Tim Hortons Field | 40m | ? | Complete

[Mister F]

A lot of you seem to favour Confederation Park. I'm curious about that. It seems to have all the disadvantages of both sites: not on an LRT or GO line, accessible only by highway, cut off from the rest of the city, no opportunity to develop power centres around it, limited parking, and the fact that it's in a park. Am I missing something?

Just to add these facts to the table, since the Ticats are saying the WH is no good because there is no highway access and it's in a residential neighbourhood: The new stadium in Ottawa is in a residential neighbourhood, an upper middle class neighbourhood full of NIMBYs no less. It's also far from the highway, accessible by Bank St. which is one lane eash direction. It's also poorly served by transit. Despite this, it is apparently good enough for a CFL expansion team. Ottawa already had its experience with the Scotiabank Place (Corel Centre/Palladium) out in the middle of nowhere. Nobody likes it out there and it takes forever to get back onto the highway and into town. That highway also has more lanes than the Linc/RHVP.
All very true. And not only is the new Ottawa stadium not near a highway, neither are the stadiums in Montreal, Edmonton, Vancouver, Regina, or Winnipeg. That's most of the league. The Als are a big success in no small part because of their stadium, which by the WH detractors' logic should doom them to failure. Being near a highway is completely unnecessary.

Land Expropriation? All it takes is one single home owner to say NO.
Homeowners can't say no to expropriation. That's the whole point.

"What did you say? I can't hear you over the noise of that shunting freight train!"
I live right next to a freight mainline. Trust me, freeways are louder.

[Millstone]

Real City, one more question:


Is hamilton still a stand alone city? Or is it now suburb of Toronto?

Why does this keep coming up?

[dennis1]

Well its a relevant question as to what role hamilton will take in ontario

[markbarbera]

Yesterday several councillors (Collins in particular) boasted that a big exciting announcement about the West Harbour will be made by the mayor and council down by the WH site today. Yet no announcement. Why not? What happened to the big news?

[SteelTown]

My guess would be that Mayor Fred didn't have time because the Committee of the Whole didn't finish the entire agenda yesterday. They took a recess last night and went back today to finish.

[markbarbera]

...or maybe there isn't a big announcement after all...

[bigguy1231]

bigguy quit making stuff up, it was reported that sask had the largest profit not the only one to make a profit.

Hey thats what I heard, thats what I am stating, if you don't like it prove me wrong and I will gladly admit my mistake.

[bigguy1231]

There's not enough parking. There's not enough space for the proposed entertainment district. The City doesn't own the land, the Hamilton Conservation Authority does (big difference). We only have three major parks in this city (Bayfront, Gore, Confederation). Do we really want to tear one of them up for a football team? I will agree, that would look nice there, though.
.

Actually the city does own Confederation Park but the Conservation Authority operates it.

[EastVanMark]

The only team in the league that made money last year was Saskatchewan. That was widely reported this past winter.

No it wasn't. In fact the opposite was reported. Here's a link to help you:

http://www.esks.com/article/eskimos-release-annual-financial-results

The Club had a Net Profit of $416,482 for the year ending December 31, 2009.

Only the three community owned teams released financial figures. (2 of which made money)

Other teams are owned by private interests and don't disclose financial records. However, both the Lions and Stampeder owners claimed to have made money although neither would say how much. (Calgary actually made more than anyone last year with a Grey Cup windfall upwards of $5,000,000) Any other "reporting" is dubious to say the very least.

[SteelTown]

'Another Hamilton drama'
Council either smart - or the gang that couldn't shoot straight

August 12, 2010
Wade Hemsworth
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/824743

One says the stadium decision proves to outsiders that Hamilton is growing up.

Another says it will only worsen the city's existing reputation for messing up its own future.

Yet another says to relax - very few people outside Hamilton care much about it at all.

Like the debate over the stadium itself, assessing its effect is itself dividing the opinions of observers who make their living by reading the marketplace.

Mohawk College's dean of business, media and entertainment, Rick Court, himself a businessman, believes that outsiders, especially business people, will credit Hamilton city councillors for making a tough but wise decision to put renewal ahead of football, by placing the Pan Am stadium in the west harbour, despite the wishes of the Hamilton Tiger-Cats.

"I think we really have an opportunity to develop the harbour. I think we will get some interest in condominiums down there, because that horrible land, that horrible eyesore, will be cleaned up," he said. "Whether it ends up being a Ticat stadium or just ends up being a good a community stadium for concerts, soccer or whatever, it still cleans up the land -- and that's good business."

Condominium developer Harry Stinson, a Toronto expatriate who has been critical of the political and business climate in Hamilton, thinks councillors made a mature decision that helps Hamilton emerge from its longstanding reputation as a "company town."

He said investors want to put their money into vibrant communities populated by engaged citizens, and the level of interest in the debate shows that Hamilton is far from complacent about its future.

"I think it's a positive message in that there actually is a spirit to the citizens. That's been missing," he said. "I think business is more and more dictated by the perceived desirability of a community. Businesses go where the people want to be."

Urban renewal specialist Storm Cunningham, the keynote speaker at Hamilton's economic summit earlier this year, says the solidarity of the 12-3 vote matters more than the outcome itself, since Hamilton has a reputation for waffling.

"It's nice to see a very clear vote for the west harbour," he said. "That was a very positive thing."

Cunningham said it's important to remember no single project will make or break a revitalization.

"The confidence is going to come from seeing a city that's working -- on an ongoing, day-to-day basis --on a revitalization program that makes sense."

But John Dolbec, CEO of the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce, said Tuesday's vote has certainly damaged Hamilton's reputation, since without securing a permanent tenant for a Pan Am stadium, the city won't qualify for the funding that would allow it to build it.

"Frankly, it leaves an impression nationally that we're the gang that couldn't shoot straight," he said. "It has just, in my view, tragically, taken something, which should be a good news story, and it's now become another Hamilton drama."

McMaster business professor Marvin Ryder says Hamilton shouldn't worry about wider fallout.

"It's big enough that it's got national attention, yes, but I don't think it sends a specific signal to the business community," he said. "Yes there will be a little buzz around it, but in the long term I don't think it's going to have any impact, really, one way or another."

[mattgrande]

Don't risk driving Ticats away, Young warns
Vote for west harbour today would be 'massive mistake'

http://thespec.ca/News/Local/article/824748


If you drop out of negotiations, you don't get a say. Period. Either come to the table with the City now (which Scott Michell said they would never do on FAN590 yesterday), or they can leave the city. The ball's in their court.

[BCTed]

If you drop out of negotiations, you don't get a say. Period. Either come to the table with the City now (which Scott Michell said they would never do on FAN590 yesterday), or they can leave the city. The ball's in their court.

I like Bob Young. There is something that feels scuzzy about Scott Mitchell.

[AL3000]

I like Bob Young. There is something that feels scuzzy about Scott Mitchell.

Cohon and Mitchell have totally manipulated Bob Young, with Mercanti adding fuel to the fire as soon as he saw the gravy train coming up the hill. Bob is in very, very poor and unscrupulous company.

[SteelTown]

I like Bob Young. There is something that feels scuzzy about Scott Mitchell.

I feel the same way.

[markbarbera]

Well, I guess we now know why there was no 'Big Announcement' at WH yesterday:

Ticats not top priority for Katz
TheSpec.com - Local - Ticats not top priority for Katz

John Kernaghan
The Hamilton Spectator
(Aug 12, 2010)

A Pan Am stadium is a secondary element in the Katz Group's interest in Hamilton, Patrick Laforge says.

