Keep sailing, Argos!
By Ben Knight
Years back, my memory recalls an incident in a prominent Northern Ontario city I’m just about certain was Sault Ste. Marie.
A major curling event was scheduled, and curling ice installed in the big arena. The local junior hockey team – displaced for two weeks by the intricate subtleties of high-level rock-throwing – were departing on an extended road trip.
But before they left, some of the players thought it would be amusing fun to don their blades, and do some hard skating drills on the curling ice.
The ice was destroyed. The event nearly had to be cancelled. Curlers the world over reacted in horror. Hockey folk didn’t much get what all the fuss was about.
And here we are again, perhaps – as one more time the Toronto Argonauts seek to cast their carnivorous cleats in the general direction of BMO Field.
Just as curling ice needs to be smooth, even and free of gouging ruts, so too does soccer grass require protection from the grinding, concentrated destruction of gridiron football. What is the point of building a real soccer stadium, and finally being allowed to install truly good grass, if the surface is destroyed nine or more times a year by a brutal, gouging, grinding rival game?
Soccer fans are already reacting in horror. The problem is getting CFL fans – and local politicians – to care.
For what it’s worth, though, I don’t get the sense the Argo invasion is actually all that serious a threat this time around.
The team is losing games and money at an appalling clip. We’ve recently learned that their owners are being financially propped up by the owner of the British Columbia Lions – and have been since they arrived.
The Argos famously bailed out of two earlier, abandoned Toronto soccer stadium plans, primarily using Canada’s hosting of the FIFA Under-20 men’s tournament in 2007 as leverage for a better rent deal at the Dome With Sky Formerly Known As SkyDome.
Now, with the team up for sale, any and everything that could make the Boatmen seem more attractive is – once again – in play.
But before we start getting the entire south-end support section of ravenous Toronto FC fans stomping and chanting at every single Toronto City Council meeting throughout 2010, let’s take a collective deep breath, and consider … the obstacles.
- The playing surface at BMO Field is 75 yards wide. That’s sufficient for the CFL, although it leaves next to nothing for the huge bench areas most gridiron teams require.
- BMO’s field is 115 yards, end-to-end. A CFL field is a whopping 150 yards long. Big end-zones are essential in the pass-heavy three-down gridiron game. Even if they were shrunk to 15 yards – something the league has said it would grudgingly accept – we’re still 75 feet short of playable.
- The field is already hemmed in tightly by grandstands on three sides, and a plan has been approved to add some permanent seating in the open north end.
- Any lengthening of the playing surface would require the demolition of the south end, extension into and across Princes Boulevard, and the building of new – and movable – seating for several thousand people. That takes money, and …
- There’s no money.
- For the Argos to play at BMO Field in 2010, the fundamental rules of CFL football would have to be altered. Expanding the field and getting stadium capacity up to the current Argo level of along about 26,000 would take two full years, at least.
- The three levels of government, having already paid the entire shot for the stadium’s construction, are unlikely to smile on this plan – especially given the hugely loud and vocal public opposition that will arise. Not only are TFC and Canada soccer fans loud, they are brilliantly organized. They will be heard.
- About the only reason grass is being installed at BMO in the first place is that private money is paying for it. Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment – owners of Toronto FC – are in an awkward position. They can’t really publicly oppose another team moving into a stadium which public money built for them. But the $5-million they are investing in the new turf certainly raises the bar higher than the financially battered Argonauts can comfortably leap.
Far more likely, I think, is that the Argos are threatening to leave the ‘Dome in hopes that the ‘Dome owners – Rogers Communications – will buy the team. Possible, I suppose, but if I’m a landlord with a struggling tenant who’s managing to pay the rent, last thing I want to do is buy that business.
But vigilance is always appropriate, and it’s not a bad time to work up some strategies for effective public opposition of any attempt to dock the Good Ship Argo at the pleasant port of BMO Field.
This is crucial. If Canada is to have soccer – real soccer – it has to protect the grass at BMO Field. The park is finally free to become the true home of Canada’s national soccer teams, and the day isn’t far – I truly believe – when TFC will pass the Argos as Toronto’s fourth professional sports team.
The Canadian Football League is both a sporting and cultural institution in Canada. Yesterday’s Grey Cup game was a blast. And did you know the CFL draws just about exactly the same average number of fans per game as the Spanish La Liga?
But gridiron lines – and gridiron cleats – destroy both the atmosphere and artistry of the beautiful game. And to permit these atrocities for the benefit of a struggling, bankrupt franchise whose financial seizures have already dealt multiple setbacks to the Canadian soccer dream is simply not a reasonable option.
The CFL does NOT belong at BMO Field. We’d all better start thinking of simple, effective ways to explain that to people.
Onward!



November 30th, 2009 at 9:54 am
This is a fantastic blog Ben. I wish some of the media outlets would pick it up. The Globe and The Star need to have this on their sports pages. You just verbalized the very sentiments of every soccer fan in this city, perhaps this country.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Nice one, Ben. Thanks for adding some perspective. I feel *slightly* less worried now.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Well Said Ben.
I agree that there are just too many obstacle.
Put me in the school that believes that this is smoke and mirrors and a negotiation tactic.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Great Blog, Ben. I am still a little worried, though. Your sentiments about CFL fans not caring about Soccer (I have personally heard “Nobody cares about Soccer” from several of them) are what really sets me off. The Deputy Mayor seems to be one of them (ref:
“The stadium doesn’t have the length of the field required for normal CFL regulations,” deputy Toronto mayor Joe Pantalone said yesterday. “However, the CFL can waive that, for the greater good of the sport. And hopefully, they do that, because I know that’s what the Argonauts have requested them to do.”
Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/story.html?id=2278526#ixzz0YM6sDtQb
November 30th, 2009 at 10:17 am
A great blog as usual Ben!
You write that the plan has been approved for the North Stands, and the Globe writes that it’s a proposal that won’t get approval until January. Can you confirm what the situation is?
I’m sure the installation of the North Stands was already planned, but the timing of the announcement seems to be nothing more than a coutermeasure to the Argos. Could they really have gotten approval so quickly?
November 30th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Hope could come this week as Toronto city council votes whether to expand the north section of BMO Field.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/city-set-to-vote-on-proposed-bmo-field-expansion/article1382261/
A yes vote will all but kill Cynamon and Sokolowski’s power play move.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Good shout Ben as usual. This was always the thought I had when this came up before. I’m amazed at the gall the Argo owners had when they floated this. Not only do they feel they can stroll into BMO, but they also expect the CFL to alter the league rules to allow this. The nerve of them to bring this up in the week of their league’s biggest game shows how ego-maniacal these 2 tw#ts are. They can always share the new Ivor Wynne once that gets built.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:51 am
About the turf…will it be like the one in Montreal that was torn up for the Canada-Honduras game? Because that’s a soccer specific stadium and that pitch didn’t look too good with only soccer being played on it.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:57 am
I’m a big fan of both TFC and the Argos. I’d love to see the Argos out of Skydome but I don’t think BMO Field is the place for them. Not only because of the conflicts with soccer/TFC but because the stadium isn’t suitable. The playing field is too small and so are the stands. This abysmal year not withstanding, the Argos recent average attendance is more like 30 000 with some games topping 40 000. They really need a nice 30 000 seat stadium but, unfortunately for them, the finances aren’t there to build their own.
As a TFC fan I have no desire to see football in the soccer stadium. That said, some TFC fans could be a little less self-righteous in defending “their” publically funded stadium.
November 30th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I didn’t know that the CFL has the same average attendance as the Bundesliga because it doesn’t. Bundesliga is around 38,000, CFL 29,000
November 30th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Kingston — self-righteous? What are you talking about?
Soccer in this country has struggled mightily to get a single publicly funded soccer stadium and now fans are self-righteous in protecting it?
Soccer fans saw the Argos jump out of two previous deals on stadiums, and soccer fans are self-righteous for calling them out on it?
The Argos had a 50000 seat stadium built with taxpayer money (way more taxpayer money than used for BMO Field) and fans are self-righteous to complain about the Argos moving to another taxpayer funded stadium?
November 30th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Good piece Ben. The soccer loving residents of Toronto MUST take this threat seriously. It may seem far fatched but until such time that I hear the words “the Argos are not coming”, I will assume that Toronto’s famously shortsighted municipal politicos might actually approve this ridiculous proposal to move the Argos to BMO.
Email your city councillor. Twitter Mayor Miller. Make your voice heard.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
@Dan:
The reason the field was torn up and in such bad shape at Saputo Stadium for the Honduras game was because it was a newly laid pitch and it had rained a lot that summer so the roots of the grass grew out horizontal since there was always water near the surface… hence why it was so easily torn up. For a solid surface, you need less water for the roots to grow downward in search of moisture, allowing the grass to really anchor itself into the ground. It was not a result of too many games or the effects of the soccer played on it.
