Elias Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 <begin rant> I don't get it. Why don't people in this country understand that if you don't support your local community, they won't turn around and support you. "A political power-play engineered by some of Canada's top academics" from National Post. Top academics, they're morons. UofT had an amazing opportunity, to get a new stadium built, to get a new hockey arena built (with the Leafs), to get federal and provincial money. The stadium and arena don't really add anything to the University. But it's what they represent. They could have used these as a catalyst to create a whole sports training center with a huge sports science (sorry, I mean kinesiology) and research department as well, which leads into medical research, training, drugs, nutrition, etc. And they get the prestige of having two of the most famous sports clubs on their grounds (no anti-Toronto b.s. comments please). Damn, there's a ton of things they could tie into "sports", from economics (impact on cities, govts, jobs, etc.) to health to social aspects to I don't know even biology and physics for crying out loud. Now, the reality is that UofT only "needs" a 5 000 seat artificial turf stadium that can be use for about 8-9 months a year. And the land to be built on is as close to priceless as it gets. But the point is that the pro sports and stadiums are the most high profile items that other groups (Argos, CSA, Leafs, rugby, track, etc. and corporations) could get behind and support financially. More fun quotes from the National Post article: quote: One of those vociferously opposed to having the stadium rebuilt on a site it had occupied from 1898 until it was demolished in 2002 was historian and best-selling author Margaret MacMillan. She is a provost with the university's Trinity College and has an office near the site. "Our concerns are about the noise, traffic and security," MacMillan told a reporter last week. "Yes, there used to be an active stadium on the site, but there used to be public executions in the city as well. Since the stadium has vanished, times have changed." One, she's a historian? Does she understand what history means? And I love that comment about times have changed. So I guess she has no problem with the Taliban et al, you know, women had the right to speak, but now times have changed. RETARDS!!! quote:Originally posted by Free kick Time have change!!!!? the previous stadium was only torn down what? three ago. Things have changed that much in three years. You mean to say that there were public execution around that time !!!!! shaking my head. quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca Actually I am thinking that along with bringing Varsity back, bringing public executions back might also be a good idea, now that she mentions it. I have somebody in mind as the first candidate...... The Argos owners want the new stadium built at York. So hopefully York has the brains to use this to get some improvements done like a subway to York, and use it to grow their impressive sports package like home of the national tennis centre, I think its also basically the home of the national track team. UofT is not central anymore. It's not even central in what is the city of Toronto today, i.e. the "megacity" (that would be up the street at like Yonge/Eglinton/Lawrence - just steps from Downsview). About 2.5 million live in the city, and about 2.5 million live in the 905/GTA area. York or Downsview unfortunately make a lot more sense. The only thing downtown makes sense is for nostalgia and history. But times change ... As for 2007, why not the SkyDome? All the European teams will attract huge crowds, as I think would most of the countries actually. This is the kind of opportunity Americans and the rest of the world take advantage of. Most of the media and corporations are in Toronto, honestly, is it a good idea not to have games here? And why not go all out and aim big. Get a deal with the SkyDome and the Jays (promote them to all the "ethnic" communities - if they haven't moved to North Dakota that is) and cordinate it so the Jays can go on a road trip for like 2 weeks or something while the games are here and lay down natural grass. This really ain't rocket science. I don't get this country. Like people here want a Canadian A-League division instead of a Canadian MLS division. How does that make any sense? </end rant> Sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Elias, excellent post. I would change the topic to "U of T decision makers are retarded". They surely are shortsighted and have no vision for the future. What do you expect from the same people who tore down the original Varsity when it didn't have to be. There simply is a bunch of stupid people running the U of T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 NIMBY's. refers to people who take the " Not In My Back Yard" view of things. The same people who forced the construction of the ( much needed downtown expressway access) Allen expressway to stop at Eglington W ave. Their rationale being nothing more self interest or more specifically trying to preserve their own inflated property values. Or the the kind of people who petitioned the to stop