Why did the Argos not partner in BMO Field originally?

All this Argo-Cats shared stadium talk has me feeling for the Argos who had a brilliant opportunity slip through their fingers a few years ago.

I know the Varsity Stadium plan fell through because of university management and the Argo's eventually didn't see themselves as viable at York University.

Can someone refresh me as to why the Argos didn't partner in the BMO Field project? I seem to recall the Argos signing a 5 year lease at Rogers Centre after the York arrangement was called off. Was it being tied to this lease that kept the Argos from participating in BMO?

If this were the case, I think it would have even been worthwhile for the Argos to contribute to the new stadium such that it would eventually accommodate CFL football and then have moved in once the Rogers Centre lease was up.

Well, to make a long story short, because TFC and MLSE didn't quite understand that a 20,000 stadium was not what would do for TFC and the MLS. Now they are stuck with playing the MLS Cup in a 21,000 seater and our Grey Cup wouldn't consider that unless we were on our last legs, going down the tubes.

But hey, that's what the TFC'ers wanted and MLSE, they didn't want the Argos involvement so that's what they ended up with, good luck to them. MLS Cup in a 21,000 seater - YIKES! :o Embarrasement Mr. Garber but that's what you wanted and guess what, that's what you got.

It was a very calculated move by MLSE to screw the Argos/CFL. In fact, they weren't invited by MLSE to get in nvolved. And MLSE purposely screwed over the Argonauts and CFL by designing the stadium so it could not accommodate a CFL sized field.

And to open another can of worms...I feel the taxpayers of Toronto and Ontario who built the thing were screwed in the process.

don't sweat it....MLS will fold winin 5 years, leaving BMO for the argos taking, if they want it.

The argos decided to stay at Skydome. They felt they got a sweetheart lease deal.
In hindsight, maybe not the best decision...

Regardless, I don't think you want to go to BMO. The Mistake by the lake. When the weather is bad nobody is going to go. It's hell. It's too small and not enough seating.

as long as there is not a reason to build another stadium in TO the Argos will always play at the rodgers centre, it is the same out here , if the olympics had never come to vancouver bc place would still be here, the only other option in TO is to build a temperary stadium for a few years to see how succecful that will be, and then maybe there will be enough interest in TO build a permanent 30,000 seat outdoor stadium like winnipeg is going to get.

Had the Argos partnered in the stadium from the get-go, accommodations would have been made in terms of capacity, player facilities and layout for football. So we would have likely seen a 25,000 seater with the ability to intimately view soccer or football. The soccer crazies wouldn't have known the difference and wouldn't be complaining because despite popular belief in their community, lines can in fact be washed out of grass or turf.

Now MLSE and the soccer-nuts have a sense of entitlement over a publicly owned facility. Despite the renovation of nearby Lamport Stadium for public use, BMO is now effectively a pro-soccer only stadium. There is no public use and the venue has hosted one concert in 4 years.

Do you know this as fact? Why would MLSE as an operator or the City of Toronto as an owner choose to build a venue without the ability to accommodate 10 football games per year?

its a joke with all these people defending the argos, the argos have been in existence, their problem was lack of a decent owner puting his own money together and building a stadium, look at edmonton they got their new stadium with the commonwealth games and got the job done, now in edmonton they have good foresight and decided to fix their turf, seating and locker rooms and are building a fieldhouse, the argos still use that toilet skydome, and are practicing on some cheap rugby field at utm with some welfare portables used as coaching offices. Can't blame that on garber, mls, mlse, csa, or fifa.

What you have to remember is that the Rogers Centre is one fine stadium. Sure the sightlines and how it was built aren't the best for football and it's not my favourite football stadium by a long stretch but it works, there is no need for the Argos to move out unless the rent gets too high. The TFC soccer thingy is what it is and good for them, these people enjoy soccer and all the power to them. The Argo owners C & S decided to stay at the RC, that was their choice and MLSE decided to make the stadium soccer specific and smallish, which both appear to be mistakes now as I say they are playing the MLS Cup in a 21,000 and it should be 30,000. It'll be interesting if they add temporary seating for the game.

Yes, this has all been well documented and discussed at great length on this forum. MLSE designed the stadium (with the approval of the city/province as the funders) to ensure that football could never be played at the facility without considerable re-structuring of the end seating in the stadium (estimated at 15 million a couple of years ago).

That just seems totally weird why you would build a stadium like that to make it more difficult to get a partner down the road to make the stadium more profitable that plays on basically the same shape field. But what did they do? The opposite, strange.

not as weird when you factor in recent moves - like putting in natural turf.... This was done as MLSE was having trouble getting quality players. The Argos would prefer to play on artificial turf...
Football is a lot harder on grass, increasing the cost associated with maintenance/ replacement.
While they share the same shape of field the two groups are far apart on some of the finer points that would make for beneficial partnership. It was wiser for MLSE and the City to go the current route and encourage more soccer use in the way of Friendlies and National team use than seeking another tenant that would add to the maintenance cost without beable to recover the cost from said tenant.

