Argos unlikely to play at BMO Field in 2014

[boban]

That's what I mean.

Just because they won't be able to play at BMO in 2010, it doesn't mean that this issue is dead.

My thoughts exactly. This is what, the 3rd, 4th year of Argo threats to move to the NSS?
When does this stop. Honestly this is becoming a nuisance. Any way legal action can be taken to shut them up for once and for all?

What were Cynamon and Sokolowski thinking?.... really:

42 CFL players with their crap load of gear in a soccer locker room??? You have to be kidding me...

They have to be delusional...

Not only that, you would have to build totally different change rooms. What is the practicality of TFC players and staff moving there belongings in and out after each game, likewise for the Argos. And its more than change rooms. Training rooms, washrooms, therapy rooms, etc. are needed more for the Argos just for numbers alone.

What am I missing? I don't understand the Las Vegas remark. The CFL clearly supports the Canadian economy. I see nothing in the article you have posted about either. I'm confused.

The CFL executives have to dine, rent meeting space and sleep somewhere during these meetings. Why not do that in this country instead of giving Americans the money?

[SilverSamurai]

I'm not sure this is dead forever. It won't be unless the Argos get their own stadium or start selling 50,000 tickets per game. Every time the Rogers lease comes up for renewal, there will be distractions about "oh well we might go here instead" to try and keep the rent down. Next time this comes up, there might be public money available to get the stadium expanded or private investor money from Braley or someone else. So it remains a longer term issue in my opinion.

That said, MLSE are not stupid (far from it) and I would fully expect them to start taking steps now to make it as expensive and difficult as possible for the Argos to ever modify the stadium for CFL. The north stand is a good start. Foe example, filling up dates on an annual basis for cash spinning friendlies on the new grass (Real, Barca, Liverpool, etc year after year will make the City a tonne of money) and working with the CSA to make BMO Field the unoffical home of Canadian soccer so that the city gets more money from that and the damage to the sport would be huge if the Argos took the CSA dates away. I also wouldn't be surprised to see a string of minor midifications over the years designed to keep the place soccer specific and make it harder to convert the facility for CFL.

The Argos under the current fuckwit owners are not really a threat now that the CFL has pissed on their reduced field size idea. The Argos under new owners or with public money backing would be. MLSE and the CSA need to start working now to stop that from ever happening.

Of course, when TFC's 15 year lease (?) is up at Exhibition, there might be an opportunity for MLSE to build us a red bull arena type place at another venue that they would own outright. If the TFC fan base keeps growing AND the league keeps growing in terms of tv ratings, franchise profitiability, etc, then that's not an unreal dream to hold onto. If MLSE could make money from a new stadium then they'd probably do it. Neither the team nor the sport as a whole are big enough to justify it for now, but in 15 years? With all the school kids playing soccer now out earnign money and wanting to spend it on TFC and MLS? Who knows. If MLS ever gets a real foothold in the US (and with current grass roots growth and immigration from soccer supporting countries still increasing, then it very well might in the next 10 to 15 years), then MLSE will be nicely placed to make a huge windfall from their $10m investment in the franchise. A new stadium in those circumstances, location permitting, might actually be a good move.

Unless I'm mistaken, don't the CSA get the 2nd choice after TFC?
So in essence, the Argos would be a 3rd choice tenant?
Might even be 4th after that lacrosse team... Are they still playing at BMO next season though?

I think the order is TFC, CSA, Lacrosee folks (whatever their name is), Argos (IF they ever got it and hopefully they never will!)

[Oldtimer]

Might even be 4th after that lacrosse team... Are they still playing at BMO next season though?

The Nationals are still playing at BMO next year.

[Redcoe15]

All I can say is GOOD!!! The idea of the Argos moving into BMO Field was a joke from the moment Cynamon and Sokolowski made their intentions known a couple of weeks ago. There was no way they could have done it without there being reverberations throughout the league with the game being played on a smaller field.

Will this be the end of the attempts and rumours? You can never say never. But I am more confident BMO Field will continue to be used as a showcase for soccer in Canada for a long long while.

NOW WE PARTY!!!

[jloome]

To repeat myself from last week: never will happen, never was going to happen. Hell will freeze over before the CFL allows a smaller pitch.

[jloome]

^ Frankly, common sense is in short supply these days, especially in the public realm and I for one wasn't counting on it. The Argos had a lot of enabling language put in the NSS/BMO Field agreement and I was worried they would leverage that to do anything they wanted.

So I'm very relieved.

Why? If you know the CFL at all, this was never going to happen. THe language in the deal is irrelevant; the Argos' own league was never going to sanction playing on that small a pitch, or anything even close to it.

This was all much ado about squat, which is probably why MLSE wisely kept out of it. It knew full well there was no need, that CFL lore, tradition, fanbase and business practices would all guarantee it wasn't going to happen.

[Hitcho]

Actually BMO Field (a/k/a the "National Soccer Stadium") is the official home of Canadian Soccer. The CMNT never wanted to play there, because of the turf, but with the change to grass, expect "official" to become "reality."

I thought it was supposed to be official, but then I kept hearing rumours that the CSA would want to move the games around the country anyway to keep up interest in all areas and not just give the CMNT games to Toronto area only. So I wasn't sure if they would want to commit 100% to BMO Field for that reason. I hope they do.

It's a bit like when Wembley was being rebuilt and the England team toured the country for its matches, but on a much, much larger scale.

[Hitcho]

Why? If you know the CFL at all, this was never going to happen. THe language in the deal is irrelevant; the Argos' own league was never going to sanction playing on that small a pitch, or anything even close to it.

This was all much ado about squat, which is probably why MLSE wisely kept out of it. It knew full well there was no need, that CFL lore, tradition, fanbase and business practices would all guarantee it wasn't going to happen.

I don't know the CFL well enough to comment definitively, but there is definitely sense in what you're saying Jezza. However, a couple of comments on why I would continue to take this threat seriously going forward:

1. I've heard people opine that no Argos means no CFL because of the loss in tv money etc without commercials being broadcast into the heart of Canada's biggest populace, and the fact that it would leave them with a 7 team league. Again, I don't know how much substance there is to these suggestions, but you can see why any decision for the CFL which came down to "shortened pitch for the Argos vs no CFL" would not be a hard one to make, at least on a temporary basis.

2. You're assuming that no money is thrown at this to modify BMO Field for a CFL pitch. Right now, that looks like a safe assumption as the fuckwit Argo owners have no cash and the City is in no position to help out, especially so soon after the TFC deal was done. However, what might the landscape be in 5 years? New owners for the Argos with money to invest on something like this for a longer term vision? Better times for the city or a groundswell of people saying "spend the money to save the Argos or they are going bust"? I don't think we can completely rule out $$$ for modification in the future.

So, while this is great news I would suggest that we all maintain a watchful stance on this, at least for the emdium term or until the Argos find another permanent solution beyond the Dome. To me, this remains a very real threat. If the Argos ever get the money (from anywhere) to pay for the modifications, then the City will allow them in as equal tenants with TFC. EQUAL TENANTS. At that point our world collapses because they'd get equal say on dates of use, stadium colours, field markings, storage space and so on. That, my friend, is armageddon time for TFC fans.

[Hitcho]

Unless I'm mistaken, don't the CSA get the 2nd choice after TFC?
So in essence, the Argos would be a 3rd choice tenant?
Might even be 4th after that lacrosse team... Are they still playing at BMO next season though?

I think the order is TFC, CSA, Lacrosee folks (whatever their name is), Argos (IF they ever got it and hopefully they never will!)

The City were making noises along the lines of "The Argos would not get a different deal from TFC if this were to go ahead". TO me, that indicates an equal footing. And that would also mean a share in the concession and parking receipts as well as helping to shoulder the shortfall in operating losses which I believe TFC had to agree to. If they are getting all that, then you would have to think they would get equal say in dates of use, stadium livery and colouring, storage space, and so on.

So no, if they ever got into BMO Field, I don;t think the Argos would be a 4th choice tenant. I think they would be joint primary tenant with TFC and on an equal footing.

The current fuckwit Argo owners cannot afford to pay up on equal terms to TFC I expect (hope), but who knows down the line?

[Toronto Ruffrider]

2. You're assuming that no money is thrown at this to modify BMO Field for a CFL pitch. Right now, that looks like a safe assumption as the fuckwit Argo owners have no cash and the City is in no position to help out, especially so soon after the TFC deal was done. However, what might the landscape be in 5 years? New owners for the Argos with money to invest on something like this for a longer term vision? Better times for the city or a groundswell of people saying "spend the money to save the Argos or they are going bust"? I don't think we can completely rule out $$$ for modification in the future.

The dollar value for modifying BMO that keeps popping up is $15 million, but as others have pointed out, I believe the actual dollar value is more like $30+ million. BMO Field would require extensive (and expensive) structural changes in order to host CFL games. I'm not saying it won't happen, but one would think that given the cost of retrofitting BMO, it would make far more sense just to build a new stadium from scratch.

