Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
I think our global rank makes that point pretty clearly.
It's an awkward situation. The city and venue that the world is most likely to be impressed by (Vancouver and BC Place) is out. So that leaves you with lively Montreal with its big obsolete mausoleum of a stadium, plain Toronto with its small frankenstadium, and plucky Edmonton which actually has a good stadium but brings out everyone's petty jealousy and insecurities (the embarrassing Kelly column being a great example) because it's not as big a city as the others.
|
When buy-in was so marginal to begin with, I'm not surprised.
We're in this weird neither-nor stage right now in Canada. We'd never be able to host given the timid buy-in, so we hitched our horse to the US/Mexico. Now, we're not even sloppy seconds in the game consideration department, so spending money and putting our best foot forward is even harder to justify.
To wit: Vancouver would have had the best stadium, but bailed before it even started. Toronto settled for the secondary venue in the city, not the big guns. Now Montreal/Quebec doesn't even want to spend the money on their stadium because they don't feel it's worth it. I guess it's a nice promotion for Commonwealth and Edmonton.
The Olympics (especially the Winter ones) are more our thing. At least there's buy-in and longer benefits to them.