The Case Against a Roof

[Parkdale]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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!

[Parkdale]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?...

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]

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]

I personally enjoy rain games.... but I know i'm the minority on that one.

[gdg_9]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.