-Hammer-

Yeah, me too. Early pioneers for the game in our country deserve to be rewarded in some fashion.

I dunno, I kind of disagree. I think it's more mickey mouse if they make them blow up the roster. has shades of MLS allocation draft. I don't think any other league would make them blow up their roster just for joining.

About 5 minutes ago it just dawned on me how much of a head start Ottawa is going to have against the rest of the teams if they join the CPL.
Will be seriously hard to take them down in that debut season considering the pieces they've already acquired and the chemistry while other teams are playing together for the first time.

I have no problem with that. They didn't say 6 Canadians at all time. You still create that inner competitions (Can vs. Can - Can vs. Foreigners).
Let's look at the positives.  The wording of CPL (if true) is incredibly clever. They are allowing more internationals on rosters than MLS but putting the emphasis on starting 6 Canadians and half the roster being Canadians overshadows that teams will be allowed to sign up to 11-12 internationals. Good CONCACAF internationals can be found in the Caribbean and Central America at a reasonable price as that region tends not to be the focus of top leagues.
All and all, I'm liking what we're seeing so far.
As I said earlier, my family are from Central America and if anyone thinks that a great young prospect would say no to Canada and a 85k+ salary, you guys have no clue about the reality of theses parts. Most of them will absolutely jump at the opportunity.

As far as the name, I love Forge. It's a great name that is both a tribute to the Steel industry in the Hammer, to the creativity of our arts scene and it's especially great if you play up an Academy aspect of the team. It's simple, it's centers on the whole point of the team and the league as a whole is, to give us the tools to compete on an international level and build the game in this country. It's also world's better then Founders which was god awful for multiple different reasons I stated earlier.
As far as the colors, I'm glad they are going to have one game a year running black and gold, and frankly hope they co-brand those colors as the alt kits for the team (or keeper kits) I can live with orange and grey, as I do feel grey is underused in sports. It also lets you walk that line between yellow and orange. That said, I would have preferred black, gold and grey as the colors.
As far as the logo, the Hammer logo I love it, although why the sparks are on top of the hammer and not where the Hammer is smashing is a bit odd, but I think it's suppose to be an open forge in the background spewing fire, or sparks from a Hammer strike (from the wrong angle). As I said though, I like it, kinda also looks like a sun. I also like that they kept the Hammer, simple and clean, and while they couldn't resist giving meaning to the number of lines on the handle (each representing one of the amalgamated communities of Hamilton), it's simple enough an explanation to not get ridiculous.
The HF logo, I don't hate it, but I wouldn't say I love it either, and to be honest I'm seeing more and more cracks with it every day. I'm not usually a fan of using just a letter or two letters for your logo, because it's 1) boring 2) overdone 3) makes you look like a highschool or college team and 4) doesn't communicate your branding well. When I look at it, I think "Samoan Tribal Tatoo" not "Hamilton Forge Soccer" I'll be honest, part of me googled Klingon alphabet to see if someone pulled a prank, just for kicks. It's just kinda...there, if they don't put it on a shield with some words, I'd be concerned people would just think the logo is some kind of clothing line.
I would have gone with a Hammer smashing an Anvil with golden sparks coming out on it, on a black shield back drop so the sparks also look like stars, but I can't complain as I can't design it myself.

