Automation Gallery said:
Lol:D, did they forget that Exhibition Stadium had a capacity of 55k
Click to expand...

That is of course true....but the whole area is different now. I am someone who is old enough to have regularly gone to Exhibition Stadium and now go to BMO Field for every match. The traffic after games at our little 22k stadium is worse than I used to experience at "the EX". I think it has a lot to do with the amount of residential east of the stadium now and north of the tracks in Liberty Village.....also heavily influenced by the fact that there are often events at SkyDome concurrent with BMO that utilize the same roads (obviously SkyDome did not exist when Exhibition held 55k).

Add in the bigger crowds that the Ricoh and Direct Energy Centre can have and it is quite a mess down at the Lakeshore/Gardiner area pre and post match.
 
And level 2 English clubs probably draw similar numbers of fans. I can't really see any downside to this at this point
 
Jayomatic said:
Pretty boring as usual. Something I'd expect to see from a level 2 English club.
Click to expand...

I've heard these are purely preliminary designs for the roof. Additionally it would very naive to expect anything as big as a top-flight English stadium. An increase to 30,000 is a nice number and when more seating is needed the corners can be filled in (without as much interference to the season due to construction).

I for one, am excited, not only as a season ticket holder but as a hopeful for 2026!
 
Mulder said:
Fans were sick of seeing the second coming of the expo's. They had to do something to attract people to the stadium.



First off, this isn't what I said. I said north american football.
Secondly, ratings wise, doesn't show it to be a huge success. Which is why CBC cancelled it in the first place. But that's a different topic.



No offense, this is a pretty naive comment. You could goto any point in the last 30 years and just replace names of those who want to bring an NFL team to Toronto. Inserting Bon Jovi seems to be today's fad.




You're talking 1 Billion for a team, 1 Billion for a stadium and X00 million for a relocation fee.




Congrats, 40% of Canadians's don't want a team here, and 40% would only accept a team if it doesn't hurt the CFL. A




Again, overstating. These "corps" would be buying leafs tickets still. They may buy suites at the start. But after the lease expires they'll drop em. See Skydome & Bluejays as a legit example.
Click to expand...

A lot of things wrong here:

1) The payroll increase wasn't a response to fears of Expos 2.0 occurring in Toronto but the dynamics of attempting to compete in the AL East. AA fell flat on his face on that attempt unfortunately. Furthermore, the Blue Jays are far from ever being the "second coming of the Expos." Larger market, much larger fan base, and stable ownership. They're the definitive second fiddle to the Leafs in terms of popularity in the sports market but well ahead of the Raptors, Argos, and TFC.

2) Corporations buy Leafs tickets in conjunction with Raptors tickets as well. MLSE maintains massive corporate sponsorship for this very reason: ensuring they buy tickets. The ACC being close to Bay Street doesn't hurt either. Any NFL expansion project led by MLSE will undoubtedly maintain this close corporate connection so your claims that they would drop em after the lease expire isn't entirely accurate. The suites at the Skydome are an entirely different matter, not to mention more corporations have suites at the Dome than in previous years.
 
So MLSE are looking for $10 million from each branch of government for the $120 million expansion
 
Jayomatic said:
Pretty boring as usual. Something I'd expect to see from a level 2 English club.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but it's important that the architecture of our significant institutional buildings speak to the culture of Canada as well as our sporting traditions. Winnipeg got it right with IG Field, Toronto deserves no less for its football team.

A stadium architecture that gave strong nods to old Varsity Stadium (football) or even old Maple Leaf Stadium (baseball) is what we should be entertaining. Those buildings spoke to who we were as a people, this BMO Field design doesn't. Begs the question, is this being built for people who are culturally European or north American?

It's important that people see themselves reflected in important buildings rather than have them reflect someone else's culture. Save European stadium design aesthetics for Europe.
 
isaidso said:
Not only that, but it's important that the architecture of our significant institutional buildings speak to the culture of Canada as well as our sporting traditions. Winnipeg got it right with IG Field, Toronto deserves no less for its football team.

A stadium architecture that gave strong nods to old Varsity Stadium (football) or even old Maple Leaf Stadium (baseball) is what we should be entertaining. Those buildings spoke to who we were as a people, this BMO Field design doesn't. Begs the question, is this being built for people who are culturally European or north American?
Click to expand...

That's an interesting way of phrasing it: the battle between the culture of somewhere vs the culture of nowhere.

Who wouldn't want to take in a game at IG Field? Not only is it somewhat intimate by design, the ambiance and vibe from its undulating roof contribute to amplify the home game atmosphere. By comparison, BMO Field is sprawling, empty barely-utilitarian space that's only somewhat redeemed by the yellow brick exterior -- but ultimately a soulless corporate vehicle for extracting money. Winnipeg, on the other hand, has been busy over the past 10-15 years reinventing itself as a creative-class city that builds interesting, thoroughly urban architecture. While Rob Ford's Toronto is still taking cues from American suburbs.

30,000 is a nice number, but possibly still on the small side. The Western section is probably more of an impediment than an asset in expanding the facility properly -- but a proper expansion would more than likely take a significant amount of time, so I expect that will take it off the table. That and the reality of the public ownership of the site.

Given Leiweke's other moves this off season, there's no reason to doubt he's a bold big-picture empire-builder. And in like in baseball, in Europe part of the experience of taking in a game involves experiencing the stadium: Old Trafford, Emirates, Wembley, etc. But as with anything else, would MLSE's corporate overlords approve of such spending? I'm not sure it's in keeping with their culture.

As for nods to Varsity or other lost stadia, Varsity was originally fairly utilitarian itself. Whatever's built should physically embody what Leiweke is trying to create with the team: a globally-recognized brand that's consistently among North America's very best.

That demands a creative, unique stadium that will give people a little sense of awe, which people will love to see and be seen at.
 
City's executive committee votes in favour of BMO Field expansion.
Click to expand...

One person voted against - you can guess who
 
He was on baord until MLSE asked the city to kick in $10million
 
I (and many other TFC fans) are still worried about the quality of the pitch, and the gridiron markings. Lieweke says it can be dealt with, but hasn't pointed to a stadium where it has been dealt with successfully. Has anyone come across one before?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top