Also consider the amount of money MLSE has put into this stadium.... The argos haven't put one red cent so far... or offered any.

as far as the public use at the stadium - the stadium is still availiable to the public... This was per the agreement between the City and MLSE. It was further cemented in the latest agreement that allowed changes to the stadium.
The deal clearly specifies up to 12 hours a week of community use from April to October (about 360 hours a year). This compares to 4,895 hours of community use in 2008

[url=http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2010/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-26066.pdf]http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2010 ... -26066.pdf[/url] [url=http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2010/05/16/13969281.html]http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer ... 69281.html[/url]

They are putting together a nice training facility that will add quite a bit more public access and might be enough to convince the City to limit public use to regional highschool/ league use for finals, etc.

[url=http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2010/05/tfc-announces-major-soccer-initiatives]http://www.torontofc.ca/news/2010/05/tf ... nitiatives[/url] [url=http://www.theaircanadacentre.com/assets/default/Practice%20Facility.pdf]http://www.theaircanadacentre.com/asset ... cility.pdf[/url]

All seemingly valid points alpha but come on, did they really need to pour all that cement in the end zones, I mean it's not like there are tiers of decks for seating. That just seems strange that in the off chance the city or MLSE actually did think about adding some gridiron to it down the road. Just seems strange to me, that's all.

there probably will be in the future....

they should put the bills game in that stadium maybe it might sell out and then they could claim how popular it is.

Unfortunately, the problems in Toronto are not really stadium related. Torontonians see what has happened with the Als at Molson Stadium, and figure the same will happen there. I doubt any new, small outdoor stadium would result in being anything more than a fad. Interest would be great in the short term, but then fade.
The problems with selling the CFL in southern Ontario won't be solved by a stadium. If that were the case, then Hamilton would not have had the attendance problems that they have had (before Bob Young) that went back to the '80's. If you were looking for a small stadium with great sightlines, it would be tough to top Ivor Wynne.
What fans in Toronto need to do is focus on the positives of SkyDome. The most obvious thing is the retractable roof. It's not unusual to see attendance drop off when the weather turns bad. Fans in most cities would love a retractable roof. The SkyDome is well located, easy for people to get to via private or public transit. The stadium also has all the amenities of being home to a MLB team. No one has to pi$$ in a trough. The sightlines aren't perfect, but they aren't terrible either (like in the baseball deck at old Exhibition Stadium).

Yup, if Toronto can get it self together, they should be selling out the place game in and game out at 50,000 and show Canada who rules the roost with the most historic and most Grey Cups won franchise in Canada, they should be proud of the Argonauts and at least have an Argonaut Lane with the Blue Jay one -oops I'm forgetting it has to be American to get any street named after you, sorry Toronto. What was I thinking? :?

As has been previously discussed many a time, Toronto has this obsession with American approval. What isn't cool in America isn't cool in Toronto, with the exception of the Leafs. Ive said this before, but it makes me laugh when a Torontonian claims to dislike the United States and then eat McDonalds, drink Budweiser and watch the NFL. Not enough people eat Harveys, drink Canadian or Moosehead (greatest beer ever) and watch CFL. Then you can say you dislike the US. Rant off

As a Ti-Cats fan who's called Toronto home for the better part of 7 years, I'm sick of some in this country slagging Toronto on the premise of its sports tastes.

There are plenty of breweries in Toronto that trump Molson's McBrand of Canadian beer. Steamwhistle is my beer of choice and there are plenty who drink home-brews in this city without touching Canadian let alone Budweiser (brewed in Canada for AB by Labatt with the same formula as Blue except with wood chips)

Do the Argos get the short end of the stick in the media? Yes! Does the general population succumb to following whichever sports teams Hollywood tells them to be into? Yes! Is Toronto a great city made up of a tolerant cultural mosaic where I can eat, drink and party with the world while forgetting about spectator sport from time to time? Hell yes!

I love the CFL and want to see the Argos succeed in Toronto. Even TFC is beginning to have its attendance falter amidst their best season on the field.

Toronto may be a weak sports town, but with 16% of the Canadian population residing in the GTA, I'd be a little more flexible on what we call 'real Canadian taste'.

Newfoundland joined Canada via a referendum in 1948 where only 52% supported the idea.

Quebec remained in Confederation via a referendum in 1995 where only 51% supported federalism.

Its pretty easy to see that this country has more to its collective itentity than drinking Canadian or Moosehead, loving hockey and being obliged to watch the CFL.

Its pretty easy to see that this country has more to its collective itentity than drinking Canadian or Moosehead, loving hockey and being obliged to watch the CFL.

For the record I think the word obliged is also supposed to refer to obliged to love hockey and quite frankly that's just not the case from this guy, I like it but not as much as Canadian football. Blasphemy! Someone's going to torch the Canadian Football Hall of Fame again tonight I bet. :wink: