Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Football or soccer? Really, we have to choose?

Something else I don't get - why do we have to choose between football and soccer? Where did this debate begin? And who is it that's suggesting Major League Soccer is the only option for Ottawa? Those who favour soccer over football make only one suggestion that backs up their claim - Ottawa has never been able to support football enough to hang on to a CFL team. What they seem to miss in that argument is this question - if we couldn't support football, (and the reasoning is mostly that the CFL is perceived as a minor football league), then what makes us think we can support MLS (which is even more of a minor league when it comes to soccer than the CFL is when it comes to football)? Where is the logic there?

The papers this morning are talking about the 67s, and the suggestion that were Lansdowne to disappear - were Frank Clair stadium to be torn down - the 67s would necessarily disappear as well. And I was surprised - where is this talk of tearing down Frank Clair? If we pick soccer over football and build a new stadium out in Kanata, are we then going to take a wrecking ball to Lansdowne? Is that the idea? And if so, isn't this whole debate a no-brainer? We already have a stadium. One that needs significant repairs, no doubt, but it exists. It's there. It's downtown, where stadiums for sports ought to be in order to affect local business in an optimal way. It would be cheaper to fix Frank Clair than it would be to build an entire new stadium. and what a shame it would be if we just bulldozed the place because it wasn't being used. How about this - even if we choose soccer over football, why not use Lansdowne anyway? And by extension of that logic, why not have both, anyway?

1 comment:

  1. putting more then one sport stadium in kanata is stupid. it really is.

    Ottawa is not a soccer town.

    and even if it was, putting it way the hell out in K town is ridiculous.

    spread the stuff out.