Tea not their fault. In fact last year they helped by just moving the very low attended pre season game to Varsity erased one less date to wagle out of Rogers. Still were able to sell full ten game season ticket package with the season ticket holders the option to attend the pre season game or comp tickets for another game.
Also probably a much bigger savings by playing the game Varsity.
As long as they are playing in Rogers centre or downtown Toronto the Argos will continue to be a better TV viewed game and less at the gate.
Another money saving measure that would remove another date to wiggle out of Rogers would be to sign on as the Home team for the Moncton game.
There will be no rent for the Argos
CFL takes care of all travel lodging promotional costs for the game. the 750K per game can still watch on TV and there will be no 15,000 fans for a tuesday night game with less of a TV audience as well.
The extra travel game may affect some teams but the Argos really do not have any travel costs for games played so close by in Hamilton so that would equall the extra travel strain of 10 games with Hamilton so nearby. Meeting at their practice facility and bussing to RC is not that much different than meeting at thier training site and bussing to Hamilton.
Revenue for the pre season game and a tuesday night game probably is in the negative for the Argos anyway.
Varsity and Motcton are automatically in the plus.
Teams that struggle with revenue in all sports often take a home game and play it at a non home sight.
Expos in PR
Bills in Toronto
Jags in London.
NBA celtics used to play a few home games in providence RI
So the precedent is their and it is not out of the norm for pro teams in all sports do or have done similar.
I dont think the Argo fans would strike if they only have 8 home games instead of 9.
The only reason that the Argos played at Varsity last year was due to Rogers not providing any dates for the team in June. The team had no other choice but to play elsewhere.
The League is going to put less focus on TD Atlantic for awhile and is focusing more on Halifax, the fact that Moncton couldn’t sell out 16,000 pretty much ended the agreement between the league and City of Moncton.
Leafs, Raptors, Blue Jays (when they’re winning and have a lot of hype behind them), Marlies (for an AHL team) and TFC (not so much anymore) all sell relatively well in the Downtown, the issue is not the Argos being DT or where the dome is located, it’s the perception of the CFL and the Argos.
I guess your not going to take me up on the bet I offered you ?
This would be the best way to make the schedule, IMO. It would preserve/emphasize regional, within-division rivalries, create a bit of mystery in regards to the other division, cut down on travel costs, and ensure larger gate numbers.
What bind the rc is empty on most nights when blue jays aren’t playing. How can’t you put the blame on Braley/rudge? You think a tim lewike would sit around jerking off like rudge does or would he negotiate with Rogers on a better deal? I bet you any money that mr.absentee owner has not bothered to even pick up his phone to give Rogers a call about this issue! Which is another fine example why these two clowns should be banned from the cfl ever again.
This setup would certainly make division rivalaries more interesting,meaninful and intense,and like Jukjeon stated cut down on
travel costs and increase larger gate receipts.Now that the B.B.'s are back in the West an extra game vs the Riders would be
great for the fans,and set up a rubber match 2 out of 3 for the coveted “Banjo Bowl”.As a Cat fan I would love to play 12 games
against Eastern opponents considering that last year,we were 8-2 vs the rest of the division,and a guarantee of 4 games vs that
team from Toronto would suit me fine.With Ottawa in the east next year,it’s only a 40-45 minute plane trip there or the team
can Via Rail like they’ve done for years when playing Mtl away,and of course Tor is 40 minutes down the highway by bus.It would be basically the same setup as previous seasons,except that unlike previous yrs you would be playing two teams only once in the other division instead of home and away in the West and in the East it would be one home and away series and once vs the rest of the division per team.
Using the Cats as an example their schedule could go something like the one below in 2014,teams could rotate home and away between divisions on a yearly basis.
HAM…(4)vs TOR(2H/2A),(4)vs Mon(2H/2A),(4)vs OTT(2H/2A)…SASK(2)(H/A),CALG(1)(H),B.C(1)(A),EDM(1)(A),WNP(1)(H)
Unfortunately, they have decided not to release the schedule this year. :twisted:
I agree on all points. What makes you think that Rogers are going to give them any better dates in June? Why would they not jus go with Varsity again where they can get a date much more easier.
Ans yes that is the reason that the Argos will no longer work downtown they are now pretty strongly engraved of the Argos and the CFL for downtown Toronto.
