ARGO/MLSE deal at final stage

The Argo/MLSE was humming along as some people pointed out. with hope of an annoucment by FBb 10th of not only having the Argos move to BMO, but also of having the team being purchased by MLSE. Seems the league or the Argos or both changed the amount of Grey Cup games assigned to Toronto over the next 12 years. MLSE wanted 4 Grey Cup over 12 years, which according to the source was agreed upon. That money would go to the funding of a revamp BMO for CFL football and pay the Argo owner the 12 million, that from sources he is determined to get for this team. My source said the new amount is now 3 Grey Cup games in 12 years.Again speculation is MLSE has given the lelague till FEB 9th, to change it back to 4 GC in 12 years, or MLSE is walking never to come back again. If this is true, the league needs to wake up fast and but it back to 4 GC in 12 years. Then again perhaps its B.S, but i have a bad feeling about this now

I guess asking for the source is too much to ask :lol:

Either way, I think we should have some indication later this month. Does any one know when the Board of Governors meeting is scheduled for?

Yikes, buddy. Where did you hear this? Not sure what to make of what your wrote.

Anyway, 4 GC in 12 years is NUTS - and a bad idea. Hopefully, that is NOT the breaking point.

Well considering Braley owned teams have had 5 GC over 14 years and 6 if you include 2007 in Toronto, this is ratio seems in line.

Agreed, I have hard time thinking this one detail is the breaking point in the deal. If it is, the league would be wise to give MLSE what they want.

Sadly, you are right.

Agree as well with Mightygoose. Well, let's face it, Toronto is probably the most central, ie. easiest city in Canada to get to from anywhere for flights and the most hotels, tons, and the history of the Argos as the oldest team etc. I think Toronto, if the city and a major organization like MLSE is going to buy them and have them play out of a stadium they operate, should get the GCs they want as long as it's not too nutso and 4 isn't too nutso over 12 years. I'm good to go with it! :thup:

When I was working the Canadian association that I belonged to and organized national conferences every year, the same argument was made, Toronto is simply the easiest place to host conferences. Yes, it was moved around the country but it was a no brainer for Toronto. And yes, that could be said as "sadly" but Toronto is what it is. People from all over the country loved going to Toronto because of the restaurants and night life and many, the ones from English Canada, often had friends and family they would visit and the place where they worked payed for the conference so Toronto was simply the top city as most wanted it.

No, but it's close. :wink:

If MLSE is going to buy the team, cover the upgrade costs and cover the team's losses, then 4 in 12 years is worth it - but it's also pushing the envelope. 3 is more realistic and fair to the other teams. If they do this, I would want a commitment that MLSE will own the team after the 12 years - when the GC's start being more evenly distributed. The last thing you want is for MLSE to say (after Year 12), "We want another 4 over the NEXT 12 years or we will walk away".

The league has ONE buyer and ONE potential Landlord who happen to be the same. The league and Braley should understand the position they are in. MLSE has a barrel, rope a whip with a lead spur at the end.

Yes but the other teams are not as understanding as one would hope. Hamilton will want and deserve a Cup or 2. So will Ottawa. And Montreal. If MLSE has 4 of 12, that leaves 8 for 8 other teams over 12 years. Toronto isn’t the only one with bills to pay. I’d hope MLSE would settle for 3, which would be fair but as you implied, beggars can’t be choosers.

:thup: :thup: :thup: I'll just add ONE buyer at the level of a MLSE. My guess is no other potential buyer can come close to MLSE in terms of just about anything, prestige, available capital, ins with the media etc.

Braley is stubborn, and we should respect that really, but even he knows what the writing on the wall is here. MLSE is simply way out of his league. Pride I get but he has to realize at the end of the day, well, no more need be said.

Let's face it, Rogers and MLSE before MLSE had Rogers as part of them, simply more or less laughed at the CFL and Argos, even with locals in Cynamon and Sokolowski as owners, er part owners in reality. Let's call a spade a spade. If MLSE is interested in the Argos and Grey Cup, that's just a good thing all around.

I'd say 4/12 is definitely the outer limit, but considering that I can barely remember where the G.C. was three years ago, most people probably won't notice. However, I don't think it's the fans the League is worried about; it's the other owners who may wonder why they don't also get a G.C. every three years, though I'm fairly certain most get the point that the Argos are a lame duck that needs special consideration.

Translation of your post rpaege – the rest of the league needs to bite their pride/tongue on this one. And that’s ok.

B.C. has had their fair share of Grey Cups and could do without for a while.
Saskatchewan is fat and won’t be hurt if they did without.
Winnipeg has been a good soldier and will want another one after 2015.
Edmonton needs one to reignite its fan base.
Calgary will want one if/when they get a new stadium.
Hamilton is due for 1 or 2.
Ottawa is getting 2016?
Montreal would love one but I am not sure they have a stadium.

That is a lot of teams with only 2 (B.C. and Sask) where you could make the case that they could/should do without.

If the Argos get 4 of 12, they will wonder why they haven't had one in the last decade.

Are we talking about the CFL? Isn't this the League that wouldn't help C&S???

Yup. To me, and to the CFL, 3.5 seems to be the over/under.

3 is fine. The first year, the last and 1 in between. 4 in 12 is a LOT to ask.

unfortunately the league inst in any position to dictate terms, MSLE dominates the GTA's sports market, if you want a successfull CFL team in that sports market it will only happen under their umbrella, any team that grips about it being unfair, needs to understand that all the teams will suffer with stagnant or folded Argos, and if the Argos become successful, the pay back will benefit all the league

You're right. It would be best to hold their nose and make a deal. I just hope they ensure MLSE is in it for the long term. I don't want to hear Bob McClown say, 3 to 5 years from now, "MLSE is about to throw the keys on the table and walk away".

Hmmm, I'll give MLSE some credit on this one, they will not be throwing away any keys. The NFL in Toronto thing is deadso, lame duck as lame duck can be, at least for quite a while and the Argos are iconic historic despite that this hasn't been noted by many in Toronto including academics at the Univ. Toronto ie. Univ Toronto and Grey Cup history but this was all under the assumption MLSE was going to get the Bills. That didn't happen and everything now is changed, everything, because of that.

Are we talking about the CFL? Isn't this the League that wouldn't help C&S???
Kevin, as I say, the landscape now is totally different because MLSE didn't land the Bills and weren't prepared to over spend to get them. That changes EVERYTHING. C & S were good/verging on great Argo owners, unfortunately the timing wasn't in their favour.

I hope you're right, Earl. I hope the other teams are willing to make a sacrifice to ensure the health of the Argos. However, this would contradict everything I have seen in the past.

The Leafs are losing. That's a shame. :lol:

I'm not so sure that the league is without bargaining power. On the flip side, MLSE has only one possible tenant that can attract regular TV audiences of 700,000+ to watch games in their stadium. BMO is already walking away from sponsoring the stadium because there are no such tenants playing out of the stadium at the moment. If MLSE wants to get anywhere near BMO-type sponsorship dollars, they'll need a tenant like the Argos to warrant it.

From the other CFL franchise owners perspective, though, I think they should be anxious to get MLSE as a partner. They may lose some $$$ on Grey Cups in the short term, but having a strong Argos franchise with MLSE's clout and advertising wherewithal behind it will only help to increase the value of the other franchises in the long run.

Anyways, I'm sure something will get done because the Argos need a home and BMO needs a high-profile tenant.

But the Argos will be a tenant (at BMO) with or without MLSE owning the team. Sadly, I think the CFL has been squeezed into God’s little acre - East of the Rock and West of the Hard Place.