kj52 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 "With respect to the Lansdowne group, soccer pitches are narrower than regulation sized CFL fields. The distance between the stands and a soccer pitch would only be an issue in the endzones where it is 20 yards longer on each side. If they can wash the CFL lines off the field something more suitable could be possible." I'm sure you meant to say that soccer pitches are wider than CFL fields. Like in McMahon Stadium in Calgary, the narrowing of the sideline area when the soccer lines are added improves the facility as a soccer venue. As long as there isn't a running track like Commonwealth Stadium is handicapped with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tovan1 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 my mistake, I meant to say that a CFL field is narrower than a soccer pitch. not the other way around... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 ^ CFL sideline rules though, make it wider than the pitch. You have to have stands set back a certain distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kj52 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 ^ CFL sideline rules though, make it wider than the pitch. You have to have stands set back a certain distance. I'm not sure of the exact distance but I've coached soccer at McMahon Stadium and there isn't that much room behind the technical area. I would guess about 6 or 7 yards at most. Fishman and others could verify that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloome Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I'm not sure of the exact distance but I've coached soccer at McMahon Stadium and there isn't that much room behind the technical area. I would guess about 6 or 7 yards at most. Fishman and others could verify that. So realistically, they could add in a row of table seating, ala BMO? Woudl certainly help, particularly if they're using temporary lines for both sports. The players will hate the turf, but in some communities it's necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I have no problem with cfl stadiums under the following circumstances: - stadium must be on the small side, like in Ottawa and Hamilton - no football lines - stadium owners/ operators are involved in team ownership (sounders situation) SSS are preferable but its not a perfect world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kj52 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 So realistically, they could add in a row of table seating, ala BMO? Woudl certainly help, particularly if they're using temporary lines for both sports. The players will hate the turf, but in some communities it's necessary. It would be a bit tight, there's less room from soccer touch line to stands in Calgary than there is at BMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloome Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I have no problem with cfl stadiums under the following circumstances: - stadium must be on the small side, like in Ottawa and Hamilton - no football lines - stadium owners/ operators are involved in team ownership (sounders situation) SSS are preferable but its not a perfect world Makes total sense. Those would have to be the baseline. At least then you can get some proximity atmosphere and the lines aren't driving away the Eurocentrics. Having the owner involved guarantees as much buy-in on fan appeasement as possible. All good points. Be nice to figure a way to regionalize the loop in three segments, to get the Maritimes involved. St. John has a 10,000-seat soccer stadium, a booming offshore oil and hydroelectric economy. Moncton (say, 3,500 to 5,000 per game) and Halifax could support a team, as well. I think any centre in which you can draw above about 3,500 game, based on average roster budgets in the $1.5M range, can make a go of it, although obviously you want to start with the pop. centres that are confident they deserve first-tier sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcoatsforever Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Makes total sense. Those would have to be the baseline. At least then you can get some proximity atmosphere and the lines aren't driving away the Eurocentrics. Having the owner involved guarantees as much buy-in on fan appeasement as possible. All good points. Be nice to figure a way to regionalize the loop in three segments, to get the Maritimes involved. St. John has a 10,000-seat soccer stadium, a booming offshore oil and hydroelectric economy. Moncton (say, 3,500 to 5,000 per game) and Halifax could support a team, as well. I think any centre in which you can draw above about 3,500 game, based on average roster budgets in the $1.5M range, can make a go of it, although obviously you want to start with the pop. centres that are confident they deserve first-tier sports. You could draw a sizable group with a small stadium in between Summerside and Charlottetown. Soccer is the most popular sport in PEI by far, I'm sure you could get people to turn out and support the only professional sports club that would likely ever be on the island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloome Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 You could draw a sizable group with a small stadium in between Summerside and Charlottetown. Soccer is the most popular sport in PEI by far, I'm sure you could get people to turn out and support the only professional sports club that would likely ever be on the island. Given the relative population base draw is under 70,000 it might be tough -- it's about two hours from Charlottetown to Souris, so Kings County might not contribute much support. But if the budget's realistic, it's certainly the only size of venture, outside junior hockey, that would really fit on the island. If I recall, they had AHL for a short time and it didn't make it. But like you say, soccer's huge there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 For PEI to have any shot it would take a full buy in from the community, local business, and provincial government. Even then it's not a slam dunk. For a league like this to thrive, the budgets needed to legitimize it in the big centres would demand crowds of 5,000 as a baseline. We need to focus on getting 8 teams in the biggest markets available to perform at a stable level. At that point branching out into smaller areas could be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tovan1 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 PEI would probably be more suited to being in D3 (if the CSL is able to regionalize) than a D2 level. The population base and geographic location would require massive investment relative to the size of the community. 8 teams in the 8 of the largest population centres, aside from the MLS cities, would require a smaller relative investment. The greater frequency of flights between larger cities would also provide for less expensive travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloome Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 PEI would probably be more suited to being in D3 (if the CSL is able to regionalize) than a D2 level. The population base and geographic location would require massive investment relative to the size of the community. 8 teams in the 8 of the largest population centres, aside from the MLS cities, would require a smaller relative investment. The greater frequency of flights between larger cities would also provide for less expensive travel. I still believe we should be looking more at 10 or 12 teams, to be taken seriously. Having five or six teams in each region rather than four would also decrease the frequency of travel, and you can imbalance the schedule -- 3 per season against your conference, 2 against the other. On a 10-team league hat would be a total 22-game schedule. Also, without a third regional loop, the Maritimes would initially be too expensive in recurring travel cost for western teams. Ideally, you want the teams travelling short for two-thirds of their sked, at least Something like WEST Victoria Vancouver Calgary Edmonton Saskatoon EAST Toronto Hamilton Ottawa Montreal Quebec City Due to its location as the furthest large centre from the mean centre of either loop, eliminating Winnipeg and the maritime cities in the formative years will save each operation a large amount on travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverthursday Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I still believe we should be looking more at 10 or 12 teams, to be taken seriously. Having five or six teams in each region rather than four would also decrease the frequency of travel, and you can imbalance the schedule -- 3 per season against your conference, 2 against the other. On a 10-team league hat would be a total 22-game schedule. Also, without a third regional loop, the Maritimes would initially be too expensive in recurring travel cost for western teams. Ideally, you want the teams travelling short for two-thirds of their sked, at least Something like WEST Victoria Vancouver Calgary Edmonton Saskatoon EAST Toronto Hamilton Ottawa Montreal Quebec City Due to its location as the furthest large centre from the mean centre of either loop, eliminating Winnipeg and the maritime cities in the formative years will save each operation a large amount on travel. I have one issue with you here jloome. Make it four or five games in your conference, and one, maybe two games out of your conference. A 26 - 30 game schedule would be way smarter if you are getting 4,000 - 5,000 fans a game. That extra revenue from tickets would cover the extra travel much better. It would make sense for each team to own a bus with the exception of out of conference travel, which would be simple. fly out once and charter a bus, and make a five game swing. If the league could get a major hotel chain sponser it would cut into that budget a little too. Trust me. $200,000 for a team bus for five years until the warranty runs out, sell it, and buy a new one for five more years. Boo-freaking-yah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I still believe we should be looking more at 10 or 12 teams, to be taken seriously. Having five or six teams in each region rather than four would also decrease the frequency of travel, and you can imbalance the schedule -- 3 per season against your conference, 2 against the other. On a 10-team league hat would be a total 22-game schedule. Also, without a third regional loop, the Maritimes would initially be too expensive in recurring travel cost for western teams. Ideally, you want the teams travelling short for two-thirds of their sked, at least Something like WEST Victoria Vancouver Calgary Edmonton Saskatoon EAST Toronto Hamilton Ottawa Montreal Quebec City Due to its location as the furthest large centre from the mean centre of either loop, eliminating Winnipeg and the maritime cities in the formative years will save each operation a large amount on travel. At the end of the day, it's wherever the money comes from. If someone want to build a 10,000 seat SSS in Winnipeg, and properly back the club, god speed to them. But I see where you are coming from on the travel issue. I think having a central travel expense pool would really help the league out. The expenses in the east will be much less than the west. If everyone pays an equal amount into the travel fund it should stabilize the league as a whole. For the schedule, i would rather see a double home and away in conference and single home and away for out of conference. This balances out home dates for each team. An 8 team league would result in a 20 match schedule, 10 teams would be 26, and 12 would be 32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tovan1 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I'm not sure it would be wise to put D2 teams in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal where MLS teams are still establishing themselves. The presence of a new D2 team (in addition to MLS and it's reserve and academy teams) could fragment the soccer market and make both teams weaker. Theses markets won't be mature enough for multiple professional soccer teams for long time. Using Marlies/Leafs as an example, Marlies are irrelevant in Toronto because the thinking is, why follow the Marlies when you can follow the Leafs? Similarly, the Edmonton Road Runners of the AHL weren't able to coexist with the Oilers. Canadians, for one reason or another, don't appear to support minor league teams when a major league team is present in the same market. The Voyageurs Cup is already a good proxy for a complete domestic league. Although D2 teams would be in a different league than MLS teams, they would still meet them regularly in VC competition (depending on the format). Going along with my original idea: MLS in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal and D2 in Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, London, Hamilton, Ottawa, and Quebec would allow professional soccer to focus on having a presence in the 11 largest/most established soccer markets across the country. 