As far as the name, I love Forge. It's a great name that is both a tribute to the Steel industry in the Hammer, to the creativity of our arts scene and it's especially great if you play up an Academy aspect of the team. It's simple, it's centers on the whole point of the team and the league as a whole is, to give us the tools to compete on an international level and build the game in this country. It's also world's better then Founders which was god awful for multiple different reasons I stated earlier.
As far as the colors, I'm glad they are going to have one game a year running black and gold, and frankly hope they co-brand those colors as the alt kits for the team (or keeper kits) I can live with orange and grey, as I do feel grey is underused in sports. It also lets you walk that line between yellow and orange. That said, I would have preferred black, gold and grey as the colors.
As far as the logo, the Hammer logo I love it, although why the sparks are on top of the hammer and not where the Hammer is smashing is a bit odd, but I think it's suppose to be an open forge in the background spewing fire, or sparks from a Hammer strike (from the wrong angle). As I said though, I like it, kinda also looks like a sun. I also like that they kept the Hammer, simple and clean, and while they couldn't resist giving meaning to the number of lines on the handle (each representing one of the amalgamated communities of Hamilton), it's simple enough an explanation to not get ridiculous.
The HF logo, I don't hate it, but I wouldn't say I love it either, and to be honest I'm seeing more and more cracks with it every day. I'm not usually a fan of using just a letter or two letters for your logo, because it's 1) boring 2) overdone 3) makes you look like a highschool or college team and 4) doesn't communicate your branding well. When I look at it, I think "Samoan Tribal Tatoo" not "Hamilton Forge Soccer" I'll be honest, part of me googled Klingon alphabet to see if someone pulled a prank, just for kicks. It's just kinda...there, if they don't put it on a shield with some words, I'd be concerned people would just think the logo is some kind of clothing line.
I would have gone with a Hammer smashing an Anvil with golden sparks coming out on it, on a black shield back drop so the sparks also look like stars, but I can't complain as I can't design it myself.

I like their secondary logo. Hope they use it more often in the future. I've seen worse to be honest

As far as the name, I love Forge. It's a great name that is both a tribute to the Steel industry in the Hammer, to the creativity of our arts scene and it's especially great if you play up an Academy aspect of the team. It's simple, it's centers on the whole point of the team and the league as a whole is, to give us the tools to compete on an international level and build the game in this country. It's also world's better then Founders which was god awful for multiple different reasons I stated earlier.
As far as the colors, I'm glad they are going to have one game a year running black and gold, and frankly hope they co-brand those colors as the alt kits for the team (or keeper kits) I can live with orange and grey, as I do feel grey is underused in sports. It also lets you walk that line between yellow and orange. That said, I would have preferred black, gold and grey as the colors.
As far as the logo, the Hammer logo I love it, although why the sparks are on top of the hammer and not where the Hammer is smashing is a bit odd, but I think it's suppose to be an open forge in the background spewing fire, or sparks from a Hammer strike (from the wrong angle). As I said though, I like it, kinda also looks like a sun. I also like that they kept the Hammer, simple and clean, and while they couldn't resist giving meaning to the number of lines on the handle (each representing one of the amalgamated communities of Hamilton), it's simple enough an explanation to not get ridiculous.
The HF logo, I don't hate it, but I wouldn't say I love it either, and to be honest I'm seeing more and more cracks with it every day. I'm not usually a fan of using just a letter or two letters for your logo, because it's 1) boring 2) overdone 3) makes you look like a highschool or college team and 4) doesn't communicate your branding well. When I look at it, I think "Samoan Tribal Tatoo" not "Hamilton Forge Soccer" I'll be honest, part of me googled Klingon alphabet to see if someone pulled a prank, just for kicks. It's just kinda...there, if they don't put it on a shield with some words, I'd be concerned people would just think the logo is some kind of clothing line.
I would have gone with a Hammer smashing an Anvil with golden sparks coming out on it, on a black shield back drop so the sparks also look like stars, but I can't complain as I can't design it myself.

