Massive Attack Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 Football strikes a blow for soccer http://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/columnist.jsp;jsessionid=NHDICNPGGDAO?content=20030731_163350_296 The CFL's takeover of the Toronto Argonauts does a huge favour for the CSA. Nothing was said publicly, mind, but you can bet there were some deep sighs of relief at the Canadian Soccer Association when the CFL finally took action to take the "argh" out of the Toronto Argonauts. The very public corporate croaking of out-of-control ex-Argo owner Sherwood Schwarz removes one of the most troubling wild cards from the earnest effort to build a nice little soccer/CFL stadium at Toronto's Exhibition grounds. Under Schwarz, the CSA has had to deal with a man hemorrhaging money and not paying his bills. Already facing a mighty uphill battle to win some $80 million in public funding from three cautious levels of government, Canada's soccer barons have been thrown into a surging sea of uncertainty thanks to Schwarz's reeling unpredictability. Well, you can clear those decks, matey. It ain't clear sailing, but at least the waves ain't soaking down the sails. It may not happen for a few months, but there will be new ownership for the Argos. Already, major Toronto media outlets are urging the Boatmen to drop anchor at the CSA's 30,000-seat marina at the Ex. Good thing - especially if the Argos are in a position to pay their own way. Right now, the biggest threat to the stadium deal is its overwhelming reliance on government money. Knock that down a chunk - preferably a big chunk - and this lovely little stadium daydream might actually even come true. And even better, the CSA is actually in the driver's seat here, having already commissioned and blueprinted a sweet little facility. But brace yourself, soccer fans. You're going to hear a lot of other stadium proposals for the Argos in the coming months. The looniest so far? An unnamed radio station's admittedly semi-silly proposal to throw up some temporary bleachers and roll out a big green carpet for the CFL right next door to the slot machine pavilion at Woodbine Racetrack! Call me a loopy optimist, but I think the CSA can offer the Argos vastly more than that. And what of those who think the Argos will ignore the CSA's invite and build their own building? Such folks should remember that the Toronto Maple Leafs wanted to build an arena on top of Union Station, and to heck with the Raptors, who had already broken ground, just down the street, for what is now the Air Canada Centre. Massive pressure - from governments, business sense and fiscal sanity - collapsed those two incompatible projects into one. Three levels of government will now similarly be pressuring the Argos to bunk with the CSA. A good chunk of the media seems to agree this is the way forward. And every bit of that pressure brings us closer to a FIFA-approved state-of-the-art soccer palace on the north shore of Lake Ontario. Well done, CFL! --- Out of the boardroom and back on the field, didn't Manchester United striker Ruud van Nistelrooy put on a dazzling show against Celtic in the opening match of the Champions World Series in Seattle? The fleet-footed Dutchman's first touch was dazzling that night, as he effortlessly nudged ball after ball into places where defenders couldn't see it, let alone do anything about it. It was amusing hearing soccer legend and TV colour commentator Giorgio Chinaglia chastise the Glaswegians for giving van Nistelrooy "too much room" on his first goal. In fact, rude boy Ruud was practically wearing the green and white hoops of the man marking him when he knocked down a cagey through pass, setting himself up perfectly for an unassailable one-timer straight to the back of the Celtic net. And yet, Chinaglia was right! Wearing one defender didn't even slow van Nistelrooy down. Looks like opponents will have to consider fitting him for a second. Van Nistelrooy didn't score United's second goal, but he created it almost single-handedly. First, he corralled a red-hot downfield pass that would have eluded most other target men. His first touch was jaw-droppingly subtle, a cagey redirect that put the ball on the perfect path, without removing any pace. The brilliant United striker then poured on the speed, abolishing his defender and forcing drastic intervention from the Celtic netkeep. Finding his way blocked, van Nistelrooy turned and dumped a fine square pass directly in the path of an uprushing Ryan Giggs, who had very little choice but to score through the tattered remains of the pre-shredded Glasgow defence. United will likely need all the goals they can get this season, as a serious hamstring injury to England defender Gary Neville, suffered in the very same game, further weakens and destabilizes an a Red Devil defence that has never quite replaced Jaap Staam, banished to Italy writing a tell-all book quite a good long while ago now. One player, two thrillers. On the night, this was a combination of speed and touch there was simply no defence for. It's hard to say that a player who has already led the Red Devils in scoring has arrived, but this level of originality and domination doesn't come along very often. I may deeply dislike Manchester United (Grr! Rotters!), but I expect to have a lot of fun watching them this season. ------------------------- "And tha riot be tha rhyme of tha unheard..." Calm Like A Bomb - Rage Against The Machine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimglow Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 Here is what TSN.ca is reporting this morning... 