[Hitcho]

The dollar value for modifying BMO that keeps popping up is $15 million, but as others have pointed out, I believe the actual dollar value is more like $30+ million. BMO Field would require extensive (and expensive) structural changes in order to host CFL games. I'm not saying it won't happen, but one would think that given the cost of retrofitting BMO, it would make far more sense just to build a new stadium from scratch.

Yes, if you can find a venue. I know plenty have been proposed but would they actually be available when the pinch came, including five years from now? And what about land costs, added to building costs? Would that make the other venues as attractive still? Because if not, then the only options are stay as Dome tenants and pay whatever Rogers demands or retrofit BMO Field and try and get some public money for it. (Or relocate/fold the team, but I would be sad to see that happen even as a non CFL fan).

[jloome]

I don't know the CFL well enough to comment definitively, but there is definitely sense in what you're saying Jezza. However, a couple of comments on why I would continue to take this threat seriously going forward:

1. I've heard people opine that no Argos means no CFL because of the loss in tv money etc without commercials being broadcast into the heart of Canada's biggest populace, and the fact that it would leave them with a 7 team league. Again, I don't know how much substance there is to these suggestions, but you can see why any decision for the CFL which came down to "shortened pitch for the Argos vs no CFL" would not be a hard one to make, at least on a temporary basis.

2. You're assuming that no money is thrown at this to modify BMO Field for a CFL pitch. Right now, that looks like a safe assumption as the fuckwit Argo owners have no cash and the City is in no position to help out, especially so soon after the TFC deal was done. However, what might the landscape be in 5 years? New owners for the Argos with money to invest on something like this for a longer term vision? Better times for the city or a groundswell of people saying "spend the money to save the Argos or they are going bust"? I don't think we can completely rule out $$$ for modification in the future.

So, while this is great news I would suggest that we all maintain a watchful stance on this, at least for the emdium term or until the Argos find another permanent solution beyond the Dome. To me, this remains a very real threat. If the Argos ever get the money (from anywhere) to pay for the modifications, then the City will allow them in as equal tenants with TFC. EQUAL TENANTS. At that point our world collapses because they'd get equal say on dates of use, stadium colours, field markings, storage space and so on. That, my friend, is armageddon time for TFC fans.

Watchful is always sensible. But neither of these points makes it particularly more likely. Toronto is considered a pretty weak partner in the CFL (please, games in Edmonton and Saskatchewan routinely draw 35,000 plus. The only reason they'd worry about the Argos is history and because the league is already tiny.)

And on the second point, the city would almost certainly have to consider the legal implications of a massive expansion that a) hurts the business of its existing partner in the facility, perhaps to the point of it losing its investment and b) paying for such an expansion without a significant, multi-million dollar ownership investment package. The idea that they would simply be granted equal tenant status seems exceptionally unlikely.

Net resut? Watchful's fine. But it's never likely to happen, so there's no point everyone getting so excited.

[Oldtimer]

Hitcho, you scare me.

The picture you paint is far worse than I was thinking, but I suspect you might be right.

[TheRenter]

The Nationals are still playing at BMO next year.

I don't get it?! I thought if this whole install a grass pitch at BMO/move the bubble over Lamport deal got done, that the lacrosse team would then be playing out of Lamport, no?!

Having a second tenant, lacrosse or otherwise, precludes BMO from being a SSS, no, or am I missing something here altogether?

I mean, isn't Lamport suitable for the needs of the nationals?

[TFCRegina]

Watchful is always sensible. But neither of these points makes it particularly more likely. Toronto is considered a pretty weak partner in the CFL (please, games in Edmonton and Saskatchewan routinely draw 35,000 plus. The only reason they'd worry about the Argos is history and because the league is already tiny.)

And on the second point, the city would almost certainly have to consider the legal implications of a massive expansion that a) hurts the business of its existing partner in the facility, perhaps to the point of it losing its investment and b) paying for such an expansion without a significant, multi-million dollar ownership investment package. The idea that they would simply be granted equal tenant status seems exceptionally unlikely.

Net resut? Watchful's fine. But it's never likely to happen, so there's no point everyone getting so excited.

Sask doesn't routinely draw 35k plus. Let's not make up facts.

Saskatchewan didn't start selling out Mosaic/Taylor Field until 2007 when the team got good. Prior to that, it was super easy to get tickets and the average was much lower. Routinely would indicate that it draws well regardless of how the team does. IE: Part of the normal happenings.

I'm also aware that it sits 33k at max, 2,000 temporary seats, 31k in normal seating. It can be outfitted for as many as 55k in temporary seats but they are just that...temporary.

