Talk:Toronto FC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Association football Portal The article on Toronto FC is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association football related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the USA and Canada task force.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Toronto, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Toronto articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Toronto FC vs. FC Toronto 2 US Open Cup 3 Pre TFC is now history 4 The North End Elite Support Group 5 FC vs F.C. 6 Sources 7 US Open Cup table 8 Supporter's Groups Websites 9 Interesting Uniforms 10 Nicknames 11 Jerseys 12 ROSTER? 13 Abbe Ibrahim 14 TV rights? 15 Andy Welsh is Scottish, not English 16 Fair use rationale for Image:TorontoFC.PNG 17 Importance 18 Using Football v. Soccer on a N. American article 19 Notable Former Players List 20 Coaching record 21 Protected 22 Revert squirrel edit 23 Uniform Pictures 24 Toronto FC vs. Toronto Football Club 25 New Toronto FC Uniforms 26 Add new player information

[edit] Toronto FC vs. FC Toronto

Should there be any mention of the fact that people in the soccer community repeatedly (incorrectly) refer to the team as FC Toronto. I would assume that this is largely due to the fact that there is a team in MLS called FC Dallas. The covor of the first issue of Major League Soccer Magazine and Allen Hopkins the sideline reporter for ESPN's broadcasts has called them FC Toronto. I'm not saying I endorse this, I'm just wondering if there should be any mention in the article. 71.36.181.218 13:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I do not believe we should be including any mention of "FC Toronto" as it's an incorrect reference to the club and the whole point of this encyclopedia is to give users information that is accurate and relevant. Cashcleaner 06:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] US Open Cup

Does anyone else think its stupid that Toronto can't play in the Open Cup? If teams like Cardiff and Swansea can play in the FA Cup then why shouldn't Toronto be able to play in the US Open Cup? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.36.190.13 (talk) 13:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pre TFC is now history

Can you move some pre TFC info to its history? (68.199.35.102 21:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC))

[edit] The North End Elite Support Group

I would like to have a new support group added to the list. It is called The North End Elite, and it was started by supporters in sections 127 and 126 who wished to organize the support in the north end of BMO Field. The website for the group is [www.thenorthendelite.com] . The group is not yet officially recognized, but is active and has attracted many members. I have images of the section with a few of the banners during the last match.Northendelitist 03:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FC vs F.C.

I moved the page to "F.C." for consistency, because we have "D.C. United", "F.C. Dallas", "C.D. Chivas USA"; most soccer clubs throught the world have the dots in their Wikipedia articles. DR31 _(talk) 01:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

It is not about consistency. You need to look at the official websites of these teams before you add periods because of your preference. Toronto FC and FC Dallas do not use periods. C.D. Chivas is not even the official name, as Club Deportivo Chivas USA, is. D.C. United has periods as the official name, as Washington, D.C. uses periods as it is the city's name. KnoxSGT 04:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Then the Dallas page should be moved. DR31 _(talk) 12:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The FC Dallas page has been moved to FC Dallas (MLS) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KnoxSGT (talk • contribs) .

Please don't create a new section when responding to comments; just reply in the same section by editing the page (rather than using the + button). Also, why was FC Dallas moved to FC Dallas (MLS) (it's since been moved back)? Is there some other FC Dallas that isn't in MLS? Powers 18:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

This page needs sources. If we don't have a published second-party source for the name speculation, this article is unencyclopedic. Powers 14:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] US Open Cup table

i dont know how to do this, but can someone please remove US Open Cup from the table on the right hand side. It has already been determined that they will not compete in this tournament as they are not an american team (Soccer fan 23:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC))

Looks like a permanent part of the MLSbox. I did the best I could by marking them "ineligible". Powers 23:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I created a MLS Canada template so it will not show the US Open Cup. SFrank85 03:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Less than ideal, don't you think? What if the MLS box changes? Powers 18:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Should US Open Cup be removed from the MLS box? It's not an MLS competition. --Elliskev 19:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

It's tempting. The Rochester Raging Rhinos don't get it listed in their infobox, nor do the many teams that won it before the MLS existed. It is important information, though, equal in stature to a league championship. I guess I'm undecided. Powers 02:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

It might aswell stay now. SFrank85 00:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