November 30th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
[...] are looking to move to the city-owned stadium: TFC fans and bloggers are rightly up in arms, with Ben Knight commenting that the problem is (as ever with soccer in North America, even in a soccer friendly city like [...]
November 30th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Great piece Ben. What baffles me about this plan is that it wuold be bad for EVERYON involved. Consider from the followiong viewpoints:
CFL - oldest franchise in biggest city playing on joke field with poor facilities for teams, benches etc.
TO City - 8-10k fewer fans per game means lost revenue from them all in transit, parking and concession/ticket sales cuts. not to mention loss of ability to host major events and tournaments which will amount to millions in the longer term.
CSA - loss of national soccer stadium (in a decent condition at least) which was built with public money and no world class pitch for national team games (men, women and juniors alike). Gridiron lines make national soccer home look like a joke.
TFC/MLSE - having spent $5.5m on new pitches the BMO grass wil be destroyed and covered in grid iron lines. Scheduling conflicts with season overlap. Cannot train TFC team on own grass because of additional CFL wear.
Argos - greatly reduced fan attendance and support. Home field is a laughing stock, as are home dressing rooms etc. Handicap whenever they play because of weird field size. Stadium is all red, Argos are blue - further laughing stock material.
Fans - BOTH sets of fans lose out because neither set wants this to happen.
So, why is this even being considered by the City? The clown owners of the Argos should be quietly told by the CFL to stop being idiots.
November 30th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Comparisons with the Bundesliga are not accurate. The CFL has eight teams. The Bundesliga has probably at least ten more teams than the CFL. The bottom feeders in the Bundesliga probably draw less than the average CFL game. However, if we have to compare apples to apples, look at the average attendance of the top 8 Bundesliga teams. It’s probably twelve or fifteen thousand more than the CFL average.
November 30th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
[...] a few folks such as Onward’s Ben Knight are taking the logical approach: the Argonauts will never play at BMO Field and here’s why. [...]
November 30th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Folks, since the last time I looked at global attendance numbers, the Bundesliga has, in fact, pulled well ahead of the CFL.
However — in average attendance in seasons that concluded in 2008:
CFL — 29,206
La Liga (Spain) — 29,124
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_attendance_figures
November 30th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
@ snowcrash you’re forgetting that Germany has 45 million more people than Canada. The German population is also much more dense (close together) as well. Therefore your post makes no sense. However you cut it the CFL has very good attendance & amazing television ratings. To boot, the final minutes of the ‘09 Grey Cup was one of the most entertaining pieces of sport I’ve seen in a long time.
I personally feel that BMO is too small for the Argos anyways but since $50 million dollars of taxpayer money was used to build it the option should at least be explored. We all know the Skydome was built primarily for the Blue Jays. If the Blue Jays never existed it would have never have been built since Canadian Football does not require a retractable roof but baseball in Toronto does for the month of April.
The CFL is cultural institution in Canada, it’s part of our history and part of being Canadian. We need to find a good home for the Argos first & foremost.
November 30th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
“We” don’t need to do any such thing, J.
The Argos can look out for the Argos. The soccer community will do everything possible — and many, many things are possible — to keep the Boatmen out of BMO Field.
Pick either side, if you like. But this fight — should it happen — will be HUGE.
November 30th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
@ J.
learn some history.
It was the Argos that got the ball rolling with the talk of Domes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Centre#Background
November 30th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
@ Ben - this fight maybe HUGE for you and perhaps some of you blog buddies.
Unfortunately, not enough CFL fans care about BMO field or TFC to make it huge the other end. The CFL is simply looking out for it’s best interests whether means moving in to BMO, moving elsewhere or getting a better lease at Rogers.
BMO was a stadium built on the cheap, it’s two-bit, minor league & not big enough for CFL football. That being said the Argos and the CFL are simply more important to Canada and our culture than the MLS so we have to do what is right.
November 30th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
J, you obviously have no idea what’s actually under way here.
Stay tuned!
November 30th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Very good item, well done, Ben. Never seen so many comments.
J, let me guess, you’re a locally born white boy. Who are you to judge what’s better for Canada’s culture?
Fact is, the Argos have been less than relevant in this very diverse city for a long long time. this ain’t Saskatchewan.
November 30th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Ben, thanks for the article.
Forgive the run-on sentence, but I find it a bit paining for soccer writers to attempt to support their “maybe if I ignore Canadian (and North American) realities, and pretend it is called football here, eventually I can get the 329,998,000-odd people who disagree to change their minds” mentalities by calling football “gridiron”.
Gridiron is not a term virutally anyone in the world uses to describe our versions of footbal - not Canadians, not Americans, not even the English for the most part (who call it “American football”, having no idea of the Canadian variety).
Some Aussies call it gridiron, so do some in Ireland. We aren’t in Australia or Ireland, nor are we in the UK.
Why, oh why, oh why do you torture your prose?
Call it football or the CFL or the CFL game - that is what the ENTIRE COUNTRY does.
Pretending that we didn’t develop our own “football” in this country over 150 years won’t make it the case and won’t give you or your friend a british passport (if you don’t already have one). Pretending otherwise doesn’t make you a bigger soccer fan so why try?
November 30th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Kingston… Im glad you support both team hopefully with your pocket book
as to the righteous opinion of the public monies spent on BMO
lets look at our public monies spent on the ‘argos’ Skydome…
“The completed stadium started life with a $165 million debt that ballooned to $400 million by 1993. The stadium became a huge liability to the Provincial Government, and as the economy soured, so did public support for the so-called “white elephant”. In March 1994, Bob Rae’s Ontario NDP government paid off all outstanding debts from the Provincial treasury, and sold the stadium for the massively discounted price of $151 million to a private consortium…”
there’s ~250 million public money gone…
Then Sportsco International LP bought the stadium out of bankruptcy protection for $85 million then Rogers spending $25 million – about 4% of the cost of construction…
I think the cry should be against the righteous owners of the Skydome..
I adamantly support defending “our” publicly funded stadium. Its the best money spent by our politicians in a long time… let alone…
“MLSE contributed $8 million towards the construction of the stadium and $10 million towards securing the naming rights of the stadium. The Canadian Federal Government contributed $27 million, with Ontario’s government adding an additional $8 million. Toronto paid $9.8 million”
November 30th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
ps.. nice job as always ben
November 30th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Ben, I have a simple solution to MLSE’s dilemma….just purchase the stadium outright! and if they’re even smarter expand it ASAP…I think it’s a no brainer because I predict soccer in North America is poised to really take off over the next 5-10 years.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I’ll parse a comment I posted elsewhere regarding this issue.
First and foremost, I don’t believe the Argos will move to BMO. It is, as suggested in the article, a negotiating tactic. I’m not sold that the CFL would approve the field mods (keeping in mind the disaster that occured in Memphis in ‘95) required anyway, nor that the city would agree to pay for turf repairs on MLSE’s newly installed grass. But that said, what exactly is the upside for the Argos?
They move out of an all weather facility (that is, admittedly, too big) to a basic outdoor stadium that is too small. For those who truly believe our CFL to be “big league” (at least in Canada), trading the dome for BMO is not a step up.
Why would the Argos want to move? Well, the primary reason to suggest it is, I believe, a negotiating tactic for either a new deal at the dome or the sale of the club (not necessarily to Rogers… I think MLSE might be their target buyer). Secondly, they cannot draw effectively at the dome - a downtown stadium w transit access (and expensive food, parking etc), averaging about 26k (with some freebies, obviously).
What would moving to BMO do for the Argos? Well, they believe it would help them to mimic Montreal’s success at Molson stadium. Keep in mind that the Als lost money for quite some time playing in the small stadium, but it did create demand for tickets… something the Argos could use.
Would it help them? Really?
Moving to a stadium that is too small and with an oddball field?
In my opinion, no. In fact, it would likely make a bad business model worse. Not to mention the fact that the modifications necessary would likely cost in the $20M range… who pays? Not the Argos, I bet.
And frankly, if they’ve got that kind of money to invest in new digs, they should be talking to York or U of T about that 30k stadium idea again… A stadium they could control, sell naming rights to, sell club seats and suites… all sources of revenue they need to compete with other clubs. That’s the real answer for the Argos. Being a tenant at BMO is not going to be better for them than being a tenant at the Dome.
If given the choice, I’d rather see $20M in public money go to a second stadium dedicated to the Argos than $20M in renos that will not improve the Argos fortunes, but stand to diminish the BMO experience for TFC (and other clubs’) fans.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
To all those who have taken as gospel the Wiki article about the Argos starting the ball on Skydome… that particular ball got rolling under the direction of a former premier, who sat through the snowstorm in April 1977 at Exhibition stadium for the first Jays game, wondering if his grand PR event would be cancelled by bad weather or, worse yet, blamed on him… After the disatrous ‘82 Grey Cup, the Argos jumped on that bandwagon (their former stadium having been largely ruined for football by the renovations for Baseball - a word to the wise) as quickly as they could, but then as now, had no real cash to put into the project.
The Jays were initially interested, but were also considering a baseball only facility on the old CN property at the time (hindsight is 20-20, but that seems like it would have been the better bet now, doesn’t it?). Eventually, the groups got together (ahem) and the present skydome plan was agreed.
The Argos have never had the money to be a significant player in a major stadium development. No CFL team has that kind of financial clout (though these days, a couple of the owners do). The Skydome was never an “Argos”-driven project as was suggested. They were just interested in a new, free building. The city realized it needed to do something as “status quo” at the old Exh just wasn’t working - for anyone. The original plan was to build a retractable roof baseball stadium, but make sure the design allowed for CFL football to be played as well. That’s why the lower bowl seating has such a shallow angle (that’s a feature almost all baseball stadia have). That lower deck seating angle is also why they aren’t great seats for any non-baseball event at the dome.
And as time rolled on, $125M of taxpayer funding ballooned to $650M+ (some believe the total cost of the skydome project was actually a $150M or so more than the official figure finally released) before the place finally opened.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Anyone who can sit through an american football game and be entertained by that should seek help…
Never mind that game goes on and one with enless interuptions and nothing happening{almost as bad as baseball},but the “celebration” of violence,drug use,doping and out of shape characters stomping around is appaling.
If that’s your “taste” of what you like,it is fine…I will stick to enjoy soccer and please,do that cattle herd stomping dance somewhere far away from a new soccer grass pitch at BMO.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
what are all the comments about the Bundesliga for? Ben compared CFL to *La Liga*. It’s kinda different.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
He compared it to Bundesliga to begin with and then changed it when we pointed out he was wrong, which is fair enough.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
@MM if that is true there are a whole lot of Canadians & Americans who need help…
I for one have been to a Grey Cup Game and it was very entertaining.
Let me tell you the Grey Cup experience is the benchmark of any sporting spectacle you have in Canada. Nothing else even comes close! It’s the feeling of different cities in Canada coming together, the feeling of belonging to something unique and just celebrating being Canadian.
Ben - please don’t call it anything else but Canadian Football if you do you’re doing a dis-service to Canadian history.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
tonydamato:
An interesting idea… one I suspect MLSE will have as their final fall back if all else fails in their efforts to block the Argos.
I’d like your comment on an alternative, however:
TFC needs more seats, lots more. The present reno plan calls for only about 1300 more (at least at this point). There are also practical problems in expanding any facility by more than, say, 15 percent of original capacity (unless all services were sized to accommodate a larger facility, which I don’t believe to be the case at BMO). In short, it’s very hard to see how BMO can ever seat more than about 24,000 at most. (I think everyone (including MLSE) was surprised by the support this club has received, so we can’t really blame them for “thinking small” when the stadium was under development).
So, how about the Argos buy out MLSE’s interest in BMO, then MLSE uses that money (plus what they are paying for the grass and assorted improvements, say $16M or so - I’m assuming the BMO naming rights cash would go with them) to float construction of a new facility that is actually big enough for their fan base, and is fully dedicated to the beautiful game?
Granted, it’s a big step, $110M or so for a 30-32k seat soccer facility. But this is the company that built the ACC, and builds massive condo projects as well. They have the loot and the expertise. Do they have the will?
TFC is rumoured to be making in the $3-4M range annual profit right now. Adding 10,000 paying customers roughly 20 times a year… hmmmmn. Building their own facility wouldn’t produce windfall profits, but it would give them total control.
Ok, so it’s a little out there… but BMO is already a little small for the club’s needs. I don’t get the feeling that will change in the next decade or so…
Thoughts?
November 30th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
John, BMO Field is publicly owned.
November 30th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Q-bert…Please,describe what exactely you loved so much in particular…???As I stated to me the whole idea of calling that show a sport is repulsive to me,so I would like to know what a fan of that really likes about it… Last time I attended a “game”,there was 1.32 seconds left on the clock and I needed to visit a restroom,it took half of an hour to finish that…Come on and you call that a sport…?Creatures whose biceps are 4 times the size of their forearms,whose necks are wider then most people’s thighs,some of whom’s bellies hang all the way down to their knees,to watch that knowing that they use stereoids,have no education and are basically finished by the age of 30 as functional people and you enjoy that as a part of Canadian culture…?
December 1st, 2009 at 2:39 am
Ben;
Yes, but MLSE did contribute $10M to the project (and another $10M roughly, which secured them naming rights). That was the interest I was talking about the Argos “buying”.
These are not the only issues, of course… MLSE’s renos have already started, and as we all know, the Argo owners either don’t have or won’t spend the kind of money necessary…
December 1st, 2009 at 8:52 am
One quick thing to state, Argos pays no rent to play at the Skydome when Rogers bought the Dome from the city, and also if the Argos were to move in, they would have to start paying rent to the people who contributed to the stadium meaning all three level of governments, the Ex, and MLSE. I am confident the Argos won’t move in, mainly because they are bankrupt.
And for the attendance figures are all too exaggerated since this year Argos lost a lot of fans, they fill about 50 - 60 percent of the Dome, while TFC fills about 90 - 100 percent of the stadium.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:01 am
@ MM:
I really don’t understand why we people feel the need to piss on other sports just because they are different. If you only like soccer and can’t fathom how someone could be interested in another sport, then good for you. Someone could have exactly the same gripe about soccer, and that would be their right. Just because you are close-minded doesn’t mean everyone else is or has to be.
For the record, there is a reason why the guys are that big, they are supposed to be hard to move! And despite how big they are, you might be surprised at just how athletic they are. And the “have no education” comment is gold. You do realize that virtually all pro-football players come from universities right? That’s probably more educated than the average soccer player…
December 1st, 2009 at 10:41 am
Alex…
Man…2 things,american football isn’t “sport”…and the doped creatures might play for “college” teams,however,re-enroll in same 3 or 4 courses season after season and most never graduate…{it’s a way to pretend they are studends}…You didn’t know that?
December 1st, 2009 at 10:47 am
@ MM:
Are you familiar with the term “stereotype”?
And saying that football isn’t “sport”, doesn’t make it true. Like I said, you don’t like it, don’t watch it and don’t follow it. That, however, doesn’t give you the license to dismiss it as not being a sport.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:10 am
Does anyone even know what they are debating about here? I saw one poster try and discount another’s argument because he assumes he must be “white”. Another saying American football is boring. What does any of this have anything to do with the topic?
So some of you don’t like the CFL. So what? Why do you care what what happens at BMO on the days TFC arn’t using it. It is a public facilty afterall so no one really cares how you feel about the CFL. And the simple fact of the matter is many Canadians do care about the CFL.
It doesn’t matter who is white, who is Chinese, who finds the CFL boring, whether soccer is better, how many fans watch the Bundesliga, whether the Argos were involved in the origins of the SkyDome, etc.
The Argos said it will give all scheduling priority to soccer and the stadium dimensions won’t be altered. If this is true, then for TFC fans, the only real issue is whether the soccer pitch will be damaged by the CFL (including both ripping up the field and white lines), is it not? All we need is an opinion from an expert in field maintenance, and experienced in soccer/football maintenance, to advise whether the proposal is doable. Or, some comparisons to other locations that have attempted soccer/football on a joint grass field, that have worked, or have not.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:47 am
@ MM
Sorry bud, you’re just wrong (and equally as ignorant as many of the soccer haters). I used to watch hockey, and that was it. The world cup was on TV when I worked in a golf course bar (many years ago) and I remember thinking about how terrible the sport was. Coming from hockey, I was appalled at the lack of scoring (indeed, at the lack of ever seen a shot on net!). At the time, I wasn’t interested in even giving it a chance.
Well, now I’m a hardcore TFC fan. My brother kind of got me interested in soccer, and when TFC started playing, I decided I’d give it a chance. It’s really the emotional attachment that I had been missing. After becoming attached, I started seeing all the intricacies of the game, and began appreciating even 0-0 ties. It’s the same with football. I used to hate it, then I decided to just give it a chance. Sure, I’m still not the biggest fan, but I’ll watch some games, and I’m starting to notice things I didn’t, and I’m legitimately enjoying it.
December 1st, 2009 at 12:45 pm
MM, please.