[Rudi]

I don't get it?! I thought if this whole install a grass pitch at BMO/move the bubble over Lamport deal got done, that the lacrosse team would then be playing out of Lamport, no?!

Having a second tenant, lacrosse or otherwise, precludes BMO from being a SSS, no, or am I missing something here altogether?

I mean, isn't Lamport suitable for the needs of the nationals?

Why would the Nationals want to play at a decrepit stadium with second-rate facilities?

Being an SSS doesn't preclude everything other than soccer from being played there.

[Whoop]

I'm not really worried about half a dozen field lacrosse games.

Besides you could argue that BMO is fulfilling their access to the community requirement. LOL

[Rudi]

I'm not really worried about half a dozen field lacrosse games.

Besides you could argue that BMO is fulfilling their access to the community requirement. LOL

Exactly.

The lacrosse team won't do any damage to the turf, and will likely be even less noticable now that their lines are easier to remove.

[TheRenter]

fair enough. grateful for the agros to BMO talks having ceased, for the time being

[ensco]

for the love of God, if somebody is going to put millions into a stadium in downtown Toronto to make it usable for the Argos, do it at Varsity!

Margaret Macmillan as Trinity College Provost led the opposition to having Varsity remain a spectator facility. At the time there were grandiose plans to crreate a "face" of U of T on Bloor St (which of course never happened). To those who argued for maintaining Varsity Stadium because of the tradition, Macmillan said "well we used to have public hangings, and we don't keep those spaces for that purpose anymore". You couldn't make this stuff up.

Macmillan's gone off to Oxford now, maybe this could be re-looked at. But U of T politics is a serious rat's nest....

[Parkdale]

So we can put down the pitchforks for a year? Good.

I prefer a trident to a pitchfork.

A trident says 'God of the Seas', but a pitchfork just says:
'xenophobic peasant who chases frankenstein despite his jaunty jacket'

[Hitcho]

Watchful is always sensible. But neither of these points makes it particularly more likely. Toronto is considered a pretty weak partner in the CFL (please, games in Edmonton and Saskatchewan routinely draw 35,000 plus. The only reason they'd worry about the Argos is history and because the league is already tiny.)

And on the second point, the city would almost certainly have to consider the legal implications of a massive expansion that a) hurts the business of its existing partner in the facility, perhaps to the point of it losing its investment and b) paying for such an expansion without a significant, multi-million dollar ownership investment package. The idea that they would simply be granted equal tenant status seems exceptionally unlikely.

Net resut? Watchful's fine. But it's never likely to happen, so there's no point everyone getting so excited.

I don;t have time to find it, but there was a quote somehwre in the Argos threads from someone in the City Council that basically said "if the Argos do come in then they would not get a different deal to TFC" or words to that effect.

I'm not aiming to be a doomsayer (sorry Oldtimer!) but the bottom line is if either A) the CFL feel it's necessary to back down on pitch size to keep the Argos going, or B) the Argos someway somehow get the money to retrofit BMO Field, then the city's position seems to be "you guys both use the place, we're not giving either of you preferential status". So right now, we're good. But if A or B comes to pass, then we could be up in deep trouble.

You seem very confident Jeremy, so I hope you are right. But the reason for your confidence seems to be a personal belief that this will never come to pass. With all due respect, that's not much comfort to people when you consider that A or B could quite feasibly come to pass in the next few years.

[jloome]

I don;t have time to find it, but there was a quote somehwre in the Argos threads from someone in the City Council that basically said "if the Argos do come in then they would not get a different deal to TFC" or words to that effect.

I'm not aiming to be a doomsayer (sorry Oldtimer!) but the bottom line is if either A) the CFL feel it's necessary to back down on pitch size to keep the Argos going, or B) the Argos someway somehow get the money to retrofit BMO Field, then the city's position seems to be "you guys both use the place, we're not giving either of you preferential status". So right now, we're good. But if A or B comes to pass, then we could be up in deep trouble.

You seem very confident Jeremy, so I hope you are right. But the reason for your confidence seems to be a personal belief that this will never come to pass. With all due respect, that's not much comfort to people when you consider that A or B could quite feasibly come to pass in the next few years.

That belief is based on years of following CFL politics, which are legion. Even assuming they got the money together, they'd also have to convince the federal government to kick in, as with MLSE, and for that to happen, they'd have to present some overriding national interest. A national soccer stadium makes sense and can be sold to voters.

