Something Has To Be Done About Toronto

Great comparison!

you can still get cheap tickets. And yes, the nose bleed seats might be a "whopping" 22 bucks compared to the 14 (not 10...parking passes are 10) of a Jays game, but compare any other seat! 200 level seating for a Jays game is 81 bucks, best seats to an Argos game is 82!
The average seating price is cheaper at an Argos game, and I am sorry, 22 bucks to see a game that happens 9 times a year compared to 81 games is fine by me...

Argos prices:

[url=] ... py5619.jpg[/url]

GOLD - 72
BLUE - 22

Jays prices:
Level 100 Seating
CA $17.00 - CA $216.00
CA $17.00 (CA $14.00 Ticket + CA $3.00 Fees)
CA $216.00 (CA $210.00 Ticket + CA $6.00 Fees)

Level 200 Seating
CA $17.00 - CA $81.00
CA $17.00 (CA $14.00 Ticket + CA $3.00 Fees)
CA $81.00 (CA $75.00 Ticket + CA $6.00 Fees)

Level 500 Seating
CA $17.00
CA $17.00 (CA $14.00 Ticket + CA $3.00 Fees)

this is the problem. people who support argos ticket pricing are quick to compare their ticket prices to other over-priced tickets in the city.

the leafs have inflated ticket prices for all sports in toronto. but the leafs have the demand to justify it. the argos, raptors and jays do not. yet, management for these teams think that the high leaf prices justify their prices and that people will buy their tickets. this is why both the argos, raptors and jays draw flies.

if you have the choice of owning a regular rock with a price tag of $1M dollars or a $800,000 rock, it doesn't mean the $800,000 rock is a deal and reasonable. they are both rip-offs and noone will buy them.

The Argos also have a lot of lousy seats and that needs to factor into the price. Even on the 100 level once you're back past row 40 you're a LONG way back (think upper deck row 30+ at a stadium like Lansdowne). They can't do much about that without moving to a better for football stadium, but prices wouldn't hurt.

Hell, something resembling sane concession prices would help.

get rid of rogers

step one, stop being any kind of a rogers customer, except for argo games.

What's really weird, and this coming from someone who actually enjoyed the Bills in Buffalo for the 4 or 5 times I went to The Ralph for games in the past, is that the Rogers experiment in Toronto has made me feel less about the Bills and what they mean. Now I wouldn't go to a Bills game in Bufffalo or Toronto unless it was a freebie but am glad to renew my seasons for the Ticats, especially now that we are getting a total refurfished stadium right here in town.

The Bills have turned into lower class in both Buffalo and Toronto. Weird but that's how I feel.

And you are hardly the only one Earl. Many NFL fans in Canada and the US share that opinion.

That franchise stands to leave Buffalo once Ralph is gone.

Goodell's against that move probably for no good reason other than that the state politicians in New York are in his pocket because the Bills are the only team that plays its games in the state of New York (the NY Jets and the NY Giants play in New Jersey), but in the end the money will sway the deal to LA or otherwise away from that economically depressed area.

If many think the Skydome is the main reason for lack of support/attendance as suggested, why did the Argos have 40,000 average attendance in the early to mid-nineties there, and 30,000 average just a few seasons ago?

The marketing and product on the field iare the main culprits IMO...And the slight by Mayor Ford does not help either.

The Skydome may not be a great football facility, although if full, or nearly full, and with a winning team, the fan experience/atmosphere can be much more enjoyable.

I wonder if the average seat at SkyDome is any farther away from the sidelines than the average seat at Commonwealth Stadium?
Torontonians talk about SkyDome like it is the worst stadium ever built for football, when it is just one example of the multi-use stadiums built in the '70's and '80's. You even hear complaining about the stadium for baseball. How about focusing on the stadium's positives like the retractable roof, the stadium's location in the core of the city with great public transit connections, and concessions that rival almost any other stadium anywhere.
The atmosphere comes from the fans. A facility can only enhance it. Look at the atmosphere at BMO Field, a very basic facility, or the atmosphere at old Maple Leaf Gardens, which certainly lacked some of the things that modern arena's have. In the end, the stadium is just an excuse. If Argo fans focus on just the negatives, they just keep more people away.

It's a self-feeding problem. The Dome has a lot of really bad seats for football, so some people stop going. When some people stop going, it feels cavernous and less fun. So people stop going.

Because people stopped going, it feels cavernous and less fun. So people stop going.

Oh, and the only good thing about the concessions there is that they have Keith's on tap. Anybody in the know is smart enough to grab a sausage from one of the 20 street guys outside Union Station on the way to the game. Better food for half the price.

The Argos have not averaged 40,000-plus since the late 1970s in Ex Stadium – they never came close to that in SkyDome. As for the crowds of 25,000-plus in the mid-2000s, it has been reported (and is very plausible) that thousands of tickets were comps and that attendance figures were inflated.

In 1989 (1st year of Skydome) the Argos averaged 35,109 and in 1991 they averaged 36.353 so they have come fairly close to 40,000 in the Dome.

Even as recent as 2007, the Argos averaged nearly 31,000 per game.

I'm very fearful of asking this question, lest it become an MLS-bashing exercise but ...

The preamble: I recall it being estimated in the $25 million range to blow up the concrete bunker at BMO field to make a cfl-sized field possible. Throw in another $25 million to expand it to 25,000 seats. That's $50 million - way cheaper than just about any other option I have heard. I understand that TO FC doesn't want the stadium touched for gridiron football exceptin' over a bunch of peoples' dead bodies. So lets say the only way for the opportunity to arise is for MLS to fold.

So the question is: any news on the health of MLS and the target date for its imminent demise, if any?

Good point. From what I have read the MLS has for the most part lost money, but more teams are verging on profits this year. Good ownership has kept them afloat, and it looks like they could be rewarded in a few years. I don't see it going anywhere. The CFL owners are not exactly making a wheelbarrow full of money okay, doing better now than a decade ago), but the CFL still sticks around.

MLS got some good tv contracts from networks who were expecting higher ratings then they received in that first contract.

MLS will not get that kind of tv money again ( ex; CBC has said they over-paid and will not renew ).

if they don't make profit now with an inflated tv deal, what will happen when the tv deal is for significantly less dollars?
i think MLS will fold shortly after their current tv contract expires.