1/15/2004 (TSN.ca) -- The Globe and Mail is reporting that Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment will lease a site for a new sports complex at the University of Toronto for 35 years and then donate the facility to the university. MLSE is expected to to finance construction of a $100-million complex that would hold a football stadium to house the CFL's Toronto Argonauts, a hockey arena in addition to another practice rink for the NHL's Toronto Maple Leafs. While the MLSE board still needs to approve the deal, an agreement in principle has been reached between the university and MLSE co-owner Larry Tanenbau and a decision is expected to be reached within days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 This is all good news of course. Still what I find interesting about these stadium stories is the bit about the location. Although there is alot of mutual interest in this project between the soccer people and the argos, the idea of setting up at Woodbine would not, I suspect, be one of them. I can clearly see the Argos hating this idea. But if you were involved in soccer, I could not think of better location. Yes, almost as good as downsview. Woodbine is in the Northwest part of the city and much closer to the demographics of where you would find typical soccer fans. being very close to teh airport is also a plus for players and officials when inetrnatioonal soccer mayches are played where by players are required to travel long distance. Plus soccer is much more of a one off event where the usage of the facility is not used regularly for soccer. so cheaper land means chaeper over head which would mean lower cost for usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 In the Province today: Field of dreams So, is Whitecaps owner Greg Kerfoot really planning to build a new stadium in Vancouver for soccer, rugby, Lions football and the Olympic opening ceremonies? Well, our columnist couldn't get anyone to deny it. Ed Willes The Province Thursday, January 15, 2004 Vancouver's BC Place Stadium (left) would be finished as a major sports venue if millionaire Greg Kerfoot (right) gets a new facility built. ADVERTISEMENT This is what we know for certain. Our colleague, Cam Cole of The National Post, had a conversation with someone in Toronto who told him there are plans for a 30,000-seat, outdoor stadium in Vancouver which a) will host the opening and closing ceremonies of the 2010 Winter Games; provide a new home for the Vancouver Whitecaps whose owner, Greg Kerfoot, is largely responsible for this project; c) provide a new home for the B.C. Lions; d) bring the 2007 men's under-20 World Cup of soccer to Vancouver; and, e) essentially replace that eyesore in Yaletown, BC Place Stadium. So, if true, this would be a fairly significant story. There's just one problem. As mentioned, the only thing we knew for certain is a conversation took place in The Big Smoke in which an unnamed source alleged these things. For this reason, we haven't exactly advised the Pullitzer committee about the story, nor are we telling you to take it to the bank. We can, however, tell you while no one was corroborating the story Wednesday, no one was denying it, either. "That's wild," said a source close to the situation. "All I can tell you is it sounds like (Cole) was talking to someone in the know." 2010 chairman Jack Poole was asked to comment on the story. His assistant said he didn't have anything further to add but he might have something to say in the future. Move over, Woodward and Bernstein. This all started when the Canadian Soccer Association, which is vying for the '07 men's U20 World Cup, first discussed building an outdoor stadium in Toronto for the event. On Tuesday, however, Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment -- which owns the Leafs, the Raptors, the Air Canada Centre and, apparently, has more money than the Canadian government -- made public plans to construct a 25,000-seat venue next to the University of Toronto. That facility would be the new home of the Argos but would not be suitable for the 2007 men's U-20 World Cup. Enter Kerfoot. Quietly. The Whitecaps and their owner have been kicking around, no pun intended, the idea of a new soccer facility for a while now. But plans for a 15,000-seat venue were reportedly expanded when Kerfoot learned that both federal and provincial money could be made available through the Olympics. The new, 30,000-seat-plus facility, pegged for False Creek, would host the opening and closing Olympic ceremonies. And it would give the Vancouver committee a sparkling showcase in lieu of the drab, elephantine BC Place Stadium. Kerfoot -- who sold one of his businesses, Crystal Decisions, for $800 million last season -- would also have a new home for the Whitecaps and a new facility to help promote the game in Canada. And the Lions would finally be out from under BC Place. Now, this would be even better if it actually takes place. Kerfoot, who makes public appearances as frequently as Howard Hughes, declined to comment on the matter Wednesday. But it's fair to say he's at least interested in the project. Lions president Bob Ackles was also unavailable. The whole freaking world was unavailable Wednesday. And Poole, as mentioned, was equally close-mouthed. That doesn't leave much. But there's something about this story that passes the smell test. Kerfoot has the resources and inclination to go ahead with the stadium. The Lions and the CSA would be over the moon at the prospect of a new facility. The Olympic role, meanwhile, isn't quite as clear. But they'd have to prefer a new outdoor stadium for their opening and closing ceremonies to the quilted marshmallow