View Poll Results: Unite south end?

Voters
89. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, leave it as it is

    30 33.71%
  • Yes, lets do it!

    59 66.29%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 195
  1. #91
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryan View Post
    Is there an opportunity to hammer home the actual desire for a closed in roof?

    I mean, they are bringing us one partly because we've clamoured for it, correct? The reason we want it is for sound more than anything. I don't think any of us Canucks really give two shits about the weather aspect...

    Oh you'd be surprised. The majority (not shown here) would prefer a shelter from rain and sun. We that look at weather as an attribute or characteristic of one game to the next with no question of attendance are the minority. Last game's atmo/crowd would not have happened in the rain.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  2. #92
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil View Post
    Considering those were concept drawings, and how often concepts become reality, I wouldn't hang my hat on any of that being near 'final'.

    Curious to see what they are going to try though.
    Rest assured Prez, when the changes come I'll put this to rest. I just want the people who care to know that what they want has not been in the design...yet.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  3. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Homeless
    Posts
    5,042
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    Oh you'd be surprised. The majority (not shown here) would prefer a shelter from rain and sun. We that look at weather as an attribute or characteristic of one game to the next with no question of attendance are the minority. Last game's atmo/crowd would not have happened in the rain.
    Who cares about the roof.... If we get a roof then we will never see that topless guy in front of 112 jumping up and down getting wet in the rain!!! I wanna rub his nipples, yeah baby...

  4. #94
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    30,364
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Some of the best support has been during rain games.

    I'd like to a roof so we don't suffer from heat stroke when TFC schedules 2 p.m. matches on a Saturday afternoon. Those hot, scorching days drain support more than any other form weather. It's been proven in the past.

    As for the sound aspects, it will help but it's not a magic elixir if support is crap anyway.

    A roof isn't the cure all.

  5. #95
    RPB Member
    Past President

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Dichio Country
    Posts
    12,251
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    Again I'll say this is just -The last plans I've seen so far- But with no back the sound won't project and the design calls for a moving stand so the roof has to be high enough to not obstruct as the stands move behind it. This means not only does it fail to cover more than half the stand but any sound bouncing off a roof that high would be minimal and useless to time to.

    And just to clarify my stance,

    I'm not AGAINST a roof. I'm against a roof that doesn't help us AND more importantly comes with Argos. So I'm eager to see a plan that at least will satiate the peeps so excited for a roof that will help support or make them comfortable.

    THIS PLAN IS NOT IT.
    I wasn't suggesting you were anti-roof, I was only curious as to whether there was some sort of acoustics engineering thing telling us that an open sided roof won't work to at least help spread sound around. My understanding is that solids also transmit sound, so wouldn't a roof covering us transmit something to other areas?
    Toronto FC baby...best team everrrrrrrrrr -Jozy

  6. #96
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    t.dot
    Posts
    7,192
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the first concept i'd like to see in the supporters section before anything is safe standing rail seats

  7. #97
    RPB Member XI17 Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario
    Posts
    8,510
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    Again I'll say this is just -The last plans I've seen so far- But with no back the sound won't project and the design calls for a moving stand so the roof has to be high enough to not obstruct as the stands move behind it. This means not only does it fail to cover more than half the stand but any sound bouncing off a roof that high would be minimal and useless to time to.

    And just to clarify my stance,

    I'm not AGAINST a roof. I'm against a roof that doesn't help us AND more importantly comes with Argos. So I'm eager to see a plan that at least will satiate the peeps so excited for a roof that will help support or make them comfortable.

    THIS PLAN IS NOT IT.
    How high and how small is the proposed roof? Acoustics isn't my forte, but even some of the shallowest parabolas can increase the magnitude of sound transmission by a noticeable margin.



    If the South Stand roof is anything like the North stand roof pictured above (left side), I don't think there should be a problem as long as the surface's has the correct angle with which to reflect the sound. Is the South Stand roof similar or are we talking something really small and really high?
    Last edited by Cashcleaner; 06-03-2014 at 12:35 PM.
    Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.

  8. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,469
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The way i envision it is the wind will come off the lake coming up over the back of the stands and forcing its way down on the southend actually suppressing the sound, maybe that's off base but that's just the way i see it working.