The Katz executive, who is president of the Edmonton Oilers, said the main focus of the organization is Copps Coliseum, the convention centre, Hamilton Place and parking associated with those facilities.

Councillor Lloyd Ferguson said Tuesday Katz and its association with entertainment giant AEG represent a serious option, as there is interest in the stadium operation.

Laforge said Katz's role would be as facilities operator for the city's current properties. He said that a stadium is a stretch at this point.

He added the Katz interest is not tied to Hamilton's NHL interests.

"As we said several different ways when we were in Hamilton, we're not here to offer an NHL team or promise to deliver an NHL team."

He said in negotiating a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the city, the Katz Group might come up with $1 million if it exercised an option on running the facilities. The MOA would include a "stand still" clause to give them time to study a city business case.

"We should pay for that right. But we haven't figured out the time period or what's reasonable yet."

Laforge said AEG's visit to Hamilton was simply to show what is possible in areas like the west harbour. He said Katz likes the west harbour, likes the bay views and AEG thought it had promise.

Hamilton lawyer Jasper Kujavsky, one of more than 30 people to speak at the marathon session of citizen delegations at Tuesday's committee of the whole meeting, said the Katz Group-AEG alliance provided a bonus opportunity as it represented two votes on the NHL board of governors through the Katz-owned Oilers and L.A. Kings.

He told council the city could emerge over time from the heated Pan Am debate with top-ranked hockey, football and soccer.

http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/824730

That's the feeling of cold water being spashed on the face of Hamilton Council by Katz et al.

So much for an attempt to spin Katz involvement with the stadium as some sort of legacy element for a Pan Am stadium.

[roccerfeller]

Wow

this is getting a little heated between Young and the West Harbor decision.

I really hope the Ti Cats stay put guys....

I'll be watching them in Winnipeg tomorrow :(

[SteelTown]

LOL

http://media.hamiltonspectator.topscms.com/images/ad/a2/ecfc58ca4c75a16a0e49dae1d579.jpeg
Graeme MacKay
http://media.hamiltonspectator.topscms.com/images/ad/a2/ecfc58ca4c75a16a0e49dae1d579.jpeg
http://www.mackaycartoons.net/

[markbarbera]

Here is the content of an email I sent to the Mayor and council this morning:

Mr. Mayor,

I am writing to express to you my complete disappointment in the manner in which you and Hamilton Council have handled the issue of the potential site location of a new Pan Am stadium in Hamilton.

As a resident of Ward 2, I completely understand your desire to focus energies on reviving the downtown and waterfront neighbourhoods. As a resident of the city I have done my bit by making a conscious decision to purchase a home and set up my residence in the downtown area. For me, the notion that a stadium is an appropriate device for facilitating urban renewal may be well-meaning but completely inappropriate. The key to reviving the downtown is to make it a more attractive place to live and work. A stadium only serves to facilitate the occasional visit confined to the immediate precinct, and would fail to act as an anchor for the kind of concentration of jobs and residents required to once again make the lower city a living, breathing, vibrant place. In fact, placing the stadium at this site completely contradicts the vision detailed in the City’s “Setting Sail” plan for the West Harbor area.

I can appreciate the pressing need to remediate and reclaim the contaminated lands in the West Harbour area. There are many options available to council to address this need, only one of which is a new stadium. Placing a stadium at this site may resolve this contamination issue, but this is at a cost of over $60 million dollars to this city. This exorbitant amount may have been justifiable if the stadium was to be economically viable and act as the new home for the Hamilton Tiger-Cats. However, it is quite apparent that the Tiger-Cats will not locate here, and city staff made it quite clear in their report to Council that this stadium would not be viable without the Tiger-Cats as a tenant. Given these new facts, it is incumbent upon you and all Council members to reconsider the wisdom of such a large investment on a facility destined to become an annual drain on the city coffers.

Surely some consideration must be given to a more economically sound approach to reclaiming this contaminated property, one that actually works in tandem with the principles of the ‘Setting Sail” plan. The city now owns the contaminated land and I understand remediation costs are estimated at between $5 and $10 million. Instead of removing $60 million from the Future Fund, why not use a fraction of that to remediate the land and repurpose it in a fashion compatible with the principles of “Setting Sail”? For example, I understand Mohawk College and McMaster University are exploring the possibility of a joint downtown campus. For me it makes much more sense to work with them to establish a campus on the remediated former Rheem lands. This campus could have an emphasis on the liberal arts, which would dovetail perfectly with the emerging arts scene on James North. Why hasn’t this opportunity been explored? How many other opportunities are being squandered by your fixation on a stadium at this site?

Putting all that aside, I want to express my frustration with Council in general, and with you in particular regarding your approach to Bob Young and the Hamilton Tiger-Cat organization. The Tiger Cats have had a working relationship with this city that spans two centuries. During the span of this relationship, they have made a significant contribution to the fabric of Hamilton both on and off the playing field. They have been a symbol of our civic pride nationwide to the degree that the Black and Gold has come to represent not just the Tiger-Cats but the City of Hamilton itself on the national stage. The Tiger-Cat organization has donated countless hours and dollars to local charity and community events over the years. Your inflexibility on site location has damaged this relationship so deeply that we are at the point where this 140-year relationship is coming to an end. The loss of the Tiger-Cats goes far beyond losing the presence of the CFL in Hamilton. Their loss will be crippling to the many local charities who have benefitted from the generosity of the Ticat organization. All of council must ask itself this question: Is the remediation of 20 acres of West Harbour land truly worth $60 million dollars as well as the loss of the Hamilton Tiger-Cats?

Mr. Mayor, yesterday, the Hamilton Spectator quoted you as saying, with reference to Bob Young and the Ticat organization, "I hope that entrenched positions on their side don't continue and that they come to the table in earnest and talk about the serious intent of our city council". I cannot begin to express my disappointment and frustration with this comment. Mr. Mayor, no one is more entrenched in their position on a stadium site than yourself. You have been completely inflexible in your position that the stadium must be located at the West Harbour site. In order to resolve this impasse all parties involved need to move from entrenched positions, including yourself. Mr. Mayor, you need to heed your own advice or this city will end up losing the Hamilton Tiger-Cats as well as funding from the federal and provincial governments for any new stadium.

Mayor Eisenberger, in 2006 I voted for you because at the time you represented a mayoral candidate who would move away from a confrontational style of governance and more towards a role of one who governs by building consensus. This entire stadium debacle has shown how wrong I was about you. I cannot be more disappointed with my choice for mayor as I am today. Should this stadium situation continue down its current path, rest assured I will not be making the same mistake when I visit the polling station in October. I implore you to abandon your entrenched position regarding the West Harbour lands and assume the role of consensus-builder that you promised in 2006. The damage from failing to do so will gravely impact the city beyond this fall and well into the decades that lie ahead for this city. I implore you and all council members to reconsider your position before it is too late.

I'll be sure to share any responses I may receive.

[markbarbera]

LOL

http://media.hamiltonspectator.topscms.com/images/ad/a2/ecfc58ca4c75a16a0e49dae1d579.jpeg
Graeme MacKay
http://media.hamiltonspectator.topscms.com/images/ad/a2/ecfc58ca4c75a16a0e49dae1d579.jpeg
http://www.mackaycartoons.net/

I thought this one was much better:

http://mackaycartoons.net/2010/2010-08-10.jpg

source: http://www.mackaycartoons.net/2010/huh2010-08-10.html

[bigguy1231]

No it wasn't. In fact the opposite was reported. Here's a link to help you:

http://www.esks.com/article/eskimos-release-annual-financial-results

The Club had a Net Profit of $416,482 for the year ending December 31, 2009.

Only the three community owned teams released financial figures. (2 of which made money)

Other teams are owned by private interests and don't disclose financial records. However, both the Lions and Stampeder owners claimed to have made money although neither would say how much. (Calgary actually made more than anyone last year with a Grey Cup windfall upwards of $5,000,000) Any other "reporting" is dubious to say the very least.

Thanks for the clarification. I was wrong then.

Like I said I was just repeating what I heard.

[bigguy1231]

I am not a fan of his but let's be fair to Brad Clark. It was only a committee of the whole meeting. He knew what the vote was going to be and knew that he would have the opportunity to cast his vote at the council meeting today.

[bigguy1231]

City council just confirmed their decision at council meeting albeit with a smaller majority. CH reported a 9-6 vote.

Whitehead and Jackson changed their votes. Not sure who the third one was.

[dennis1]

No offense. But I just want this to be over.

Who's with me?

[thurmas]

Wow I can agree with dennis on something! Let's just finish this already and all enjoy the Quebec Tigres-Chats. Oskie oui oui!

[Acajack]

I have CHCH on my cable package but I rarely watch it.

So the other night I was looking for news about the stadium, so I turned to CHCH and to my surprise the host was Mark Hebscher, formerly of Sportsline.

It was kinda of funny to see Hebscher devoting all of that air time to a story intimately linked the Ticats and the CFL, when one considers he and Jim Tatti couldn't be tortured into talking about the CFL when they were at Sportsline on Global... They were all about the NFL.

[dennis1]

Wow I can agree with dennis on something! Let's just finish this already and all enjoy the Quebec Tigres-Chats. Oskie oui oui!

YUp. I don't even care anymore. I just want this thing built.

[realcity]

City council just confirmed their decision at council meeting albeit with a smaller majority. CH reported a 9-6 vote.

Whitehead and Jackson changed their votes. Not sure who the third one was.

That's it then. 9 - 6 in favour of having no involvement in the PanAm Games and booting the Cats out of Hamilton.

[dennis1]

I have CHCH on my cable package but I rarely watch it.

So the other night I was looking for news about the stadium, so I turned to CHCH and to my surprise the host was Mark Hebscher, formerly of Sportsline.

It was kinda of funny to see Hebscher devoting all of that air time to a story intimately linked the Ticats and the CFL, when one considers he and Jim Tatti couldn't be tortured into talking about the CFL when they were at Sportsline on Global... They were all about the NFL.

Intresting considering the NFL was not as popular then.

[bigguy1231]

That's it then. 9 - 6 in favour of having no involvement in the PanAm Games and booting the Cats out of Hamilton.

I was just about to edit my post, it was actually 10-6. The first report from CH was 9-6 which didn't make sense at the time.

We will see what Hostco decides. I don't think things are as dire as you seem to think they are.

[bigguy1231]

I have CHCH on my cable package but I rarely watch it.

So the other night I was looking for news about the stadium, so I turned to CHCH and to my surprise the host was Mark Hebscher, formerly of Sportsline.

It was kinda of funny to see Hebscher devoting all of that air time to a story intimately linked the Ticats and the CFL, when one considers he and Jim Tatti couldn't be tortured into talking about the CFL when they were at Sportsline on Global... They were all about the NFL.

Hebscher is a Hamilton guy, back to his roots. Been back a couple of years now.

This fall he will be launching a Sportsline type show on CH in addition to the show he currently does.

[Acajack]

Intresting considering the NFL was not as popular then.

Sportsline actually played a huge role in the popularity surge of the NFL. The first years of Sportsline coincide almost perfectly with the sharp decline in popularity of the CFL, in Ontario in particular. The NFL had its fans in Canada before the mid-80s, but Sportsline took things to a new level - basically ignoring the CFL and, when they did mention the Argos and Ticats (always after the NFL and even after NCAA sometimes), the announcers would often make sarcastic comments and snicker.

Since Sportsline was pretty much mandatory viewing for all sports-starved young males growing up in those days (of which I was one), the impact on the CFL's image was devastating.

[bigguy1231]

Intresting considering the NFL was not as popular then.

Who says it wasn't popular then. The NFL's popularity has been pretty much the same since the 70's. Some people like it others don't. I watch the NFL all the time, but if there is a CFL game on I would more than likely watch it. Just because people watch it doesn't mean it's more popular. Alot of the time people watch the NFL because they have no other choice on a Sunday afternoon. Thats all thats on.

I remember when CH had Monday night football on back in the 80's. They used to get huge ratings. Thats why they lost the bidding for it when their contract was up, someone else, Global I think took it over and the ratings went down.

[bigguy1231]

Sportsline actually played a huge role in the popularity surge of the NFL. The first years of Sportsline coincide almost perfectly with the sharp decline in popularity of the CFL, in Ontario in particular. The NFL had its fans in Canada before the mid-80s, but Sportsline took things to a new level - basically ignoring the CFL and, when they did mention the Argos and Ticats (always after the NFL and even after NCAA sometimes), the announcers would often make sarcastic comments and snicker.

Since Sportsline was pretty much mandatory viewing for all sports-starved young males growing up in those days (of which I was one), the impact on the CFL's image was devastating.

Sportsline promoted the NFL because Global had the broadcast rights. It was in their own interest to do so.

[Acajack]

Sportsline promoted the NFL because Global had the broadcast rights. It was in their own interest to do so.

Yes indeed. Plus, the CFL really missed the boat on the TV-ification of its product in the 1980s. What with its blackouts in major markets, games only on a piecemeal network of independent stations at one point, scheduling all over the map, and a host of other blunders.

Global and the American networks just killed them with their reliable menu of games at 1 pm and 4 pm every Sunday, and at 9 pm on Monday.

On the TV front, TSN has really helped the CFL catch up in recent years.

[dennis1]

Sportsline actually played a huge role in the popularity surge of the NFL. The first years of Sportsline coincide almost perfectly with the sharp decline in popularity of the CFL, in Ontario in particular. The NFL had its fans in Canada before the mid-80s, but Sportsline took things to a new level - basically ignoring the CFL and, when they did mention the Argos and Ticats (always after the NFL and even after NCAA sometimes), the announcers would often make sarcastic comments and snicker.

Since Sportsline was pretty much mandatory viewing for all sports-starved young males growing up in those days (of which I was one), the impact on the CFL's image was devastating.

I remember this. MLB was the most popular and Oakland and the Jays were the model franchises of the time. The CFL was much bigger when I was little, maybe because SO was smaller. I first notices people around the area lost widespread interest in the CFL later in the early 2000's. Now on the street you have to find people to talk about the CFL, and they are all older too.

[Acajack]

Who says it wasn't popular then. The NFL's popularity has been pretty much the same since the 70's. .

I think the NFL has grown steadily in popularity since the 1970s, but it really exploded in Canada in the mid 1980s. Before that time, you didn't really have very many "NFL-only" type of people in Canada. Many people watched both, with an advantage to the CFL even.

But the mid 80s saw almost an entire generation of young people who had no interest in (or often, even any knowledge of) the CFL. The 1980s saw the advent of the CFL's "lost generation".

Today, to many people "pro football" = the NFL and nothing else. This wasn't the case in the 1970s.

[dennis1]

Yes indeed. Plus, the CFL really missed the boat on the TV-ification of its product in the 1980s. What with its blackouts in major markets, games only on a piecemeal network of independent stations at one point, scheduling all over the map, and a host of other blunders.

Global and the American networks just killed them with their reliable menu of games at 1 pm and 4 pm every Sunday, and at 9 pm on Monday.