copnstruction of a bridge access to the islands airport. In all three of these examples ( varsity, allen exprswy, and island link) they all try to mask their self interests with rationals that consist of balntant inaccuracies and even lies. Strangly the makeup of these types strike me as very similar that writter who commented in that National Post article why she opposed Varsity construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TorontoInferno Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 You know, i'm not half surprised the Varsity Deal got killed. After going to UofT for 5 years (I took a victory lap) i'm continually amazed at the 'academics' they have working at the university. They are without a doubt the most arrogant, self centred bunch of high foreheads this side of Parliament Hill. To look at Varsity as a detriment is just a bunch of hogwash. That a university such as this to claim it is a serious north american institution of higher learning with a field (Varsity, its now just Varsity Field) as their athletic ground is embarassing. And to claim that they are out of money defies logic. Just where did they put my 5 grand + per year x 50000 students(give or take a couple thousand)? Are they buying golden toilets and ivory wash tubs? I certainly did not get one! I got a cat skin in a 150 dollar picture frame, and a 75 dollar picture that makes me look like i'm swimming in a gown. I swore i would not give any more money to those greedy bsatards but they get you going in, and get you going out. They turn down an essentially free stadium (I'm pretty sure they would guarantee the loan; which is easy, there is lots of collateral between Bloor, Spadina, University & College) because a couple people complain about noise ? Since when did the UofT care about peoples concerns? With all the noisy, drunk students and constant construction around campus, you would think they are immune to community complaints! I wished the city would get a new Varsity, memories of Canada-USA Women, Canada-Mexico are very fresh in my mind, but with people like the UofT, the City of Toronto, and the Government of Canada involved, something WAS bound to get fouled up, big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Elias <begin rant> I don't get it. Why don't people in this country understand that if you don't support your local community, they won't turn around and support you. And I liked Jarrek's comment about bringing back executions, see other thread. I think you'll find that was my comment. [8D] You have to keep in mind that many of the academics in question are not local (often having grown up & studied in other parts of Canada and quite frequently, other parts of the world), and as such are not likely to give a rat's ass about supporting their local community. I'm not saying I agree with them, just that it should be borne in mind. With U of T & the CSA now negotiating with York U one would think they would be gun-shy about dealing with another academic institution - and trust me, there are just as many, if not more, left-wing pinko commie crypto-facist neo-hippy ****ers (for lack of a more accurate description) amongst the academia at York as there are at U of T. They had the opportunity to have the International Space University (ISU) built on York's campus but the builders decided to put it in France or somewhere else when they received too much dissent over the idea from un-intellectual mamby-pamby pansies at York - though most of that dissent was from the same idiotic, moronic, excremental-smears-on-the-underwear-of-life students that advocated in the student paper that Remembrance Day was evil and should be done away with, because it was a bastion of facism in modern-day society. But on the plus side, York has seen the building of a not-really-necessary brand-spanking new Tennis Centre, so if they can agree to that on their premises I guess it is forseeable that they can agree to a new soccer/football stadium. Plus York is always looking for reasons to one-up U of T and this would be a good way of doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Geez, w.a.n.k.e.r gets censored? And here I was trying to not to sound too harsh...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayWay Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 The Varsity project's collapse wasn't the product of N.I.M.B.Yism and finger-wagging though, was it? I was under the impression that, in the end, this was a matter of finances -- not opposition from the academic community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:Originally posted by JayWay The Varsity project's collapse wasn't the product of N.I.M.B.Yism and finger-wagging though, was it? I was under the impression that, in the end, this was a matter of finances -- not opposition from the academic community. Jay, Just about every article on this subject today suggests that the decision was all about politics and not finances. Besides, the public purses would have covered the cost overruns thus there would have been no financial burden on the university. Furthermore, that costs had escalated to 100 million instaed of 80millis is hardly unreasonable. Projects of this scale seldom if ever meet projections. Did you