Please don't tar us all with the same brush. Many Argo fans do go to RC AND are excited about the prospect of moving to a better stadium (which I expect BMO will be, by far, for football).
I went to the Toronto FC game this afternoon (yes, I seem to be turning into a fan I'm afraid. Terrific game by the home side!).
I liked the stadium even more than my first visit a couple of weeks ago.
I bought my tickets on the west side stands (Section 221, Row 18 which is close to the top).
Terrific view of the field!
I usually don't jump to excessive optimism when looking at these things, but I think there is a real opportunity for the Argo fan base to grow again when the team moves to BMO next year. The stadium experience does seem to be much better at BMO Field versus Rogers Centre.
I'm very much looking forward to getting my season ticket renewal offer for next season to see what are the options!
I'm looking forward to seeing CFL football there, I hope the lost Argo fans come back.... :thup:
In todays Toronto Sun, Steve Simmons made a reference the endzones at BMO Field may only be 17 yards deep.
Confirm or deny: When the Argos move to BMO Field, the end zones will be 17 yards long, not the usual 20-yard Canadian Football League end zone ..
Anyone else hear anything about this rumor?
I know its coming from Simmons.
The quote appears under the header HEAR AND THERE[url=http://www.torontosun.com/2015/05/30/maple-leafs-have-tough-decision-for-june-draft]http://www.torontosun.com/2015/05/30/ma ... june-draft[/url]
Interesting that TFC only got 17,000 for today's game. Also interesting, that the sports reporter who covers TFC for the Toronto Sun, never includes attendance if it's not over 20,000 in his story. Argos draw 17,000 at BMO and would not matter if they won or lost the only story the media would focus on would be the 17,000
Steve Simmons implied BMO will be too short for a CFL field. Not by a lot.
Anyone else heard this?
For me, I would not be upset if endzones were shorten to 15 yards. That way all the empty MLS stadiums (when the ponzi schemes collapses), can be easily converted to possible CFL expansion cities. Cue the squawking for the MLS fans. :lol:
Oh look, another sell-out crowd for the Toronto No-Names!
Did you read the post by TCHABS two posts (and five hours) ahead of yours?
No. I missed it. I just went straight to the thread and posted. My apology to TCHABS.
If this shorter field rumour turns out to be true, it would give new meaning to the term "home field advantage".
The Argos would become more familiar with playing in the (slightly) shorter end zones than the visiting team, potentially providing an advantage.
Of course, it also opens up the possibility of detractors saying that the Argos are doomed to always end up "short" in their home games! :lol:
If I was a team with good kick returners (like Brandon Banks for example) I would not want my endzones to be 3 yards shorter - especially with the new convert rules. That three yards might not sound like much but it may be the difference between having the opportunity to return a missed kick and not having the chance.
Myself as well. The calibre of play is high enough to work within this size of endzone.
I would be OK with a shorter endzone too but I'd rather have the whole league go in that direction.
Id also like to see the entire league move to 15 yard endzones. Still large enough to differentiate itself from the NFL, but not too large where I think 20 yards is just way too much space.
Completely agree! :thup:
And just think - until 1986 the end zones were 25 yards deep.
Yes it got changed because of B.C. Place
I’ve never liked the ability to run a deep route when scrimmaging from the ten yard line.
With 3 downs though (hey, Michael Sam was saying now he's just got 2 downs to get the qb ), a longer endzone is required but 15 yards should be enough I think if a 20 yarder can't be done.