Argos Grey Cup Trivia

Number of Grey Cup wins in the "Pinball Era" (1989 to present):
4 (1991, 1996, 1997, 2004)

Number of Grey Cup wins in the "Pinball Era" with no player on the team earning at least $1 million per season:
1 (2004)

Argos cheat!

A “known”, Ex-Pat. There’s a few other Grey Cup winning teams that have done, or are doing about the same.

We just lost a Commissioner that objected to this disparity.

A previous owner (David Braley) sems to violently object to the concept of being able to “buy” a Cup.

Toronto, of course, has zero “honour” to speak from. Pinball will hardly have the stuff to respond to your post.

The only teams that seem to follow the “rules” are Hamilton, Saskatchewan, and sometimes Winnipeg…and, even in an eight team League, this is a minority.

Our “seat” on the Board of Governers is Bob Young, and he is the one best suited to answer your several valid points.

I will simply watch, listen, and “learn” from his response.

Don't just assume that if a team hasn't won the Grey Cup more than once if at all in the last 15 years, it means that they are playing by the "rules". ALL the teams went over the salary cap last year, Saskatchewan was the 3rd biggest offender, IIRC.

Also, don't preach about honour to the Argos. The deal the Ticats made last year to give the Eskimos the Grey Cup was pretty low stuff, and certainly not "honourable".

I hope some day the owners can get their head around a firm, fair, enforceable salary cap, but on the other hand Ticat fans like you and Ex-Pat would have nothing to whine about when the Argos win their next GC.

Seriously, though, thanks for the thread Ex-Pat, it was nice to be reminded we've won 4 of the last 15 Grey Cups.

I enjoyed the August cover story of CFL Magazine, about the history of our great game.

I especially liked this excerpt:

In 1907 the Canadian Amateur Athletic Union [u]expelled the Toronto Argonauts[/u] and Montreal Winged Warriors from the CIRFU for paying their players - a move that put the sport irrevocably on the road to full professionalism.
The moral of the story: Even way back then, the Argos felt compelled to try to win by out-spending everyone else.

Wouldn't it be fun if we still had the option of expelling them from the league for it?

Remember a couple of years ago, when Sask traded Kevin Glenn to the Argos because they didn't want to compete against him in their own division? And then the Argos turned right around and traded him to Winnipeg?


Wouldn't it be funny if the Argos missed the playoffs because Kevin Glenn's team is now in their own division? And even funnier because this year's Toronto-Winnipeg QB trade involved one Mr Spurgon Wynn. You go with your QB of the future - we'll stick with ours.

Tuck is actually correct for the most part (aside from the ticats eskimos deal(s) of course, i think it was perfectly legit to trade for futures)

Saskatchewan is or at least WAS one of the three highest spending teams in the league last year(doesn't mean they spent well....) and just picked up KJ and Armstead

Winnipeg threw big money at players this year. (Simpson, etc)

Hamilton wasn't exactly saintly in those '98 and '99 years... but even with my bias i can see that (although i don't think we were as bad as some Argo fans might tell you)

also... apparently (and this isn't SOLID info, but meh) all the teams were approx $700K appart from biggest spenders to lowest... and the highest (presumably the eskies) were WAY over the 'cap' (ie more than $700K)

just some things to think about is all....

You guys sure can turn a light-hearted Argo-bashing thread into something more serious.

There's really no argument here. We all know that the Argonauts are inherently evil. It is, quite simply, self-evident. A truism. Once Tuck and other Argo fans come to accept this, we can move on to a more meaningful dialogue.

I don't know, when your season is a write-off and you do a 2 part trade (ie. you take our good players now, so you can win the Cup, and we'll take your good players after the season's over) that doesn't seem right.

Anyways, doesn't matter, Ex-Pat is just trolling... helping to work up the rivalry a bit before our first game at IW this year.

You're right Espo about the $700 000 between highest and lowest spenders of 2005. That quote came from Calgary owner Ted Hellard. There was 2.6 mil cap last year, and the avergage spent was over 3.7!

Argo bashing on the Ticat forum is not trolling. It is more akin to doing the sign of the cross in a Catholic church. Who would like to join me in prayer?

In the name of the Sazio, and the Mosca, and the Holy Covington, Argos Su*k.

Oh Lee Knight, we beseech thee, amen.

Could this be an attempt at new chant for our rivals when they come to visit? It may be controversial, for reasons some have mentioned. But that's exactly why some might like it, and you never know, it could catch on.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into that. Maybe this post was just part of the kind of thing that happens before games in which the blue team is the opponent.

Would "Argos Cheat" be an acceptable chant to bob? If it is maybe we can start tonight. If nothing else, like the forbidden chant, it is an apt description.

What would Howard Fields do?

Maybe. But one problems with it is if it's chanted when the Ticats are losing, it'll make us look like sore losers. But hopefully that won't be an issue tonight.


nice posts Tuck.