them into the incredibly private club of the NFL? And why would Bell want a stadium and a team when they already have the rights to the entire league? What would eight home games get a media company? Would NFL ratings be noticeably higher with a last-place Toronto team in the league?

MLSE used to build condos but that market seems too competitive for them now. Bell also like to be in areas that don't have foreign comoetition, what's left?

Bon Jovi is sitting next to Robert Kraft in the Pats owners box at the AFC championship game. So seems like he knows some people

(Kraft is chairman of the NFL committee whose approval is needed to move a franchise)