Bomber_fanaddict Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Which would you rather have? A poor record for a few years or a brand new state of the art facility to watch football games in? I know the cost of the stadium isn't directly related to the poor football performance over the last few years but the club likely cut cost in areas that have affected the play on the field. So would you rather have a playoff team with a winning record and be sitting at Canad Inns still or a crappy team for a few years and a nice stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 I can't imagine what person, in any walk of life, anywhere, would prefer to have a terrible team over a brand new stadium. Would you rather be a millionaire or have cancer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 you can have both no need to choose. Noeller 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber_fanaddict Posted October 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 you can have both no need to choose. Can we though? Can the club afford both or did they bite off more then they could chew with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber_fanaddict Posted October 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 I can't imagine what person, in any walk of life, anywhere, would prefer to have a terrible team over a brand new stadium. Would you rather be a millionaire or have cancer? I guess what i'm asking is......if we had to deal with having a poor football team for a few years while we had some time to pay off the massive debt of the stadium would you prefer that over having a good team and having to live in the old barn? Personally I can handle the poor football for a few years while making adjustments to balance both. I just don't think the club can succesfully do both right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 I voted for the new stadium, but I'm also not convinced these two options are mutually exclusive. If you can guarantee that there would only be a couple of years of futility for a brand new stadium, then it is a no brainer. The problem though is that this team has been a bad team for a long time. The issue is not the stadium, it is the board and how this team is managed. I've compiled the winnineg percentages of all the teams over the last 5 and 10 years (with this season included): Last 5 Years: Calgary 68% Montreal 62% BC 56% Saskatchewan 50% Hamilton 46% Toronto 43% Edmonton 42% Winnipeg 34% Last 10 Years: BC 63% Montreal 60% Calgary 59% Saskatchewan 53% Toronto 47% Edmonton 44% Winnipeg 39% Hamilton 37% We have been by far the worst team in the league in the last 5 years. In the 10 year picture, Hamilton has been worse then us, but not by much. Players, coaches, GMs, scouts, have all been changed in that time frame. Only the board is constant. Sorry to derail your thread, but this team was bad in the old stadium. The reason we are bad now is not the debt, is not the new stadium. It is now in the DNA of this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueandgoldguy Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Asinine question. One of the selling point of the new stadium was that it would provide the Bombers with additional revenue so they could finally compete with other teams when it came to players, coaches and management. It was supposed to help them, not hinder them. Also, what are you talking about when you say it will take a few years for them to get out from under this debt? They have to pay off this debt over the course of 45 years! Things won't suddenly change in a few years. They will still have to pay $4.5 million in debt obligations every year a few years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBURGESS Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 The two things aren't connected. You might as well ask would you like a beautiful wife or orange juice for breakfast. BTW: The massive debt is a fact of life for the next 40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Not that I agree that this poll is mutually exclusive, but the debt payment amount is constant. Therefore in 5 and 10 years, as ticket, concession, and TV revenues rise due to inflation, the percentage of the Bombers revenues that go to debt repayment will lessen. So there is a point that the organization will feel more pain in the short term paying for the stadium as opposed to 5 and 10 years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Consider all the coaches and GM's they've been paying not to coach. They've been over spending with poor results Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Perfect Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 I'm sorry to be insulting, but this is one of the pointless, if not the most pointless poll question I've seen in my 10 or so years on CFL message boards. Atomic, Blueandgold, tacklewasher and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Would you rather be the top scientist in your field, or have mad cow disease? Noeller 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Pickles or briefs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigseye Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 So what was the excuse before the new stadium for sucking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Consider all the coaches and GM's they've been paying not to coach. They've been over spending with poor results This is exactly it, they've been spending a ton on the coaches and GMs lately, just that they've been paying multiple people while only one does the job. It doesn't save any money to cheap out on hirings. Hire the best people and pay them what it takes and you'll make more money in the long run. Atomic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noeller Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Would you rather be the top scientist in your field, or have mad cow disease? Oh good...I was worried you'd choose the mad cow disease! Now, if the moon was made outta blue cheese....wouldja eat it?? Atomic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraser Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 The two things aren't connected. You might as well ask would you like a beautiful wife or orange juice for breakfast. BTW: The massive debt is a fact of life for the next 40 years. what about a beautiful wife or a non crazy wife? are they connected? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 Why do people think we spend less on talent because of the stadium? There is a salary cap that includes a floor. I believe the floor is $200,000 less than the cap. So everyone is spending around the same. We suck because of a poor general manager and CEO both of whom weren't cut rate options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaosmonkey Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 Pickles or briefs? I use my briefs to store my pickle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 The two things aren't connected. You might as well ask would you like a beautiful wife or orange juice for breakfast. BTW: The massive debt is a fact of life for the next 40 years. what about a beautiful wife or a non crazy wife? are they connected? You have to try and stay above the line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noeller Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 The Vicky Mendoza Diagonal............and beware the Shelly Gillespie Zone......... #BeenThere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brain Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 Pickles or briefs? I was thinking "Boxers or take the escalator?" *If* they were exclusive, I'll take the stadium 11.63568 times out of 10. That said, I still expect improvement, because it's lovely to go sit in the stadium, but it ain't cheap, and I want my time and money to at least entertain me and not give me ulcers. The circus is beyond frustrating. I've been indifferent to a lot of the hirings and firings over the past several years, but it's getting really hard to stay interested. The money wasting is obscene. I want to love my team again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now