Argos to BMO decision - Wednesday, May 20th

[Shakes McQueen]

I think this gets resolved by the end of this season and revealed or announced a day after renewal deadline. I'm sorry to say.

Yikes. Doing things that transparently, would infuriate a lot of season ticket holders.

I think the smart money is still on this falling apart, and the Argos ultimately figuring something else out, unless we also get news that MLSE are buying the Argos for some reason.

Unfortunately, I think my second guess would be yours. At that point, my only hope is that the Argos don't see this as a long term solution - just a stopgap while they figure something permanent out.

[Shakes McQueen]

The city leadership, i.e. the mayor, is an ex-commissioner of the CFL business - it has spoken out in his current position - why isn't this a conflict of interest I don't know..

my sense of it is the Argos strategy is essentially a pity strategy. They wait, go on saying "but we're the oldest football club in north america etc", do nothing to help themselves, get close to existinction, expect sympathy from everyone, and then get handed a solution that may or may not be beneficial to them in the long term and certainly not beneficial to TFC..

They don't necessarily need to go extinct, but there's nothing saying they can't play in a satellite suburb of Toronto, like Mississauga, and keep the name. Nobody cares that the New York Energy Drinks play in New Jersey.

[mowe]

They don't necessarily need to go extinct, but there's nothing saying they can't play in a satellite suburb of Toronto, like Mississauga, and keep the name. Nobody cares that the New York Energy Drinks play in New Jersey.

Who's going to pay for a brand new stadium in the suburbs? That too for a CFL team that will pay 10 games a year.

As much as I don't want them here, it's easy to see BMO is the ideal solution for the Argos. Great location, the right capacity, and all they have to do is come up with $20 million. Granted, that last part is quite a hurdle, but much less than a new stadium.

I think the best we can hope for is that grass turns out to be not feasible at Rogers Centre so Argos can stay there. I don't really see any other options unless they're going to upgrade York's stadium or something.

[Shakes McQueen]

As much as I don't want them here, it's easy to see BMO is the ideal solution for the Argos.

Indeed it is, amenities-wise, from their perspective. However, they have no leverage in this matter.

Is it an "ideal circumstance" for MLSE? Unless the city forces this marriage, the ball is 100% in MLSE's court, not the Argos.

[Pookie]

Indeed it is, amenities-wise, from their perspective. However, they have no leverage in this matter.

Is it an "ideal circumstance" for MLSE? Unless the city forces this marriage, the ball is 100% in MLSE's court, not the Argos.

Maybe the Argos somehow finance their own brand new stadium in the 905 area.

The thing is though without CFL stadium expansion, MLSE doesn't get Grey Cups at BMO. Each one is worth $10M (estimate). And this was a publicly stated intention since the get go.

This is a multi-use business proposal. MLSE doesn't want a competing venue and they certainly can't cash in on this big event with permanent stands that aren't CFL ready. And I would wager that they would rather build those temporary stands with government/CFL money than their own.

Can't see this falling apart.

[pdubs]

I know their is talk about hybrid grass, trying to work the schedule, ect, ect.

I picture this. FC Dallas has to deal with high school football. From a TFC point of view we have all our games, hopefully playoff games, national team games, friendlies and now Argos?

This is what worries me.






That muddy pitch we had to deal with during the DC United game early last year was a disgrace. Add in football lines and 250lbs - 300lbs men concentrated in the center of the field... call me worried and dubious that technology can guarantee a perfect game day experience in our soccer specific stadium.

Can anyone else picture a wet and damp October weather mixed in with all this wear and tear?

EDIT - I wish these videos were available in higher quality then 480p.

[Pookie]

I know their is talk about hybrid grass, trying to work the schedule, ect, ect.

I picture this. FC Dallas has to deal with high school football. From a TFC point of view we have all our games, hopefully playoff games, national team games, friendlies and now Argos?

This is what worries me.

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.

[TFC07]

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 to 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.

You're only thinking from TFC/MLS POV, not international soccer POV. Grass is going to stay so MLSE can host non-TFC soccer (like Gold Cup this year) at BMO field. Having 30k-40K grass turf stadium will draw a lot of attention for promoters wanted to host major soccer game in North America.

[Beach_Red]

You're only thinking from TFC/MLS POV, not international soccer POV. Grass is going to stay so MLSE can host non-TFC soccer (like Gold Cup this year) at BMO field. Having 30k-40K grass turf stadium will draw a lot of attention for promoters wanted to host major soccer game in North America.

Will MLSE make enough money off those games after the promoters take their cut? I imagine they're taking all this into account and will make the decision based on what will make them the most money. I also expect, like Pookie says, that the decision will be revisited as time goes by, always based on what will make the most money right now.

[ag futbol]

Who's going to pay for a brand new stadium in the suburbs? That too for a CFL team that will pay 10 games a year.

As much as I don't want them here, it's easy to see BMO is the ideal solution for the Argos. Great location, the right capacity, and all they have to do is come up with $20 million. Granted, that last part is quite a hurdle, but much less than a new stadium.

I think the best we can hope for is that grass turns out to be not feasible at Rogers Centre so Argos can stay there. I don't really see any other options unless they're going to upgrade York's stadium or something.

The city / municipality will pay. These places are getting to the point where development is becoming mature and residents are belly-aching about living in a bedroom community. A CFL compatable stadium with multiple uses is potentially appealing.

Of course this will be somewhat blunted by MLSE / city of Toronto wanting to protect their own venues but growth in entertainment outside of the GTA is inevitable with increased density and transportation issues popping up frequently.

[Pookie]

You're only thinking from TFC/MLS POV, not international soccer POV. Grass is going to stay so MLSE can host non-TFC soccer (like Gold Cup this year) at BMO field. Having 30k-40K grass turf stadium will draw a lot of attention for promoters wanted to host major soccer game in North America.

On a game by game basis though, MLSE has already shown that they are willing to bring in temporary grass and can still make a profit at that. So having turf doesn't hurt plans for Friendlies or other events between two big clubs.

I love grass, don't get me wrong. I think that the biggest downside to this roof and upgrade is that it has become a real multi-use stadium business plan. As such, I think the grass is in trouble for all the reasons highlighted in this thread. Not immediately mind you… over time.

[OgtheDim]

On a game by game basis though, MLSE has already shown that they are willing to bring in temporary grass and can still make a profit at that.

That was a disaster and is strongly disliked by teams coming in.

[TFC07]

Will MLSE make enough money off those games after the promoters take their cut? I imagine they're taking all this into account and will make the decision based on what will make them the most money. I also expect, like Pookie says, that the decision will be revisited as time goes by, always based on what will make the most money right now.

Yes, especially if they decide to bring these major international soccer teams themselves.

[TFC07]

On a game by game basis though, MLSE has already shown that they are willing to bring in temporary grass and can still make a profit at that. So having turf doesn't hurt plans for Friendlies or other events between two big clubs.

Temporary grass doesn't work. Teams have complain in the past regrading temporary grass.

I love grass, don't get me wrong. I think that the biggest downside to this roof and upgrade is that it has become a real multi-use stadium business plan. As such, I think the grass is in trouble for all the reasons highlighted in this thread. Not immediately mind you… over time.

I disagree simply because BMO field will become less attractive (in others, not making enough money) if they put down field turf. You're underestimating international soccer side on here. Not only that, but players prefer to play on grass than field turf. Not everyone is going to be open to playing on field turf which will mean it will harder for TFC to sign quality players. Just because we see couple of players playing on field turf (remember that majority of MLS teams play on grass) doesn't mean all players will be okay with it.


Another factor is that this market views field turf inferior to real turf which we're seeing on here and Blue Jay fanbase. Going back to field turf will send a negative message to market which will make it harder for MLSE to sell idea to play on field turf over grass in the end

[Pookie]

That was a disaster and is strongly disliked by teams coming in.

And yet the teams still came.

Toronto FC vs Real Madrid
Man United vs Celtic
Panathinaikos vs Inter Milan
Liverpool vs TFC

…. the teams may or may not like it but the promoters certainly don't seem to have issues booking them.

Again, not saying it is ideal for any team but I'm saying if they had to, they could live with it.

There is a chance that grass and football can work. Hull City FC (EPL) and Hull FC (Rugby) co-exist at KC Stadium. It's a hybrid surface. The rugby side played on the 20th (Friday) and the football side played Chelsea today on the 22nd. Aside from the lines and some chewed up parts, the game went on and it wasn't a disaster.

[Pookie]

Another factor is that this market views field turf inferior to real turf which we're seeing on here and Blue Jay fanbase. Going back to field turf will send a negative message to market which will make it harder for MLSE to sell idea to play on field turf over grass in the end

I don't disagree with you. I'm not sure what we are arguing

I'm not advocating FOR turf. Simply saying that there will likely come a point in time where turf becomes a serious discussion within MLSE. Save all of these reasons to fight against it.

[TFC07]

And yet the teams still came.

Toronto FC vs Real Madrid
Man United vs Celtic
Panathinaikos vs Inter Milan
Liverpool vs TFC

…. the teams may or may not like it but the promoters certainly don't seem to have issues booking them.

Again, not saying it is ideal for any team but I'm saying if they had to, they could live with it.

There is a chance that grass and football can work. Hull City FC (EPL) and Hull FC (Rugby) co-exist at KC Stadium. It's a hybrid surface. The rugby side played on the 20th (Friday) and the football side played Chelsea today on the 22nd. Aside from the lines and some chewed up parts, the game went on and it wasn't a disaster.

Temp grass isn't cheap and BMO field is planning to host more than one international game during the summer. So I don't see any upside of having temp grass on field turf than just simply having grass permanently if you're planning to host plenty of soccer games.

[TFC07]

I don't disagree with you. I'm not sure what we are arguing

I'm not advocating FOR turf. Simply saying that there will likely come a point in time where turf becomes a serious discussion within MLSE. Save all of these reasons to fight against it.

I highly doubt it unless this market lose interest in soccer and MLSE thinking of getting out of soccer business.

[Alonso]

They put a wood floor basketball court over top of an ice rink for two different sports at the ACC.

It's not an astronomical engineering feat to do the same for natural grass for soccer and turf for CFL at BMO.

That's the only reasonable way this could work.

[TFC07]

They put a wood floor basketball court over top of an ice rink for two different sports at the ACC.

It's not an astronomical engineering feat to do the same for natural grass for soccer and turf for CFL at BMO.

That's the only reasonable way this could work.

Apples and oranges.

Grass is a lot harder to maintain than what people here making it out to be. Unless MLSE invest in removable turf that we see with University of Phoneix (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUs70OZnqpc) than I highly doubt we will see grass on plastic turf.

[Alonso]

Apples and oranges.

Grass is a lot harder to maintain than what people here making it out to be. Unless MLSE invest in removable turf that we see with University of Phoneix (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUs70OZnqpc) than I highly doubt we will see grass on plastic turf.

That's what I'm suggesting.

If they are serious about making this work, then the best solution is putting a turf surface over the grass (NOT ON THE GRASS) for 5 hours for the CFL game and then remove it and let the grass go about it's business.


EDIT: It doesn't have to be as fancy as the University of Phoenix setup. It's not rocket science. Where there's a will there's a way. And any other cliches you'd like to include.

[TFC07]

That's what I'm suggesting.

If they are serious about making this work, then the best solution is putting a turf surface over the grass (NOT ON THE GRASS) for 5 hours for the CFL game and then remove it and let the grass go about it's business.

That wouldn't work. Turf and CFL players will damage the grass.

Covering grass and having 250lbs CFL players running over it will kill grass. Grass needs it's oxygen. lol

Grass will have to be top of field turf order for this work and then taking grass out when hosting CFL games.

[Alonso]

That wouldn't work. Turf and CFL players will damage the grass.

Covering grass and having 250lbs CFL players running over it will kill grass. Grass needs it's oxygen. lol

Grass will have to be top of field turf order for this work and then taking grass out when hosting CFL games.

You could put it over the grass without it being on top of the grass.

Use your imagination.

[TFC07]

You could put it over the grass without it being on top of the grass.

Use your imagination.

You will still damage it no matter what. You can't put too much pressure on grass and cut it's oxygen even you put a layer between grass and field turf.

If we're going to have two surfaces, then it will be field turf as main surface and grass will be on top. If MLSE decides to bring removable turf that we see with University of Phoenix, then it can work. Also, temp grass isn't solution either because surface will be too soft to play on (it takes time for grass to become solid on surface that it grows on) and too expensive (both bringing new grass and labour to lay grass on turf every time there's a soccer game)

[PAOK17]

You could put it over the grass without it being on top of the grass.

Use your imagination.

I am not sure how this can be done. Assuming we are ok with the grass being covered for 5 hours, I can't think of any way that the turf surface can sit above the grass surface with nothing in physical contact with the grass. The only thing I can think of is having the surface suspended over the grass surface with the supports planted off of the grass on the outer edges. You'd be basically building a giant bridge like structure. That's the only way you can put something over something with being on it (i.e. touching it). Other than that, you'd need a floating surface.

[Alonso]

You will still damage it no matter what. You can't put too much pressure on grass and cut it's oxygen even you put a layer between grass and field turf.

If we're going to have two surfaces, then it will be field turf as main surface and grass will be on top. If MLSE decides to bring removable turf that we see with University of Phoenix, then it can work. Also, temp grass isn't solution either because surface will be too soft to play on (it takes time for grass to become solid on surface that it grows on) and too expensive (both bringing new grass and labour to lay grass on turf every time there's a soccer game)

You are missing my point.

No pressure should be applied on the grass. We agree on this. Nothing should actually touch the grass.

Now... "get er done".

POAK17: That's what I'm suggesting. For arguments sake imagine two I-Beams on either side of the field with an I-Beam on top of those two every ten yards perpendicular.

[PAOK17]

You are missing my point.

No pressure should be applied on the grass. We agree on this. Nothing should actually touch the grass.

Now... "get er done".

POAK17: That's what I'm suggesting. For arguments sake imagine two I-Beams on either side of the field with an I-Beam on top of those two every ten yards perpendicular.

Yeah I realized that as I was typing it out haha.

Technically it is feasible. I mean, it wouldn't be near longest 'bridge' in the world. Would it be expensive? Most likely. But cost removed, I can't see how this couldn't be engineered.

[Alonso]

Yeah I realized that as I was typing it out haha.

Technically it is feasible. I mean, it wouldn't be near longest 'bridge' in the world. Would it be expensive? Most likely. But cost removed, I can't see how this couldn't be engineered.

Just did a google search and found this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaP2YjTwtm0

Lille stadium takes half the pitch and floats it over the other half of the pitch to set up for concerts.

Again, where there is a will there is a way.

It wouldn't have to be even this fancy, just a platform that you can set up over the grass.

Maybe they put a permanent crane in one of the corners of the stadium that can drop the platform in from the parking lot on CFL game days.


MLSE if you're reading this, I'm for hire. I'll solve it for you.

[greatwhitenorf]

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.

[greatwhitenorf]

You are missing my point.

No pressure should be applied on the grass. We agree on this. Nothing should actually touch the grass.

Now... "get er done".

POAK17: That's what I'm suggesting. For arguments sake imagine two I-Beams on either side of the field with an I-Beam on top of those two every ten yards perpendicular.

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.