On the TV front, TSN has really helped the CFL catch up in recent years.

IMO Cable and Modern Satellite have played a major role in the Decline of the CFL. with the antenna if your US market had a team then you saw games. No with everyone having a million channels, you can follow and team anytime.

The CFL was also wrong to turn its back on CBC. At least I think so. Look what TSN has said already about a team moving to QC City. They will take a massive rating hit.

[dennis1]

I think the NFL has grown steadily in popularity since the 1970s, but it really exploded in Canada in the mid 1980s. Before that time, you didn't really have very many "NFL-only" type of people in Canada. Many people watched both, with an advantage to the CFL even.

But the mid 80s saw almost an entire generation of young people who had no interest in (or often, even any knowledge of) the CFL. The 1980s saw the advent of the CFL's "lost generation".

Today, to many people "pro football" = the NFL and nothing else. This wasn't the case in the 1970s.

Yes. How many kids even follow the CFL now? Its less than 30 percent, maybe half of that even.

[Acajack]

I remember this. MLB was the most popular and Oakland and the Jays we're the model franchises of the time. The CFL was much bigger when I was little, maybe because SO was smaller. I first notices people around the area lost widespread interest in the CFL later in the early 2000's. Now on the street you have to find people to talk about the CFL, and they are all older too.

How old are you? I am in my late 30s and was a teenager during the heyday of Sportsline in the late 80s. My generation is prime CFL Lost Generation territory.

Arguments over CFL vs. NFL were a constant during my late teens and early 20s, and the pro-NFL/anti-CFL people were always the overwhelming majority.

(BTW, this was in Ontario, not in Quebec.)

[SteelTown]

CFL lobbied Ottawa last week

By John Kernaghan
http://www.thespec.com/news/article/248714--cfl-lobbied-ottawa-last-week

The Canadian Football League was privately lobbying federal cabinet ministers during last week’s public upheaval over funding and placement of Hamilton’s Pan Am stadium.

All the ministers involved say there was no discussion about Hamilton or a stadium.

Records filed by CFL commissioner Mark Cohon – and made public on Ottawa’s lobbying registry - show the league communicated with Minister of State for sport Gary Lunn twice on August 3, two days before news broke that indicated the federal government was opposed to building a stadium on a West Harbour site that the Tiger-Cats would not endorse.

At that time, the city was studying the Ti-Cats’ preferred site on the East Mountain, but the football club has since said it is not going to play in Hamilton after 2011.

A spokesperson in Lunn’s office said one communication was related to the Grey Cup over the next three years but could not explain why there were two communications between the CFL and the minister of state on the same day.

The lobbying documents show the league also communicated with Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty on Aug. 3 and on Monday with Cabinet Minister Peter MacKay, who is minister of defence but also the senior minister from the maritimes, where the CFL has shown interest in expanding.

The documents do not establish who made the communications, or what form they took, only that they were direct to the ministers. The lobbying registry also does not detail the nature of the contact, except that it concerned “sports” in the case of all three ministers.

The CFL also had contact with Flaherty in June regarding a long list of items that included sport, tourism, industry, regional development and infrastructure.

The Spectator has asked the CFL and each minister’s office to provide more details of the behind-closed-doors communications.

[dennis1]

How old are you? I am in my late 30s and was a teenager during the heyday of Sportsline in the late 80s. My generation is prime CFL Lost Generation territory.

Arguments over CFL vs. NFL were a constant during my late teens and early 20s, and the pro-NFL/anti-CFL people were always the overwhelming majority.

(BTW, this was in Ontario, not in Quebec.)

20 years old.

Alot of of people at school don't even know the CFL exists

[bigguy1231]

I think the NFL has grown steadily in popularity since the 1970s, but it really exploded in Canada in the mid 1980s. Before that time, you didn't really have very many "NFL-only" type of people in Canada. Many people watched both, with an advantage to the CFL even.

But the mid 80s saw almost an entire generation of young people who had no interest in (or often, even any knowledge of) the CFL. The 1980s saw the advent of the CFL's "lost generation".

Today, to many people "pro football" = the NFL and nothing else. This wasn't the case in the 1970s.

Actually it was later in the 90's when the lost generation for the CFL started, People who were in their 20's back in the 80's are the CFL's biggest fans now. They are all in their late 40's or 50's now.

The NFL numbers on CH back in the 70 and 80's make the numbers now look small. They uses to draw almost a million viewers on a Monday night. Thet don't even come close to that now. But we didn't have too many channel in those days, maybe 20 -25 on cable.

[markbarbera]

As posted on the spec:

Council reaffirms West Harbour stadium choice

Council has reaffirmed its choice for a Pan Am stadium location - but not without the loss of a few councillors' support.

Ten councillors voted in favour of the west harbour at this morning’s meeting - two fewer than during Tuesdays vote. Councillors Tom Jackson and Terry Whitehead switched their position, while Brad Clark, Sam Merulla, Dave Mitchell, and Margaret McCarthy maintained their opposition for the site.

Several councillors expressed concern that the city would lose the Pan Am Games altogether.

'If you can't see the smoke signals or the tea leaves, you're fooling yourselves,' Whitehead said.

Jackson also spoke at the meeting, announcing he can no longer support west harbour and is reversing his position.

“My constituents have spoken in volumes that something is wrong with the city’s choice of the west harbour site without the TiCats,” he said.

Whitehead also spoke against the city’s choice.

“I certainly have a real challenge in supporting something that will inevitably end up with a divided community, no stadium, and no Tiger Cats.”

http://www.thespec.com/news/article/248705--council-reaffirms-west-harbour-stadium-choice


Whitehead and Jackson must have gotten a real earful from their constituents. I am sure all the others councillors have too.

If there were hopes this would quietly disappear before municipal election campaigns switch into full gear, council is in for a disappointment. Especially if the path continues towards the loss of stadium funding and the departure of the Ticats. Things are about to turn ugly, but hey, it looks good on them.

[thurmas]

A few things killed the CFL in the 80's. The rise in popularity of the expos and jays in Canada's 2 big markets made the cfl look small potatoes when they could watch the dodgers or yankees come to town.The collapse of the alouettes in Montreal made the league look weak and it lost a huge market there. No salary cap, thinking the league could compete with the usfl at the time and to a lesser degree the nfl, the cfl over payed players.Terrible television and marketing, as mentioned above there was little to no cfl marketing in the 80's and with so many blackouts it killed any viewership interest. A great book that chronicles the cfl from 1970 to 1995 is Frank Consentino's A Passing Game which talks of all the troubles the CFL went though in that time and talks of some of the real bone head decisions that went on back then.

[Acajack]

The CFL was also wrong to turn its back on CBC. .

The CBC served the CFL well for a time but in the end the network was not an effective driver of viewership for the game. Your target market for football does not generally watch CBC (other than for hockey - and I will get to that later), whereas it does watch Global for U.S. shows during which NFL broadcasts on the same network are promoted.

TSN (now that everyone has it) may actually be a bit better than CBC because it has all sorts of sports that the target demographic pays attention to (including NFL), so the CFL promos reach them better.

Also, CBC production values of CFL broadcasts were generally subpar during that period. I think this was because the CFL games were produced in-house.

On the other hand, Hockey Night in Canada had/has good production values but HNIC is produced by an outside company (Molstar at one time...).