    Without a back to at least the south stand i see a marginal at best increase to the acoustics at BMO.

    Hopefully the new and final plans take this into consideration

  9. #99
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    I wasn't suggesting you were anti-roof, I was only curious as to whether there was some sort of acoustics engineering thing telling us that an open sided roof won't work to at least help spread sound around. My understanding is that solids also transmit sound, so wouldn't a roof covering us transmit something to other areas?
    It wasn't you Jack, it was me. Just clarifying because I'm posting a lot and it's not a crusade I just want people to see that what's proposed won't get the job done they want. And you're right even a high roof with no back will do something. Just nothing close to close enough.
    Last edited by Fort York Redcoat; 06-03-2014 at 01:09 PM.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  10. #100
    RPB Member XI17 Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario
    Posts
    8,510
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pint View Post
    The way i envision it is the wind will come off the lake coming up over the back of the stands and forcing its way down on the southend actually suppressing the sound, maybe that's off base but that's just the way i see it working.

    Without a back to at least the south stand i see a marginal at best increase to the acoustics at BMO.

    Hopefully the new and final plans take this into consideration
    Shit. Yeah, that is a good point about wind coming in. If we had some surrounding structures to break it up it wouldn't be a problem, but yeah, we often get steady breezes in from the lake and that could certainly disrupt the noise generated in the stands if we had nothing to stop that level of airflow.
    Did the USA , of all countries, just fix soccer? - C. Ronaldo, May 27th commenting on the FBI-led investigations into fraud and corruption throughout FIFA.

  11. #101
    RPB Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    116
    Posts
    21,718
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prizby View Post
    the first concept i'd like to see in the supporters section before anything is safe standing rail seats
    At that meeting back in March with SSH, the guy there with TL had no clue what safe standing was.

    I got the strong feeling that somebody suggested a new stadium, and they are flying by the seat of their pants to figure out what a good one will be.

  12. #102
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prizby View Post
    the first concept i'd like to see in the supporters section before anything is safe standing rail seats
    Argos fan- Why does my flipseat have a rail in front of it? = Not their first choice and they'll stick to something all fans will be ok with.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  13. #103
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,469
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cashcleaner View Post
    Shit. Yeah, that is a good point about wind coming in. If we had some surrounding structures to break it up it wouldn't be a problem, but yeah, we often get steady breezes in from the lake and that could certainly disrupt the noise generated in the stands if we had nothing to stop that level of airflow.
    Even if it is just meshing like you would see at your local outdoor tennis courts it would help cut down on the wind.

    It won't help with sounds loss through the back but would help keep the wind from messing with acoustics... to play devils advocate though: the breeze off the lake is one of the better parts of the stadium during the super hot summer months.

  14. #104
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    112
    Posts
    2,839
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prizby View Post
    the first concept i'd like to see in the supporters section before anything is safe standing rail seats
    Absolutely. Rip the seats out of 112 at least. We just break them by standing on them anyways. Use them for replacements everytime those Montreal fuckwads come to town and destroy 105.

    Then again, what happens when there's another event that could use the seats? /shrug.

  15. #105
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,469
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    Argos fan- Why does my flipseat have a rail in front of it? = Not their first choice and they'll stick to something all fans will be ok with.
    Was thinking about that for a little while but something where the railing can be raised and lowered could work... either hydraulics or some sort of locking system for the railing

  16. #106
    RPB Member
    Past-President

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    112 - RPB
    Posts
    12,909
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pint View Post
    Was thinking about that for a little while but something where the railing can be raised and lowered could work... either hydraulics or some sort of locking system for the railing
    If the stands are mobile then I would expect they won't have hydraulics involeved. I do think that even with the safe standing seats there are some FIFA or Concacaf issues.
    Road Trips: July 7 2007 Chicago, July 22nd 2007 Columbus, August 11 2007 NY, October 13 2007 LA, March 29 2008 Columbus, May 24th 2008 DC, May 26 2008 Montreal, June 28th 2008 NE, March 7-11-14 2009 Charleston, March 28 2009 Columbus, April 10 2010 New England, May 12 2010 Montreal, April 7 2012 Montreal, March 16 2013 Montreal , June 3 2014 Montreal, March 14 2015 Columbus

    Twitter: @RPBPhil

  17. #107
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,469
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil View Post
    If the stands are mobile then I would expect they won't have hydraulics involeved. I do think that even with the safe standing seats there are some FIFA or Concacaf issues.
    very true... it's likely a very complex matter based on bureaucracy with both MLSE legal as well as all of the governing bodies. It's a cool idea that i would like to see but i have a couple items I would rank higher than this.

