TFC+Argos4Life....
The Argos HAD their chance at an outdoor stadium but THEY pulled out of the York U deal. So the stadium has now been built and you want in now?
Fuck off. You are already in one taxpayer funded facility, no need to move to another.
This stadium was built to host the U20 tournament, for the National Team and TFC, not the Argos. They are just fine at the Dome. If you want to team up with a CIS Team, why not look at Varsity?
So what you are saying is that a CFL franchise is unable to be self sustaining.Originally Posted by TFC+Argos4Life
The term soccer is derived from Association Football, which predates your favoured game of bastardized rugby.
Quite frankly I couldn't care less what name is attached to the game in three countries, as the remaining six billion inhabitants of the planet embrace it as football.
totally unrelated question... how many argos are in the olympics?
Cite me one example of a facility that has to constantly place, replace, remove "skids of grass" on a continual basis.
Your correct, Im not an expert on how this system might function...but trying to think about logically...I can't imagine it would be the ideal surface to play on. I can envision seams...uneveness....and most definitely...especially with the field turf underneath...unnatural bounces of the ball. I can envision tight schedules causing the expedient installation of these skids and sloppy jobs being performed. I can also envision poor grass quality.
Once again...Im not an expert...but the surface is not ideal. TFC already has a difficult enough time as it is proving the legitimacy of field turf to potential incoming players....imagine trying to prove the legitimacy of "skids of grass" as a proper playing surface.
Unlike throwball....football requires a pristine surface to play on for a proper game to be conducted.
p.s. As for your smugness......as a cab driver in Seinfeld once said...."Smugness is not a good quality"
Well done Parky, that was great!
I'm not sure how you got that out of what I said. The CFL is the oldest pro league in North America, and the franchises have been just as "self-sustaining" as any. Three of the teams are community owned, but none of them require enormous sums of money to remain in operation.
A CFL team could be the only tenant in a stadium, but it makes no sense to do so. Stadiums are expensive, and it's a terrible waste to have one sitting empty except for 10 home dates per year. In order to get more use out of the facilities, cities often have junior or CIS teams play there. In your definition, TFC isn't "self-sustaining" either, since the MNT is also a tenant as well as exhibition games by CSL teams as well as community events. Neither are the Leafs, Raptors, and Blue Jays "self-sustaining" according to you.
Bottom line: Does a CFL team need to share a stadium in order to remain afloat? No. Would it be stupid to have a CFL team be the only users of a multi-million dollar piece of infrastructure? Very much, yes.
Bottom line: soccer is a common game. No one gives a shit about american football.
Moderator
While I agree that the concept of groundsharing isn't the end of the world in itself, I think you do have to realise that TFC already groundshare with other local organisations in addition to the CSA and OSA. Accomodating the Argonauts will not just affect Toronto FC, but also the various other soccer organisations that use the facility, most notably for it's soccer-specific facilities.
And Bars, your remark has as little bearing on the discussion as someone who would say... think the Argonauts deserve to move to BMO because they've been around here longest. Both arguments have absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand.
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.
Moderator
The Argos aren't the only tenant in their CURRENT location. In fact, I'm pretty sure the Argos don't even pay rent for it.
The argument isn't about keeping TFC the only tenant at BMO - it's about keeping the stadium soccer-specific.
As others have pointed out, the Argos had a chance to get on board with a facility for both clubs, and pulled out when Ted Rogers offered them a good deal at SkyDome. This left MLSE footing the bill for approx. $13 million of the contruction cost, and the need to find another site. Now that they have seen what a great atmosphere BMO has been for Toronto FC, they want in.
Fuck that. This is our house. You had the chance to make it your house.
As for the "skids of grass" option - won't happen. Laying a proper grass football pitch isn't as simple as laying a basketball court over a hockey rink ala Air Canada Centre.
- Scott
“Heroism breaks its heart, and idealism its back, on the intransigence of the credulous and the mediocre, manipulated by the cynical and the corrupt.” ~Christopher Hitchens
Moderator
I give a shit about American Football. It is possible to enjoy multiple sports. Even ones that adopt sadly inept names for themselves.
I said it before, I'll say it again: The saddest part of this whole BMO/Argos saga, is that it is stoking the fires of all kinds of anti-CFL, anti-american football hate.
Football may be the beautiful game, but that doesn't mean other sports aren't at least pretty good looking.
- Scott
“Heroism breaks its heart, and idealism its back, on the intransigence of the credulous and the mediocre, manipulated by the cynical and the corrupt.” ~Christopher Hitchens
Moderator
^^ Laying down sod is doable for a single match or small tourney, but yeah, you'd need a pretty complex system in place to do it over and over again.
And I totally agree with your last post as well. Unfortunately there are more than enough idiots on both sides of the argument who want to drag the debate down to a stupid dick-measuring contest.
Last edited by Cashcleaner; 08-10-2008 at 02:18 AM.
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.