8 teams in 2 conferences (double home and home in conference, and single home and home out of conference = 20 game regular season + playoffs + VC competition = 25-30 games/season). And yes, a balanced travel budget league-wide would be a necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Hasn't this whole issue already been debated and discussed to death in this forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Hasn't this whole issue already been debated and discussed to death in this forum? I dunno, you and Blizzard seem to want to argue about it everytime the issue is raised. If you don't want it discussed, then don't shoot it down, threads with agreement tend to die sooner than those with disagreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex D Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Every time we start expressing our ideas the thread gets poisoned by certain individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloome Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Hasn't this whole issue already been debated and discussed to death in this forum? Apparently not: you're still with us. Seriously Richard, if you don't like it and have nothing to contribute, I recommend the Starbucks down the road, or Slate Magazine, or something. As a famous man once noted, censoring something you don't like or enjoy is as simple as picking up the remote. Same applies with threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloome Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I'm not sure it would be wise to put D2 teams in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal where MLS teams are still establishing themselves. The presence of a new D2 team (in addition to MLS and it's reserve and academy teams) could fragment the soccer market and make both teams weaker. Theses markets won't be mature enough for multiple professional soccer teams for long time. Using Marlies/Leafs as an example, Marlies are irrelevant in Toronto because the thinking is, why follow the Marlies when you can follow the Leafs? Similarly, the Edmonton Road Runners of the AHL weren't able to coexist with the Oilers. Canadians, for one reason or another, don't appear to support minor league teams when a major league team is present in the same market. The Voyageurs Cup is already a good proxy for a complete domestic league. Although D2 teams would be in a different league than MLS teams, they would still meet them regularly in VC competition (depending on the format). Going along with my original idea: MLS in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal and D2 in Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, London, Hamilton, Ottawa, and Quebec would allow professional soccer to focus on having a presence in the 11 largest/most established soccer markets across the country. 8 teams in 2 conferences (double home and home in conference, and single home and home out of conference = 20 game regular season + playoffs + VC competition = 25-30 games/season). And yes, a balanced travel budget league-wide would be a necessity. I don't think you can claim an elite league without those cities, all three are big enough to support two pro teams if they're both of quality, and it would create intense V.Cup rivalries. And we have to keep the fan's view in mind at all times: a 10-team league is simply more in keeping with traditions they're used to. An eight team league in a country this size looks dinky to many (footie fans, not CFL fans.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcoatsforever Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I don't think you can claim an elite league without those cities, all three are big enough to support two pro teams if they're both of quality, and it would create intense V.Cup rivalries. And we have to keep the fan's view in mind at all times: a 10-team league is simply more in keeping with traditions they're used to. An eight team league in a country this size looks dinky to many (footie fans, not CFL fans.) I think even the CFL fans tolerate the 8 team conundrum at best, many (myself included) want Ottawa and Atlantic expansion to be top of the CFL's agenda in the coming years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tovan1 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Richard, for a minute there I thought that this was a discussion forum... oh wait, it is! a forum where people discuss things. What a novel idea.... Nobody's forcing you to discuss the topic, if you feel that it's repetitive and redundant you can always ignore it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trident Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 The Voyageurs Cup is already a good proxy for a complete domestic league. Although D2 teams would be in a different league than MLS teams, they would still meet them regularly in VC competition (depending on the format). get used to saying was a good proxy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 ...I may as well put my two cents in. I'd love to see an eventual 18 professional clubs in Canada. Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal would continue to play in MLS, with an additional 15 clubs playing in some form of second division league. I'd say: West...................................Ontario...............................East Victoria................................Ottawa..............................Quebec City Calgary................................Hamilton............................Halifax Edmonton.............................London...............................Moncton Saskatoon............................Thunder Bay.......................St John Winnipeg..............................2nd GTA.............................Fredricton The Canadian D2 league would play a heavily unbalanced schedule, with each team playing a double home-and-away within its own division and each team in the other two divisions once (West teams would play all Ontario teams home in one season and the East teams away, then reversed the next season) for a 26 game league season. Each of the fifteen teams, along with the 3 MLS teams would enter the Voyageurs' Cup to crown an official national champion. 1st group stage: D2 only - 5 groups of 3 (one team from each division in each group), home-and-away, group winners advance to QF. QF - (5 group winners, plus 3 MLS teams) seeded to prevent MLS sides drawing each other and depriving D2 sides of a favourable gate, two-legged ties. SF - open draw, two-legged ties. V-Cup final - single-match (either neutral site, or home team determined by coin flip). MLS sides would play a maximum of 5 V-Cup matches. D2 sides play a minimum 30 matches (league, plus V-Cup group stage), plus up to five more V-Cup. Now, if only had the billion dollars needed to make this all happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.