Canada Pre-World Cup "friendlies" thread: news, gossip and speculation.

[red card]

This qualification will obviously have ramifications for Canadian soccer but also for Canadian society.

A tidbit from an Open Canada (aims to engage foreign policy & international affairs discussions) article:

At a baptism I attended last weekend, talk after the ceremony turned to football and Canada’s impressive performance on the field. Most of the attendees were Syrians. One of them said that “we” had qualified.

He realized he had said “we” about Canada. He seemed surprised by it, surrounded as he was by his countrymen and women. 

The work of belonging is hard. .....But the work is made easier by the realization that others like you are now “from” here. That they have found glory and success, belonging and adulation, by virtue of who they are and what they brought to the table, their own talents and lived experiences. That it is possible for the “we” to denote somewhere else than what your accidental birthplace dictated. That your chosen home can be yours, not just a rest stop on the way.

https://opencanada.org/finding-home-in-canadas-soccer-triumph/

[blueseeka]

Wonder if this means friendly will be in BC or Edmonton

[SpursFlu]

1 hour ago, blueseeka said:

Wonder if this means friendly will be in BC or Edmonton

At the risk of just sounding like something I would likely say. This sounds like BC Place. Not only does BC Place have the presentation and size, Vancouver also has the wealthy destination factor. So not only could you sell a lot of tickets, you could probably ridiculously overprice those tickets

[gigi riva]

I  have heard rumours about a friendly vs Argentina  in September . can someone confirm this

[Floortom]

10 hours ago, blueseeka said:

Wonder if this means friendly will be in BC or Edmonton

Superpowers won’t be playing on turf. I think the friendlies will have to be in Toronto or Montreal - a nations league match can be in those other regions though. With the momentum the program has now even a home match against curaçao will get huge turnout 

Edited April 10, 2022 by Floortom

[blueseeka]

2 hours ago, Floortom said:

Superpowers won’t be playing on turf. I think the friendlies will have to be in Toronto or Montreal - a nations league match can be in those other regions though. With the momentum the program has now even a home match against curaçao will get huge turnout 

What is the max attendance for Montreal?

[SpursFlu]

I get teams don't like playing on turf but I thinks it's dramatically overstated 

Especially when you consider its a friendly. It has nothing to do with injuries, players and coaches just want that muscle memory in a big game so they intrinsically know the run of the ball. 

Edited April 10, 2022 by SpursFlu

[SoccMan]

This is why BMO Field should be permanently expanded to 45000, yes I get it that TFC will not get 45000 for every game . 21000 to around 29000 is what they can realistically get the majority of times, but even for TFC  you can get  close to 45000 for some major games like a big playoff game or a future MLS Cup game . Moreover , for the national team there will be games in the future where you will get 45000 to a game , so why not expand it to 45000 permanently instead of a stupid temporary expansion for the World Cup. Toronto’s Rogers Center seats around 50000 but most years the Jays average around what 21000 to 25000 , so what’s the difference. Expand BMO to 45000 permanent seats and be done with it .

Edited April 10, 2022 by SoccMan

[blueseeka]

1 hour ago, SoccMan said:

This is why BMO Field should be permanently expanded to 45000, yes I get it that TFC will not get 45000 for every game . 21000 to around 29000 is what they can realistically get the majority of times, but even for TFC  you can get  close to 45000 for some major games like a big playoff game or a future MLS Cup game . Moreover , for the national team there will be games in the future where you will get 45000 to a game , so why not expand it to 45000 permanently instead of a stupid temporary expansion for the World Cup. Toronto’s Rogers Center seats around 50000 but most years the Jays average around what 21000 to 25000 , so what’s the difference. Expand BMO to 45000 permanent seats and be done with it .

I think they will. Too much money in future qualifiers and friendlies

[Ruud]

2 hours ago, blueseeka said:

What is the max attendance for Montreal?

20k or so.  
I expect they get one but revenues would be lower once a deal is done with Gabe Gervais 

[Redpunkfiddle]

13 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

At the risk of just sounding like something I would likely say. This sounds like BC Place. Not only does BC Place have the presentation and size, Vancouver also has the wealthy destination factor. So not only could you sell a lot of tickets, you could probably ridiculously overprice those tickets

Except RS has outlined how the business agreements for the CSA at BMO mean the profit opportunity is similar to what you could get at a higher capacity BC Place. And you can gouge in Toronto too. So, it won't surprise to go back there.

[JAVIERF]

Yes there is a chance it is almost confirmed, but they are playing vs Argentina they said in the french speaking province.  Quebec or Montreal are the cities pushing and maybe some say down here on tv aa a speculation that the son of Pierre is  involved somehow he  wants to bring Lionel Messi too.  

[Obinna]

11 hours ago, Redpunkfiddle said:

Except RS has outlined how the business agreements for the CSA at BMO mean the profit opportunity is similar to what you could get at a higher capacity BC Place. And you can gouge in Toronto too. So, it won't surprise to go back there.

Is this fact or speculation? because it has never been clear to me from @RS. My assumption has always been that the deal between CSA and BMO is a fact, but whether that equates to similar or more profit than playing at a full BC Place is speculation. 

If Rudi or anyone else can speak more to it, go for it!

[RS]

6 hours ago, Obinna said:

Is this fact or speculation? because it has never been clear to me from @RS. My assumption has always been that the deal between CSA and BMO is a fact, but whether that equates to similar or more profit than playing at a full BC Place is speculation. 

If Rudi or anyone else can speak more to it, go for it!

It's a fact that there's a sweetheart deal in place between BMO Field and Canada Soccer for games held there. There are public documents that bear this out.

I've heard from several different people over the years that games held elsewhere would have to be hugely attended to make the same money for the CSA that they would make at BMO. This is supported by the number of games held in Toronto vs. everywhere else.

I suspect a sold-out BC Place would bring in more revenue for the CSA, maybe even much more depending on the ticket prices, but there have been very few guaranteed sold-out dates held in this country to take such a risk up to this point. A mega-friendly against a top 10 nation would be among such smart "risks" to take.

[Shway]

On 4/10/2022 at 11:31 AM, SpursFlu said:

I get teams don't like playing on turf but I thinks it's dramatically overstated 

Especially when you consider its a friendly. It has nothing to do with injuries, players and coaches just want that muscle memory in a big game so they intrinsically know the run of the ball. 

This is an understatement. 
The stigma surrounding turf is still consistent throughout major international teams. 

If anything the sports science has increased, and teams don’t like players playing on turf, and will complain at any chance. It’s even harder for national teams to select those players knowing the circumstances - what makes it worse is when it’s a friendly.

Nearly 10 years ago Chile v Brazil at the sky dome was played on make-a-wish grass that was thick and choppy, but was still preferred over playing on the turf that laid beneath.

If anything the turf stigma has got worse, and no top team would be willing to travel to Canada to play.

We are talking about Brazil or Argentina not Curaçao.

Edited April 11, 2022 by Shway

[SpursFlu]

Turf now is so good there really isn't any risk of injury. If the game is more in the tradition of a friendly I don't think it will matter. If the game is meant to prepare the team for an immediate game or competition I could see it being an issue as you would want to recreate what you're preparing for as much as possible 

[Ottawafan]

This needs to become a priority for the game in Canada. Develop more fields that are grass or hybrid like in Toronto. If that’s the standard the players and the CSA want, let stadiums follow suit. 

[Shway]

17 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

This needs to become a priority for the game in Canada. Develop more fields that are grass or hybrid like in Toronto. If that’s the standard the players and the CSA want, let stadiums follow suit. 

There’s no reason why BC place doesn’t have a hybrid surface. 

If it did, it would be our marquee stadium. 

[reggietfc]

no way ARG plays on turf,they would have add temp grass at bc place or oly stadium,what is cheaper temp grass or adding temp seating at bmo?

[Ruud]

1 hour ago, SpursFlu said:

Turf now is so good there really isn't any risk of injury. If the game is more in the tradition of a friendly I don't think it will matter. If the game is meant to prepare the team for an immediate game or competition I could see it being an issue as you would want to recreate what you're preparing for as much as possible 

As per above I think big teams will simply say no to turf friendly  or leave big players home  

[nfitz]

On 4/10/2022 at 11:25 AM, blueseeka said:

What is the max attendance for Montreal?

About 72,000 for the 1976 Olympic final.

Biggest outdoor stadium these days is Molson with just over 20,000.

(I'll get my coat ...)

[Ruud]

31 minutes ago, nfitz said:

About 72,000 for the 1976 Olympic final.

Biggest outdoor stadium these days is Molson with just over 20,000.

(I'll get my coat ...)

Saputo would be the venue unless they want to put real grass in Olympic stadium and sell 60k for Argentina?  

[RS]

3 hours ago, Shway said:

There’s no reason why BC place doesn’t have a hybrid surface.

It wouldn't work with the current roof.

Plus, BC Place is used heavily for trade shows, monster truck rallies, etc. That kind of heavy use will not work on grass, hybrid or not.

[Shway]

17 minutes ago, RS said:

It wouldn't work with the current roof.

Plus, BC Place is used heavily for trade shows, monster truck rallies, etc. That kind of heavy use will not work on grass, hybrid or not.

Why because of the limited sun?

I’m sure theres gotta be a way sOme engineer can figure out, the need just isn’t there - yet. 

[RS]

10 minutes ago, Shway said:

Why because of the limited sun?

I’m sure theres gotta be a way sOme engineer can figure out, the need just isn’t there - yet. 

The limited sunlight means grass would not grow properly, and the heavy usage for those non-sporting events I mentioned means whatever grass is there would be torn to shreds.

Getting more sunlight in there isn't that hard — it would mean installing a lot more glass, like Seattle and Houston's baseball stadiums.