I’m sorry you couldn’t enjoy the Grey Cup. It was a wonderful evening’s drama and sport.
Whether or not you understand the gridiron game, it remains a serious threat to BMO Field. Howzabout we just focus in on that, everyone?
December 1st, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Listen,my only objective is that this “show” doesn’t perpetually ruin the season for the TFC next year…To me if they had to share the new grass pitch with the “gridiron”,it would be a nightmare…The only thing I saw from the GreyCup was that one of the “teams” couldn’t count to 12 and lost the Cup,based on that…
December 1st, 2009 at 1:29 pm
It had been my intent to send a link to this blog to Mayor Miller and to my local council-twit. But there is no way I can do that now.
Good god folks, can we not stick to the topic at hand? Some of you carry on in a manner worse than a classroom full of 2nd graders. If any members of City Council were to see this crap it would only re-enforce the stereotype so many have about football supporters.
Ben, is there a way you can strip out the stupid comments and preserve the integrity and importance of your original post and the supporting comments? I genuinely feel that it would be a good read for Herr Miller and his troika on City Council, but not in the manner in which it currently appears.
December 1st, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Send it anyway, Observer. I don’t think too many people are going to dig 40 comments deep — and I’m not nearly as offended by this conversation.
December 1st, 2009 at 3:50 pm
This is the sort of thing I was referring to:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup-2010/teams/england/2324487/Wembley-defend-pitch-damage-after-NFL-game.html
MLSE or whoever has a financial interest, ought to retain an expert to explain why CFL and MLS can’t co-exist on the same grass surface; if this is true.
December 1st, 2009 at 4:23 pm
@John Bladen: You said -
So, how about the Argos buy out MLSE’s interest in BMO, then MLSE uses that money (plus what they are paying for the grass and assorted improvements, say $16M or so - I’m assuming the BMO naming rights cash would go with them) to float construction of a new facility that is actually big enough for their fan base, and is fully dedicated to the beautiful game?
MLSE has invested $25m including the $5m for grass and the North End Expansion. Where are the Argos going to get that kind of money? Braley had to front them half the franchise fee of $3m when they initially bought the Argos and they have lost money every year since. They have been losing money playing in a rent free facility averaging 28,000 fans a game yet they are going to either pay millions to buy into BMO or pay high rent to draw 20,000 fans a game? Really?
December 1st, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Juve177…
Great article…you linked.You don’t need an “expert” ,maybe just a landscaper with a little common sense.Hopefully,who doesn’t wear a helmet,doesn’t break rocks with it and doesn’t look at the World through thick bars.
The reason why these ” american football” teams shouldn’t be “playing”{pardon upon…stomping} on soccer grass is the same reason they shouldn’t do that on golf courses.
December 1st, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Shawn;
The point is exactly that the Argos should be required to “pay to play” at BMO. See subsequent post. (FYI, they don’t pay rent at the dome. They do, however, pay the operating costs ‘attributable to their use’)
In my view, this is a better argument to make than: “The Argos can’t be allowed because the stadium is ours/soccer only/unsuitable” or whatever. If we rely on that argument, I think there is a possibility that TFC fans might lose this ‘battle’, should it come to that.
What the Argo owners are trying to do, in my opinion, is simply skew the question. For the most part, the discussion hasn’t been about them showing up with their checkbook (something they’ve failed to do three times, as Ben pointed out), it has been about whether the field can fit, whether the league would permit the move, or the questionable point that “the facility was supposed to be for soccer and CFL football” (you can find quotes from Mr. Miller to that effect in the Globe, amongst other sites).
Can you link any article that suggests what the Argos might be willing to pay to move to BMO? I can’t. It’s not even a matter for discussion at present.
As to the Argos financial wherewithal, you are correct, the franchise itself doesn’t have the cash. Sokoloski is reasonably wealthy however, as is Cynamon. If they really want a stadium for their club, I believe they have the ability to float a mortgage for it. I also believe they can get matching taxpayer funding (at a minimum) as well. As I’ve said, they would be far better off with their own facility. Given that $20M in Fed cash is now refurbishing MLG for Ryerson, do you have any doubts that w $10M of the owner’s money down the Argos could raise the capital to build a no frills $60M stadium? I don’t…
But they don’t want to do that. They want “in” at BMO, for free if possible. Pretty much all of my posts on this subject are meant to point out that that isn’t the best solution for anyone, including the Argos.
December 2nd, 2009 at 12:52 am
John Bladen…
How would they pay 250K after every game to relay the grass?
December 2nd, 2009 at 1:03 pm
MM:
It seems I’ve not made my POV clear. I’m not ‘in favour’ of the Argos move. I just want to make sure the financial side of it is a point of discussion (because I believe that any legitimate interest they may have in moving will evaporate if the Argos are required to pay conversion costs, rent and or maintenance).
If the Argos do move there (and as I said above, I don’t think they will, nor perhaps, that they really ever intended to), they need to be forced to pay to do so. Thus far, their discussion with the city has been about “non monetary” aspects of the move. My point (and, if I’m reading it right, Ben’s point in the original article, Ben?), is that it is a tremendous mistake for any of us to allow the argument to be shaped that way. The financials must be first and foremost in the discussion (what does it matter if the CFL accepts the field size and lower capacity if the Argos can’t pay the cost of conversion?).
To your point regarding new turf after every game, it’s a factor, but I don’t agree that $2.5M would be required. Check out the KC stadium at Hull (and others). Damage is an issue there, but the turf isn’t a total write off after each Rugby game. There are plenty of shared football/rugby facilities in Europe. Now, again, I’m not in favour of the Argos move, and it would mean added maintenance costs, but relaying the turf 10 times a year isn’t a reasonable expectation. Not every CFL game would destroy it. That said, resodding is a cost that the Argos would have to accept as 100% theirs.
The present talking points are just standard developer speak from CynSok. Never reveal the price until an agreement is in place.
They want both the city and the league to say it’s ok. Then they have created ‘momentum’, and anyone opposing is “standing in the way” of a plan approved by the city and the CFL. If they get to this point without discussing money, my fear is that we taxpayers will be on the hook for their latest bad idea.
As I’ve said now several times, we as fans need to keep the cost of conversion and stadium changeover a major talking point with the City. If that ball is kept in play, I’m convinced that Cynamon and Sokoloski will fade quietly away (again).
They want new digs. They don’t want to pay for them, just like at York, just like at U of T. If they were willing to pay (I’d never suggest these guys can’t pay, just that they don’t seem to want to), they would be pursuing their own facility, not trying to move into a smaller facility that doesn’t really fit their needs.
Is that a clearer explanation?
December 2nd, 2009 at 1:23 pm
John Bladen…
The shared facilities in Europe with Rugby are extremely expensive to maintain and many times become completely unplayable,especially during steady rain etc…It only happens on a handfull of stadium in UK.
I can tell you that Man-U or Sparta Prague or Real Madrid don’t have any rugby team there…Mind you rugby could still be less destructive to the “american football”…I consider Rugby as a sport.
Most soccer pitches are carefully regenerated between games and seldom even training os the soccer squad happens there.
Based on our local experience with university “football” team sharing field with “soccer” team,it takes one game in bad conditions to completely ruin the grass for the entire duration.
I didn’t say it would cost 2.5 million,but 250K,unless you added the total cost of replacing and maintaining the grass for the TFC for the entire season?
I suggest to put Argos on some artificial turf somewhere and keep the pristine new grass at BMO to soccer…Canada has only 3 professional teams ,TFC being one of them,so I don’t see why a “football” team would find it necessary to impose on them.
December 2nd, 2009 at 6:56 pm
MM:
Yes, $2.5M for “replacing the turf after each game” over the course of a season, which is what you suggested would be necessary.
No, Man U wouldn’t consider sharing a stadium. They are amongst the richest clubs in the world, orders of magnitude above TFC. They have the wherewithal to refuse. But there are premiership (and lower) sides that do it. It can be done is my point, not that it ought to be in this case.
And if you are the local authority responsible for these facilities, the cost to replace pitches a couple of times a year looks fairly insignificant compared to the cost to build a second facility (in the case of Hull and HKR, I believe both contributed to the construction cost of the facilities, easing the burden on each). Those are the kinds of arguments that need to be refuted in this debate. Again, I return to my point about the need to keep the cost of a potential move front and centre in the message.
I would imagine plenty of people at city hall are thinking right now “Why wouldn’t we do this? BMO is already built, it’s practically a free move”. It is incumbent on the rest of us to keep reminding them that it isn’t free at all. Not for the Argos, not for TFC, and not for taxpayers.
December 7th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
great post but curling ice is not smooth - it’s “pebbled”