@Pete I appreciate the fact that you've put some thought and research into the comparison between Melbourne and Toronto. However, there are some details that you didn't mention, that IMO, throw the comparison off. The rugby vs football analogy has been made many times in this thread, on this forum and various other places. Yes, bothh rugby and football involve grown men chasing a ball the size of a pineapple around a rectangular field, offsides, laterals, delay of game, a goal of reaching the endzone, a kick for additional points after a try/touchdown and the consumption of alcohol is encouraged while watching the games That doesn't make it the same. Walmart sells pizza. Doesn't make it a restaurant. Rugby doesn't involve 45-odd players, coaches, trainers and other personnel congregated into a sizeable area along the sidelines. The games are 1-1.25 hours shorter with the action spread out more evenly throughout the field. Leiweke has also said that there will be no logos on the grass itself. He never mentioned advertising so we cannot assume there won't be any or that they won't be in colour. There is no guarantee yet from the CFL that they will not paint their own logo or their own advertising during playoff games where teams turn over some the game operations duties to the league. In the Grand Final this year, you mention that there were no visible logos bit you did not mention that the average emperature in May in Melbourne is 14 while its only 5 in Toronto, making it easier to wash or steam the rugby stuff off. Additionally, there were two weeks between the last Rebels game and the Grand Final where there were no other events. Notaeeing any rugby lines is the results you should expect to see under those conditions. Speaking of scheduling, on May 8th all three of City, the Victory and the Rebels were in action...in Melbourne no less. City and Victory played at the Etihad while the Rebels played at AAMI. Was this pre-planned months in advance? Maybe butnot likely considering the fact that the Victory were also looking to move there Grand Final game to the Etihad if the had known what the date of the Final was, earlier in advance. The fact that they didn't meant that they were forced to play at AAMI. Missing out on lost revenue seems like a first world problem compared to a possible scenario in November if both The Argos and TFC are in the playoffs. What happens if MLS wants TFC to play on a Sunday during which the Argos also need the stadium for a homecl playoff game? Does the CFL yield or does MLS yield? What happens when the Argos play on a Sunday and TFC has a game the following Wednesday? What happens when TFC have a home playoff game the day before an Argos game/Grey Cup and it snows overnight? In almost every other MLS city where the MLS team is sharing its venue, you can easily come up with some contingencies. Once the Rogers Centre is locked into a baseball configuration in 2018, can it still work as a backup facility? Would Rogers allow the Argos to play in there? Would the so called "primary tenent" at BMO be the one to play at the Rogers Centre? Can they patch up the infield with grass in time? You can say that we'll.cross that bridge when we get there but you can't deny that it could become a messy situation?
On a semi-related note, with a natural grass surface set to go into the SkyDome by 2018 (a date which, apparently, will not be moved forward despite the "early" departure of the Argonauts), might the Blue Jays ownership make it more awkward for TFC to play any "out-of-season" games there - such as the home leg of a CONCACAF Champions League knockout round? I suppose one could argue that the strain on the surface would be relatively indoor compared to what is currently happening with NYCFC. But even so, might the Jays decide to be less generous than they hve been with the current artificial surface?
Rogers didn't want the Argos playing on the new grass field that will be installed for the Blue Jays. But we are supposed to believe that the pitch at BMO will be fine? I heard the PR machine praising some new type of hybrid grass recently. Sure Vancouver and Seattle play on turf but is that ideal? Mismanagement of this team from day 1 has forced us into this partnership.
Once the grass is installed at RC it means the stadium has to stay in baseball configuration permanently.....no more of those seats that rotate from being on an angle from home plate to first and 3rd basis for baseball to sideline seats in the rectangular configuration. CFL football field dimensions won't fit in that configuration. With no seats in north end and telescoping seats in south end, CFL field fits nicely at BMO The Desso hybrid pitch has been around for quite a while now and in use in a fair number of soccer and football stadiums around the world. http://www.dessosports.com/sports/football/football-projects The first multi-purpose stadium to have it was in Huddersfield, England (a bit of a breakthrough as it was one of the first combo rugby/soccer stadiums in UK...previously the two sports seldom (never?) shared). That pitch lasted 15 years of double use before having to be replaced. No, turf is not ideal....that is why they are going with Deso. Would love to see an expansion of that theory.
Just a theory, but I think if TFC was raking in the $$$ there would be no need for another tenant at BMO. If the on field product wasn't so bad all these years the ticket prices would be higher (for better or for worse), ad space would be more lucrative, tv ratings higher, more merchandise sold etc. etc. I don't think MLSE would want to mess with that. Basically, if TFC was a financial success I doubt the Argos would even be in the conversation.
Of course none of that financial success (whether it is there or absent) would make it through to the hands of the stadium owner....the city of Toronto. So even if TFC were the most profitable team in the world......they would pay a fixed rent/fee to the city for use of the city's stadium (the profits of which are then split with the stadium manager MLSE) and the city would be well within their rights to say to the stadium manager ..."you know, we think having another professional sports team tenant paying rent for 9 - 12 games a year would be a good thing for our bottom line....make it work"
All good points - and yes - there is more option to play in other stadia here as well - especially once Baseball season is over (assuming they take out the grass to host concerts and conventions etc. like they currently do at Skydome. The CFL mob on the sidelines should be standing on rubber mats IIRC, but otherwise that is a concern. I'm pretty sure that there is no need for undersoil heating in Melbourne, which makes the grass think it's may early or late in the season. For the record the rugby leagues paint the field with hideous advertising and logos too. Scheduling will be a concern, ultimately - and that is where the crux of this all lies.
In Edmonton (before a switch to turf) they used to station people along the sidelines to ensure that the players walked around the field rather than across it when they were entering and leaving the stadium. Rubber mats or whatever can certainly be done to protect the grass. I don't really see scheduling as a problem. The Argos play ten games per year (assuming they play their preseason game at home and not at a neutral site). At most there could be two playoff games if it is a year when the Argos host the Grey Cup. If NHL and NBA teams can co-ordinate seasons with ~50 home games each, surely TFC and the Argos can come up with a workable schedule.
Would they say that though, if TFC was a much more profitable business? Would they risk disrupting it?
Ultimately, it's a decision that is up to the stadium owner (the city) not the stadium manager (MLSE). If the city wants to redo the lease agreement once the term is up, they can. Since they have a working relationship to manage the stadium, there will some consideration to MLSE as tenant, but not to the sole exclusion of other options.
For regular season games scheduling shouldn't likely be an issue. But if Argos end up hosting the grey cup, that will need to be a set date and will take priority over everything else including potential TFC playoff games.
When the Argos host the Grey Cup the date will be known at least two years in advance. I don't think scheduling around it will be a problem with that much advance notice.
That is true.....but with MLS cup now being played at the home pitch of the highest ranked of the two finalists it could create problems. There was a time when it was hosted at a neutral site (remember November 21 2010 when it was here) but no longer. Now the site is decided on 2 week's notice and is in the first week of December. Just be our dumb luck to get good and make it to a home MLS cup and have it held within a week of a Grey Cup. I don't think this is worth worrying about and is certainly in the "deal with it when it happens" category but it is funny (IMO) that the only time scheduling would become an "issue" and be out of the control of stadium management is the very time when the whole sport/league is watching.
The scenario of TFC being the top finishing finalist AND BMO hosting the Grey Cup in the same, and having it all go down in the same week is very very unlikely. Not worth even worrying about, and even then since it would be known before the MLS season is scheduled that BMO will be hosting the Grey Cup on a certain date that MLS could plan its schedule to not have the MLS Cup final too close to the Grey Cup. A non-issue if you ask me.
Aside from the fact that I said in my post it was not really worth worrying about ........I do have to dispute that in any Toronto Grey Cup year MLS re-works their entire schedule working backwards from the Grey Cup in Toronto to establish when MLS Cup will be (which will in turn drive all the other dates) on the off chance Toronto is the host of MLS Cup. They will, rather, let the chips fall where they may and as remote as those two things happening in one year might be....when they happen they will just happen and MLSE will just have to figure it out.
Whether or not they have heard of it, I'm sure if BMO is set to host the Grey Cup in a given year, MLSE will make MLS aware of it in due course. They'll make a contingency plan if necessary. In fact, I note that the date for this year's MLS Cup matches are not even set yet, so they probably plan those as they go. BMO is not the only shared stadium in MLS. And don't kid yourself, many Americans are aware of the CFL and Grey Cup. I've even met a few who watch it.
If TFC made the final, out of pure euphoria, I don't think anybody would particularly care about this conflict. If it's conference finals, schedule the away leg on the Grey Cup date. If it's the actual final, we can wait a week.
I did a quick look on recent dates for both the Grey Cup and the MLS Cup final, and typically the MLS Cup final has been a week later than the Grey Cup.
Did anyone here catch Primetime Sports yesterday? They raised some interesting questions. What if the Argos start to demand practice time at BMO?
wouldn't that just be covered in their lease 1) play games at BMO ....2) Practice at your practice facility in Downsview. Did PTS discuss what happens if aliens swoop in under the cover of darkness and remove the field entirely?