[dennis1]

A few things killed the CFL in the 80's. The rise in popularity of the expos and jays in Canada's 2 big markets made the cfl look small potatoes when they could watch the dodgers or yankees come to town.The collapse of the alouettes in Montreal made the league look weak and it lost a huge market there. No salary cap, thinking the league could compete with the usfl at the time and to a lesser degree the nfl, the cfl over payed players.Terrible television and marketing, as mentioned above there was little to no cfl marketing in the 80's and with so many blackouts it killed any viewership interest. A great book that chronicles the cfl from 1970 to 1995 is Frank Consentino's A Passing Game which talks of all the troubles the CFL went though in that time and talks of some of the real bone head decisions that went on back then.

I'll be sure to check the library for that.

CFL still doesn't have a salary cap I believe. Which is odd considering everyone else will by 2020.

[Urban_Genius]

IMO Cable and Modern Satellite have played a major role in the Decline of the CFL. with the antenna if your US market had a team then you saw games. No with everyone having a million channels, you can follow and team anytime.

The CFL was also wrong to turn its back on CBC. At least I think so. Look what TSN has said already about a team moving to QC City. They will take a massive rating hit.
Actually, the best thing to happen to the CFL is TSN. CBC was absolute garbage. The only thing that wasn't smart was that the CFL decided to not have a bidding war on it's product for this TV deal (with TSN from 2008-2012). They sold their product short. Next TV deal CBC will be bidding and ultimately the TV deal will be at least double what the CFL is currently getting.

One thing I've never understood with the CFL is the fact they cut their product short. It's almost like their ashamed at times to market their product.

IMO, a big reason why the Southern Ontario market is not as strong as it used to be or as it can be, is because of the short-sighted blackouts of the 80s. There no better advertising for your product than making your product available on a weekly basis. Thankfully, blackouts will be a thing of the passed.

[bigguy1231]

As posted on the spec:
Whitehead and Jackson must have gotten a real earful from their constituents. I am sure all the others councillors have too.

Whitehead is a wuss and will twist anyway the wind blows.

As for Jackson I was surprised he voted in favour of the WH in the first place. The political bagman for the Conservatives must have had a conversation with him to get him on board with the Ticats. He was probably told if he has any desire to run for higher office in the future for the Cons then he should vote against the WH.

[Urban_Genius]

I'll be sure to check the library for that.

CFL still doesn't have a salary cap I believe. Which is odd considering everyone else will by 2020.

The CFL's salary cap is of 4.25 million dollars.
It's not necessarily a hard cap because teams can exceed it, but then they get fined and risk losing draft picks.

[dennis1]

The CBC served the CFL well for a time but in the end the network was not an effective driver of viewership for the game. Your target market for football does not generally watch CBC (other than for hockey - and I will get to that later), whereas it does watch Global for U.S. shows during which NFL broadcasts on the same network are promoted.

TSN (now that everyone has it) may actually be a bit better than CBC because it has all sorts of sports that the target demographic pays attention to (including NFL), so the CFL promos reach them better.

Also, CBC production values of CFL broadcasts were generally subpar during that period. I think this was because the CFL games were produced in-house.

On the other hand, Hockey Night in Canada had/has good production values but HNIC is produced by an outside company (Molstar at one time...).

This is true but it is Aug 2010 and people still haven't given up the antenna. I still see them everywhere. The CBC made the game availiable to almost everyone. TSN just makes it availiable to those who can afford cable.

[dennis1]

The CFL's salary cap is of 4.25 million dollars.
It's not necessarily a hard cap because teams can exceed it, but then they get fined and risk losing draft picks.

They have an NBA thing going on.

This is also true. Cohon gave WPG a big slap down some time ago this year some violation and fined them. I didn't know what it was for, but now I see.

[bigguy1231]

Actually, the best thing to happen to the CFL is TSN. CBC was absolute garbage. The only thing that wasn't smart was that the CFL decided to not have a bidding war on it's product for this TV deal (with TSN from 2008-2012). They sold their product short. Next TV deal CBC will be bidding and ultimately the TV deal will be at least double what the CFL is currently getting.

One thing I've never understood with the CFL is the fact they cut their product short. It's almost like their ashamed at times to market their product.

IMO, a big reason why the Southern Ontario market is not as strong as it used to be or as it can be, is because of the short-sighted blackouts of the 80s. There no better advertising for your product than making your product available on a daily basis. Thankfully, blackouts will be a thing of the passed.

I agree, TSN is doing a great job.

The problem in SO is that there is just so much to choose from that the CFL because of it's lack of marketing in the past, has gotten lost in the shuffle. The marketing has dramatically improved since Bob Young took over, but the problem now is the lack of winning. If they put a winner on the field for a few years they would help themselves greatly.

[Acajack]

Actually it was later in the 90's when the lost generation for the CFL started, People who were in their 20's back in the 80's are the CFL's biggest fans now. They are all in their late 40's or 50's now.



Well, I am pushing 40 and was a teen in the late 80s and my age group is definitely a "lost generation" for the CFL.

People in their late 40s today were teens in the CFL's heyday: the mid to late 70s (and even early 80s) when you had 50,000 people at Argo games at the CNE even though they sucked most years, and 60 to 70,000 for the Alouettes at Olympic Stadium.

But just a few years after the Argos' Grey Cup win in 1983, the CFL had already drifted somewhere off the map for the upcoming generation.

[bigguy1231]

The CFL's salary cap is of 4.25 million dollars.
It's not necessarily a hard cap because teams can exceed it, but then they get fined and risk losing draft picks.

I thought they just increased that cap with the new collective agreement. Isn't it up to 4.75 million or thereabouts.

[dennis1]

Actually, the best thing to happen to the CFL is TSN. CBC was absolute garbage. The only thing that wasn't smart was that the CFL decided to not have a bidding war on it's product for this TV deal (with TSN from 2008-2012). They sold their product short. Next TV deal CBC will be bidding and ultimately the TV deal will be at least double what the CFL is currently getting.

One thing I've never understood with the CFL is the fact they cut their product short. It's almost like their ashamed at times to market their product.

IMO, a big reason why the Southern Ontario market is not as strong as it used to be or as it can be, is because of the short-sighted blackouts of the 80s. There no better advertising for your product than making your product available on a weekly basis. Thankfully, blackouts will be a thing of the passed.

Then NFL still has blackout, so if the CFL doesn't they have taken a step in the right direction.

[Acajack]

One thing I've never understood with the CFL is the fact they cut their product short. It's almost like their ashamed at times to market their product.



Not sure how it is today, but in the 1980s you couldn't even buy buy an Ottawa Rough Riders, Toronto Argonauts, Hamilton Tiger-Cats jersey or cap anywhere in these cities except at the stadium itself during a game!

[thurmas]

The league does have a salary cap since the mid 90's, however the league used to have revenue sharing in the 70's which was smart since the nfl has had that since the 60's yet since the 80's I believe the cfl has no revenue sharing between clubs which is bull shit. Also of how dumb the cfl in the 90's was they had owners like Bruce Mcnall, Larry Rickman the Gleiberman guys and Nelson Skalbania many of whom went to jail for being crooks. Also the league had a one player marquee player rule that didn't count against the cap so the argos paid millions to Rocket Ismail and Flutie of which they had no real money. Other clubs paid too much to other players aswell which made the league broke.

[bigguy1231]

Not sure how it is today, but in the 1980s you couldn't even buy buy an Ottawa Rough Riders, Toronto Argonauts, Hamilton Tiger-Cats jersey or cap anywhere in these cities except at the stadium itself during a game!

Thats true.

I remember going to the Ticats office that was in the downtown back then to buy tickets for a game and thats all they had was tickets. No merchandise at all and that was the teams office.

[markbarbera]

Speaking of TSN...


SUITOR: Hamilton did nothing for Young and Ticats
Glen Suitor
8/12/2010 1:06:47 PM

The Hamilton city council has spoken - the Hamilton Tiger-Cats are not important to the city's politicians.

By voting 12-3 in favour of the West Harbour site - the location that's been the obsession of the city's Mayor since the process began - the municipal government's message is that the football team and all its great history and tradition can stay or go and they really could care less one way or the other.

It's a sad and almost surreal day for football fans in Hamilton and across this country. This decision has left the team with really no options but to move the franchise. Bob Young did everything in his power to compromise and make it work.

But without the support of local government, a venture the size of a professional football team has virtually no chance for success. And make no mistake, this government did not support Bob Young.

Now over the next few months, all 12 of the 'revitalize the West Harbour,' voters will stand in front of cameras and say how much they love the team and how they're trying to do everything they can to negotiate with Bob Young and keep the team in the city. But in the end, they will say, if he moves it, that's his call.

The spin will do exactly that - make your head spin. But remember football fans, if the Ticats leave at the end of the 2011 season, there is no one to blame - and I mean no one to blame - but the elected Mayor in Hamilton.

Bob Young bought the team in memory of a late family member who used to love the Tiger Cats and did it when no one wanted to be involved. He may not have had a whole lot of experience in the world of pro football ownership, but as a Hamilton native it was important to him to save the franchise and keep it going in the city.

He put millions of dollars of his own money into the team over the last seven years and thousands of hours that he likely didn't have when running his other business ventures. He has never been frugal with the franchise. The team has struggled over the last couple of years in the standings, but not for a lack of trying on Young's part.

He has paid for free agents.

He has hired coaches and general managers.

He has not cut corners.

In this negotiation process, Young has again reached into his pocket to pay for international experts to examine all the possible sites and recommend what would work best for the franchise. And every one of them to a person said that the West Harbour was the worst choice. Which of course, didn't matter to the Mayor?

When an arbitrator was hired, his recommendation for a compromise was the East Mountain. It wasn't Young's first choice, but he could live with it. It also didn't matter to the Mayor.

Young was ready to invest $75 million dollars in the new facility and business - an amount that was actually questioned by one or more of the 'fix the West Harbour' voters, which is just flat out rude.

The Cats' owner was willing to make the stadium a multi-purpose facility, bring soccer to the city and create a youth soccer centre. And if all that wasn't enough, just to be a good citizen and on top of everything else he had offered, he said he would contribute financially in other ways to rebuild the precious West Harbour.

In the end, there were 10 possible places for this stadium to go and only one didn't work for the football team. The very one that was chosen by the Mayor and his posse and it really is a shame.

So before the spin from City Hall begins, remember what was on the table from the Ticats and what Mr. Bob Young has done and was willing to do for that city.

It's painful to say it because of its rich history, but the Ticats pack up and leave in a year and a half. When the two-week long Pan Am games are over and there are tumble weeds rolling down the middle of a West Harbour stadium, remember that it was your Mayor that made it so, not your fellow Hamiltonian Bob Young.

It's the responsibility of every citizen to do what they can to improve the community they live in. For some that may be as simple as paying your taxes. For others who have earned financial success through hard work and dedication, their contribution can be so much greater. And it's the government's responsibility to help facilitate those contributions in any way possible for the good of the community.

Bob Young did every thing in his power to make his community a better place. And for all his time and money, he got the door slammed in his face by the local government. I hope the citizens of Hamilton remember that a year or two from now.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/glen_suitor/?id=330319

[Urban_Genius]

I thought they just increased that cap with the new collective agreement. Isn't it up to 4.75 million or thereabouts.

I believe that's when the current CBA expires. So in 2013 the cap will be at 4.4 million. The CFL is about to enter a boom period that it has never experienced. With that teams will start making far greater profit. The players for some reason decided (pretty much forced) to give up the clause in the CBA stipulating 56% of league revenues would go to the players, just like in the NHL.

So while the cap should likely being higher, they're keeping it low so teams can start being more profitable in the long run.

Edit- Sorry, it's 4.4 million in 2013.

[bigguy1231]

Glen Suitor is just a chearleader for the CFL. Thats what he gets paid to do. His comments are irrelevant.

[thurmas]

I am 26 years old and I became a fan in the cfl's darkest days the early 90's. I think because that was arguably the league's best era in terms of pure talent it had with the likes of Gizmo, Dunigan, Flutie, Ham, Allen, Pinball, Pitts it was just such good football! Going forward the league needs to go to a strict friday,saturday,sunday schedule no more wed or thurs games you won't get good crowds or ratings those days. Sell the naming rights to the Grey Cup that should pocket the league a few million. The upcoming tv rights should double what the league will get in tv monies so that will help. Better marketing, the league is better at it now but stars need to be spotlighted more. Cory Boyd should be all over billboards in Toronto right now and in schools getting kids hooked on 3 down football.

[dennis1]

The league does have a salary cap since the mid 90's, however the league used to have revenue sharing in the 70's which was smart since the nfl has had that since the 60's yet since the 80's I believe the cfl has no revenue sharing between clubs which is bull shit. Also of how dumb the cfl in the 90's was they had owners like Bruce Mcnall, Larry Rickman the Gleiberman guys and Nelson Skalbania many of whom went to jail for being crooks. Also the league had a one player marquee player rule that didn't count against the cap so the argos paid millions to Rocket Ismail and Flutie of which they had no real money. Other clubs paid too much to other players aswell which made the league broke.

Yeah that's what I'm talking about, no rev sharing. Although there is a good arguement that it is socialism and the MLB survives with out it, and the CFL is fine the way it is now.

[dennis1]

I believe that's when the current CBA expires. So in 2013 the cap will be at 4.4 million. The CFL is about to enter a boom period that it has never experienced. With that teams will start making far greater profit. The players for some reason decided (pretty much forced) to give up the clause in the CBA stipulating 56% of league revenues would go to the players, just like in the NHL.

So while the cap should likely being higher, they're keeping it low so teams can start being more profitable in the long run.

Edit- Sorry, it's 4.4 million in 2013.

So we would see avg of $400,000 per year if they wern't keeping the cap low? Cool.

[dennis1]

They should cut the Number of non imports to 10. Don't subsidize the CIS anymore. If you are good you will make the team end of story.

[markbarbera]

How about this from the Stoney Creek News...


[QUOTE]Shooting down our shining stars is a blood sport
MARK CRIPPS MANAGING EDITOR, TALES FROM THE CRYPT
Published on Aug 12, 2010

Regardless of where people stand on the great stadium debate, I for one am embarrassed at the public thrashing given out to Tiger Cats owner Bob Young.

Taking down people who try and make this community a better place seems to be a popular blood sport in Hamilton.

Just a few weeks ago, Charles and Margaret Juravinski were the popular target for local mudslingers.

In 2006, the Hamilton Health Sciences board voted unanimously to rename the Henderson General Hospital in honour of the Dundas residents in recognition of their multimillion dollar gifts to health care in the community.

The Juravinskis donated $23 million alone to expand cancer services at the Mountain hospital. The have donated millions to other projects in the community.

I understand the sensitivities around the renaming of the hospital. I appreciate the historical platform people place on Nora Frances Henderson’s contribution to the community.

But the public trashing handed out to the Juravinskis was over the top.

It’s no surprise Hamilton council helped spur on the character assassination by voting against the HHS recommendation to honour one of the city’s most generous philanthropists.

It made me cringe to think how this made us all look.

Now the cannons have been turned on Young. To read some of the commentary, whether on Twitter, Facebook or local media websites, you’d think the owner of the Hamilton Tiger-Cats was the worst person on Earth.