on Pacific Blvd. They could also sell an initiative driven by the private sector, i.e. Kerfoot. And they'd be selling it in a city which is eager to buy the concept. When you come down to it, Vancouver needs an outdoor stadium for the Lions, for the Whitecaps, for national and international soccer and rugby competitions. If Kerfoot can deliver all that, they should rename Stanley Park after him. We won't even mind that he doesn't talk to the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 I'm not sure why a new stadium in Toronto would be unsuitable for the Men's U20 finals - the papers in Toronto are reporting the exact opposite. And we've seen the U17 finals in Finland held on artificial but suitable grass, even if the FieldTurf couldn't be temporarily replaced by grass for the tourney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 Without wanting to start a city vs. city debate (I won't have the restraint to stay out of it like I did on the other board), I think quite simply if God smiles on Canadian soccer and puts new stadiums in Toronto and Vancouver - the Vancouver stadium will be used for international matches and events far more than Toronto just because of the prohibitive cost of putting real grass in the Toronto. I think both would be a great and beautiful thing, but the value of the stadium in Toronto with Field Turf isn't that large to the national team program. I'm sure there will be occassional matches there, but I don't think Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa will see much action on their plastic. As G-L points out though, getting the stands built is the biggest thing, we can throw some grass in the middle at some other point hopefully. I love the location for the new Toronto stadium proposal. Right downtown, before the T&T game I see people wearing Cdn jerseys all over downtown at breakfast and at the pubs, I walked to the stadium (which is always great) and was a block away from a great pub. cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosehead Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 what would the profit be on hosting U20 Youth World Cup? If you are talking about 1 million per stadium to retrofit them with natural grass that might be your profit on the whole tournament. I don't think the CSA would have that kind of money to do it for international friendlies maybe for international tournaments. I like it that Toronto could get a nice downtown stadium and it would be good for track & field, but I don't see it being that useful for the CSA our National team or for local pro soccer. From a soccer perspective I am more excited by the Vancouver stadium proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 Simply on asthetics, a soccer stadium with real grass and no track will always be preferable than artificial turf with a track. The latter does not necessarily render itself "unsuitable" however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Moosehead what would the profit be on hosting U20 Youth World Cup? If you are talking about 1 million per stadium to retrofit them with natural grass that might be your profit on the whole tournament. I don't think the CSA would have that kind of money to do it for international friendlies maybe for international tournaments. It's not all about profit. Hosting a YWC successfully slowly prepares an eventual bid for the real deal. Just like the 2007 WWC would have done us great good in that regards, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamiltonfan Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 If a big soccer event was to take place in the new stadium couldn't they put seats over the track? I know if Hamilton were to get the Commonwealth games there would be a track during it but then they would put seats over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 quote:Originally posted by matthew Without wanting to start a city vs. city debate (I won't have the restraint to stay out of it like I did on the other board), I think quite simply if God smiles on Canadian soccer and puts new stadiums in Toronto and Vancouver - the Vancouver stadium will be used for international matches and events far more than Toronto just because of the prohibitive cost of putting real grass in the Toronto. I think both would be a great and beautiful thing, but the value of the stadium in Toronto with Field Turf isn't that large to the national team program. I'm sure there will be occassional matches there, but I don't think Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa will see much action on their plastic. As G-L points out though, getting the stands built is the biggest thing, we can throw some grass in the middle at some other point hopefully.cheers, matthew Matthew, I agree that we have to be optimistic about seeing two new stadiums in Canada. As for the field turf question, I imagine that things are going to change between now and then. Just as they have changed over the past 5 years. FIFA did the U-17 on artificial surfaces as mentioned, and UEFA has not only allowed it for club competitions but in the UEFA cup, where I think it was used recently. The FIFA site actually promotes it quite a bit and has a program backing its improvement and slow implantation, and in 4 years time we just might see them ready to have part of a WYC on it. So I am not entirely skeptic even though it is clear that the game is more beautiful on grass and with fans up close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC supporter Posted January 15, 2004 Share Posted January 15, 2004 If it ends up going on a university campus, it's bound to have a track. But what a waste! An eight-lane track that robs a venue of intimacy, to be used for university sports that don't draw and the hope of a once-a-decade international meet. It's like putting a police tape up between spectators and events. "Attention people, stay away from the action. Repeat, stay away from the action." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamiltonfan Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 for major events couldnt they just put seats over the track???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver Fan Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 The fact that CFL fields are so wide is another factor that takes away from the Englsh style stadiums we all desire.American football stadiums with the narrow field puts you closer to the action for soccer games.So,whether in Toronto or Vancouver,none of us will be as close to the field as we want as long as we have to cater to both football and soccer which is the case in both cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver Fan Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 The Vancouver Province article is getting air time on the local sports radio station.The story is being described as having legs.They point out that since everyone who could be potentially involved are declining comment it means that there is something to the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack Football strikes a blow for soccer This Ben Knight article is not new, it's from July 31, 2003! Which explains why everything he talked about --- the CFL taking over the Argos, the Champions World Series --- happened 6 months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Not only is the article not new, but neither is the post that originally mentioned it (if you look at the original date). I guess that's the (slight) problem when threads with the word "new" in them are revived 6 months later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Vancouver Fan The fact that CFL fields are so wide is another factor that takes away from the Englsh style stadiums we all desire.American football stadiums with the narrow field puts you closer to the action for soccer games.So,whether in Toronto or Vancouver,none of us will be as close to the field as we want as long as we have to cater to both football and soccer which is the case in both cities. Actually, CFL dimensions advantage us for sideline viewing. Since a CFL field is 65 yards wide, ther only needs to be another 5-10 yards tacked on to make it wide enough for international play. In the States, college stadiums, for example, are mostly unuseable because they're 50 yards wide, so maybe 60 from stand to stand. An American stadium has the advantage for behind the nets, though. An American football field is 120 yards long (100 + 2x10), which sticks the nets right in front of the first row. Canadian rules mean a field that's 150 yards long (110 + 2x20), which usually means the nets at the 0 line and the stands another 20 yards back. But stadiums in Canada are relatively small they rarely have significant endzone seating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca Not only is the article not new, but neither is the post that originally mentioned it (if you look at the original date). I guess that's the (slight) problem when threads with the word "new" in them are revived 6 months later. Oh pfft, stupid me. [:I] It's Mimglow's fault for digging up a 6-month-old post! I think we should organize these stadium threads better. We've got a few of them both in the Canadian National Teams section and the General Discussion section. I would suggest consolidating them all into the General Discussion section as right now it's all speculation, over and over again, that really has little to do with Canadian national teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimglow Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 quote:Originally posted by DJT Oh pfft, stupid me. [:I] It's Mimglow's fault for digging up a 6-month-old post! I think we should organize these stadium threads better. We've got a few of them both in the Canadian National Teams section and the General Discussion section. I would suggest consolidating them all into the General Discussion section as right now it's all speculation, over and over again, that really has little to do with Canadian national teams. *putting my hands up* Yup, I'm the culprit! [8D] Since this is an ongoing saga (maybe we should have a thread called "Toronto Stadium Prospect"), I was reluctant to start a "new" thread, so I made use of the the "Search" method, which DJT always laments is not used enough The result was a 6 month old "new" thread. Hehehe. Whoopsies!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimglow Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 quote:Originally posted by DJT Oh pfft, stupid me. [:I] It's Mimglow's fault for digging up a 6-month-old post! I think we should organize these stadium threads better. We've got a few of them both in the Canadian National Teams section and the General Discussion section. I would suggest consolidating them all into the General Discussion section as right now it's all speculation, over and over again, that really has little to do with Canadian national teams. *putting my hands up* Yup, I'm the culprit! [8D] Since this is an ongoing saga (maybe we should have a thread called "Toronto Stadium Prospect"), I was reluctant to start a "new" thread, so I made use of the the "Search" method, which DJT always laments is not used enough The result was a 6 month old "new" thread. Hehehe. Whoopsies!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.