PDA

View Full Version : The Case Against a Roof



Parkdale
02-03-2014, 09:47 AM
There's been a lot of talk about a roof lately… and it's been making me wonder… There has to be other people who aren't in favour of a roof (like me).

Let me elaborate for a minute. Parky gets up on his soapbox

Think back to all those great BMO field memories. How many of them were linked to the weather? Remember the sun coming out after a rain storm and watching the team turn it around? Remember that soaker against Vancouver where they had to delay the match twice, and we advanced because of it? Remember those hot summer days rolling into the stands after a tailgate and just loving the summer weather? Almost all of my awesome memories of BMO field are directly linked to 3 things – the crew of folks we're with in the stadium, the BMO experience, and on rare occasions, the team.

At the moment, Toronto FC is the only major league team playing outdoors in the city of Toronto. Sure the Blue Jays can open the roof, but that's still like sitting inside a convertible with the top down – it's not really outside. The connection has to be made between the overall atmosphere at BMO and the open-sky nature of the experience. The energy, vibe and spirit of the crowd isn't like anything else in stuffy old Toronto, and I think that being exposed to the elements is a key factor.

So what are the advantages of a roof? We'll be a bit louder, and that's a good thing, BUT remember how loud we were in 2007? You could hear a goal celebration from Queen Street! The stadium roared after every goal! A roof would let us hang banners from the rafters like at Jeld-Wen in Portland, but would that alone be worth risking openness of the South stands? Sure a roof would improve some things, but how would it detract from other things? Would the pros outweigh the cons? In my opinion – nope.

It's easy to see the roof as a concession to the fair weather fans. We're still going to be there, rain or shine, and there's lots of people in every section at BMO who brave the elements and don't let a little rain stop them. Would a roof be catering to the people who wouldn't be there unless it's a sunny afternoon? And let's not forget night games! With a roof they'd probably have to overlight the whole place. It wouldn't be like a boxing match where they light the ring and leave the crowd in relative darkness – it would be like the ACC. It's not going to be lit like an old European stadium, that just doesn't happen anymore. And would people be more inclined to sit during games if they felt like it was an indoor stadium? Part of me thinks so.

So there – a rambling mess of a thread, but there's a point in here somewhere. Some of us DON'T think a roof would be an improvement. In fact, I think it would effectively cut off the past. We've have a distinct line in time where "the good old days" ended.

So am I the only one? (it's grownup discussion time folks, so please, keep it civil and on topic)


Oh right…. You know the Argos are used to playing at the Skydome, so a stadium with a roof would be all that much more appealing to them.

CBTFC
02-03-2014, 09:53 AM
Sorry man...Sitting there in the scorching sun in the summer, or cold driving rain in the spring/fall just isn't enjoyable. And it would (will) sound SO much better in there with a roof to keep the sound in.

I look at newer MLS stadiums (i.e. SKC and Houston), and get serious stadium envy.

Fort York Redcoat
02-03-2014, 09:58 AM
Sunscreen. Water. I'm good.
Weather happens outside. Skydome is soulless.

Rain games are the loudest games. No roof necessary.
I don't go to games to feel comfy or relax, though.

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 10:05 AM
Sorry man...Sitting there in the scorching sun in the summer, or cold driving rain in the spring/fall just isn't enjoyable.

I guess that's the difference of opinion. Even when the weather is shit, I still enjoy it.


Sunscreen. Water. I'm good.
Weather happens outside. Skydome is soulless.

Rain games are the loudest games. No roof necessary.
I don't go to games to feel comfy or relax, though.

yeah, what he said.

TFC_Allez
02-03-2014, 10:15 AM
Valid points by all. But I would prefer a roof over my head. And even with a roof as described, we'll probably still get wet with a good down pour lol. Still waiting to see some leaked renderings of possible ideas though.

flatpicker
02-03-2014, 10:16 AM
I get what you're saying, Parky. But is it possible you are letting nostalgia affect your judgement? As TFC fans, we've had so little to get excited about and those rainy days did provide a moment of fun amoungst the misery. But surely things would be equally as exciting (or more so) if the team actually started winning while we watch with a roof over our heads. Also, I like a roof because it creates a more intimate feeling and a sense of being closer to the team and even our fellow fans. Besides, don't most soccer stadiums around the world have a roof over their fans? And they still manage some electric atmosphere.

MartinUtd
02-03-2014, 10:21 AM
The thing about the roof is, it's only supposed to cover the seating areas, not the entire field. You'll still get that "sun coming out" moment and you'll still get wet depending on which way the wind is blowing.

Otherwise I see a few sparse sentimental reasons that are misguided at best. Sure we were loud in 2007 but imagine how much louder we would have been with acoustics. And the Vancouver game? That was cancelled due to lightning, not rain.