...

http://www.stoneycreeknews.com/opinions/article/216913

[SteelTown]

Remember about commentary articles.

[markbarbera]

Remember about commentary articles.

Edited to appease your wishes, kind sir.

While you are still in the aggresive moderating mode, perhaps you can assist in guiding this thread back on topic? This is supposed to be about the Pan Am stadium, not a NFL vs. CFL discussion. Not meaning to be a killjoy, but there's not much time before you will have to change this thread status to "cancelled" and I'd hate to see the last few entries veer off topic ;)

[bigguy1231]

Mark Cripps's opinion matters about as much as Glen Suitors does. The Mountain News and associated weekly's have become a joke since he took over as managing editor. He is a conservative and promotes a conservative agenda. The party machine has been moblized by the local bagman.

[markbarbera]

Mark Cripps's opinion matters about as much as Glen Suitors does. The Mountain News and associated weekly's have become a joke since he took over as managing editor. He is a conservative and promotes a conservative agenda. The party machine has been moblized by the local bagman.

TSN is wrong, Metroland is wrong, Whitehead is wrong, Merulla is wrong, yadda yadda yadda. Just so I get this right, the only opinion that matters is the one in agreement with yours, correct?

[dennis1]

Mark TSN has money at stake. If they gained from QC City the would be quiet.

[thurmas]

I don't understand though tsn owns rds aswell so the higher rds ratings would offset the lost tsn ratings.

[dennis1]

RDS is only in QC though. That province already has an existing fan base.

[Anders Knudsen]

TSN is wrong, Metroland is wrong, Whitehead is wrong, Merulla is wrong, yadda yadda yadda. Just so I get this right, the only opinion that matters is the one in agreement with yours, correct?

that's harsh. You posted two articles that might have been penned by the Ticats themselves, don't be shocked if they get criticized. No one voted for the East Mountain except our biggest idiot of a councillor, it just wasn't a viable option, we could never have paid for it. That's not to say the Harbour is either, and many councillors expressed their concern about that. But if we lose the Ticats because of this it won't be because of the EM vs WH vote, it will be because of the massive incompetence on both sides of the negotiations that prevented a suitable site from coming forward in the first place. I'm not clear yet who this blame lies with, but there's no way this is a story of the innocent caretaker vs the inept councillors.

[SteelTown]

David Adames is in Toronto meeting with Ian Troop at the moment. CHCH is live outside of the building in Toronto.

[SteelTown]

Meeting is done, met for about two hours. Chris Murray said to CHCH it was a positive meeting and the 15,000 seat stadium at West Harbour is still a go. Velodrome will be next to the stadium.

[dennis1]

Ian Troop approves.

It's really over.

The TiCats can work out a deal.

[realcity]

what good is a 15k stadium?

[mattgrande]

what good is a 15k stadium?

We can change it to a larger stadium when Bob Young/Scott Mitchell changes his mind. And if they don't, 15K would be a good size for community sports (ie, Canada level soccer, rugby, etc).

[realcity]

you mean like the one we already have? The 6000 permanent, 6000 additional seat Ron Joyce Stadium.

http://www.aximconcrete.com/assets/base/axim/joyce(1).jpg

and this cost $43m. That's roughly the size of the cities contribution. It's 6k seats. How do we get it to 30k seats? How much $

[mattgrande]

According to the reports, it costs $50M to bring a 15K stadium to 30K. That's still a huge chunk of change. Would there be enough parking at Mac for it to be a viable option? Would the entertainment precinct be viable?

EDIT - And besides, HostCo said the money is for new stadiums, not fixing up old ones. That's why Ivor Wynne isn't a viable option.

[realcity]

It still doesn't address the fact that we'll have two stadiums will the same use and size. about 10 kilometers from each other.

[markbarbera]

Meeting is done, met for about two hours. Chris Murray said to CHCH it was a positive meeting and the 15,000 seat stadium at West Harbour is still a go. Velodrome will be next to the stadium.

Ian Troop approves.

It's really over.

The TiCats can work out a deal.

Guys, all Troop did was receive the proposal. Nothing has been approved. Troop's next step is to present the City's report to the Board of Directors within the next two weeks with his recommendation. The Board will then decide whether or not to approve the city's proposal.

According to the reports, it costs $50M to bring a 15K stadium to 30K. That's still a huge chunk of change. Would there be enough parking at Mac for it to be a viable option? Would the entertainment precinct be viable?

EDIT - And besides, HostCo said the money is for new stadiums, not fixing up old ones. That's why Ivor Wynne isn't a viable option.

Mac's stadium is not going to be expanded.

Hostco has never said money is only for new facilities. There are several existing facilities in Toronto, Barrie, Welland that are receiving funds to upgrade existing facilities.

Ivor Wynne was not originally considered because the Pan Am stadium was originally envisioned for track, which was not feasible at IWS. Now that track has been moved out of Hamilton to Toronto and soccer is the sport in Hamilton, there's no reason not to consider a rehab of IWS.

[bigguy1231]

It still doesn't address the fact that we'll have two stadiums will the same use and size. about 10 kilometers from each other.


McMaster's stadium is not our stadium. It belongs to the university.

[bigguy1231]

TSN is wrong, Metroland is wrong, Whitehead is wrong, Merulla is wrong, yadda yadda yadda. Just so I get this right, the only opinion that matters is the one in agreement with yours, correct?

Whats the matter can't handle that someone else is using your playbook. Anyone can cherrypick articles that will support a certain point of view.

[realcity]

McMaster's stadium is not our stadium. It belongs to the university.

so what? I can rent RJ Stadium if i wanted. I was told that a 15k stadium is still useful for community sports, national soccer tournaments, concerts or whatever? My comment was we already have a stadium to do all that. And it does.

Do you think Varsity Stadium only hosts UoT sports?

I will say again, we will have two similar sized stadiums with similar uses and only 10km from each other. That's great.

[markbarbera]

Another editorial. Posted in a manner to keep Mr.Moderator happy.


Hamilton loses, Toronto wins: Editorial

By Toronto Sun

Last Updated: August 12, 2010 8:13pm

Labour Day will cease to be classic in Toronto if the Hamilton Tiger-Cats take their Oskee Wee Wees out of Ontario.

But that’s the threat now that plans for a new stadium have divided Hamilton.

Ticats owner Bob Young has only promised to keep the CFL squad in the Hammer until the end of next season, then it could be anyone’s game.

The stadium showdown erupted after Young and city council couldn’t agree on a site for the new stadium.

The future of the Ticats hangs in the balance. Will they move to Quebec City? Moncton? Burlington? Milton?

For CFL fans in this area, the Tabbies need to stay. It’s one of the best rivalries and the Labour Day classic between the two teams is circled on all Argonauts and Ticats fans’ calendars. It has been since 1950.

This stadium debacle could also mean Hamilton loses most, if not all, the events it is supposed to host for the 2015 Pan Am Games.

Bad for Hamilton. Good for Toronto. And good for the Games.

...

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2010/08/12/15008531.html



Has any newpaper other than the Toronto SpectatStar had a positive editorial about this decision?

Stand by for the inevitable typical reply posting by bigguy grumbling about everyone being wrong, right-wing conspiracies, Braley's hitmen, blah blah blah. (Psst: Bigguy - Fred Eisenberger is a Conservative - exactly what is he really up to??)

[Jon Dalton]

If you post a Toronto Sun article, you're only asking for it.

[SteelTown]

Another editorial. Posted in a manner to keep Mr.Moderator happy.

Thanks! You've made my night.

[markbarbera]

Thanks! You've made my night.

You're welcome! But if that's all it takes to make your night, you must be overdue for a night on the town ;)

[realcity]

why is this only apparent to everyone outside of Hamilton? We made quite possibly the biggest mistake in this cities history. It could be the final nail and the Hammer put the nail in itself.

[bigguy1231]

Another editorial. Posted in a manner to keep Mr.Moderator happy.




Has any newpaper other than the Toronto SpectatStar had a positive editorial about this decision?

Stand by for the inevitable typical reply posting by bigguy grumbling about everyone being wrong, right-wing conspiracies, Braley's hitmen, blah blah blah. (Psst: Bigguy - Fred Eisenberger is a Conservative - exactly what is he really up to??)

I may not like some of the things Fred does, but one thing I do like about him is that he has integrity. He won't sell out to the highest bidder or someone that promises something in return for his vote.

Other than cutting and pasting other peoples opinions you should try some original thought if you have any. It's starting to sound more and more like you have been employed by the Ticats, repeating the same old talking points over and over.

[BCTed]

Ivor Wynne was not originally considered because the Pan Am stadium was originally envisioned for track, which was not feasible at IWS. Now that track has been moved out of Hamilton to Toronto and soccer is the sport in Hamilton, there's no reason not to consider a rehab of IWS.

It's pretty dilapidated and tired. I think it's time to move on.

[bigguy1231]

first.... why is this only apparent to everyone outside of Hamilton? We made quite possibly the biggest mistake in this cities history. It could be the final nail and the Hammer put the nail in itself.

second.... I'll be waiting for bigguy to say this is yet another irrelevant journalist/expert/stakeholder opinion. And of course I always love the secret conservative society conspiracy theories.


Actually I don't mind your rants. I may not agree with you sometimes but at least you have an independant opinion unlike others who seem to think that cutting and pasting is a way to get their point accross.

What secret conspiracy theories. If you knew anything about politics in this town you would know who pulls the strings politically. It's not just conservatives, although in this case it is. It could have just as easily been a liberal and in the old days it was almost exclusively liberals.

[Berklon]

first.... why is this only apparent to everyone outside of Hamilton? We made quite possibly the biggest mistake in this cities history. It could be the final nail and the Hammer put the nail in itself.

I think you're one step away from being that guy on the street carrying a "The end is near" sign. You think you could blow this out of proportion a little more?

If the loss of the Pan-Am games and/or Ticats and/or stadium is enough to put the "final nail" in this city - then the city never really had much hope to begin with. I like to think the city had bigger asperations than just that.

[BCTed]

I think you're one step away from being that guy on the street carrying a "The end is near" sign. You think you could blow this out of proportion a little more?

If the loss of the Pan-Am games and/or Ticats and/or stadium is enough to put the "final nail" in this city - then the city never really had much hope to begin with. I like to think the city had bigger asperations than just that.

The Pan Am Games are no big deal. I don't think anybody really watches them anyway.

The stadium is probably a pretty big deal. This city could use a new one.

The Tiger-Cats are quite a big deal --- huge part of the city's identity and one of its most identifiable symbols and differentiators.

If the Tiger-Cats were to leave (which I very much doubt will happen), this city would feel it.

[realcity]

thanks for that Berklon. very compassionate of you.

anyway here's a graphic for you.
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b276/theshawsphotos/RJ-andPA-stadiums-geography2.jpg?t=1281671944

I photoshopped in the Hancock Stadium at Illinois State at Stuart and Caroline because it is a 15,000 seat football stadium. And I'm making this reference for 'after' the PanAm Games. If this 15k stadium ever gets built, the question I'm asking how is this venue not in competition with a similar venue at Mac?. In a C-market, two competing venues will not help the WH white elephant. Varsity and BMo will be an option before RJ or WH stadiums are ever considered. What an epic waste of the Future Fund.


Someone please make an argument against these two 10-20k seat venues will not be competing with each other. ?

Look at the new 'Convention Centre" whatever it;s called. the former Camco warehouse... and it is already taking business from Hamilton's (incompetently forever managed HECFI). So IF IF Big IF this useless 15k white elephant stadium gets built with our $50m Future Fund it will be competing with RJ Stadium 5km away.

I have always said.... there was a 5% chance that this stadium gets built on WH. And I'm still going with those odds. Even worse to add to my 5% prediction, is that it will be a pathetic 15k aluminum bleacher stadium, with zero amenities, if it actually gets built, it will be disposable. And guess what... absolutely zero benefit to an already underused Bayfront Park and ... please... downtown.. will not even know it exists.

Copps was built in what 1980? with the same argument. What has happened? A dollar store across the street anchored with a pizza and wing plaza. A halfway house, home to murderers and rapists across the street and a Quiznos. That's what Copps has done in 30 years to downtown. But o yea we;re just waiting for that other piece of the puzzle.... which is something a mile away down Bay Street North. Which will help downtown. Why did Pricewatershouse leave? why did Dalton Timmins leave? why did 15 floors of the Stelco Tower leave? Why did IBM, RBC, BMO, etc leave downtown?

Was it because we didn't have a stadium host to the Ticats a mile away?


I'm officially taking my "Hamilton has so much potential" perspective opinion out. Because how long does it take to realize this so-called "massive potential?" There is potential but it is pointless when it takes *if ever* several generations to realize it.

It all doesn't matter.... because not even the 15k stadium will be built here. Like the rest of the province is saying... it will be built near a Toronto hiway, because Hamilton refused it to built anywhere but in the middle of a residential neighbourhood.

[dennis1]

IMO, I have a compromise

Stoney Creek at fifty road? There will be a GO station out there too. And lots of land to make Young happy. Anyone?

[emge]

If anyone's interested in taking this discussion in a slightly different direction, how about some feedback on what revenue streams the Ti-Cats could maximize instead of just parking? If financial viability is still the major hangup, then how do other downtown stadiums make it work, besides broadcast revenues, revenue-sharing or parking?

Obviously, this is all assuming three things. (1) They get good marketing, (2) They identify several specific target markets, not just the current ones, and (3) They win more, which always helps.

How about some brainstorming? There's a good list of ideas and ways stadiums do it in other areas, but I'd like to hear some hometown ones.

[realcity]

Revenue streams
1. season ticket sales (pre-paid is good $)... could be higher with regional sales, with a regionally located team... like on the QEW.... ooops is that hiway...? Kick me off this forum. i supported a highway... I must be like a Roman Emporer. We should put the stadium in Walnut Grove and have local f and b serve homemade apple pies.

2. gate tickets.... would totally be higher with a stadium that the region could access. AND feel safe at.

3. tv sponsorship (tv in Canada is not super lucrative, it's basically product placement $, a bit higher than "SlapChop® buying 30 minutes). It's revenue of course but currently being realized by Mr. Young. So no big deal changer there.

4. parking revenue totally Mr Young has zero money to be made on this valuable revenue stream. Unlike everyother pro sports team, for some reason Mr Young is evil for wanting the same? Just because there is a parking lot, does not mean you cannot ride your bike or take the bus there. Go ahead, take transit or bike. But some people might want to drive their car. Gawwd dammit, is that so bad? You want to drive a vehicle to the game *so bizarre, like no one does that* then you pay a parking price. Wow what a concept, we should spread this nirvana experience to the rest of North America.

5. merchandise. Mr Young has been doing the best he can with it. Ive never seen more Cats merch around in my life. so the club is doing what it can for merch revenue. A new stadium will definitely increase merch sales.

6. I don't know. But I bet there is more. But I'll be the first to admit here, that I actually know less about operating, owning and managing a CFL football team than the actual owners and managers.