The best line I heard on Saturday was from Parkdale (Mike) that looking up at the South end canopy reminded him of the movie Independence Day.
The best line I heard on Saturday was from Parkdale (Mike) that looking up at the South end canopy reminded him of the movie Independence Day.
my thoughts exactly, but Kurt can be sometimes argue for arguments sake. Wouldn't mind the facts/opinions of others changing his mind once in a blue moon.Originally Posted by mook-life
Love his articles in 2016 thus far though
I agree Nick but with the caveat that if they'd just have clearly told everybody what they were going to do, the hysterics would never have occurred. Ya they said temporary stands so those of us who pay attention knew something was going in there but a little bit of information can go a long way.
They do have some issues to work out with the new removable seats at the bottom of the southend but hopefully that can be taken care of this season.
[IMG][/IMG]
So for the 10th year, have renewed in 104. Originally purchased these seats with my young son in mind and because these were aisle seats with easy access to washrooms and exits. Though its a quiet section, the view is something awesome when the ball reaches the back of the net, always get a fantastic view of the TIFOs, and kinda fun to see the visiting 'celeb' players up close...Over the years we've debated making a move to southend but having grown attached to our 'section' family we've hesitated every year to leave the 'neighbourhood'...Well, on Saturday we discovered for the insane light grey price increase this year, arrived to our seats to discover:
1. No entrance and no aisle...the adjacent section was paved and closed off completely with the only access crawling over a dozen people to get to my seats
2. New fence now almost completely blocking the view of the jumbotron even when standing...its like sitting in a cage or jail cell
3. The so called 'roof' ends somewhere just above and behind my head meaning if it does rain, we'll get doused from rain pouring off the roof
4. My seats which used to be lined up at the corner flag, are now a good 4-5 feet behind the flag. None of this was brought forward at renewal time.
This reno is getting thumbs down for my personal game day experience.
I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. Rather, I'm just trying to relay the thought process and reasoning behind some of MLSE's decisions.
Basically, MLSE's board wouldn't have approved building the roof (or the renos in general) unless the venue was expandable for major revenue-generating events.
And because the venue had to be expandable to 40,000, the southend canopy simply couldn't be extended over the south concourse, where the priority seating is.
Certainly in an ideal world BMO Field would be a completely enclosed venue like Ibrox.
i am sure you are right Kurt. It's the same kind of shortsighted thinking that led to the SkyDome being poor for Football and Baseball, because it had to work for monster trucks. MLSE has to think that way, it's a corporation and it's only job is to make money for its shareholders, but the CSA and the City should have defended the integrity of the stadium as a soccer specific venue, purpose built as Canada's National Soccer Stadium.
But isn't the city's job to do what benefits the city? The injection of cash into Toronto via Grey Cups, Winter Classics, World Cups could be massive.
Again, every soccer fan should be idealistic. But I'm simply reporting from what's realistic and why certain things happened the way they did.
In the end, I'm still skeptical the pitch will be pristine during co-share. But, I also think the renos will be a net positive all things considered.
World cup? Even at the expanded capacity isn't it 5-10k short of the min size for a World cup Venue? or am I off in thinking min capacity is 45 or 50k?
Think minimum is 40kish.
Okay, at the end of the day i'm always going to have my concerns about the stadium but i am looking forward to seeing it on a game day again. Some kinks to still be worked out with the temp seating in the south but Saturday can't come soon enough.
Circa 2009:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...m-options.html
According to Jérôme Valcke, the Fifa general secretary, 12 stadiums, of a minimum capacity of 40,000 for the group matches, and 80,000 for the opening match and final, are required to host the Fifa World Cup finals,
Don't know if they've updated. It's been a while and FIFA has changed a bit since then. Shrug. We would not be hosting an entire World Cup as is or likely for a long time.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
2 stadiums in Russia are only going to have a 35,000 capacity - Ekaterinburg Arena and Kaliningrad Stadium
From the west side, it was so loud that we couldn't hear the songs. And I honestly don't know if that was good or bad. But except for Oh Canada and TFC clap clap clap it was just noise. Very loud noise
From the press box, I think part of that has to do with the supporters groups not being together. Yes, you can hear the southend at times, but if they were all singing together, it would be great noise.
We can host the Grey Cup and have, without the BMO renovation. It was great at SkyDome. And we could host a World Cup there too - look how fantastic the Galaxy match was there. So this argument doesn't wash for me.
Saturday was great, but for me the shared use has risked the pitch and that risks attracting good players and that in turn risks the club. On a wet September day, CFL will destroy the pitch. We know that from all experience. And then here comes turf because you can host winter classics grey cups and monster trucks etc., and there goes players like Giovinco. Is that worth it so that MLSE can make even more money from a Winter Classic? Not to me and it shouldn't be to the city.
Last edited by MightyDM; 05-11-2016 at 08:19 PM.
Most of the songs Saturday were all together, if I'm remembering correctly.
That makes sense.
I think it was because the roof amplified the east side noise because I couldn't hear either capo and by the looks on their faces, they couldn't hear each other either. It was hard to follow at certain times and chants took a while to catch on. Worked better when folks down in 115 and beyond were involved. Capo stands would have helped probably. Any idea why they were AWOL?
All Capo stands were in place except the one in 114, it's always been nearly impossible to hear the capo a section over at the best of times let alone on an opening day when the ambient noise is raise so much more.
need capos to have headsets to communicate.
That would be helpful, having seen headsets in action before at US WCQ it was very useful in keeping all the capos on the same page.
Remember The Man, The Legend, The Goal 5-12-07 and All That #9 Left On The Pitch, Thanks For The Memories !!!
Had walkie talkies last season and doesn't work. Lets get a few more games into the season so we can see the real effect of the roof and then the people on that grind can try and find a solution that works for them.
Not sure that's true for soccer, but I agree overall. If I owned BMO, they did what I would have done. There's a reason all the SSSs are in the deep burbs, and the downtown stadiums are mostly multipurpose. (Portland is the exception, I know, I don't know how you get that starting from scratch, you have to have the city center grow up around you.)
You can't cater that much to a secondary soccer league in a big city prime location like BMO.
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
i woulda been happy with a small UofT stadium. though the GO train is ultra handy
Portland isn't SSS. Its Portland state's football stadium. They play on fieldturf.
In fact, it used to be the AAA baseball stadium and football stadium at same time 20 years ago. Thats what gives it the "unique" shape
MLSE is partly owned by Rogers the current owners of SkyDome. There is a venue that can hold all the stuff they're talking about. They are just blowing smoke up are arses on this point. There is something much more important behind all of this and I think it has something to do with ownership of BMO. To date the city owns the land (exhibition grounds) and they built the stadium for ~67Mil through funding from multiple levels of government and MLSE's small input (which they got naming rights they sold for more than they invested originally). So it's City "owned" and operated by MLSE under contract(s).
Now over the past 9 years MLSE has invested in natural grass complete with heating system, stands in the north end, new scoreboard in the north end, tear down stands (and buildings) in the north end and put some temporary seating, expanded East side capacity, added canopy "roof" over East, West and South end....over the years that has to be well over $130Mil. So, my question is, is the ownership status and management contracts for MLSE/City exactly the same? If I was a mega company why would I give the city that much investment without a change to ownership??? I wonder what the real deal is here. The risk to the product (TFC) is way to much for minimal gain (Argo's games + 2 or 3 events of 35k people) from my perspective but yet they did all that and invested over $130Mil to make it happen all for the good of the City building? Something doesn't add up for my liking.
This has long been discussed in the Argo thread.
The Skydome is not as good a choice for a Grey Cup or an NHL game as people are not interested in indoor versions of that stuff.
Outdoor versions - people pay more money for the event.
Why? Well, look at Saturday night.
BTW, the City owns the land and thus BMO. That's a provincial law. Nothing has changed in that regard. MLSE thinks/thought a BMO redo is a good investment. Something in terms of a roof had to be done anyways as the concrete is deteriorating.
I thought the Grey Cup in the Dome was pretty good. You can put a lot more people in there and at the last one I remember talking with a bunch of guys from Sask who loved that it was going to be inside. I don't ever read the Argo thread so I wouldn't know how much of what was discussed.
I guess time will tell on a bunch of things with this change. I 100% get the deteriorating concrete thing and agree it needed to be protected.
You make a good point also about City owning the land and thus BMO but it just seems like such an enormous investment for MLSE without financial guarantee. They don't like spending anything without getting others to pay part of it.
Hand signals would work if everyone co-ordinated on them.
Also that megaphone isn't very loud. I'm in 113 row 12 and all I usually make of it is fuzz. Add in the new ambient east side noise and I heard nothing most of the time.
Posting Permissions