    I'm sure this stadium is becoming much more complex than they originally thought it would be

  18. #108
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    t.dot
    Posts
    7,192
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    Argos fan- Why does my flipseat have a rail in front of it? = Not their first choice and they'll stick to something all fans will be ok with.
    believe the seats would retract for the end zone...so they wouldn't be used anyways

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil View Post
    If the stands are mobile then I would expect they won't have hydraulics involeved. I do think that even with the safe standing seats there are some FIFA or Concacaf issues.
    Almost all the Bundesliga teams use them to some variation...when they are used as terraces, people aren't assigned seat numbers, for champions league and world cup qualifiers, people are 'assigned' a seat number (to one of the rail seats); would allow for more flexibility and possibly more seats sold during tfc games

    not sure how concacaf could have a problem considering some of the fields players have had to play on (Arabe Unido with the pot holes to name one off the top of my head)

  19. #109
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prizby View Post
    believe the seats would retract for the end zone...so they wouldn't be used anyways
    Yes retract for the end zone but the remaining seats still used. Are you thinking they just wouldn't use the North and South end at all or are you proposing safe standing for just the rows that cover the endzone? Not that we have any say on it...



    Almost all the Bundesliga teams use them to some variation...when they are used as terraces, people aren't assigned seat numbers, for champions league and world cup qualifiers, people are 'assigned' a seat number (to one of the rail seats); would allow for more flexibility and possibly more seats sold during tfc games

    not sure how concacaf could have a problem considering some of the fields players have had to play on (Arabe Unido with the pot holes to name one off the top of my head)
    This makes no sense. Conditions of the field surface quality and rules concerning seating in NA or a FIFA region have very little to do with the other.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  20. #110
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    t.dot
    Posts
    7,192
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    1. Yes retract for the end zone but the remaining seats still used. Are you thinking they just wouldn't use the North and South end at all or are you proposing safe standing for just the rows that cover the endzone? Not that we have any say on it...





    2. This makes no sense. Conditions of the field surface quality and rules concerning seating in NA or a FIFA region have very little to do with the other.
    1. Based on the initial diagrams, there would be no end zone seating in a cfl confirguration2

    2. Both fall under safety guidelines

  21. #111
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prizby View Post
    1. Based on the initial diagrams, there would be no end zone seating in a cfl confirguration2

    2. Both fall under safety guidelines
    1. Show me please. I was looking for it today and couldn't find it.
    2. Completely different guidelines. No need for comparison.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  22. #112
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    t.dot
    Posts
    7,192
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    1. Show me please. I was looking for it today and couldn't find it.
    2. Completely different guidelines. No need for comparison.
    1. image #3 (or #4 depending if you count the leading pic as well) - http://www.wakingthered.com/2014/3/5...pansion-images
    2. maybe i was taking a too general approach (end of debate-ur right)

  23. #113
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Centre of My Bloody Universe.
    Posts
    19,075
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prizby View Post
    1. image #3 (or #4 depending if you count the leading pic as well) - http://www.wakingthered.com/2014/3/5...pansion-images
    2. maybe i was taking a too general approach (end of debate-ur right)
    BAM!!!

    Thank You! This changes things a lot!




    This is showing the Argos will have NO north and South stand! Attendance for Argos will actually be REDUCED from TFC! And we all have heard they could easily average over 30k and or so much more than TFC. Very interesting.


    Thanks for the link and obviously the WTR guys.


    This is all pointing to the roof not having to be higher or without a back except for that "special event" stuff they want so badly...

    So Leafs fans, the roof that doesn't do enough would be all for you...
    Last edited by Fort York Redcoat; 06-03-2014 at 03:10 PM.
    FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER

  24. #114
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,469
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat View Post
    BAM!!!

    Thank You! This changes things a lot!




    This is showing the Argos will have NO north and South stand! Attendance for Argos will actually be REDUCED from TFC! And we all have heard they could easily average over 30k and or so much more than TFC. Very interesting.


    Thanks for the link and obviously the WTR guys.


    This is all pointing to the roof not having to be higher or without a back except for that "special event" stuff they want so badly...

    So Leafs fans, the roof that doesn't do enough would be all for you...
    Don't forget the "Great Lakes World Cup" big the city of toronto wants to get involved in lol

  25. #115
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Section 110 Row 24
    Posts
    7,291
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryan View Post
    Is there an opportunity to hammer home the actual desire for a closed in roof?

    I mean, they are bringing us one partly because we've clamoured for it, correct? The reason we want it is for sound more than anything. I don't think any of us Canucks really give two shits about the weather aspect...
    I doubt it. This has everything to do with ticket sales and keep bums in seats.

    Traditionally it rains or bakes at most TFC games. A roof just makes sense to make sure people are not afraid to come to games. I'm not talking about supporters or people who stick it out no matter what - I'm talking about the other 15000 people in the stadium (5000 of those people exist, the other 10,000 is what they are trying to attract)

    It also makes coming to BMO for a winter classic a bit more realistic. not really cos it's still outdoors and fucking cold and snowy and will still sell out, but optics of having the roof make it more friendly for those afraid to come to a game in the middle of winter. (a.k.a. purley a selling point to get the game here in T.O.)

    Most new stadiums in MLS have roofs. Makes for a nice cozy atmosphere. This roof will get us to that level of more intimate feeling. It sells the entertainment value of being at a TFC game.

    Oh, and the supporters say it'll help with the sound and they will work in our favour to convince council to do it because of their past history with bombarding the city with requests to help the team.

  26. #116
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,331
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cashcleaner View Post
    How high and how small is the proposed roof? Acoustics isn't my forte, but even some of the shallowest parabolas can increase the magnitude of sound transmission by a noticeable margin.



    If the South Stand roof is anything like the North stand roof pictured above (left side), I don't think there should be a problem as long as the surface's has the correct angle with which to reflect the sound. Is the South Stand roof similar or are we talking something really small and really high?

    we need the roof to be much lower and covered behind the south end, the way it is drawn, this will not prevent any wind from ripping through the stadium.

  27. #117
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    114 INEBRIATTI
    Posts
    7,522
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyone that knows me is aware of how I feel about GA. I believe it's the way forward. Look around the league, what has worked and how are they doing it? Do we want to stay how we are or are we capable of more?
    Support is divided in the stands. We need something different to make that change. Continuing to do the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.
    If we want people in the stands early and like minds standing together GA is the answer. Don't be afraid of change.
    Some may not like this, anyone can be a fan. Being a supporter is different and fans do not belong in a supporter section. Wanting to stand and have cheap seats isn't enough.

  28. #118
    RPB Member
    Moderator

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On the Interwebs
    Posts
    18,703
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cashcleaner View Post
    The Red Patch Boys are already mostly situated in the South End. U-Sector is already mostly situated in the South End. That's a big chunk of the recognized supporters right there, and as seats open up more of our respective members are able to make the move into 112/113. If you really want to unite the South End, shouldn't this be posted on the forums of all those various smaller groups? Or is it already? I mean, we're already there and we're already pretty united.

    Or is this another example of our group being asked to bring an issue to the FO on behalf of someone else? Understand that I'm not bothered with that if that's the case - I just want some no-bullshit clarification for once, because it tends to happen more than most people may think.
    I'd like to see this too.
    MLS is a tough, physical league, that emphasizes speed, and features plastic fields, grueling travel, extreme weather, and incompetent refs. - NK Toronto

  29. #119
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    114 INEBRIATTI
    Posts
    7,522
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldtimer View Post
    I'd like to see this too.
    For clarification this thread and poll wasn't started by anyone from our group.

  30. #120
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    scarborough
    Posts
    6,156
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belfast_Boy View Post
    For clarification this thread and poll wasn't started by anyone from our group.
    so what would the ideal outcome be? if a realistic (ie: no bullshit casual, standing around taking selfie, etc) section was a possibility, would other groups be open to the concept?

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •