Argos to BMO decision - Wednesday, May 20th

[Alonso]

Wembley Stadium in London, England was designed to have a raised steel floor sit upon pillars that connected to dedicated footings below the surface of its grass pitch. The design called for groundskeepers to remove large plugs of grass and dirt from directly above the footings and drop the pillar bases into the hole. The steel floor was designed to attach to the pillars and accommodate a track and field or other playing surface. In one instance, they installed a car racing circuit.

It was designed that way to offer a facility for an Olympic games bid. But because it took about 20,000 seats of Wembley's 90,000 capacity out of service, the remaining capacity wasn't deemed adequate by the Olympic overlords. Hence, another stadium disaster ensued, the Olympic stadium in Stratford.

There you go. Problem solved. Already been done. Article: http://www.designbuild-network.com/projects/wembley/

From the Wembley stadium article:

The stadium has the facility to be converted into an athletics venue by virtue of a removable steel and concrete platform which rises 6m above the football pitch

[Ajax TFC]

Wembley Stadium in London, England was designed to have a raised steel floor sit upon pillars that connected to dedicated footings below the surface of its grass pitch. The design called for groundskeepers to remove large plugs of grass and dirt from directly above the footings and drop the pillar bases into the hole. The steel floor was designed to attach to the pillars and accommodate a track and field or other playing surface. In one instance, they installed a car racing circuit.

Wow, that's actually exactly what I was thinking could be done. Then I refresh the thread and find that it already has been done. It wouldn't be cheap, but it would be a lot cheaper than building a new stadium, and without compromising the quality of the soccer pitch

[Pookie]

There's a lot of grasping at straws when it comes to the CFL in Toronto.

No one in their right mind would actually invest in the Argos without a secondary agenda - i.e. satisfying a clause for simultaneous NFL franchise ownership. There's nothing in their performance, live attendance over the past three decades, or future prospects to suggest they will ever make money for a new owner.

A large and growing number of very bright and wealthy individuals and corporations are investing in soccer. The game has gone through several births, deaths and re-births at the professional level in North America. This edition is the tipping point.

Not only do we see an incredibly wealthy group of owners, we are seeing a huge groundswell of demand for soccer-specific stadia to house these clubs.

Soccer also has a much broader appeal with parents nowadays. You don't see soccer leagues handing out billion dollar settlements because of brain injuries suffered by its players. The strongest statement on that front would be the recent shock announcement of SanFran 49ers sensational young linebacker Chris Borland: http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...njury-concerns

Football has seen a decline in participation for many years. While that may not affect it's immediate appeal with aging, increasingly sedentary viewers who grew up with CFL, it certainly doesn't do the game's future any favours. If decisions have to be made about spending public money on a sports facility, the one with the strongest future, hence the greatest likelihood of revenue-producing support, has to be the prime concern.

Given the ownership profile of MLS, one can't begin to compare the CFL's prospects to those of MLS. What's amazing about the growth and appeal of soccer in North American is that it has largely happened without the support, or even approval, of mainstream media.

The CFL has enjoyed an endless series of journalistic blough jobs from TSN, it's all-good, all-giddy broadcast partner. The Toronto Sun and its related newspapers serve as the 'official' newspapers of whatever franchise they happen to cover in Canada. Soccer has largely been handed negative, sarcastic coverage over the past decades, case in point smirking commentaries of CFTO's Lance Brown or Joe Tilly, Global TV's Jim Tatti or Mark Hebscher and anyone employed by TSN up until about five years ago when they finally realized they better jump the bandwagon or get left behind. Or dinosaurs like Dave Perkins with the Toronto Star or Steve Simmons with the Toronto Sun, guys who just never grew up understanding a broader perspective of soccer in Canada and could only offer uninformed commentary on the game. Or nothing at all.

The same phenomenon occurred for decades in the States, often with even more stridently negative coverage. Yet soccer still grows and grows. The owners of franchises in Major League Soccer are some of the world's richest and most progressive thinkers. You can't say that about the CFL.

As a Toronto taxpayer and voter, I know what I want my money spent on and it's on the home of a soccer team with a bright, prosperous future, not on a sport with decades of chronic financial losses, long-term declines in interest and participation and serious worries from within its own community about whether football is a safe game to play anymore.

All well and good.

Perhaps the question should be asked of the current soccer investors/operators in this city, why they don't see a soccer specific stadium as being viable?

[OgtheDim]

All well and good.