If you look at any other soccer team from around the world, none of their boxes include any sort of wins, championships, ect... I looked at teams from Europe, Africa, Asia and South America even the USL First Division where the Raging Rhinos play. I think the MLS box should be changed to conform with the rest of the world's soccer boxes. Soccer fan 13:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, change the boxes. --J3wishVulcan 13:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand your reasons, but you may want to post these opinions on the Major League Soccer board before you change anything. Remember that others monitor the page too. Here is something else to keep in mind; say Cracovia Kraków wins the UEFA Champions League, I think Cracovia fans would want to see that posted on the team's featured page. Even though the Polish Ekstraklasa supports UEFA competitions as it is a member, the UEFA is not technically the Ekstraklasa. Now apply that to the USA, if an MLS team wins an Open Cup, sponsored by US Soccer. Even though the Open Cup is not an MLS competition, it is a US Soccer Federation one. I am not saying you're wrong, but do consider this. KnoxSGT 13:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but can't it be handled in an Honors section? --Elliskev 13:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

That's fair. KnoxSGT 00:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Since my input was asked for: I am against changing the boxes to the Euro standard; it just doesn't fit the American game, from lack of chairmen to the different ways nicknames are handled, to English vs Americanisms (manager vs coach, "colours", "ground", etc). The differences DO matter. I don't see why the boxes have to be like the rest of the world; the structure of the game in the US is vastly different than elsewhere. There are different boxes for NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB; I don't see why MLS can't have it's own format. In fact, I designed this one based on the soccer national team templates before the club templates became standard. Now, as for the US Open Cup thing, it's easy enough to make it parametrized, which I just did, so Toronto can now use the regular template. DR31 _(talk) 01:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Supporter's Groups Websites

I'm going to be removing the following from the Supporter's Groups section because they appear to be completely inactive:

• Toronto FC Fans Page - hasn't been updated since July
• Toronto FC Fans Forum and News - site since May, forum since July. Up to date information ... - since July
• TFC Talks - since July
• Fan site for supporters - half finished, says it's under construction, no "news" just pictures taken from other sources
• Toronto Sports Fever - just one old (July) link to the official site

Is this cool with everyone? i think it would clean up the page and direct traffic to the sites which are actually keeping up with the team, if the forums/people on these sites begin using them again then they'd be fit for inclusion again. AgainstSteve 05:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Just wondering ?? I have been a faithful blogger throughout this first season. I have many other MLS team bloggers that link to my blog (New York, DC, KC). The Right To Play folks were happy to provide me with their icon so that I could give them a prominent link. I have watched many of the above blogs fall to the wayside. Although I enjoy reading the RPB and Usector forums and have registered with both as Still Kicking, I am a solo blogger with no connection to any supporter group or the team other than my season tickets. Could the wiki page include my blog ?? Am I fit for inclusion ?? http://torontofcfan-mistakebythelake.blogspot.com/ 70.49.7.84 14:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You should really state that these supporters groups are endorsed by MLSE and generally act as the corporations mouth pieces. Where most Ultras in Europe aren't endorsed by their clubs- which makes them free.

• Except that saying that is grossly inaccurate. Don't know what your beef is with the success of the Toronto Supporters groups, but all of them (with the possible exception of Tribal Rythm Nation) operate independently of the club and it's parent company. If anything the opposite is true. We have made several demands to the club on behalf of our members and the club has followed through on them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.242.233.33 (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting Uniforms

Maybe they should change their name to "the Riddlers", with that question mark on the front of their jersey. If nobody knows what their uniform looks like yet, maybe that should just be put there instead rather than have people out looking for soccer jerseys with question marks on them.Yankee Rajput 15:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Only absolutely thick bastards would think that was their actual shirts. -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 22:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL, would have to agree. SFrank85 00:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nicknames

Is there any documented (English-language) nickname for the team? SFrank thinks it's The Red and Whites, JewishVulcan thinks it's the Reds. As per the article, the team wants a nickname to come organically though La Corriere calls them the "white-and-reds" in Italian. I think any sort of colour based nickname will have to wait until the team's jersey actually comes out (but I don't plan on removing either "the reds" or "the red and whites" or "the white and reds"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by AgainstSteve (talk • contribs)

I haven't been following the team super-closely, but they're are covered on the news a fair amount (I live just outside toronto). I have never once heard a nickname for the team yet. perhaps when the unis come out and the team actually has more than one player...maybe. SnaX 02:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

On message boards people refer to them as simply the 'Reds'. That is my source. And what better source is there for a nickname than the fans themselves.--J3wishVulcan 02:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

On the message boards that i have been visting, they are referred to as TFC; they are not referred to as the reds on any of the major boards like usector, rpb, or big soccer Soccer fan 17:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think all the "i biancorossi" stuff, and the other info on Italian nicknames in the History section, is relevant because it was all conjecture -- added before the jersey was released. Now that we see the team colours are red and grey, I think it makes sense to delete all that stuff. James17930 3:54, 24 December 2006, (EST)

The Italian paper (Corriere) is continuing to use "i biancorossi" e.g. January 13, 2007, even though the team's colours are red, white, grey. I will modify the article to include that as a nickname.Oldtimer6 10:09, 17 January, 2007, (EST)

Is biancorossi really a "nickname"? Italian papers around the world call any team that has red and white biancorossi, but not all teams might consider that a nickname per se. If the Corriere has an article about a game against Red Bull New York and calls them biancorossi as well, does that become a RBNY nickname? Bigdottawa 09:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that you are being unreasonable. Of course it is a nickname! Just because it might be applied to other teams does not invalidate it. For example, FC Dallas is nicknamed the "Hoops" (after the kit design). That appears in the Wikipedia article on FC Dallas, and has been used regularly on the mls website. This nickname has been used for a lot longer for Celtic FC of Glasgow, Scotland, but that doesn't invalidate it as a nickname for FC Dallas, as it is clearly being used as such!!! Oldtimer6 15:45, 5 February, 2007, (EST)

If Toronto fans begin calling the team biancorossi, it's a nickname, just like Hoops became a Dallas nickname because people call them that. A newspaper calling them biancorossi hardly makes it a nickname. Bigdottawa 09:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've now deleted all reference to "ethnic names." It's unimportant, as it has become clear that the team is simply called "TFC" by just about everyone. (Also it is unimportant in the English wiki what the team is called in other languages). Oldtimer6 9:37, 8 May, 2007, (EST)

'The REDS' is used by the Red Patch Boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean the team's nickname is The REDS. The Reds is used by the RPB for obvious self interests. The team is still truly looking for a nickname. The Reds lacks any orginality.

Reds is used in several chants, some easily viewable on TFC's website: "Come on you Reds." "When the Reds go marching in." etc. Unoriginal, yes. Actually used, yes. Like it or not, it's there.

Also used on a Sept 4, 2007 TFC article on MLSNET

As stated above these chants are RPB's using 'reds for obvious self interest. First thing to come to mind is Liverpool when REDS is said, and this ain't Liverpool. Red beavers, Red Hawks, something more Canadian and or identifiable with T.O. is better rather than a simple reference to a colour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.223.174.242 (talk) 20:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think people need to research the team and it's history more if you think TFC Supporters use the nickname Reds simply because of self-interest on the part of the Red Patch Boys. All of the recognized supporter groups and many unaffiliated fans use the term Reds to describe the team. Several Toronto newpaper articles, television broadcasts, and radio news spots have been quoted using the term Reds for the team. Cashcleaner 06:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

"Dichio was very complimentary towards the efforts of the Reds' coaching and training staff to keep him fit and as rested as possible throughout the season." http://web.mlsnet.com/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20070904&content_id=115387&vkey=news_mls&fext=.jsp

Oldtimer6 11:21, 5 Sept, 2007, (EST)

I'm not sure why some IPs are edit warring to remove the "Reds" nickname. Simply put, it appears in news reports - including articles on the the MLS web site. Regardless of whether or not you like the term, you can't delete it if it is actually being used. --Ckatz^chat_spy 21:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

• And again, it should be noted that the club itself and players have all used the nickname "Reds" for the team. If that doesn't create legitimacy, than I don't know what does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.242.233.33 (talk) 20:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

On the forums bigsoccer and by RPB the team is ofter referred to as Redcoats, to avoid using the generic name Reds as discussed earlier, what right does anyone have to argue with a good percentage of fans (according to two polls 25-35% of the most active fans, aka the ones on forums refer to the team as Redcoats). 76.68.118.41 (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Vitakan S

It's very simple how to deal with the "Redcoats" nickname. Come up with a credible source. Once this happens, it can be added to the article. Kingjeff (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Term used in a promotion for 2008 home opener by RPB. http://www.redpatchboys.ca/stage/images/DC345x162%5B1%5D.jpg

It has been used on a variety of forums. On football 365 the post match thread title included the "Redcoats" term Re: The OFFICIAL Toronto FC Thread! Watch out Columbus March 29 - the Redcoats are coming!!! http://forum.football365.com/index.php?t=msg&goto=9455&

A poll taken on Bigsoccer demonstrated that around 30% of people were familiar with the term http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=678528

A poll taken at an Red Patch Boys forum (an official Supporters group) demonstrated that around 25% used the term http://s3.excoboard.com/exco/thread.php?forumid=2561&threadid=357722

Often used in the Mistake by Lake Blog: http://torontofcfan-mistakebythelake.blogspot.com/2007/10/toronto-fc-2-new-england-revolution-2.html

Term is used in one of the away chants by Toronto Supporters:

the Redcoats sail Can't hear <team> sing Call up the T-F-Ceeee We'll sing you our song Sing you our song Don't wanna go home Don't wanna go hooooome This is the best trip I've ever been on Do_Do_Do, Do_Do_Do, Do_Do

76.68.118.41 (talk) 01:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Vitakan S

Pay close attention because I'm not saying it twice, Vita. Redcoats has been used as a nickname for TFC fans on tour (notably the RPBs) - Not the team itself. Also, I have yet to hear a chant that incorporates the name Redcoats in it. It is a misrepresentation when you cite these articles in a such a manner. 99.252.168.104 (talk) 05:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't ****ing talk down to me, whats you real name? Your a member of RPB76.68.115.96 (talk) 11:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Vitakan S

Hi, Jloome here from the RPB and big soccer forums requesting the removal of "redcoats" as a "nickname"preferred by a minority of fans. There is nothign here to support it within the framework of Wiki's acceptance of common usage; in fact, nearly all online links to this nickname direct to posts by the same small minority of people trying to force this nickname upon TFC fans and the club. At least four separate on line polls on big soccer demonstrate a vast majority of fans will never use or accept this nickname -- they are misrepresented in the above argument as showing people are "familiar" with the term, when in fact the question they're askign is whether the term shoudl be used.

Wikipedia should not be used as a forum for propaganda. However, when a small minority is attempting to impose its will on the rest of the group the page represents, that is exactly what is taking place. Please remove both the references to "redcoats" as a nickname for Toronto FC and the term "Red Squirrels", an obvious attempt at showing how easy it can be to subvert information via public postings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuzzyloome (talk • contribs) 17:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jerseys

See http://adamjameshutchings.spaces.live.com/ AgainstSteve 05:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Does someone's online space count as a source??? Soccer fan 19:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

It does if he's a local sports store worker with access to the Adidas Canada merch catalogue.  :D Cashcleaner 06:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Well I probably wouldn't quote text from it but these drawings are the same as the standard Adidas sketches that come out before new jerseys are released. And the VP/GM has confirmed to a supporter's group basically all of the features which these sketches contain. Heresay I know, and if you're gonna revert it to the question marks I won't interfere, but still these are legit AgainstSteve 05:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ROSTER?

Hi guys, should we start putting up the players for the team or should we wait to see which players Mo will trade away? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.121.168.64 (talk • contribs)

Let's put 'em up as they come. Bill Oaf 01:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

sounds good —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.121.168.64 (talk • contribs)

Removed Dyachenko, he was traded —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.141.212.7 (talk • contribs)

Removed Kotschau, they dropped him, heard on the FAN 590 from MO. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.141.212.7 (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

Removed ROberts, reports he signed with Sparta Rotterdam from a Dutch newspaper. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.141.212.7 (talk) 17:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC).

Two questions about the roster, which is the 18-man roster, and which is the 10-man developmental squad? And secondly, why is Mo Johnston's statement about how many Canadians he will field still written as if it is an event yet to come? I don't know whether to delete or to change the statement to something about how it did not happen. Ironfistofanarchy 00:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

1. Xavier Balc was drafted yesterday 2nd overall in the 2008 Supplemental Draft and I have tried adding him to the roster like the others we have drafted in the Superdraft yet someone keeps removing him without giving an explanation. I'm all open to being wrong for some reason (maybe players picked in the Supplemental Draft have a different status or something) but there is just no explanation. What's going on?

2. Savo Milosevic was recently added to the roster. He had a trial with TFC near the end of the 2007 season but I had heard no official news that he was signed. This link was provided (http://www.transfermarkt.at/de/spieler/7896/savomilosevic/profil.html). Moreover, for those who don't know German, if you click on the other tab (Transferdaten) it gives a list of his transfer history. According to it, he came to TFC in November 2007 after being released from Osasuna ("Vereinlos" literally means "without club"). However, this is (more or less) the same date as his free trial. Can anyone find other evidence to support his joining TFC?