Bailing out private businessmen too stupid to see that the success at BMO has nothing to do with the location and is all about the product? Nope, doesn't seem particularly high percentage to me. But that's going to have to happen on both the provincial and federal level before any CFL owner is coughing up the $30-million-to-$45 million such a retrofit would cost.

Yeah, it's a belief. But unlike the fear of it happening, it's at least rational, as in grounded in the probable.

It's just all exceptionally unrealistic. And I'd argue that you haven't presented anything "quite feasible" at all. Whereas, the cost, the politics, the history of the CFL and a multitude of other factors DO add up to "quite unlikely."

And the smaller field thing will NEVER happen.

TFCRegina, that's because their away attendance skews the average. When they're at home, they averaged 30,606 this year, according to reporter Rob Vanstone, who has covered the team for years. On the road, they averaged 33,696. Even off by nearly 5,000 seats as I was, they're still well ahead of Toronto.

And the ESkies were at 37,614. Either way, both cities were well above Toronto's averge of just under 27,000. Every team in the west was. Winnipeg, Hamilton and Montreal averaged less.

So, it's hard to argue -- as was the original point -- that the CFL is any more dependent on Toronto than any other market.

[craigtfc]

Flash foward 365 days from now, headlines read.....Argos looking to play at BMO. I will repost this in 365 days from now.

[Bars92]

They might think about it, but they'll always go back to the Skydome in the end.

[profit89]

Good. They can Fuck right off!

Ditto.

[Shakes McQueen]

Watchful is always sensible. But neither of these points makes it particularly more likely. Toronto is considered a pretty weak partner in the CFL (please, games in Edmonton and Saskatchewan routinely draw 35,000 plus. The only reason they'd worry about the Argos is history and because the league is already tiny.)

This isn't really true, from what I know of the CFL.

The Toronto Argos (and by extension, the Toronto media market) are the biggest factor in the money the CFL currently gets from their exclusive TV deal with TSN.

And the Argos average 25k-27k a game, last I had read, which is perfectly strong attendance for a CFL game.

I'm pretty sure the Argo's owners actually recently wanted to restructure the league's profit sharing structure, and cited the role they have in generating television-based revenue for the league.

Again though, I suppose this could all be incorrect. To be fair, I don't pay much attention to the CFL, aside from these little incursions into the soccer world that seemingly happen every damn year.

- Scott

[Hitcho]

jloome - I'm in no position to comment on CFL politics and history so I won't try! But I'm glad you're confident.

I still think that if it came to losing the Argos and by extension the CFL, then government money could be found to be spent on a government owned infrastructure, and the league would be prepared t bend ts rules on a temporary basis for one franchise to stop itself from going out of existence. Survive or die would surely lead to survive being picked. Would it ever get to that? I don't know. I do agree that it seems unlikely some wealthy person will buy up a failing franchise in a non-growth league with mininmal profits available and drop $15 to $30 million on retro-fitting BMO Field. That's just madness.

[james]

Maple Leafs Sports and Ent. have shown they dont want the Argos playing at BMO field. One plus side of being owned by MLSE is they are rich and more powerful then the Argo owners. MLSE probably would have the upper hand in telling the City the Argos cant play at BMO, and if City disagrees MLSE could always just buy the whole stadium off the city if they had to. What the stadium cost $60 million??? MLSE is worth something like $1.5 billion, how much are the Argo owners worth?? and MLSE spend $60 million just on Leafs and Raptor salaries every year!

[Shakes McQueen]

Maple Leafs Sports and Ent. have shown they dont want the Argos playing at BMO field. One plus side of being owned by MLSE is they are rich and more powerful then the Argo owners. MLSE probably would have the upper hand in telling the City the Argos cant play at BMO, and if City disagrees MLSE could always just buy the whole stadium off the city if they had to. What the stadium cost $60 million??? MLSE is worth something like $1.5 billion, how much are the Argo owners worth?? and MLSE spend $60 million just on Leafs and Raptor salaries every year!

Not possible. The land that stadium sits on is also not owned by MLSE, it's worth a fortune, and it's probably not even for sale.

I also think people lose perspective on MLSE's wealth - they didn't get to where they are by brazenly throwing millions of dollars around. A lot of folks here have become really good at theoretically spending tons of MLSE's money preserving and improving our little soccer team, typically under the weak reasoning that "they can afford it".

As an example, I've seen a few people prospose that, if the Argos moved into BMO Field, MLSE should just build TFC it's own stadium in response. Like... really? You expect MLSE to spend tens of millions of dollars building another new stadium, after three years, and the millions that were contributed towards building BMO Field?

- Scott