The best way to get away from that perception is to get away from the downtown to an area where that perception will no where near that strong and ther a a couple of million to the North in York and Durham that would be happy to catch a pro sports game that does not force them to head downtown.
It is the MLS syndrome. Playing out of much too large football stadiums gave teams the lower level sports perception. Moving to another large section of the Metro will not have to contend with that perception and can change that perception while bringing a pro sport to a populated area where it is not.
Sporting KC dead at arrowhead in KC. Move across the border into Kansas into a new specific stadium were two positives.
I might be mistaken but I believe the CFL has previously used a formula consisting of facing each opposite division team twice (home and away) and filling in the rest of the schedule with division match ups. In the case of an east division club, that’s 10 games against west division teams, 3 games against 2 division rivals and 2 games against the remaining division rival. For a west division club, it would mean 8 games against east division teams with 3 games against 2 division rivals and 2 games against the remaining 2 division teams.
I hear and understand arguments that more division games would increase gate and decrease travel costs. That said when you have 8 league-wide opponents and only 9 home games, you really should get the entire slate of opponents into your barn once per year. I’m not sure that clubs meeting 4 times in a year will increase draw. I worry instead that 4 match ups waters down a rivalry. I personally could have done without seeing Hamilton and Winnipeg match up 5 times last year (preseason + 4 regular season). Had Winnipeg qualified for the playoffs this could have conceivably been 6 match ups in a year.
Part of football’s allure is that each game on its own means so much. Division games more-so. Making division games against a particular opponent more scarce then increases the intensity of those games.
I for one cannot wait until the CFL makes it 10 teams. I would fully expect the league to adopt a balanced schedule playing every team once home and away. The divisional match ups would have their intensity solely because they matter more in the standings. The Argos would play in Hamilton on Labour Day… that’s it and I think it would be great.
Should the league hypothetically get beyond 10 teams, then it becomes impossible to have the entire league visit your stadium in a regular season. Given this, the division match ups should be kept to 2 per opponent (home and away) as it becomes feasible and important to maintain balance in the division schedule. The surplus could be inter-division games. Perhaps inter-division opponents could be determined based on previous season rankings.
It would seem very odd to me for East division teams to play more games against West division teams than against teams in their own division . . . what’s the point of having divisions if they go that route?
Once (if) the league reaches ten teams, I’d hope they keep the divisions intact and the inherent rivalries within the divisions by having each team play a three-game series against the divisional rivals and then fill in the rest of the sched with games against the other division.
Having interdivisional games a rarer occurrence would hopefully increase the interest generated by those games. Ideally, they’d make such games during regular, special weeks in the schedule. Keep Canada Day, Labour Day, and Thanksgiving Day for regional rivalries, but maybe each season set aside weeks 4, 8, and 12 (or whatever, as long as they don’t land on the three mentioned) as East-West weeks.
-
The East playing more games against the West has happened many times in the past. When the “fully interlocking” schedule started in 1981, East played 10 games against the West and six against the East.
-
There is no chance any Eastern team will ever accept a schedule in which Sask would come to town only three out of every five seasons, because the Riders are a huge road draw. So there’s no way we will go away from home-and-away against every team, IMO.
No proof that attendance in Hamilton or Montreal is higher when Sask comes to town. In Toronto last year the highest attendance was for the Ticats. In Hamilton at IWS the highest attendance has always been against the Argos.
Sask games may have higher TV ratings, but Easterners couldn’t care less about the Riders.
Playing games within your own division would be a great way to save money, it must cost teams a fortune to send 46 players and a dozen coaches on Western road trips.
-
It seemed weird to me then, and it would again. A team competes against its divisional rivals for playoff spots. Therefore, they should play most of the games that go to determining playoff spots against those teams . . . at least that’s what seems logical to me.
-
The Eastern teams would have to consider if that Sask draw is worth losing other big (sometimes bigger) draws against divisional rivals, and whether it would be worth all the extra travel expenses out west, and whether it would be worth the lower draws in the home games against the other western teams. I don’t know for sure, but I’d bet the bottom line would be much better served with fewer not more games against the other division.
I think the CFL has it right with 9 teams that gives you 2 games with each team in the league a home and home. that leaves each team with 2 more games to schedule which would be a 3rd game against two of your divison foes.
I am not sure if they would do it but one should be against your biggest rival Toronto-Hamilton, Montreal-Ottawa, Calgary-Edmonton, Saskatchwan-Winnipeg, which leaves only BC without a rival. BC’s final two scheudles games (3rd game with opponent that season) would be against tow other West teams on a rotating basis while the other 8 teams would play their main rival a 3rd time every season rotating home and away every other season then a 3rd game within their division rotating basis.
Much Much better then an 8 team league playing your opposite conference team twice, teams within our conference 3 times, and one team within your conference 4.
Playing your biggest rival 3 times gives each team another game before or after the back to back Labor day Home and Home.
10 teams could be an equal home and home against each team if you want it nice and neat or could still play a third game vs your Labor day rival and only one game against a team from the other conference if you want another game against your rival other then in Back to back weeks that is the Labor Day Home and Home.
Playing every team in your league is pretty uique to moern big time football NFL or NCAA power confernces do not get to play every team in their league. Bringing arguments of a much weaker or much stronger schedule for diffeent teams.
For the CFL playing everyone almost the same amount of games makes very close to an even schedule for all wheehr it be 9, 10, or 11 teams
And yes having more than 10 teams even 11 would be a great schedule. You will not have each team visit your city each year but you will play then at least once. Also with 11 teams that gives the CFL a nice 20 week schedule with ezht team have 2 byes 1 withing the first 10 weeks and one within the secnd 10 weeks.
Still getting to play every team at least once and every team in your conference twice in a home and home
Here's what I am predicting
Each team plays a home and home with every other team. that's (16 games).
The remaining games are as follows....
TOR - HAM (H), MON (A)
HAM - OTT (H), TOR (A)
MON - TOR (H), OTT (A)
OTT - MON (H), HAM (A)
BC - CAL (H), WIN (A)
CAL - EDM (H), BC (A)
EDM - SAS (H), CAL (A)
SAS - WIN (H), EDM (A)
WIN - BC (H), SAS (A)
Book it!
It makes sense, at least superficially, that the majority of your games should be in your own part of the league and against the teams with whom you are competing for playoff spots. The problem, though, is that in a nine-team league you would end up playing the same teams over and over again.
Let’s say the league stays with 18 games and has only one game against each team in the other division. Western teams would play four times against the east and 14 times against the west – four, four, three and three against the other four teams in their own division. Eastern teams would play five times against the west and 13 times against the east – five, four and four. How easy is it to sell three home games against the same team? And play them twice on the road as well? Plus a possible matchup in the playoffs?
In a small league, you’re always going to get sick of playing certain teams over and over, and there are always going to be weaker and stronger draws. I think it would be a massive backward step, and financially problematic, to go back to a partially interlocking schedule. Give me two games against every team, and two extra against traditional rivals. The playoff “unfairness” issue is compensated for by the crossover rule anyway.
I think you have it exactly right. Small league with only 9 teams having a home and home with everyone makes much sense and playing a team a third time could be on against a traditional rival from Labor day and the other three game series rotating through your divison. Cannot have anyor 4 game searies that is too much and is one thing that hurt the CFL.
BC would be the only team without a true Labor day rival so they would just rated their two 3 game series throughout the west division each year. With the crossover in affect still I think that is a perfect schedule for9 teams.
Again, you seriously still don’t get it. Getting out of DT isn’t going to help, because it is not the problem despite what you seem to believe and if you’re so confident, take the wager I’ve offered… which I’m still waiting to get an answer for. A yes or no would suffice.
Sreiously I am entitled to my opinion
Seriously I am not going to wager you. NO
Seriously what do you think is going to help??? or are you one of those who beleieve the Argos will fold :roll:
I agree I don’t think the Argos being downtown is the major problem. It may help in short term to get newer fans but the fact remains having an absentee owner like David Braley and having an idiot like Chris rudge as CEO of the Argos are two major factors in the Argos failing in the toronto market place.
Have never once stated that you weren’t entitled to your own opinion, but you don’t seem to understand what the Argos problems actually are. You continually state that the Argos are going to move to York and it would be better there with no proof or facts. Even though everything is pointing to the Argos going to BMO for reasons that I and several others have pointed out so many times. You seem to think it makes more sense to build in York and yet say that it’s ridiculous to renovate BMO, which makes no sense at all, especially considering that aside from Braley stating that he’s had discussions with other cities, there’s literally no other information out there in terms of an Argo only stadium. Yet MLSE buying the Argos and moving the team to BMO, plus the costs of renovating BMO ($120 million+), the City telling MLSE they want the Argos there or else no public funding etc, aren’t just internet rumours they’ve been confirmed to all be in motion.
If you had just said no in the beginning, I wouldn’t have had to ask the amount of times I did.
As I pointed out before if you’re so confident that your plan is the way the Argos should and/or would go, put your money where your mouth is, but now that I have you answer I’ll leave it at that.
I would never want any CFL team to fold. If you want my honest opinion I’ll glad point it out.
#1. The perception of the Argos has to change by the media, general public, naysayers/haters and corporate Canada. Having MLSE own the team alone would help a lot, but it wouldn’t fix everything. As area51, myself and others have pointed out, the Argos need to get their Brand out there and start marketing the team a lot more, visibility is extremely important especially in Toronto. MLSE owning the Argos should help with the media side, but IMO Rogers, Shaw, CBC and Bell also have to do their part as well, listening to Toronto radio or even watching the news, the Argos are barely a blip (CTV does an okay job sometimes), The Leafs are the talk about the town always being talked about in the media, I’ll never understand how the Raps and TFC get the coverage that they do because it’s unwarranted. Give the Argos the same media coverage that the Jays get and you would see how much it would improve the Argos situation in so many ways. Continue the football 101 course that the Argos have been doing, but put it in a larger scale and get sponsors involved so that more people can be aware of it as well as hopefully becoming future fans. The naysayers/haters will be extremely difficult to bring in, because the CFL isn’t seen as “cool” for some reason and IMO one of the most difficult things to do in the world is change people’s opinion, especially when you’re dealing with ignorance and sheep, but finding a way for these people to watch on tv or attend games with an open mind would help, although I really don’t know how to go about that, I suppose the media would help in that aspect to an extent. Corporate Canada/Toronto, well that’s where MLSE would help in a lot of ways, but at the same time it’s a perception thing, once more fans attend and the media attention grows the Corporate side will be there as well. Grassroots is also important, being visible to the schools in the GTA as well as the minor football leagues is what needs to continue happening but on a larger scale. Setting up a practice facility that also acts as the football hub (similar to the Toronto Rock’s “TRAC” facility) should be the goal, as well as holding camps for youth and coaches to help the development of the game. The Argos and even the League should be getting more involved with the universities as well, the NFL seems to do it up here and the CFL should make that a focus, our Brand should be the dominate brand you see everywhere plain and simple.
#2. Stadium - Nobody is going to spend the money for an Argo only stadium, it makes no fiscal sense and neither Braley nor Bell are going to do it. MLSE buying the team and moving them to BMO helps in so many ways, even if they are the secondary tenant, mainly due to TFC and Soccer Canada using the facility less that 30/40 times a years, whereas the Jays play at home 81 times. Also having control over revenues like the facility fee, concessions and parking would make the Argos break even to profitable, and that’s not even including the corporate support MLSE comes with or the new tv revenue. Having control over dates would also help to ensure that Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday games are eliminated. Lastly having control to have a home game atmosphere and not just being a tenant would help from the perspective of fans also selling the game and league.
#3. Ownership - The Argos have had 7 different ownership groups over the last 25 years and that shouldn’t happen, they need a strong, local and committed group that can not only fund the losses if they happen, but can also bring the Argos into the future and not only stable but thriving and profitable. MLSE right now is the ownership group the Argos need, they can do things with the Argos in Toronto that nobody else could.
#4. C.E.O - IMO the Argos need a specific type of C.E.O, more so than any other CFL team, because their in Toronto, it’s not just a different market in Canada it’s a massive market. Keith Pelley was hands down the best C.E.O the Argos have ever had, he understood what had to be done to grow the fanbase and attention, plus media Toronto and corporate Toronto were all over him. While getting Pelley back might not happen, the Argos need a young up and comer that the suits in T.O want to associate with and pay attention to. That person would also need to understand the market as well how to maximize the Brand of the Argos in terms of marketing, advertising and grass roots.
Bet you blame Braley and Rudge for the extreme cold Toronto’s been having as well, eh ?