Lucky Strike (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Lckystrke

[edit] Abbe Ibrahim

I've removed him from the roster for now. He may well sign, but until then, all Mo and TFC own are his MLS rights. That is to say, if he returns to the league, he's Toronto's - but he could still sign elsewhere. I assume that Ibrahim will end up with TFC, but he's not signed yet. Bill Oaf 20:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TV rights?

The official site is usless. 198.161.51.39 02:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The Score, Rogers Sportsnet and CBC are them as far as I know from what I've seen on the website. Kingjeff 04:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Andy Welsh is Scottish, not English

Earlier I took the liberty of changing the flag next to Andy Welsh's name to the Scottish flag in place of the English flag. When I looked back I saw somebody had changed it back to the English flag. I am once again going to change it back to the Scottish and I ask whoever is changing it back to please stop. MLSnet.com clearly states that "Welsh, 24, is a midfielder born in Manchester, England, but his nationality is Scottish." Clearly, the Scottish flag is correct and putting the English flag next to his name is misleading and inaccurate. If you are a citizen of a particular nation then it is that nation's flag that goes next to your name. Just because he was born in England does not inevitably make him English. I was born in Landstuhl, Germany, but I am a natural born American citizen. Please consider such things before making these edits. brentman87 07:23, 16 May 2007 (PDT)

• Only an idiot would put a Welsh flag. Yes, he was born in Manchester, but his nationality is Scottish. 99.247.137.108 12:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TorontoFC.PNG

Image:TorontoFC.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Importance

I put the importance of the article with the Football (er...soccer) WikiProject as HIGH, because TFC is one of the premier teams in the MLS. Yes, they may be a new team, but we have the best fans in the MLS! Ebuz610 17:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Using Football v. Soccer on a N. American article

I think it is more reasonable to use "football (soccer)" as opposed to "football" or "soccer" for a couple of reasons:

1. While this is an article based on a North American team, the bottom line is that the official team name incorporates FC in its name. Whether or not this is an attempt to be trendy, the fact of the matter is that FC stands for Football Club. The term soccer is directly taken from association football so as to discern between it and (most notably in the UK) rugby football. If the team didn't have the FC attached to it, it would be a different story in that respect.

2. This article falls under the jurisdiction of WikiProject Football, and as such, needs to adhere to certain naming conventions. The game is called football by a good 95% of the world's population, and while this is a North American based article, viewable by everyone, it should, to be fair, adhere to the same conventions that the rest of the Wikipedia's world football articles adhere to -- and soccer can appear in parentheses as it does in the actual article about the game. Ryecatcher773 18:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy states that the variety of English used should be in line with the origin of the subject. Canadian English should be used, and in Canada, football means Gridiron. Therefore, soccer should be used. All the English speaking world knows what soccer means anyway, so there is no ambiguity. -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 02:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC).

Except that the club isn't called Toronto SC, it's Toronto FC. Ryecatcher773 06:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

It is called "Toronto FC" (football) in all likelihood for the sense of tradition, and for the association with the international game. However, in North America the sport is most commonly known as "soccer", the team plays in "Major League Soccer", and "football" (when used in association with a North American club) is very probably going to be confused with the Canadian or American game. That aside, it is fine to include "football" as you did. Would it be better to say "(association football)"? Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

You talk of a need Ryecatcher, but there isn't a need. Soccer is 100% ambiguity free. And according to the club owner, the F in FC stands for Futbol anyway. Like us to write "...is a Canadian soccer (football/futbol) team"? -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 19:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC).

Booth, it's confusing to see that an Englishman of all people is arguing for the use of 'soccer' when you clearly know that in this context (a universal encyclopedia) it isn't unreasonable to write it 'soccer (football)'. So far as the owner goes, he obviously knows more about hockey and basketball than he does about football (real football, not the kind the Dallas Cowboys play) or Spanish. Besides the game being an English invention, and English being the co-official language of Canada, using the Spanish spelling exposes a grammatical error: If it is in fact, 'Futbol' (which is silly in the first place), then the correct syntax in Spanish is to place the 'FC' before, not after the name 'Toronto'. Futbol and Football are the same thing -- it's a matter of spelling. Last I checked, Canada has two languages, and Spanish isn't one of them. In French and English it's Football. The owner is ignorant. Why perpetuate it? You know it's football, I know it's football, and the rest of the English speaking world knows that it's football. If we were talking about Chivas USA (a club with direct ties to a Mexican club, that plays in a town with a major Spanish speaking population) the argument might make sense. But, it doesn't. Do what you want, I don't care. But don't tell me, as an English speaker, that you don't see the ludicrousness of the owner's statement -- as well as that of your own argument. It's football. Socer (football), Football (soccer), however you want to put it -- it's Canada and the two official languages of that country spell it football, not futbol. Ryecatcher773 07:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

No it isn't, it's called soccer in North American countries, regardless of what the rest of the world says. And WP states that the English used in an article should match the English predominantly in that area. Therefore, we use Canadian English, which calls association football soccer. On UK articles, do we write "Manchester United are a football (soccer) team in England"? No. -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 15:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Notable Former Players List

This list seems to change daily so I'm hoping we can find something to agree on.

1. Do we mean notable in general (like O'Brien, Pinto, etc...), or notable/important player for TFC (here, players like Stamatopoulos and Eskandarian would fit in)?
2. We need to come up with a minimum requirement for a player to be considered notable. By statistics (in this case which ones) or reputation as a good player (which might be difficult since it's subjective).
3. We need to make sure that whatever consensus comes out, we stick to it!

Let me know what you think!

Lucky Strike (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Lckystrke

I think we should be much more careful in who gets added to the list. One could make a strong argument against everyone currently on the list being there. I suggest that, as a rule of thumb, the list should not contain more names than the number of years the team has existed. That way we'd be forced to think about whether Eskandarian, for example, really deserves to be a notable player when he did nothing noteworthy for TFC and has a resume that includes scoring goals at a rate of only four or five per season with a single USMNT appearance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.54.164 (talk) 12:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coaching record

I've just created a coaching record table. How does it look? Kingjeff (talk) 02:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks great, nicely done! Lucky Strike (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Lckystrke

[edit] Protected

Due to recent edit warring, this page has been protected for 3 days. Please use this time to come to a consensus on what the page should look like. If you come to a consensus before the protection expires, feel free to leave me a message or ask at WP:RFPP for the protection to be removed.

Please also use proper edit summaries when editing this page. Stifle (talk) 11:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Revert squirrel edit

{{editprotected}} I realise there is an edit war going on regarding what nickname (Reds versus Redcoats, etc.) should be used by the fans. However one of the final edits before page protection was clearly a joke. Please revert this edit - there's no record of this being used - it's a joke based on an incident last season when a squirrel ran onto the pitch during play. Nfitz (talk) 04:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

N Not done If this were indef protection I might have researched further to determine the validity of this request, but as the protection expires tomorrow, I'll just direct you to meta:The Wrong Version :D Happy‑melon 10:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Uniform Pictures

Should the pictures of the uniforms be updated? (here and on the 2008 season page) They are playing in red jerseys and red shorts now instead of the white shorts. 206.223.166.206 (talk) 14:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Toronto FC vs. Toronto Football Club

User:216.249.50.52 is claiming Toronto FC's full name is Toronto Football Club.It contradicts the section that says The "FC" in the team's name is the conventional initialism for Football Club, but in official media and documents the team has only been referred to as Toronto FC, never Toronto Football Club. Larry Tannenbaum, chairman of MLSE, stated at the team name's unveiling that "I think the way we spell it is 'futbol'." In the following sentence where it says, "In a Q&A posted on the MLSnet website, it was made clear that "FC" stood for "Football Club."" is not true. I went to that paticular source and it didn't have that question. Kingjeff (talk) 23:41, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Toronto FC Uniforms

All the other articles of the MLS clubs have removed their picutre and reverted back to the original uniform template. I think this is so because their uniforms had changed. Toronto FC's kit had changed this season as well, the shorts are no longer white, but red (the whole kit is red now). Can we discuss changing the uniform in the infobox back to the kit template with the correct colours? thanks.... --Muppeteer (talk) 19:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Add new player information

{{editprotected}} Add MF Amado Guevara #20 - Honduran Nfitz (talk) 04:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

N Not done for now - all additions to protected pages need to be reliably sourced. Happy‑melon 10:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

No lack of sources [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Not even sure why this page is fully-protected. There has never been an issue in the past, and much of the warring was by IP number. Surely a semi-protect would be more appropriate. Nfitz (talk) 13:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

N Not done. Page is not protected anymore. You can now boldly go and add señior Guevara yourself. --David Göthberg (talk) 01:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)