Fort York Redcoat
02-03-2014, 10:21 AM
I get what you're saying, Parky. But is it possible you are letting nostalgia affect your judgement? As TFC fans, we've had so little to get excited about and those rainy days did provide a moment of fun amoungst the misery. But surely things would be equally as exciting (or more so) if the team actually started winning while we watch with a roof over our heads. Also, I like a roof because it creates a more intimate feeling and a sense of being closer to the team and even our fellow fans. Besides, don't most soccer stadiums around the world have a roof over their fans? And they still manage some electric atmosphere.

You make a great point flats

Roof for EVERYONE ELSE! 3 sided roof no south!:scarf:

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 10:24 AM
Also, I like a roof because it creates a more intimate feeling and a sense of being closer to the team and even our fellow fans.

Would a roof really make it more intimate? That's one of those qualitative observations that's really hard to prove until it's been done.

But yes, I'm totally coming from a point of Nostalgia here, but there's no denying that the atmosphere has been a contributing factor to our gameday experience, and that atmosphere has always been outside.

I know it's apples to oranges, but how was the atmosphere at the Skydome CCL matches? Good, but not great. Sometimes on the road the experience is great, and other times just good. I'm just not sold that a roof will make the experience better.

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 10:25 AM
Roof for EVERYONE ELSE! 3 sided roof no south!

I've love to see the 'awning' thing on the west side extended and then one from the east side added. This way people who want protection from the elements could have it, while leaving the outdoor feeling intact.

Oldtimer
02-03-2014, 10:25 AM
So am I the only one?



You certainly are not the only one, but I think most of us would like a roof.

For me, it's not about fair-weather fans. For me it's about unifying chants, instead of having random noise. A roof lets one section hear what another section is doing.

ManUtd4ever
02-03-2014, 10:28 AM
It's a double edged sword. I would prefer no roof when the weather conditions are amicable, but there are just too many game days wherein the atmosphere suffers because of rain.

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 10:28 AM
Otherwise I see a few sparse sentimental reasons that are misguided at best.

yes they are sentimental, but I wouldn't say misguided when you factor in The Toronto Factor. The Skydome is a snore, the ACC is generally a bore. Ricoh is for kids and pretty much every convert is a bunch of people standing around tweeting. BMO field and the Toronto FC experience has been a freak anomaly in stuffy Toronto, and I think that being outside has been a huge contributing factor.

Could a roof be used to close the Argos case for good? Like if a roof was built that couldn't be moved or extended for a CFL field. That would be a winning situation.

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 10:30 AM
For me it's about unifying chants, instead of having random noise. A roof lets one section hear what another section is doing.

that's a very valid point.

Joe Kool
02-03-2014, 10:33 AM
I can see the point of the people that would be against the roof. There have been some memorable times. For me it is like this. My wife is a big fan of the team...not as big as me...but still a big fan and she is limited to how many games she can go to due to her disability because cold and rain are not a good combination for her. Getting wet in certain areas can actually be dangerous for her with her situation and the ponchos just don't always cut it to keep dry. If a roof means she can come out to enjoy more games with me then I am all for it. I do have some good memories with the nice weather and was always worried that a nice summer evening with the breeze blowing off the lake would be affected by the roof but I am hoping the pros outweigh the cons for me. I know I have a pretty unique situation to have to deal with. I just hope if done it is done right. That is all. I like the open air feeling.

MartinUtd
02-03-2014, 10:35 AM
yes they are sentimental, but I wouldn't say misguided when you factor in The Toronto Factor. The Skydome is a snore, the ACC is generally a bore. Ricoh is for kids and pretty much every convert is a bunch of people standing around tweeting. BMO field and the Toronto FC experience has been a freak anomaly in stuffy Toronto, and I think that being outside has been a huge contributing factor.

Could a roof be used to close the Argos case for good? Like if a roof was built that couldn't be moved or extended for a CFL field. That would be a winning situation.

When I was at Elland Road I could see the sky when I looked up on a 60 degree angle. It still felt like I was outside. I really don't see what you're driving at here. That they'll be more "plastic fans" with a roof? I think Jermaine Defoe (or any high profile DP) will bear more responsibility for that. Back in 2007 the new feeling might have had that magic to it, but I still remember hearing in the stands "Yeah bro, I could play with these guys. Fuck MLS".

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 10:40 AM
I really don't see what you're driving at here. That they'll be more "plastic fans" with a roof?

I wasn't driving at that, but if I had to follow that line of thinking.... If MLSE invests in a roof, it wouldn't be for the positives that we're looking for (better sound, banner space). It would be to make a more comfortable experience for the people who aren't standing in the south end. People can be sensitive to the weather without being "plastics" (like Joe Kool's example above).

Phil
02-03-2014, 10:58 AM
I think a roof would still have us feel that we are outside but have some cover from the elements - the best of both worlds.

It won't be a concreate tomb like skydome, depending of roof height and design it could be a real masterpiece.

I wont get my hopes up until the design images are out though.

OgtheDim
02-03-2014, 11:00 AM
Given the recent talk of MLSE actively trying to figure out how to get noise happening in the lower bowl at Leafs games, I would give them the benefit of the doubt about wanting to use a roof to create a better atmosphere at BMO. Atmosphere creates buzz which creates ticket sales and beer sales and merch sales, and most importantly for these owners, sells eyeballs on TV, ears on radio and clicks on the net. They sent out people to look at other stadiums and came back from places like Sporting Park with ideas. Done right, this could help out.

ManUtd4ever
02-03-2014, 11:06 AM
I think a roof would still have us feel that we are outside but have some cover from the elements - the best of both worlds.

It won't be a concreate tomb like skydome, depending of roof height and design it could be a real masterpiece.

I wont get my hopes up until the design images are out though.

It will be interesting to see the schematics for the sections of the roof that will cover the retractable seats in the North and South ends.

flatpicker
02-03-2014, 11:07 AM
yes they are sentimental, but I wouldn't say misguided when you factor in The Toronto Factor. The Skydome is a snore, the ACC is generally a bore. Ricoh is for kids and pretty much every convert is a bunch of people standing around tweeting. BMO field and the Toronto FC experience has been a freak anomaly in stuffy Toronto, and I think that being outside has been a huge contributing factor.

Could a roof be used to close the Argos case for good? Like if a roof was built that couldn't be moved or extended for a CFL field. That would be a winning situation.

A roof has nothing to do with the weak atmosphere and baseball and hockey games. Baseball fans (with a few exceptions) are generally a quiet bunch who treat game days like a pleasant picnic with friends while they discuss statistics and eat hotdogs. The ACC it terrible because most of the truly passionate fans are watching the game on tv. Can you imagine if there was a supporter section at the ACC which had low price tickets dedicated to the true hockey fanatics? Did you catch that recent Star article (http://www.thestar.com/sports/2014/01/28/leiweke_hints_mlse_may_buy_argonauts_with_eyes_on_ future_nfl_team.html)?...



Another tidbit Leiweke let slip — throwing in an “am I going to get in trouble for doing this?” directed at his PR team — was a new program starting next NHL season to give away a “couple hundred” Leafs tickets each regular season game. The tickets will go to the members of Leafs Nation, those who have never been able to afford the high ticket prices, who will attend a game for the first time as a guest of MLSE.


“We’ve got to introduce a new noise level, a new culture and a whole new generation of fans into that building,” he said.



When it comes to TFC, passionate fans can afford the ticket prices. Also, the sport has a history of vocal support which we North American fans can draw from and build upon. Hockey and baseball have little or no history of fans singing and chanting throughout a game. At least not much beyond a dull "Go *team name* Go". I've watched hockey games from Europe where fans behave as if they were football supporters. It's about accessibility and culture. Nothing to do with a roof.

Super
02-03-2014, 11:22 AM
Roof:

1. Greatly improved atmosphere
2. Bigger crowds on bad weather days
3. Stadium will look more professional

To me, it's really a no-brainer.

I understand that there are people who love the experience of standing in the sun, or in the rain, and signing in the rain, or whatever. But what good is singing in the rain when NO ONE outside of 112 can hear you? I've been in seats all over the stadium, and no matter the weather, no matter the game, I really can't hear much of anything coming from the south end. So is this just about personal preference?

To me this debate should be about what is best for the club. And a roof = bigger crowds and improved atmosphere. So again, no brainer to me.

Pint
02-03-2014, 11:25 AM
I personally enjoy rain games.... but I know i'm the minority on that one.

gdg_9
02-03-2014, 11:33 AM
I could see the arguments against a roof if we were talking about a full roof - i.e. an indoor stadium.

But with the awning-type roof that Lieweke has hinted at (i.e. EPL type stadiums), I really don't see the downside.
the pitch is still completely outdoor, the stands still have an outdoor feel (in most cases), but there is just that extra bit of protection from the elements for fans, and the improved acoustics to help enhance atmosphere and unify chants/songs.

As long as it is done properly, I really don't see a single downside to it!


... ... ...



I know it's apples to oranges, but how was the atmosphere at the Skydome CCL matches? Good, but not great.

While I generally agree that the Skydome is terrible, the CCL match against Beckham's Galaxy was one of the best sports atmosphere's i've ever experienced in this city!

That had nothing to do with the skydome, and everything to do with 30K-40K+ people in this town getting behind a winning (at least in CCL) football club.
Now imagine that, but at an expanded BMO (still outdoors, but with awnings covering stands), as opposed to the cold cavernous SkyDome.

If this team can play up to it's potential, the memory of that game gets me super excited for what's to come!

barticusz
02-03-2014, 11:34 AM
So you'd rather have the current bleacher setup and get rained on then have the following:

1. Improved concourse - likely winterized - therefore no skydome games
2. Roof over all seats creating intimacy, better noise retention and transfer through the stadium

I mean just take a look at some of the best stadiums for games right now.. Portland, KC.. compare those to partial or even open air stadiums in MLS and they blow them out of the water.

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 11:36 AM
To me this debate should be about what is best for the club. And a roof = bigger crowds and improved atmosphere. So again, no brainer to me.

totally agree. What's best for the club should be the driving factor.

I guess part of me just worries that the TFC experience as we know it will change with a roof, and I'm not totally sold that the change will be for the better. It will be louder, but will people still be singing? Sure hope so.

MartinUtd
02-03-2014, 11:38 AM
totally agree. What's best for the club should be the driving factor.

I guess part of me just worries that the TFC experience as we know it will change with a roof, and I'm not totally sold that the change will be for the better. It will be louder, but will people still be singing? Sure hope so.

It should increase synchronicity. Part of the problem of sitting in 110 was that I'd hear one chant to my left and another to the right. There's no sense in joining in either of them in that scenario.

Oldtimer
02-03-2014, 11:53 AM
totally agree. What's best for the club should be the driving factor.

I guess part of me just worries that the TFC experience as we know it will change with a roof, and I'm not totally sold that the change will be for the better. It will be louder, but will people still be singing? Sure hope so.

Let's look at Seattle's experience.

They did attract more plastic fans as they got the stadium and moved to MLS. However, real support increased as well. I would love to have Seattle-level support for TFC.

Detroit_TFC
02-03-2014, 11:57 AM
The sun baking people's brains is a bigger deal than shelter from rain. Canvas shade panels probably would be sufficient if it wasn't for the windy conditions.

OgtheDim
02-03-2014, 12:00 PM
While I generally agree that the Skydome is terrible, the CCL match against Beckham's Galaxy was one of the best sports atmosphere's i've ever experienced in this city!

That had nothing to do with the skydome, and everything to do with 30K-40K+ people in this town getting behind a winning (at least in CCL) football club.
Now imagine that, but at an expanded BMO (still outdoors, but with awnings covering stands), as opposed to the cold cavernous SkyDome.

If this team can play up to it's potential, the memory of that game gets me super excited for what's to come!

Agreed. That was an eye opener.....a full stadium of TFC supporters.


Heck, with closer seating in the open air but covered and an attacking team........there will be no incentives for paper airplanes. :)

Super
02-03-2014, 12:01 PM
totally agree. What's best for the club should be the driving factor.

I guess part of me just worries that the TFC experience as we know it will change with a roof, and I'm not totally sold that the change will be for the better. It will be louder, but will people still be singing? Sure hope so.

The TFC experience as we have known it for the past 4 years or so have been extremely bad. Honestly, it's 30 people trying to get chants going, and because of the lack of roof the sound won't travel far enough to where we can spread the atmosphere. Add to that the tons of rain games where nobody showed up. There's nothing of value to hold onto from the days without a roof.

C.Ronaldo
02-03-2014, 12:07 PM
I personally enjoy rain games.... but I know i'm the minority on that one.

thats because your not forced to sit while its pouring in a non supporters group section.

outside of supporters groups, the atmosphere has still been shot dead by rules and security

Pint
02-03-2014, 12:24 PM
thats because your not forced to sit while its pouring in a non supporters group section.

outside of supporters groups, the atmosphere has still been shot dead by rules and security

True... but if it is raining you can certainly stand up and walk over to a supporter section and join in. Nobody forces people to sit during rain, it is a conscious decision to not move into a standing section.

anyway like i said i know i'm in the minority with that sentiment.

Mark in Ottawa
02-03-2014, 12:33 PM
Might depend on the kind of roof. On TV I see stadiums with coverings that allow light to filter in so that you don't feel like you are sitting in a cave looking out the opening.

MightyDM
02-03-2014, 12:45 PM
I am with Parkdale - I like it the way it is. plus, when we call for a roof, the result will be Argos sharing the field and the justification that it was the only way to give the supporters what they wanted most - a roof. In other words, don't support a roof if you don't want the Argos at BMO.

ag futbol
02-03-2014, 12:54 PM
I would like a roof, but I will say this: the roof isn't being built for the supporters, the increased noise levels, or the people in the south stand. It's about creating a more controlled atmosphere that will help TFC cater to a wider audience, which includes the corporate crowd. Nothing wrong with that, and we stand to benefit from the project either way.

barticusz
02-03-2014, 01:03 PM
I am with Parkdale - I like it the way it is. plus, when we call for a roof, the result will be Argos sharing the field and the justification that it was the only way to give the supporters what they wanted most - a roof. In other words, don't support a roof if you don't want the Argos at BMO.

So you're saying that you'd rather have TFC play in the current set up than get a stadium renovation that will likley be on par with Sporting KC's if not better?

Some of the best stadiums in the world are using a hybrid turf and are considered to have the best field to play on, yet 10 CFL games are going to ruin it completely?

If TFC is fielding a winning team year in and out.. who cares if they are sharing a stadium, especially if they're playing in a place that is more than a high school footbal stadium in the states.

My point is: Let's wait and see what the design process will show. Why bother freaking out about something that you cannot control. They will involve the supporters in whatever decisions they will make. Leweike isn't dumb, he's been around for a while and he wants to create something exceptional here. Why would you try and stall that without having even seen what the proposal is?

Fort York Redcoat
02-03-2014, 01:40 PM
So you're saying that you'd rather have TFC play in the current set up than get a stadium renovation that will likley be on par with Sporting KC's if not better?

Some of the best stadiums in the world are using a hybrid turf and are considered to have the best field to play on, yet 10 CFL games are going to ruin it completely?

If TFC is fielding a winning team year in and out.. who cares if they are sharing a stadium, especially if they're playing in a place that is more than a high school footbal stadium in the states.

My point is: Let's wait and see what the design process will show. Why bother freaking out about something that you cannot control. They will involve the supporters in whatever decisions they will make. Leweike isn't dumb, he's been around for a while and he wants to create something exceptional here. Why would you try and stall that without having even seen what the proposal is?

Ruining the grass at all for a better shell makes no sense to me so yeah people are going to be mentioning it now before its gone.

Also, you mention high school football. Again with what it looks like being more important than whats played there?

JonO
02-03-2014, 01:41 PM
The sun baking people's brains is a bigger deal than shelter from rain. Canvas shade panels probably would be sufficient if it wasn't for the windy conditions.
Although a roof may keep the sun off people's heads, it also has the potential to keep a lot of heat trapped in the stands and make it feel hotter than it is...

T-boy
02-03-2014, 01:48 PM
A roof really keeps the supporter sound echoeing around in a football stadium. Whenever I go back to watch Oxford, they may only ge 5k supporters, but they are LOUD whenever they sing and chant just because the sound bounces off the roof. At BMO all the noise vanishes.

I don't think you can compare a European football stadium with a North American Eggball, Baseball or other stadiums as they are massive arena's. a 20k stadium should be both intimate and also intimidating. I remember Oxford's old stadium, it was only 12k capacity, but a lot of opposition players said that playing there was the worst experience just because the crowd were so close and the noise was super loud! The supporters section is as close at BMO, but all the noise created by the south east corner is just lost without a roof.

We need a roof, we really do. I think the difference in sound and atmosphere would amaze people!

flatpicker
02-03-2014, 01:49 PM
Although a roof may keep the sun off people's heads, it also has the potential to keep a lot of heat trapped in the stands and make it feel hotter than it is...

I dunno. As long as a breeze still finds it's way through the stadium it shouldn't be an issue.

C.Ronaldo
02-03-2014, 01:51 PM
I dunno. As long as a breeze still finds it's way through the stadium it shouldn't be an issue.

proper ventialtion and gravity (heat rises) will take of that

T-boy
02-03-2014, 01:57 PM
Sunscreen. Water. I'm good.
Weather happens outside. Skydome is soulless.

Rain games are the loudest games. No roof necessary.
I don't go to games to feel comfy or relax, though.

You can't compare the Skydome with the BMO with a roof. That's like comparing the atmosphere at a concert at the Horseshoe compared to the Molson Amphetheatre! The Skydone IS a soulless place, but then again, so is the Amphetheatre. If you have to compare "BMO with a roof" to anywhere, you need to compare it to another soccer stadium of equivolent size with a roof.

Red Bull Arena has 25k and a roof - what is the atmosphere like there, for example? Is it louder and more intimate feeling that BMO?

Fort York Redcoat
02-03-2014, 02:06 PM
You can't compare the Skydome with the BMO with a roof. That's like comparing the atmosphere at a concert at the Horseshoe compared to the Molson Amphetheatre! The Skydone IS a soulless place, but then again, so is the Amphetheatre. If you have to compare "BMO with a roof" to anywhere, you need to compare it to another soccer stadium of equivolent size with a roof.

Red Bull Arena has 25k and a roof - what is the atmosphere like there, for example? Is it louder and more intimate feeling that BMO?

It's a roof. I compare it. I don't care about the weather and intimacy is an excuse to change the stadium and share with the Argos. I don't need it.

If you want to talk about RBA I'll say I'll be jealous when they still have a proper grass pitch and we don't plus the Argos.

Fort York Redcoat
02-03-2014, 02:07 PM
I dunno. As long as a breeze still finds it's way through the stadium it shouldn't be an issue.

Haha breeze? Down by the Lake? Yeah I think we're good...

flatpicker
02-03-2014, 02:16 PM
Haha breeze? Down by the Lake? Yeah I think we're good...

yeah, that was why I said it.
No lack of wind down there.

Pookie
02-03-2014, 02:52 PM
It's possible to have both a roof and not a roof.

PPL Park in Philly is a good example. Partial roof over what would be our East and West sides. North and South ends fend for themselves in the elements. It is a beautiful stadium.

Red Rat
02-03-2014, 02:55 PM
I say build a roof and throw Parkdale on the roof!

Red4ever
02-03-2014, 03:00 PM
Roof. Need it for the casual fans and so we can hear ourselves chant. Anything that is going to carry sound is better. It's the most vital part of atmosphere.

backbeat
02-03-2014, 03:07 PM
I find it interesting that Real Madrid's new stadium plans and now Barcelona's new stadium plans both have retractable roofs and they have nowhere near the severe weather we do.

http://www.goal.com/en-ca/news/4184/spain/2014/02/03/4592666/barcelona-unveils-plans-for-new-camp-nou?ICID=HP_BN_3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8q30nseaJs

jabbronies
02-03-2014, 03:10 PM
So from Parky's initial post - it sounds like the roof would be closed off - similar to a skydone/olympic stadium?

I thought it would be closer to European style where the stands are somewhat covered and the pitch is open to the elements....??

Hustle
02-03-2014, 03:12 PM
My answer Depends on the design: I want an imposing atmosphere built into the design. Flat Roof and Rectangular.... Tell the designers that we want a building that children are almost afraid of entering. Our stadium needs to be imposing and look like a dungeon that somebody ripped part of the the roof off because the smell of dead competition inside it was starting to distract our boys. If they want to put a couple fiery torches on the walls here and there I am cool with that too, but that's just for bonus points. No fancy curves or bubbly looking lines and don't make the roof white...anything but white .... If they make the roof of our football stadium look like a piece of white chewing gum blown into a bubble or some quilt my grandma made or some type of futuristic landgoing sailboatship, I be going cray cray.

OgtheDim
02-03-2014, 03:26 PM
So from Parky's initial post - it sounds like the roof would be closed off - similar to a skydone/olympic stadium?

I thought it would be closer to European style where the stands are somewhat covered and the pitch is open to the elements....??

Nothing anybody has indicated has said ANYTHING about it being a dome like thing.

Apart from the obvious grass growing issue, and the cost involved, TL was very clear in saying "a roof over the fans" when talking to the media of late.

T-boy
02-03-2014, 04:10 PM
It's a roof. I compare it. I don't care about the weather and intimacy is an excuse to change the stadium and share with the Argos. I don't need it.

If you want to talk about RBA I'll say I'll be jealous when they still have a proper grass pitch and we don't plus the Argos.

You really can't just compare "a roof". It's like saying ALL cars are the same, or all houses, or all anything really! You have to make a like-for-like comparison. I don't particularly like MacDonalds, that doesn't mean to say I think all burgers are horrible, or I don't like Hershey chocolate, but doesn't mean I hate all chocolate.

I'm watching the Man City Chelsea game and the noise in that HUGE stadium is fantastic! You can't compare that to the terrible atmosphere in almost any Skydome sports game.

barticusz
02-03-2014, 04:15 PM
Ruining the grass at all for a better shell makes no sense to me so yeah people are going to be mentioning it now before its gone.

Also, you mention high school football. Again with what it looks like being more important than whats played there?

How do you know that the grass will be ruined?

I give you Emirates Stadium in London. Considered to have the best surface to play on in the EPL.
- Composed of DessoGrass (Hybrid) - similar to what is being mentioned for TFC so far.
- 28 games played on the surface during the current 2013/14 season - 18 games for TFC, 10 games for Argos

Centurylink Field in Seattle
- 18 games by the Sounders plus 8 games by the Seahawks
- Best attendence in all of MLS.
- Passionate soccer-first support and yet they are ok with playing in Century Link field and splitting time with an NFL club.

What if both teams could play on the same surface and the experience wasn't destroyed for either. Say this was possible and say it would provide you with a updated stadium that would improve the gameday experience for all. My hyoptheical situation is just as plausible as your assumption that the grass would be ruined and the Argo's will completely kill TFC's experience. I say, let's wait to see what is proposed.

barticusz
02-03-2014, 04:19 PM
My answer Depends on the design: I want an imposing atmosphere built into the design. Flat Roof and Rectangular.... Tell the designers that we want a building that children are almost afraid of entering. Our stadium needs to be imposing and look like a dungeon that somebody ripped part of the the roof off because the smell of dead competition inside it was starting to distract our boys. If they want to put a couple fiery torches on the walls here and there I am cool with that too, but that's just for bonus points. No fancy curves or bubbly looking lines and don't make the roof white...anything but white .... If they make the roof of our football stadium look like a piece of white chewing gum blown into a bubble or some quilt my grandma made or some type of futuristic landgoing sailboatship, I be going cray cray.

This. I hadn't thought of this before, but I completely agree. All we need to do is incorporate TFC's current colour scheme to the roof design, red, onyx.. and maybe a splash of white. Make it menacing.

gdg_9
02-03-2014, 04:29 PM
How do you know that the grass will be ruined?

I give you Emirates Stadium in London. Considered to have the best surface to play on in the EPL.
- Composed of DessoGrass (Hybrid) - similar to what is being mentioned for TFC so far.
- 28 games played on the surface during the current 2013/14 season - 18 games for TFC, 10 games for Argos

Centurylink Field in Seattle
- 18 games by the Sounders plus 8 games by the Seahawks
- Best attendence in all of MLS.
- Passionate soccer-first support and yet they are ok with playing in Century Link field and splitting time with an NFL club.

What if both teams could play on the same surface and the experience wasn't destroyed for either. Say this was possible and say it would provide you with a updated stadium that would improve the gameday experience for all. My hyoptheical situation is just as plausible as your assumption that the grass would be ruined and the Argo's will completely kill TFC's experience. I say, let's wait to see what is proposed.

Sorry, but i have to vehemently disagree with this.

First off, comparing 28 EPL games to 18 MLS + 10 Argos is nowhere near an accurate comparison.

American... sorry... Canadian Football is MUCH worse for a field than Soccer.
The play is all congregated in the middle between the hashes, and along each sidelines.
The repetitive nature of a bunch of behemoths trying to plow through eachother play after play in the same area of the field results in a torn up, destroyed pitch.

Second, I wouldn't trade BMO as it is now for Centruylink... it's not even a question.
Centurylink is field turf. That is a complete non-starter.

Guys like Henry refuse to play away games at Seattle because of it.
While it might be good that Seattle doesn't have to face guys like him at home, it also means there is ZERO chance of them ever signing a World Class player like that, so long as they play on that surface.

There is no way we would have landed Defoe if we still had turf, and very little chance Bradley would have come here either.

Hustle
02-03-2014, 04:40 PM
Parkdale is talking about roofs not grass. Tim L is concockting a crazy strain of supergrass in his basement right now with his 3 d printer. Grass is not a worry. Get back on topic. Hey did anyone see the president of the SanJose Quakes sporting google glasses at the unveiling of the logo...its going to take me a long time to get used to people looking that f'ed up. Roof!

Parkdale
02-03-2014, 05:11 PM
Tim L is concockting a crazy strain of supergrass in his basement right now...

well that got Rob Ford's attention!

I guess the kind of roof would make such a big difference. The problem being that some of the 'light' roof designs that still allow natural light and wind wouldn't do anything to amplify the sound. A classic 'tin shed' roof with a cement back wall would really make things loud, but also shitty.

something like this would be the best for eveyone:
http://www.timbers.com/sites/portlandtimbers.com/files/stadium.jpg

Gazza
02-03-2014, 06:55 PM
If we want to be taken seriously we do need a roof. I will never forget those weather-impacted games like the one last season against Columbus. The team going as nuts as the fans in a torrential downpour after scoring the tying and go-ahead goals. A real "all for one" moment. I think rain is brilliant during a football match in the summer, but it's also ridiculous to see half of the stadium emptying to the concourse.

A roof is needed for sound quality as well as protection from the elements. Not to mention, we'll look like a bonafide professional team.

Dave67
02-03-2014, 08:32 PM
I want a roof. Actually I want a sexy ass roof. Not some crappy just stuck on roof. But give me a sexy ass roof and giddy up.

ensco
02-03-2014, 08:33 PM
I put this elsewhere. This is what is coming, I'd wager.


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

MartinUtd
02-03-2014, 08:57 PM
Here's a wild idea: Canada wins the 2026 bid for the World Cup. MLSE commits to a large percentage of the costs associated with a brand new 70000 seat stadium at Downsview (or where ever works on the outskirts). The stadium is used for the tournament with the long term tenants being a split between the Argos and Toronto's new NFL team. BMO gets modest upgrades as a stop gap measure in the coming years and hopefully the tax payers aren't hung out to dry in the process.

jazzy
02-03-2014, 10:52 PM
The thing about the roof is, it's only supposed to cover the seating areas, not the entire field. You'll still get that "sun coming out" moment and you'll still get wet depending on which way the wind is blowing.

Otherwise I see a few sparse sentimental reasons that are misguided at best. Sure we were loud in 2007 but imagine how much louder we would have been with acoustics. And the Vancouver game? That was cancelled due to lightning, not rain.

have to agree......really important not to completely cover the stadium and have loads of sky though. Also really want those corners filled in.......want it packed all through that makes it cozy and all for one , :).....definitely like the elements...and still need proof that the cheap seats will have a roof....

jazzy
02-03-2014, 11:06 PM
Would a roof really make it more intimate? That's one of those qualitative observations that's really hard to prove until it's been done.

But yes, I'm totally coming from a point of Nostalgia here, but there's no denying that the atmosphere has been a contributing factor to our gameday experience, and that atmosphere has always been outside.

I know it's apples to oranges, but how was the atmosphere at the Skydome CCL matches? Good, but not great. Sometimes on the road the experience is great, and other times just good. I'm just not sold that a roof will make the experience better.

parky skydome sucks because its all cement , crazy distant from the field , poor angled sight lines and purposely made small size seats so they could shoehorn over 50,000 people in there....can't sit more than two innings there.....it's not really the roof , ya it should be open much more...but I guess thats it's the time period and it's dated design . Hate it but at the baseball world series it was loud and electric.........it's always about people and their committed numbers...we certainly need air and sky .

prizby
02-03-2014, 11:19 PM
the only legitimate argument against a roof is if the cost of said roof will be built into our ticket price in the years ahead

jabbronies
02-04-2014, 11:13 AM
Nothing anybody has indicated has said ANYTHING about it being a dome like thing.

Apart from the obvious grass growing issue, and the cost involved, TL was very clear in saying "a roof over the fans" when talking to the media of late.

Do you actually think before you post or do you just spew the first shit that comes out of your mouth?

Parky's initial post - which is what I was referring to and actually mention in my post - makes reference to both Skydome and the ACC and the types of environments these closed stadiums provide. He also mentions the fact that sound would not travel outside the stadium - which implies it could be closed a roof. He also mentions the fact that supporters would be protected from the elements - which is not 100% true given the fact that an open stadium would still allow rain, sleet snow to hit supporters.

Initial B
02-04-2014, 01:10 PM
I'm all for a roof over the fans, but not over the pitch. I'm sure TL can make sure there will be no roof over the supporter's section either. :D

james
02-04-2014, 02:41 PM
I think biggest issue about a roof and closed in corners at BMO field is it would help keep out some of that wind. The rain wouldn't be half as bad if it wasn't for those brutal winds that rip across that lake and straight to BMO field on some days. It even effects the play on the field. Anyone who waves a flag knows it is shit on those days, lol.

BuSaPuNk
02-04-2014, 02:44 PM
I think biggest issue about a roof and closed in corners at BMO field is it would help keep out some of that wind. The rain wouldn't be half as bad if it wasn't for those brutal winds that rip across that lake and straight to BMO field on some days. It even effects the play on the field. Anyone who waves a flag knows it is shit on those days, lol.

For sure. I remember the downpour game against Columbus. Man that flag must have felt like it was 50 pounds after all that and the wind on top didn't make it any easier. Surprised I held on to it as long as I did with no gloves.

Cashcleaner
02-05-2014, 12:37 AM
The rain has never been a problem for me, in fact, games have always been more enjoyable in rough weather it seems.

But the Sun. Oh! The Sun! It just kills me in the summer time.

Why, if I had my way...

http://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/article-1300967207614-0b51086100000578-330784_636x336.jpg

Shakes McQueen
02-05-2014, 01:16 AM
Get less wet in the rain, more shielding from the sun, and a roof will help make the place louder on match day. Good enough for me.

- Scott

Parkdale
02-05-2014, 01:59 PM
okay... consider me sold on a roof*.

*As long at BMO never feels closed in like the Ricoh or fully indoor like the Dome/ACC.

flatpicker
02-05-2014, 03:31 PM
okay... consider me sold on a roof*.

*As long at BMO never feels closed in like the Ricoh or fully indoor like the Dome/ACC.

I think it's a pretty safe bet that there won't be a roof over the pitch. Tim is pretty keen on maintaining a good soccer environment and he's probably getting design ideas based on traditional football stadiums around the world.

lanarkist
02-05-2014, 11:42 PM
I don't know. I'm all for the roof, but after getting in the south end last year, two of my favourite games of all time were the comeback against Dallas and the win over Columbus, screaming in the rain. Probably had more to do with the game itself, but the rain was always part of it. Here's hoping better on field product makes us care less about braving the elements.