Perhaps the question should be asked of the current soccer investors/operators in this city, why they don't see a soccer specific stadium as being viable?

a) BMO is a sss and it is viable currently

b) the demand to change it to soccer first and gridiron second has nothing to do with the viability of the franchise or of the stadium as it currently is

c) that current ownership sees no reason to create another sss in order to get out of sharing with the Argos has nothing to do with the viability of a sss in Toronto

d) If current ownership sees a demand for MLS in the 60K stadium range, they will build it. Given current growth in the face of massive failures both on and off pitch and with a whole swath of the local media preferring to ignore this team until they get into the playoffs, that demand for a 60K stadium may well be here in 15 years. If that occurs, there will be a new stadium at Downsview for 2030. The Argos, assuming they exist, would get left behind.

e) there is a certain narrative running around about the failure of pro club soccer in Toronto, but given current season ticket sales are ahead of last season, I'm not buying it

[Pookie]

a) BMO is a sss and it is viable currently

b) the demand to change it to soccer first and gridiron second has nothing to do with the viability of the franchise or of the stadium as it currently is

c) that current ownership sees no reason to create another sss in order to get out of sharing with the Argos has nothing to do with the viability of a sss in Toronto

d) If current ownership sees a demand for MLS in the 60K stadium range, they will build it. Given current growth in the face of massive failures both on and off pitch and with a whole swath of the local media preferring to ignore this team until they get into the playoffs, that demand for a 60K stadium may well be here in 15 years. If that occurs, there will be a new stadium at Downsview for 2030. The Argos, assuming they exist, would get left behind.

e) there is a certain narrative running around about the failure of pro club soccer in Toronto, but given current season ticket sales are ahead of last season, I'm not buying it

Step back though. MLSE is willing to invest 90M of its own money in what is a managed but ultimately rented facility.

PPL park was built for 120M. BMO was under that.

Why isn't MLSE willing to invest in its own soccer specific stadium? Why is it talking Grey Cups and outdoor hockey games?

It's all business. Risk and reward. Too risky to go it alone. And the business advantage of a shared facility, even if they don't own it outweighs the benefit of doing it themselves.

Not questioning whether MLS will fold like other leagues. It won't

Businesses don't make decisions with their hearts though. And whatever argument that people try to make about the CFL is overshadowed by the fact that the soccer owners weighed the options and figure a rented, multiuse facility better suits their financial objectives.

[East York]

There's a lot of grasping at straws when it comes to the CFL in Toronto.

No one in their right mind would actually invest in the Argos without a secondary agenda - i.e. satisfying a clause for simultaneous NFL franchise ownership. There's nothing in their performance, live attendance over the past three decades, or future prospects to suggest they will ever make money for a new owner.

A large and growing number of very bright and wealthy individuals and corporations are investing in soccer. The game has gone through several births, deaths and re-births at the professional level in North America. This edition is the tipping point.

Not only do we see an incredibly wealthy group of owners, we are seeing a huge groundswell of demand for soccer-specific stadia to house these clubs.

Soccer also has a much broader appeal with parents nowadays. You don't see soccer leagues handing out billion dollar settlements because of brain injuries suffered by its players. The strongest statement on that front would be the recent shock announcement of SanFran 49ers sensational young linebacker Chris Borland: http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...njury-concerns

Football has seen a decline in participation for many years. While that may not affect it's immediate appeal with aging, increasingly sedentary viewers who grew up with CFL, it certainly doesn't do the game's future any favours. If decisions have to be made about spending public money on a sports facility, the one with the strongest future, hence the greatest likelihood of revenue-producing support, has to be the prime concern.

Given the ownership profile of MLS, one can't begin to compare the CFL's prospects to those of MLS. What's amazing about the growth and appeal of soccer in North American is that it has largely happened without the support, or even approval, of mainstream media.

The CFL has enjoyed an endless series of journalistic blough jobs from TSN, it's all-good, all-giddy broadcast partner. The Toronto Sun and its related newspapers serve as the 'official' newspapers of whatever franchise they happen to cover in Canada. Soccer has largely been handed negative, sarcastic coverage over the past decades, case in point smirking commentaries of CFTO's Lance Brown or Joe Tilly, Global TV's Jim Tatti or Mark Hebscher and anyone employed by TSN up until about five years ago when they finally realized they better jump the bandwagon or get left behind. Or dinosaurs like Dave Perkins with the Toronto Star or Steve Simmons with the Toronto Sun, guys who just never grew up understanding a broader perspective of soccer in Canada and could only offer uninformed commentary on the game. Or nothing at all.

The same phenomenon occurred for decades in the States, often with even more stridently negative coverage. Yet soccer still grows and grows. The owners of franchises in Major League Soccer are some of the world's richest and most progressive thinkers. You can't say that about the CFL.