Moderator
Yeah, a couple of examples of laying sod temporarily for a football match would be the UEFA Champions League final this year, and the Barca/RBNY match from Wednesday.
- Scott
“Heroism breaks its heart, and idealism its back, on the intransigence of the credulous and the mediocre, manipulated by the cynical and the corrupt.” ~Christopher Hitchens
Moderator
^ Personally, I like the idea that some new stadiums have of a movable playing surface. The pitch slides out on rails to get some sun when its not in use and slides back for gameday.
Though, its probably incredibly expensive to install and maintain.
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.
That and...there's no place to put it at the Ex.
Moderator
^ Not unless we feel like knocking down the Food Building or something, at least. In any case, its still too much of an unneccesary expense.
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.
How many people play soccer in this country versus "football".
I'm just wondering how much this:
http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/commonw...216133596.html
will affect either TFC or the Argos.
I know it's for the 2015 games but there is alot to be gained (and lost) on something like this.
Moderator
Irrelevant to the Argos/BMO debate.
Though if you'd prefer to go down that road, more people watch CFL than watch MLS. Same with NFL games.
More people have their kids enrolled in soccer leagues, by virtue of it being way cheaper, and less violent, than American football.
I'm pro BMO staying SSS. I'm also anti "pointy ball hate".
- Scott
“Heroism breaks its heart, and idealism its back, on the intransigence of the credulous and the mediocre, manipulated by the cynical and the corrupt.” ~Christopher Hitchens
Highly relevant to Argos/BMO deabte. In fact the crux of the issue. I like NFL football on a sunday morn like anyone else --but my point is that soccer(football) is a common game -- I dont have to be enrolled at Miami(of Ohio) and be some roid monkey.
Moderator
But, what does that have to do with the prospect of the Argos becoming tenants at BMO Field?
- Scott
“Heroism breaks its heart, and idealism its back, on the intransigence of the credulous and the mediocre, manipulated by the cynical and the corrupt.” ~Christopher Hitchens
Argos do not have the fanbase to make such leap. They are a bunch of old granny cunts that will soon be withered away by the natural course.
You mean the leap into a stadium with 10,000 less seats than they regularly sell at the dome?
You're really not helping the cause, pal.
Moderator
Attendance wouldn't be the issue, as the Argos currently draw around 35,000 per game at the SkyDome.
- Scott
“Heroism breaks its heart, and idealism its back, on the intransigence of the credulous and the mediocre, manipulated by the cynical and the corrupt.” ~Christopher Hitchens
as far as i'm concerned, this debate is pretty simple. it has nothing to do with who supports what, which team has been around longer, or costs for converting the stadium.
it comes down to what was promised...a national soccer stadium built to house a new soccer expansion team in MLS that has a soccer specific stadium as a apart of that expansion. it was partially paid for by taxpayers money. taxpayers were not told this was a stadium being built for the argo's, or for pointy ball. it was built for soccer, and that is why is should stay that way. the argo's had their chance to be apart of this, and they backed out. now they have possibly changed their minds. well, sorry, its too late for that. go talk to York.
post of the day!totally unrelated question... how many argos are in the olympics?
tfc+argos4life,
If you're going to write an epic, please use the sans serif default font, otherwise only half of the people you want to read it, actually will.
Using a serif font on the internet by choice......wtf is that about? making your letters heavier doesn't give your argument more weight.
There's something about the inane smugness of this post that really gets my back up.
I finally bothered to squint long enough to read it, but I wish I hadn't bothered.
You can have my seasons when your 'rugby for pansies' team gets in, and you can enjoy the muted atmosphere while you're at it.
This TFC+Argos4Life is not a true TFC supporter. He's a douchebag troll who joined these forums only to make a huge ass of himself with all this Argos/TFC cumbayaga bullshit about sharing BMO Field.
Tigers can't change their stripes. Or, in his case, slugs can't wash their slime off!
oooh... ouch... you discovered my one weakness; asinine, garbled folk wisdom. I'm sure to require several hours of therapy to get over this one...
So I'm not a TFC supporter just because I don't agree with you? Does everyone who joins these groups have to keep their mouths shut and tow the party line? If that's true you might as well erase my account right now, and anyone else unhappy being a handpuppet ought to ask the same.
How about instead I keep having whatever opinions I bloody well please, and if you don't like it, feel free to ignore me... or else proceed to fornicate yourself with the nearest coat hanger.
And for those of you who intend to seriously oppose any sharing of BMO field, you'd be smart if you read my post and try to address the points I'm making rather than saying "fuck the argos, cfl sucks, (in fake british accent) ah sod off ye blimmin' wankers!". Once this move really kicks into motion, the powers that be (like Miller, MLSE, and the Argos) will need real reasons why this move shouldn't go ahead, not childish complaints. With the dollar signs that could be staring them in the face, they'd be hard-pressed to care less about your feelings.
Mike Toth? What are you doing here?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote