Sure? TFC had said they were buying them long before the MLS Cup ... seems a waste to drag in temporary ones when the permanent were coming. (no, I'm not sure either ...)
That was my impression. The league totally took over BMO Field for that match. I don't recall the club mentioning that they were bringing them in. I do recall PB mentioning that they had been thinking about getting them but that as the club only gets a portion of the revenue from field-signage, that they weren't rushing into it. That was said at least a year ago though.
It's nice to know that while standing in the pouring rain, I'll be able to watch the clearest advertisments in the league...
Looks like you were correct. Paul Beirne just tweeted that the new LED signage had just arrived at BMO Field (but not yet installed).
Ah, cool. Cosmetic or not (they are of course), they will make the place look more modern on television.
^ Yep. But hey on the bright side without a roof, you have a clear view of the Toronto skyline while you get rained on, it makes it all worth it...smh.
Or the vast majority of the west side either. Sure there's a roof, but unless you're in the last 5-10 rows of 221 to 225 you're getting rained on.
MLSE confirmed that they are hoping to attract the NHL's major events during their centenary year.....so that would be the All-Star game....the draft and an outdoor game......which might give you a bit of a timetable for BMO expansion! http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Toronto/2011/03/06/17517401.html
This is interesting. 2015 also coincides with the Pan Am games. I always thought that would be the most possible catalyst for BMO expansion. I just hope with any expansion, comes roof and amenities. I love the location of the stadium...but after visiting Red Bull Arena last year, gazing at Kansas City's new digs and seeing the renderings for Houston's new park....BMO looks like an old girlfriend.
Let's get second levels all around, replace the patio under the new seats with more seats, and the slam a roof on the place. You'll have something like 30-40,000 seats, which would fill up for a heritage classic game, and if TFC do as planned and get their act together, they might even have an average attendance of 35,000 or more. Also, Canadian MNT, WNT, and Rugby teams could play games there, as well as the Pan-Am soccer big matchups, like Brazil games and the gold medal match. A large, grass, Soccer Stadium would do wonders for this country, as well as TFC.
^I like it. But I don't think that they will cover the whole thing for some reason...I think we may get a second deck on the East Stand to mirror the west one. Something like this with a roof perhaps. (I didn't create this.....) Maybe they'll something over the South End (Standing room terrace anyone?) (fingers crossed). The North End doesn't look like it is designed for anything further roof included, plus the scoreboard would have to be taken down. Btw...What the hell is up with the speakers only on one side of the stadium? I mean come on...seriously?
My thinking is this: No roof on the North end, take down the current seats, build a new set of tiered seats from the ground (currently the patio) up, you could probably double the north end seating capacity to 3,000+ . Very excited for expansion, and the timeline isn't half bad, either. Having BMO Field expand to 40,000ish in 2016 would definitely build some serious momentum for a 2026 World Cup bid from Canada.
you had me right up until the WC bid.! so then we would have one stadium of 40k (which I think would qualify it to be no more than a group stage stadium)....remind me where the other 10/11 stadiums in the country are that meet FIFA standards (in anticipation remember that by 2026 Big O will be 50 years old and Commonwealth 48)? (if any CFL stadiums are included, please include in your explanation how we would evict the CFL teams from their homes during the month the tournament is on). p.s. part way down this article about 2018 and 2022 is a decent summary of what is needed stadium wise. http://www.espnstar.com/football/ot...l/item185719/FIFA-outline-World-Cup-criteria/ not in that article is some other things like FIFA not liking bids that have more than one stadium in the same city being used during the tournament (for congestion/crowd control/hotel usage/etc reasons) so including BMO in a bid means you might not get to use Rogers Centre (if it was going to be one of your 11 others ). As much as I hate to say it...and I have before, we are just not ever going to host a WC on our own and our only logical partner (America) does not need us to co-bid with them....we should be happy with the U-20 and women's events and do a good job with them.
well, I said 40,000ish by 2016, with a full decade in between, I would hope we'd have a plan to build more SSS's, and to expand BMO even further.
Don't get me started. If we'd saved the old grandstand (torn down the rest) and had built a new stadium around it, we'd have had a great facility. The grandstand was two long but you would have not used the end two or three sections from each end and have built new end zone sections meeting the old grandstand much as Chicago did on old Soldier Field when they chopped off one end and joined the two sideline stands with a new endzone stand. That roof was magical during Argos and Blizzard games. It tripled your sound easily! Cut down on sun stroke too.
^ 100% Agreed. A refurbished Grandstand would have been perfect. I remember it being acoustically brilliant. On the negative side though, the Argo's might have tried to jump in real quick. In other news....the refurbished Stade Saputo in Montreal will feature a ROOF. *gasp* But hey....we can always point at our LED signage/Skyline views. Sigh.
Saputo looks really great. They've even released a video as well: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x5S7qeVut8"]YouTube - Expansion du stade Saputo 2012 vidéo officiel[/ame] I've been one of the biggest critics of the way the stadium was designed but I think I've warmed up to it now. If you look at Dick's Sporting Goods Park, Rio Tino, PPL Park and Toyota Park, they all seem to be the same design with the same roof structure and dimensions. You can make the case that the new Dynamo Stadium looks the same as the new Earthquakes stadium as well. I don't think anyone here wants another cookie cutter stadium. But on the other hand, BMO's not stuck with that design. There are several different ways to build the second or third or fourth phase of BMO and unlike some of the stadiums I mentioned, there is both room to build and it would not involve taking the roof off to add an extra stand. That pic that TFCMANU is just one example something we can do that other teams can't (did I just say that?). I personally think that the south stand could be extended to build a kop for the supporters.
Yes, that's a fair point. The Argos may have indeed done just that. The Argos had some good times at that stadium. I recall being part of a crowd of over 52k for a match with the Ti-Cats. For soccer, we had a crowd that stood for years as Canada's largest for a Canadian club side when Juve came over in 1982 with Platini, Boniek, Zoff, Rossi and so many others and played the Blizzard to a draw in front of over 45 thousand. That was a special day.
Don't expect anything much re. stadium redesign for the next few years. With Rob "Gravy Train" Ford in charge, I'd be surprised if anything other than cosmetic changes take place to the stadium.
I think that it's understood that any stadium expansion would be paid for by MLSE. But otherwise, yeah, don't count on Ford for any kind of support whatsoever.
Yeah, I realize that MLSE could foot the bill for any expansion. My thinking is that adding something like the North End Stand is relatively cheap and has a revenue stream attached to it. Roofs, however, to the best of this non-engineer's knowledge, pretty complicated and expensive structural addition that have no revenue stream attached to them. Because of this, MLSE would be reluctant (to put it mildly) to foot the cost alone. The stadium was funded by a private/public consortium, has a complicated revenue sharing agreement and is owned by the City. You'd almost need the City to commit funds to ensure that a roof is added, and Ford would balk at putting money into something that would not have any hope of financial return or improve his poll numbers in the 'burbs.