honnestly think that you could build a stadium for 80 mill? Going from 80 to 100 mill is hardly anything to get your shorts tied in knots over especially when you compare the cost overruns for projects like the Skydome. As most articles suggest, it was political pressure that sunk the project. Like from that bonehead historian/author who claimed that this facility would cause noise polution. Her response when it was mentioned that there was a stadium already at that location, was that there also used to be "PUBLIC EXECUTIONS" in Toronto at one time as well. Plus, people like OLivia Chow got involved and your hearing things from people along the line that:"having a soccer stadium would bring holligans to the neighborhood". Thats what sunk the project, the finances was just a smokescreen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leafman Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Some left wing history intellectuals do love Canadian soccer (like me), but then I go to Western where the field surface for soccer at TD Waterhouse Stadium ended up being astro turf because that was what the field hockey teams wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loud Mouth Soup Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Leafman-as a King's/UWO grad myself, I would like to say that the decision to install Astroturf at JW was one of the dumbest ideas the university ever made. And having served on the USC and various committees, I've seen some dumb ones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Leafman Some left wing history intellectuals do love Canadian soccer (like me), but then I go to Western where the field surface for soccer at TD Waterhouse Stadium ended up being astro turf because that was what the field hockey teams wanted. Much like what the U of A did for Foote. Among things they didn't do. Same with the city concerning Clarke Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarrek Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:And I liked Jarrek's comment about bringing back executions, see other thread. Am I missing something here [?][?][?] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Jarrek Am I missing something here [?][?][?] Yes - you missed my post in response to that comment explaining that it was I who said that. This is the last time I'm taking credit for it. BTW, it should be noted in all this discussion that from what I've heard the reason the estimates went up $20 million was to take into account modifications to the design as a compromise to satisfy the complainers - they didn't want a certain street closed off. The architect involved has also claimed that he was about to do further revisions to the design that would bring the project back into the $80 area. Either way, it looks like the political garbage killed this particular deal either way - by being responsible for the extra cost, or by (as just about everyone but apparently Ben Knight believes) do to the existence of the whining in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Posted October 2, 2004 Author Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca Yes - you missed my post in response to that comment explaining that it was I who said that. This is the last time I'm taking credit for it. [:I] I changed it. See that's why UofT doesn't want all us neanderthals trespassing on their beautifully manicured lawns. We can't even tell names apart. But in my defence, Gian-Luca, Jarrek, honestly, what's the difference, can't we all just get along [] I just don't understand this situation at all. Why would they announce it was a done deal months ago. I can understand the CSA and the politicians making fools of themselves, but the Argos owners don't seem like clowns. The one guy owns one of the biggest homebuilders, and the other guy owns some huge bleach making company. And the president was one of the main forces behind TSN. Now they all seem like fools. quote:Originally posted by Free kick In all three of these examples ( varsity, allen exprswy, and island link) they all try to mask their self interests with rationals that consist of balntant inaccuracies and even lies. Strangly the makeup of these types strike me as very similar that writter who commented in that National Post article why she opposed Varsity construction. Sorry, I have to disagree. I think the island airport, and thus the bridge, are really dumb ideas. And the downtown expressway, I'm not too sure on that issue. But I would have to vote no. As for Varsity, I really don't like the location. My first choice would be the CNE. I was just arguing about how dumb UofT "leaders" are. Rememberance Day is fascist?!?!?! WTF!!!! I always thought York was less "left-wing pinko commie crypto-facist neo-hippy ****ers" than UofT cause they let in dumb people [] quote:Originally posted by Moosehead opportunity to be the owner and host of part of the U20 Word Cup of Soccer, one of the largest global tournaments in the world, instead it took the path to show what a parochial 2nd rate institution it in fact is. It had the opportunity to have the name University of Toronto to be named and shown to billions of people worldwide on tv. Think of that exposure and the marketing potential that was foregone, to bring in thousands of potential foreign students to its university. Instead internal bickerings over site lines for profs and possible ocassional noise has apparently scuttled the deal. It just goes to show the U of T is not a world class global institution but a snobby 2nd rate Canadian institution. What Toronto, a city of 5 million people that can't get a stadium built with a 40 million government grant. I never even thought of that. Wow, UofT is full of really really smart intellectuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Elias The link to the island would have consisted of a drawbridge. If you get chance and have nothing better to do, go down there and take a look at what the fuss was all about. You will probably change your mind on this. Currently there is a ferry that takes people from the dock at Bathurst and King to the island airpot. I think that I read somewhere that this ferry distance may have been in the Guinness book of world records as one of the shortest in world. The amount of water that you have to cross is roughly equal to a four lane city street. Also, although the airport is on the Toronto islands, there is no access possible from the island to the airport and similarly you cannot get to the islands from the islands airport. The airport is completely fenced off and inacessible. Currently you have to incurr costs to run a ferry and pay operators to cross that tiny distance. A drawbridge would have been cheaper. Secondly, having a secondary airport to handle short communter distance travel within Northeastern cities in North america would have been a terrific benefit to the traveling public and the downtown business community since Pearson can be very inacessible (especially by public transit) and travel to and from Pearson is excessively overpriced. Plus Pearson is loaded with surchages and costs that are passed on to travelers. A secondary option would would have somewhat broken the monopoly that Pearson has. Also, business travelers to places like Montreal, New York, Boston and Chicago would have saved a lot of time and hassles by avoiding Pearson. Thirdly, the entrepreneur who wanted to operate the commuter service was NOT going to operate jets out of the islands. It was going to be 70-80 seat turboprops that are probably quieter than a lawn mower. He would have purchased and run about 15 of these props THAT ARE BUILT RIGHT HERE IN TORONTO at the deHavilland plant in downsview. Which incidently, without this contract will probably shut down soon and result in a loss of thousands of jobs and also the disappearnce of the only remnant of the aerospace and aviation sector left in Toronto. Just like the Varsity stadium project, the fixed link got killed due to a combination of ignorance and self-interest rather than the public benefit. A small handfull of people pursuing self interest preyed on the ignorance of the majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 Yeah, having a decent airport close to downtown is very important. The bridge was a good idea. Especially when the city's public transportation sucks the big one! Its faster to drive or take the train to Montreal than fly from Pearson. Geez... quote:Originally posted by Elias UofT is not central anymore. It's not even central in what is the city of Toronto today, i.e. the "megacity" (that would be up the street at like Yonge/Eglinton/Lawrence - just steps from Downsview). Well, i think you're taking the term "central" too literally. I mean the center of Rio could the top of a mountain. UofT is centretown and its by far the better location. Even if you're at Yonge & Eg you can get to UofT just as fast and more confortably than to Downsview (w/o a car). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted October 3, 2004 Share Posted October 3, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Free kick I doubt having a downtown airport for TO would improve matters. One would only need to look at we've had to deal with in Edmonton for decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Posted December 1, 2004 Author Share Posted December 1, 2004 Not like there's anything else to talk about..... [] quote:Originally posted by Free kick The link to the island would have consisted of a drawbridge. If you get chance and have nothing better to do, go down there and take a look at what the fuss was all about. You will probably change your mind on this. Currently there is a ferry that takes people from the dock at Bathurst and King to the island airpot. I think that I read somewhere that this ferry distance may have been in the Guinness book of world records as one of the shortest in world. The amount of water that you have to cross is roughly equal to a four lane city street. Also, although the airport is on the Toronto islands, there is no access possible from the island to the airport and similarly you cannot get to the islands from the islands airport. The airport is completely fenced off and inacessible. Currently you have to incurr costs to run a ferry and pay operators to cross that tiny distance. A drawbridge would have been cheaper. Secondly, having a secondary airport to handle short communter distance travel within Northeastern cities in North america would have been a terrific benefit to the traveling public and the downtown business community since Pearson can be very inacessible (especially by public transit) and travel to and from Pearson is excessively overpriced. Plus Pearson is loaded with surchages and costs that are passed on to travelers. A secondary option would would have somewhat broken the monopoly that Pearson has. Also, business travelers to places like Montreal, New York, Boston and Chicago would have saved a lot of time and hassles by avoiding Pearson. Thirdly, the entrepreneur who wanted to operate the commuter service was NOT going to operate jets out of the islands. It was going to be 70-80 seat turboprops that are probably quieter than a lawn mower. He would have purchased and run about 15 of these props THAT ARE BUILT RIGHT HERE IN TORONTO at the deHavilland plant in downsview. Which incidently, without this contract will probably shut down soon and result in a loss of thousands of jobs and also the disappearnce of the only remnant of the aerospace and aviation sector left in Toronto. Just like the Varsity stadium project, the fixed link got killed due to a combination of ignorance and self-interest rather than the public benefit. A small handfull of people pursuing self interest preyed on the ignorance of the majority. WOW!!! You are right. I was there one day last week for the first time. It's impossible to build a bridge there. Never mind 4 lanes, it's like 4 feet across. A couple more ouzo shots and I would have hopped over. How do you take the ferry across??? If they lined it up, I'm sure you could just walk from one end of the ferry to the other and be there. I can't believe all the energy that went into this debate. It's really unbelievable. "Ignorace of the majority" - you mean democracy? As for the airport, on one hand, I sort of agree with the argument for the airport, but, honestly, how many people would use it? It's never taken me more than 30 minutes to get to Pearson from the east end. Obviously not during peak rush hour. WestJet's eastern base the first year was Hamilton. That didn't work to well. People from Burlington/Oakville would still rather go to Pearson. If you live north of Toronto or even North York, Scarborough, is the island airport really any closer? As for security, it would still be the same, especially travelling to the U.S. And I think it would be even more from an island location being so close to downtown, which is after all, the financial centre of this country. It's like the proposed (for about 80 years now) high speed train from downtown to the airport. Anybody I know who would be going directly from the airport to downtown (or vice-versa) is on a business expense account and pays the $50 limo fee. My grandparents in the east-end aren't about to take a train to get to the airport. They would rather pay the $35 cab. quote:Originally posted by amacpher Yeah, having a decent airport close to downtown is very important. The bridge was a good idea. Especially when the city's public transportation sucks the big one! Its faster to drive or take the train to Montreal than fly from Pearson. Geez... Well, i think you're taking the term "central" too literally. I mean the center of Rio could the top of a mountain. UofT is centretown and its by far the better location. Even if you're at Yonge & Eg you can get to UofT just as fast and more confortably than to Downsview (w/o a car). I agree about faster to drive to Montreal, but I don't think an island airport would really change that. As for "central", I was just looking more from a GTA point of view. I live in Hamilton. It would be a lot easier for me to get to Downsview, than to U of T, especially during rush hour. And if you take an even expanded area (like a 2 hour drive each way - I think reasonable for a weekend match), people who live on the 401 like London, Oshawa, etc. would save about 2 hours on their trip. As for the U of T brains, Fanshawe College in London has a course about hockey. "It explores hockey from a number of perspectives, including historical, political and economic. Falling within those outlines are subjects like violence in hockey, the media, small- and big-market teams, and the development of players through the minor system." "There was no problem making it academic," Morrissey (the teacher) says. "Hockey is the hook, but within this course there's sociology, political science, culture, an economic course. To close out the course, we are looking at hockey and our national identity." http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/DallaCosta/2004/11/30/741660.html More for the U of T brains. I'm sure somebody posted this, but on the main page at FIFA for the World Youth Championship, the second story for over a month now is about the new stadium at York University, not U of T. Like somebody else pointed out, this is a huge tournament, that will get huge world wide attention. But U of T is world class enough... Link to the WYC front page - http://www.fifa.com/en/comp/index/0,2442,WYC2005,00.html?comp=WYC&year=2005 Link to the story - http://www.fifa.com/en/comp/index/0,2442,103483,00.html?comp=WYC&year=2005&articleid=103483 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.