As a Toronto taxpayer and voter, I know what I want my money spent on and it's on the home of a soccer team with a bright, prosperous future, not on a sport with decades of chronic financial losses, long-term declines in interest and participation and serious worries from within its own community about whether football is a safe game to play anymore.

All good points, but the new economics of the CFL with new revenue coming in and the new salary cup, means CFL teams can turn a profit at 20,000. No question in my mind, if the Argos do move to BMO, under MLSE, they will get 25,000 paid. Other potential ownership groups know this, so even if the current owner gets a long term lease at BMO, other strong ownership groups will come forward ( and in fact have already approached the team if the BMO lease is signed)The Argos come down to either they get into BMO and crave out a nice following with nice profit, or they are screwed

[ag futbol]

All good points, but the new economics of the CFL with new revenue coming in and the new salary cup, means CFL teams can turn a profit at 20,000. No question in my mind, if the Argos do move to BMO, under MLSE, they will get 25,000 paid. Other potential ownership groups know this, so even if the current owner gets a long term lease at BMO, other strong ownership groups will come forward ( and in fact have already approached the team if the BMO lease is signed)The Argos come down to either they get into BMO and crave out a nice following with nice profit, or they are screwed

If this is such a slam dunk, why are they bartering for a sub 10M sale price? Doesn't add up.

I think people are too quick dismiss all the positives of skydome. It's not exactly the anchor they make it out to be. I'm not sure bmo solves their problems. It might make them a little less up in the air in terms of having a steady home, but questions abound with the business model (in the GTA at least).

[Gazza_55]

So true.

Factor in our weather too and you have a recipe for mud.

I think you are right to worry. Not only from the weather and multi-use aspect. Consider 5 clubs in MLS use turf (1 in 5) and there are some big names in that. Seattle, Orlando, Portland, and Vancouver (New England is the other). The turf didn't stop Kaka from signing nor did it stop Dempsey. Ticket sales in all 4 are strong… probably near the top of the league with respect to support. Turf didn't stop MLS from awarding franchises there and in the case of NYCFC even the lack of a stadium isn't a concern. If the conversation shifts to turf, there is no one in MLS that would likely stop it, IMO.

My gut says MLSE will try the hybrid to the best of their ability but after quite a few messy games (and significant repair cost), the conversation will shift to turf. It will be pitched (no pun intended) as a solution to the muddy problem when the real muddy problem started with MLSE's greed for a multi-use stadium.

Good examples except when Kaka signed he knew he was only going to be on turf for 1 year.

[OgtheDim]

Step back though. MLSE is willing to invest 90M of its own money in what is a managed but ultimately rented facility.

PPL park was built for 120M. BMO was under that.

Why isn't MLSE willing to invest in its own soccer specific stadium? Why is it talking Grey Cups and outdoor hockey games?

It's all business. Risk and reward. Too risky to go it alone. And the business advantage of a shared facility, even if they don't own it outweighs the benefit of doing it themselves.

Not questioning whether MLS will fold like other leagues. It won't

Businesses don't make decisions with their hearts though. And whatever argument that people try to make about the CFL is overshadowed by the fact that the soccer owners weighed the options and figure a rented, multiuse facility better suits their financial objectives.

There is a difference between the word viable and the phrase business savvy.

[GabrielHurl]

If this is such a slam dunk, why are they bartering for a sub 10M sale price? Doesn't add up

Why buy something for $10million when you can buy it for $2million??

[Beach_Red]

It's interesting to read this thread and the Bye Week thread - this league seems like a split personality. Yes, there are lots of deep-pocket owners but they're so cautious.

[burlington Red]

was interestting yesterday watching the Hull v Chelsea game, Hull share their ground with a rugby team, the rugby lines were very visible.

[Pookie]

was interestting yesterday watching the Hull v Chelsea game, Hull share their ground with a rugby team, the rugby lines were very visible.

… and the rugby team played on Friday with the Chelsea game on Sunday. It's a hybrid surface. Haven't read any complaints about it.

[Canary10]

… and the rugby team played on Friday with the Chelsea game on Sunday. It's a hybrid surface. Haven't read any complaints about it.

Didn't you read one above your post? That's how I read it at least. There were always complaints about Wigan's pitch when they were in the Premier League. They also groundshare with a rugby team.

[OgtheDim]

And has been pointed out, RL does nowhere near the damage as Gridiron.

[TFC&MCU Nino]

you are right these foot ball lines on the Ground in Seattle,New England,and Houston are Very distracting when you are watching a Soccer game,I hope that the Argo's owners will reconsider and move them some where else, and not to are Beautiful Pitch at BMO Filed!!!!

[Pookie]

Didn't you read one above your post? That's how I read it at least. There were always complaints about Wigan's pitch when they were in the Premier League. They also groundshare with a rugby team.

Was Wigan's a hybrid turf?

As for the post above mine, he referenced lines. That's distraction but I was referring to the condition of the hybrid surface itself.

[Canary10]

Was Wigan's a hybrid turf?

As for the post above mine, he referenced lines. That's distraction but I was referring to the condition of the hybrid surface itself.

Ah. Not sure what kind of pitch it is. I do now know the names of the bars and exclusive clubs at DW Stadium though.

Found this article too. The comments are pretty funny.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/f...y-take-8699235

[PopePouri]

Was Wigan's a hybrid turf?

As for the post above mine, he referenced lines. That's distraction but I was referring to the condition of the hybrid surface itself.

Grass. Swansea groundshares with Rugby and they're on Desso.

[Areathrasher]

And has been pointed out, RL does nowhere near the damage as Gridiron.

Enough to leave Wigans natural pitch battered though





Hull and Swansea never suffered anything as close to what Wigan did thanks to the desso.

[TFC07]

Closet comparison we have is NFL playing at Wembley stadium (you know stadium with Hybrid turf that MLSE likes to use as an example to justify their excuse of sharing grounds with dying Argos team). Based on that, it doesn't look good for us.

[Fort York Redcoat]

The damage gridiron does to Desso has been documented. Whether one finds it an acceptable amount of damage or not is a matter of opinion. I don't feel it necessary to look for anything worse than what we have knowing we waited for it.

[Canary10]

I think groundshare can work. We buy a couple of six foot two plus strikers and a couple of centre halves who can kick the ball far and high. Done. Stop complaining everyone.

[Mulder]

Step back though. MLSE is willing to invest 90M of its own money in what is a managed but ultimately rented facility.

I'd expect with the naming rights coming up again MLSE receives 4-6million per year range.

Especially with the attractiveness of more people in the stands, more people watching on TV if it be Soccer or Football, and the Winter Classic(s).

[TFC07]

Why buy something for $10million when you can buy it for $2million??

That is just rumour, but if CFL is so sure that Argos can work at BMO field then come up they don't come up with missing $10 million to get them into BMO field now?

That's because there's no guarantees it will work in the end. Moving to BMO field is just desperate attempt to "save" Argos. We all know (including those in CFL side) that Argos need their own stadium where they can control their gate, parking and concession revenues. They're not going to get that at BMO field

[OgtheDim]

LOL - point taken.

Wigan must play a pretty boring battering and unexpansive game of RL if they wear a ribbon down the middle of the pitch. And yet they finished second last season.

[GabrielHurl]

That is just rumour, but if CFL is so sure that Argos can work at BMO field then come up they don't come up with missing $10 million to get them into BMO field now?

That's because there's no guarantees it will work in the end. Moving to BMO field is just desperate attempt to "save" Argos. We all know (including those in CFL side) that Argos need their own stadium where they can control their gate, parking and concession revenues. They're not going to get that at BMO field

Are you familiar with the concept of economics?

And even if MLSE bought the team - they still won't be able to get into BMO until May 2017.

[TFC07]

Are you familiar with the concept of economics?

And even if MLSE bought the team - they still won't be able to get into BMO until May 2017.

Based on what? Argos can move in next year if they pay for it now! BMO field construction phase dates you're referring to aren't fixed deadlines.

[GabrielHurl]

Based on what? Argos can move in next year if they pay for it now! BMO field construction phrase dates you're referring to aren't fixed deadlines.

Based on the fact that they won't be able to do the following all in one off-season:

New Roof over three stands
Demolish North End and Seats
Demolish South End and Seats
Building North End Concourse
New Retractable Seating System for North End
New Retractable Seating System for South End
New CFL dressing rooms
New washrooms and concessions to replace those demolished on the North and south ends


And all this throughout the winter

We've seen how long the east side is taking


Edit: and the new playing surface - can't forget that.

[TFC07]

Based on the fact that they won't be able to do the following all in one off-season:

New Roof over three stands
Demolish North End and Seats
Demolish South End and Seats
Building North End Concourse
New Retractable Seating System for North End
New Retractable Seating System for South End
New CFL dressing rooms
New washrooms and concessions to replace those demolished on the North and south ends


And all this throughout the winter

We've seen how long the east side is taking


Edit: and the new playing surface - can't forget that.

Well if you look into original BMO field renovation agreement, there was only two stages which included Argos move to BMO field. However, MLSE and City had to rewrite agreement because Argos couldn't come up with money.

If Argos did have money, then all the thing you listed would happened in the final stage of construction.