PDA

View Full Version : Today's News, Tuesday, Mar.18



denime
03-18-2014, 05:44 AM
Mornin'





TFC TV





(http://www.torontofc.ca/video)Three Players Assigned To Wilmington


(http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2014/03/three-players-assigned-wilmington)Defoe Up For Goal Of The Week


(http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2014/03/defoe-goal-week)Defoe Named MLS Player of the Week


(http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2014/03/defoe-named-mls-player-week)Defoe wins MLS player of the week award after electric debut with TFC (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/soccer/defoe-wins-mls-player-of-the-week-award-after-electric-debut-with-tfc/article17525254/)


TFC impresses with resolve under pressure (http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/16/toronto-fc-impresses-with-a-resolve-that-we-havent-seen-from-this-team-before)


Defoe captures weekly honour (http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/17/toronto-fc-striker-jermain-defoe-named-mls-player-of-the-week)


MLSE plans big upgrade for BMO Field (http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/16/mlse-plans-to-spend-big-bucks-to-upgrade-bmo-field)


Canada international Nakajima-Farran to join Toronto (http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/702083357?-19896:6206)






(http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2014/03/three-players-assigned-wilmington)TFC/MLS related blogs (http://forums.redpatchboys.ca/showthread.php?29582-TFC-MLS-blogs-thread)




SUNSHINE (http://www.torontosun.com/sunshine-girl)

denime
03-18-2014, 05:47 AM
Special thanks to Nerepis for helping last 10 days to do "the News".:thumbsup:

Oldtimer
03-18-2014, 08:07 AM
The Globe article (which is from the Canadian Press) has an error in it.


Defoe scored both goals Saturday in a 2-1 road victory against Seattle Sounders FC, helping Toronto start their season with a win for the first time in club history.

In 2009, TFC opened their season with a 3-2 road win over KC.

Miss Jones
03-18-2014, 08:16 AM
“There has been so much written about this and it amazes me that it has been this controversial,” Leiweke said. “The reality is that, originally, this stadium was meant to be a solution for the Argos as well.” - This was from the Sun article.

I understood BMO was built specifically as a Soccer stadium when it was under construction and never a mention of Argos. It was to bring more International soccer games here not Football games.

Fort York Redcoat
03-18-2014, 08:20 AM
“There has been so much written about this and it amazes me that it has been this controversial,” Leiweke said. “The reality is that, originally, this stadium was meant to be a solution for the Argos as well.” - This was from the Sun article.

I understood BMO was built specifically as a Soccer stadium when it was under construction and never a mention of Argos. It was to bring more International soccer games here not Football games.


Meant by some as an Argos solution by those who had no say in it. Those who did or could do something about it couldn't put the effort in to make even news until after the fact.

tfcleeds
03-18-2014, 08:45 AM
The Globe article (which is from the Canadian Press) has an error in it. In 2009, TFC opened their season with a 3-2 road win over KC. Even NBC Sports got that wrong. They put up the stat more than once that we had never won a season opener. Looks like the stattos were celebrating St. Patrick's Day a little early! :drinking:

CoachGT
03-18-2014, 09:02 AM
Meant by some as an Argos solution by those who had no say in it. Those who did or could do something about it couldn't put the effort in to make even news until after the fact.

As I recall, the original intent was a stadium for both. But when the Argos were asked to put up money, they declined, not having any to put up.

BuSaPuNk
03-18-2014, 09:43 AM
As I recall, the original intent was a stadium for both. But when the Argos were asked to put up money, they declined, not having any to put up.

This is the way i remember it as well.

The Argos held out for Varsity and it came to bite them and they got stuck. I don't see a reason why we should be even giving them a chance I say. They had there chance they decided not to and didn't want to pony up the cash to do it.

Even now we all know that they won't be charged with expansion or conversion of BMO they probably will even get a sweet deal from the City and MLSE to play there without paying anything and will still continue to lose money.

lanarkist
03-18-2014, 10:34 AM
This is the way i remember it as well.

The Argos held out for Varsity and it came to bite them and they got stuck. I don't see a reason why we should be even giving them a chance I say. They had there chance they decided not to and didn't want to pony up the cash to do it.

Even now we all know that they won't be charged with expansion or conversion of BMO they probably will even get a sweet deal from the City and MLSE to play there without paying anything and will still continue to lose money.

Most likely - that said, if, and I mean IF, the Argos could actually put 25,000 asses in these seats, its revenue for MLSE that otherwise would sit empty. If attendance is still abysmally low, the desire costs to run the stadium on gameday could easily outweigh any real profit.

PopePouri
03-18-2014, 11:18 AM
Some nice tactical talk with Nelsen.

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Ryan-Nelsen-with-Jeff-Blair-jb-20140318-Interview.mp3

CretanBull
03-18-2014, 11:42 AM
As I recall, the original intent was a stadium for both. But when the Argos were asked to put up money, they declined, not having any to put up.

I guess it comes down to how we define the 'original intent'. In the preliminary stages of discussion, the Argos were involved. But by the time it got to the planning stage it was being promoted (in loan/grant applications etc) as being necessary to host the U-21 World Cup and a new home for TFC as well as the men's and women's national teams, and a possible concert venue.

jabbronies
03-18-2014, 12:42 PM
Some nice tactical talk with Nelsen.

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Ryan-Nelsen-with-Jeff-Blair-jb-20140318-Interview.mp3


I'd like to pick his brain. I'm curious to know if he is sticking with a 4-4-2 just to start things off or if this is his preferred base formation.
It's an easy way to get guys comfortable with each other and from there he can build - however, in CCL 4-4-2 and all of it's nuances will not work against some of the faster moving latin teams. They'll just cut runs right through that shit.

Possibly expanding out to use a base 4-2-3-1 - allows him attack high and break up counter attacks - also gives him the option to fall back into the 4-4-1-1 if really pressed back.

Yagbod
03-18-2014, 01:06 PM
From the Sun article: "A vocal minority of TFC fans hate the idea."

A vocal minority? I am sure they exist, but I do not personally know anyone in favour of this. 'Unanimous' or 'utter majority' might have been better words.

Fort York Redcoat
03-18-2014, 01:15 PM
From the Sun article: "A vocal minority of TFC fans hate the idea."

A vocal minority? I am sure they exist, but I do not personally know anyone in favour of this. 'Unanimous' or 'utter majority' might have been better words.

There are plenty that may not be in favour but have no problem with it as promised. And they are growing.

Pint
03-18-2014, 01:33 PM
Many of the people who are okay with the idea that I know are casual fans who haven't taken the time to really think about all the possible problems that could arise or people who have resigned themselves to the idea.

At this point it is happening and the most we can do is work to get as much as possible out of the renovation.

ag futbol
03-18-2014, 01:52 PM
Management should be careful. We're asking a stadium to do something not many other stadiums do, on a very minimal budget.

This is the wrong approach IMO. Its all being pushed by an Argos move-out date and a need to be in a stadium for a maple leafs game in a few years time. When that's all over they spent $0.25 cents on a solution they should have spent $1.00 on, and it's going to take $1.50 to fix it all.

Waggy
03-18-2014, 02:00 PM
Actually BMO was to be for the Argos too, it was a condition of getting a publicly built stadium. MLSE technically screwed the city over. The plan they voted on...

"When City of Toronto approved funding BMO Field, the proposal was for a stadium that was "capable of a conversion to a football format". The Argos wanted to join Toronto FC at BMO Field, but MLSE, citing budget and time limitations, constructed the stadium such that it was incompatible with CFL football"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMO_Field

jabbronies
03-18-2014, 02:53 PM
Actually BMO was to be for the Argos too, it was a condition of getting a publicly built stadium. MLSE technically screwed the city over. The plan they voted on...

"When City of Toronto approved funding BMO Field, the proposal was for a stadium that was "capable of a conversion to a football format". The Argos wanted to join Toronto FC at BMO Field, but MLSE, citing budget and time limitations, constructed the stadium such that it was incompatible with CFL football"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMO_Field

I wouldn't say that MLSE screwed the city. The city is getting some pretty decent coin from that stadium.
if anything, MLSE was smart by protecting it's interests in controlling the stadium so that Soccer would be the primary tenant.

Waggy
03-18-2014, 02:58 PM
I wouldn't say that MLSE screwed the city. The city is getting some pretty decent coin from that stadium.
if anything, MLSE was smart by protecting it's interests in controlling the stadium so that Soccer would be the primary tenant.

I didn't mean screwed as in the city got a bad deal. I mean screwed as in city council voted to fund a CFL/MLS stadium with MLSE managing it, and MLSE built a MLS only stadium. While I staunchly support BMO as soccer specific, and think the Argos should have their own stadium built by the city if thats what the city wants, as a Torontonian, had I known that at the time I'd have raised all sorts of hell to try and get council to renege on the funding. If MLSE wanted a soccer specific stadium for their soccer team, they should have paid for it. Not told the city they were building a multipurpose facility then say "Oh, sorry" after they got the money. I'm actually glad to see the city standing up to MLSE and making them stick to the deal they signed. If I was mayor I'd have demanded MLSE repay all funds the city provided at full cost, with interest, as soon as construction started and it was clearly a SSS.

Yagbod
03-18-2014, 03:56 PM
There are plenty that may not be in favour but have no problem with it as promised. And they are growing.

But are they a majority of fans?

I realize this is semantics and has no bearing on anything in the real world, but 'minority' seems to be missing the reality of the situation in my opinion.

mowe
03-18-2014, 04:26 PM
But are they a majority of fans?

I realize this is semantics and has no bearing on anything in the real world, but 'minority' seems to be missing the reality of the situation in my opinion.

The reality of the situation is that basically every fan is in support of a roof and improved facilities. The ONLY issue is the pitch. It comes down to how well they manage to work around ~10 Argo games a year. From the town hall meeting it was mentioned the CFL was willing to work with MLSE on scheduling. If true, that's an important positive step. If they can minimize damage to the pitch with priority scheduling I'd say the majority of the fans would be in favour of the renovation.

ag futbol
03-18-2014, 04:53 PM
The reality of the situation is that basically every fan is in support of a roof and improved facilities. The ONLY issue is the pitch. It comes down to how well they manage to work around ~10 Argo games a year. From the town hall meeting it was mentioned the CFL was willing to work with MLSE on scheduling. If true, that's an important positive step. If they can minimize damage to the pitch with priority scheduling I'd say the majority of the fans would be in favour of the renovation.
It is hardly that simple. We are doing the equivalent of upgrading our record player to a cassette tape, while taking the chance of losing our existing library of music. All worth it for the improved technology right?

Auzzy
03-18-2014, 04:58 PM
Actually BMO was to be for the Argos too, it was a condition of getting a publicly built stadium. MLSE technically screwed the city over. The plan they voted on...

"When City of Toronto approved funding BMO Field, the proposal was for a stadium that was "capable of a conversion to a football format". The Argos wanted to join Toronto FC at BMO Field, but MLSE, citing budget and time limitations, constructed the stadium such that it was incompatible with CFL football"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMO_Field

Well that's Wikipedia. Who wrote that article? I think there's way more to the story. The way I remember it, Argos had already held out so long, first on Varsity (which later fell through anyway because of UofT), then on York, they were barely involved at BMO. Around that time they negotiated a sweetheart deal to continue playing at Rogers Centre. (Skydome by the way was also built for the Argos originally, with lots of public money gone down the drain. Rogers bought that stadium for pennies on the dollar compared with the original cost, and are now kicking out the Argos to put in grass and have the stadium exactly the way they like for baseball. Another interesting topic BTW.)

I don't remember it was so clear that "the Argos wanted to join Toronto FC at BMO Field." The Argos wavered back and forth lots during that time, and certainly didn't want to pay for much. So the "budget limitations" could come from the Argos not being willing to pay the extra money required to have the stadium work for CFL as well. (And now they still won't be paying anything for it, apparently.)

And "time limitations" were strongly due to the long delay in the whole process to find a stadium location, with the Argos being partly responsible for that delay. By the end, the City and MLSE were worried that Toronto would lose the FIFA U-20 World Cup, which would likely have also meant losing the provincial & federal funding which was associated with that event.

The stadium was approved and built in absolute record time for Toronto standards. (Of course that's one reason it's technically crappy in many ways.) There was really no time left for the Argos to dick around more, or to figure out retractable stands etc or other complicated features for a multi-sport facility. One thing they did was put in a stage at the North End & were hoping for extra events that way -- but also making it even harder to convert as a result. (Was that mentioned anywhere, I guess they will have to pull out that big foundation under the North End when they expand the field to the north for the long CFL surface?)

I like the Argos, I'm happy if they find a good place to play, I just think that Wiki article is a bit thin. (BTW I'm skeptical the fans will like the crappy weather at BMO Field any more than the last time the Argos played in that area, which was one reason the Skydome was built for a TON of money.) Except for the problems with the playing surface, I wouldn't even mind the Argos at BMO Field, I think the retractable stands make sense.

But I think the surface will be a big problem eventually. Lots of things are still unclear with that. The only good technical solution (completely removable grass pitch) isn't even being considered, likely due to cost & lack of space.

Auzzy
03-18-2014, 05:10 PM
The other thing that worries me: the roof over the north & south ends will have to be so high to make the extra temporary seating possible behind the roof. Otherwise the roof would block the view from the temporary seats. When the roof is that high, rain will just blow in from all sides, and it won't help the sound as much either.

Unless the roof can be moved up & down, i.e., raised to avoid blocking the view when temporary seating is added? I doubt it, that was never mentioned.

Those are some of the questions I would like to ask, but I don't know if I can make it to that meeting on Saturday.

MightyDM
03-18-2014, 05:54 PM
If you go back and look at the history, you will see that the Argos were part of the proposal at Varsity then at York. They then dropped out. Building a stadium at Downsview Park was considered, but was not feasible for a number of reasons. The Canadian Soccer Association, which was behind the building of the National Soccer Stadium (still BMO's official name, BTW), and MLSE needed a location and $10 million (the Argos share before they dropped out). All along, Exhibition Place had been the City's preferred location so it said yes to a soccer specific stadium there, with the deal being that the City would own the stadium (even though mostly paid for by federal and provincial dollars) and share the profits, MLSE being responsible for any losses, with the City paying the $10 million originally due from the Argos. The budget and timing were set by the need to have it ready for the U20 World Cup, not TFC. At the Council debate, the clause was added to try to make it possible for the Argos - but that wasn't the deal the city had negotiated, which was for The National Soccer Stadium, the Tournament, and a potential MLS team. It was a last minute add on, and without money from the Argos was simply not possible. Whatever the merits of the current proposal - and I think it is best for all if we build a new, turf stadium for the Argos - the City got exactly what it wanted, where it wanted it. At the time, the CSA, Ottawa and Queens Park were delighted. The Argos and potential conversion were considered a non issue due to their great deal at the SkyDome.

JayMolly
03-18-2014, 06:38 PM
I'd like to pick his brain. I'm curious to know if he is sticking with a 4-4-2 just to start things off or if this is his preferred base formation.
It's an easy way to get guys comfortable with each other and from there he can build - however, in CCL 4-4-2 and all of it's nuances will not work against some of the faster moving latin teams. They'll just cut runs right through that shit.

Possibly expanding out to use a base 4-2-3-1 - allows him attack high and break up counter attacks - also gives him the option to fall back into the 4-4-1-1 if really pressed back.


We like and would be pleased to see a 4-2-3-1 formation used by TFC at BMO.

CretanBull
03-18-2014, 07:00 PM
I think Defoe works best with a strike partner, what makes him so effective is having someone to make runs off of, perfectly timing off-sides etc. he needs the space provided by another player up front with him.

CretanBull
03-18-2014, 07:01 PM
Re: BMO the main person behind the stadium was Mayor Miller...he wasn't fighting for a new home for the Argos, he was focused on soccer.

jabbronies
03-19-2014, 08:55 AM
If you go back and look at the history, you will see that the Argos were part of the proposal at Varsity then at York. They then dropped out. Building a stadium at Downsview Park was considered, but was not feasible for a number of reasons. The Canadian Soccer Association, which was behind the building of the National Soccer Stadium (still BMO's official name, BTW), and MLSE needed a location and $10 million (the Argos share before they dropped out). All along, Exhibition Place had been the City's preferred location so it said yes to a soccer specific stadium there, with the deal being that the City would own the stadium (even though mostly paid for by federal and provincial dollars) and share the profits, MLSE being responsible for any losses, with the City paying the $10 million originally due from the Argos. The budget and timing were set by the need to have it ready for the U20 World Cup, not TFC. At the Council debate, the clause was added to try to make it possible for the Argos - but that wasn't the deal the city had negotiated, which was for The National Soccer Stadium, the Tournament, and a potential MLS team. It was a last minute add on, and without money from the Argos was simply not possible. Whatever the merits of the current proposal - and I think it is best for all if we build a new, turf stadium for the Argos - the City got exactly what it wanted, where it wanted it. At the time, the CSA, Ottawa and Queens Park were delighted. The Argos and potential conversion were considered a non issue due to their great deal at the SkyDome.

This is how I remember it as well.

IMO the Argos do not have a right to anything. It seems to me that they are just looking to freeload into a stadium that the can control. If they don't get the control, then they fuck off and look for another opportunity.

Fort York Redcoat
03-19-2014, 11:59 AM
But are they a majority of fans?

I realize this is semantics and has no bearing on anything in the real world, but 'minority' seems to be missing the reality of the situation in my opinion.

If the minority is shrinking here than you know the majority don't really care or are for these moves. Yes.