Game Thread - Ottawa Redblacks vs. Toronto Argonauts - Saturday August 9 @ 3:00 pm

[Will]

Nature of the CFL is up+down due to the player turnover as mgmt./coaching turnover we see consistently.
I think the largest exception to this CFL winning-then-losing history is Calgary.
what was it, 14 straight seasons making the playoffs? That's a record that will likely never be seen again.

Winnipeg has also done fairly well in that department recently, which is what slightly irks me about the Argos.

[TICATS SUCK !]

From '72 to '98 Edmonton did not have a losing season, which is simply incredible. In terms of consecutive winning seasons, Calgary had 11 from '90 to '00, winning 2 Grey Cups. They also had 14 from '08 to 22, winning 3 Grey Cups. In comparison to Calgary, the Argos had 4 winning seasons, 5 losing seasons, and 2 seasons at .500 from '90 to '00, winning 3 Grey Cups. From '08 to '22, we had 4 winning seasons, 7 losing seasons, and 3 seasons at .500, winning 3 Grey Cups. The Argos have won the most Grey Cups during the two aforementioned time periods (1 more than Calgary). Plus the Double Blue have won all 6 Grey Cups they've played in, whereas Calgary has lost in the Grey Cup game 6 times, sometimes as prohibitive favourites . I wish the Argos could be more consistent in the regular season, and we have gone through some terrible years. That being said, I'd take what the Argos have accomplished any day of the week.

[Will]

From '72 to '98 Edmonton did not have a losing season, which is simply incredible. In terms of consecutive winning seasons, Calgary had 11 from '90 to '00, winning 2 Grey Cups. They also had 14 from '08 to 22, winning 3 Grey Cups. In comparison to Calgary, the Argos had 4 winning seasons, 5 losing seasons, and 2 seasons at .500 from '90 to '00, winning 3 Grey Cups. From '08 to '22, we had 4 winning seasons, 7 losing seasons, and 3 seasons at .500, winning 3 Grey Cups. The Argos have won the most Grey Cups during the two aforementioned time periods (1 more than Calgary). Plus the Double Blue have won all 6 Grey Cups they've played in, whereas Calgary has lost in the Grey Cup game 6 times, sometimes as prohibitive favourites . I wish the Argos could be more consistent in the regular season, and we have gone through some terrible years. That being said, I'd take what the Argos have accomplished any day of the week.

It doesn't help in building and sustaining a fanbase, though.

[TICATS SUCK !]

From '72 to '98 Edmonton did not have a losing season, which is simply incredible. In terms of consecutive winning seasons, Calgary had 11 from '90 to '00, winning 2 Grey Cups. They also had 14 from '08 to 22, winning 3 Grey Cups. In comparison to Calgary, the Argos had 4 winning seasons, 5 losing seasons, and 2 seasons at .500 from '90 to '00, winning 3 Grey Cups. From '08 to '22, we had 4 winning seasons, 7 losing seasons, and 3 seasons at .500, winning 3 Grey Cups. The Argos have won the most Grey Cups during the two aforementioned time periods (1 more than Calgary). Plus the Double Blue have won all 6 Grey Cups they've played in, whereas Calgary has lost in the Grey Cup game 6 times, sometimes as prohibitive favourites . I wish the Argos could be more consistent in the regular season, and we have gone through some terrible years. That being said, I'd take what the Argos have accomplished any day of the week.

It doesn't help in building and sustaining a fanbase, though.

You're right; it sure doesn't. I do envy the fact that Calgary were contenders year in and year out during their most recent 14 year stretch of success. To accomplish this is really really impressive, especially in this era when you can't keep a team together long term. It's anyone's guess as to how much the Argo fan base would increase if they were able to have a sustained run of winning football. Unfortunately, I don't think it would move the needle very much. Toronto has proven to be one tough nut to crack (to say the least) when it comes to rejuvenating interest in the Argos and the CFL.

[paulwoods13]

It seems worth noting that despite its run of success since the late 1980s, Calgary has seen a slow but steady erosion of its fanbase. Many reasons for that, no doubt, but IMO it speaks against the notion that perpetual on-field success would result in perpetual off-field success.

[argolio]

It seems worth noting that despite its run of success since the late 1980s, Calgary has seen a slow but steady erosion of its fanbase. Many reasons for that, no doubt, but IMO it speaks against the notion that perpetual on-field success would result in perpetual off-field success.

Ηaving the worst stadium in the league probably doesn't help.

[AngeloV]

It seems worth noting that despite its run of success since the late 1980s, Calgary has seen a slow but steady erosion of its fanbase. Many reasons for that, no doubt, but IMO it speaks against the notion that perpetual on-field success would result in perpetual off-field success.

I wonder if like the Argos, having the parent NHL team owning them means they are not paid enough attention to. These ownership groups might pay the bills, but is it beneficial to long term fan building?

[paulwoods13]

It seems worth noting that despite its run of success since the late 1980s, Calgary has seen a slow but steady erosion of its fanbase. Many reasons for that, no doubt, but IMO it speaks against the notion that perpetual on-field success would result in perpetual off-field success.

I wonder if like the Argos, having the parent NHL team owning them means they are not paid enough attention to. These ownership groups might pay the bills, but is it beneficial to long term fan building?

I think this is 100% the case. MLSE and the Calgary ownership group have way bigger, more valuable enterprises to look after than the little CFL franchises they own. And like Toronto, I don't think there's much chance of the Stampeders growing their enterprise value much, especially in that stadium.

[ARGO57]

It seems worth noting that despite its run of success since the late 1980s, Calgary has seen a slow but steady erosion of its fanbase. Many reasons for that, no doubt, but IMO it speaks against the notion that perpetual on-field success would result in perpetual off-field success.

I wonder if like the Argos, having the parent NHL team owning them means they are not paid enough attention to. These ownership groups might pay the bills, but is it beneficial to long term fan building?

100% the case, the CFL teams are an afterthought at best.

[OV Argo]

It seems worth noting that despite its run of success since the late 1980s, Calgary has seen a slow but steady erosion of its fanbase. Many reasons for that, no doubt, but IMO it speaks against the notion that perpetual on-field success would result in perpetual off-field success.

I wonder if like the Argos, having the parent NHL team owning them means they are not paid enough attention to. These ownership groups might pay the bills, but is it beneficial to long term fan building?

100% the case, the CFL teams are an afterthought at best.

Yep; then it's too bad so sad, that the CFL has been desperate enough to take on such useless, uncaring, corporate swine types as owners for some teams in the league.

Too bad there aren't more Doman's or Pele-dough's out there. But, maybe, just maybe, down the road, another couple of these types could emerge to take over the Argos, or the Stamps, or maybe the RedBlacks (not impressed by the efforts of that group to market and promote the team here).

Lack of respect for Canadian football in our own country remains a sad state of affairs.