As far as the name, I love Forge. It's a great name that is both a tribute to the Steel industry in the Hammer, to the creativity of our arts scene and it's especially great if you play up an Academy aspect of the team. It's simple, it's centers on the whole point of the team and the league as a whole is, to give us the tools to compete on an international level and build the game in this country. It's also world's better then Founders which was god awful for multiple different reasons I stated earlier.
As far as the colors, I'm glad they are going to have one game a year running black and gold, and frankly hope they co-brand those colors as the alt kits for the team (or keeper kits) I can live with orange and grey, as I do feel grey is underused in sports. It also lets you walk that line between yellow and orange. That said, I would have preferred black, gold and grey as the colors.
As far as the logo, the Hammer logo I love it, although why the sparks are on top of the hammer and not where the Hammer is smashing is a bit odd, but I think it's suppose to be an open forge in the background spewing fire, or sparks from a Hammer strike (from the wrong angle). As I said though, I like it, kinda also looks like a sun. I also like that they kept the Hammer, simple and clean, and while they couldn't resist giving meaning to the number of lines on the handle (each representing one of the amalgamated communities of Hamilton), it's simple enough an explanation to not get ridiculous.
The HF logo, I don't hate it, but I wouldn't say I love it either, and to be honest I'm seeing more and more cracks with it every day. I'm not usually a fan of using just a letter or two letters for your logo, because it's 1) boring 2) overdone 3) makes you look like a highschool or college team and 4) doesn't communicate your branding well. When I look at it, I think "Samoan Tribal Tatoo" not "Hamilton Forge Soccer" I'll be honest, part of me googled Klingon alphabet to see if someone pulled a prank, just for kicks. It's just kinda...there, if they don't put it on a shield with some words, I'd be concerned people would just think the logo is some kind of clothing line.
I would have gone with a Hammer smashing an Anvil with golden sparks coming out on it, on a black shield back drop so the sparks also look like stars, but I can't complain as I can't design it myself.

The H with an F hat in 90’s bad tribal tattoo lettering is pretty weird.  I thought the F video was cool though.  Let’s see what gets released tonight.
I’m quite happy with Forge instead of Founders.  Forge is a good name.

MLS will have the same impact as the NBA? I think it has the potential to have a greater impact, just because it has more of a presence in 3 teams instead of just 1. When I look at this list, it is dominated by the Toronto or the Golden Horseshoe and Canadians who moved to the US before highschool by a LARGE margin. (Like pretty much everyone except 4 from Vancouver, 2 from Montreal and 1 from Saskatoon). It's also a number in it's 30s, all time, which isn't nearly enough.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_NBA_players
However, when I also look at that, I'm left asking "Well, just about all these players went to the NCAA and went from there" how much as Basketball really grown in our country when CIS programs are still a joke, and you have graphs like the one bellow, which are still very true. I think it's more a case that Toronto highschools have benefited because of the Raptors and the NCAA is swallowing up the cream of that crop. We're still failing to qualify for the FIBA Worlds, failing to qualify for the Olympics and just now getting Bronze at the FIBA Americas. It's better then it was, don't get me wrong but it's not the springboard to say we are a Basketball nation (although outside the US, Spain and France who really is?)

It really is no stretch to see soccer eclipse basketball in Canada quickly over the next few years, because the NBA's presence is concentrated in Toronto. I don't think a lot of people out West or in Quebec care much about it. Frankly, it's a miracle that the MLB still draws as well as it does (although a generation seeing the Jays stick it to the US and Expos regret might be a factor there) and the fact that 28 Canadians have made it to the show, I think sorta speaks volumes about Baseball development in our country.
Now back to the question. Will MLS help? Sure, any time you have a local professional presence in the sport, you will see gains because you have exposure to it, even if you don't have a lot of local player development. Inspiration has a power to drive development, so yes it can and does help. There is no question MLS helps our National team, if only by raising the profile of the game, but also in development (for what it does provide).
However, the broader question, can it help enough as it stands with it's current model to get us to the World Cup, on it's own? My answer is, probably not. Why is that? Well, couple reasons.
First off, we have swaths of talent in our country not being properly cultivated out West, nevermind out East. It is no shock that the West produces a great amount of both NHL and CFL talent, and why? Because there are teams out that way. You have NHL and CFL teams in every major city save Saskatoon and Regina (mainly due to the Riders being Saskatchewan's team and the Saskatchewan not being big enough for the NHL to consider) and long established WHL and CIS Football programs in every metro of note. Having three teams is not enough to cover out country, not only from a development perspective, but from an inspirational perspective. There's not enough interest out there to have swathes of the population invovled.

Second, there is a lack of roster cohesion. It's no coincidence that most teams who win the world cup, have squads composed of players who play in their domestic league, many on the same club. It's also no surprised that Europe and South America routinely dominate because they have the strongest national leagues, and thus not only to they benefit from the strongest domestic competition, but benefit by having their best players nearby to practice together as a national squad. Say what you want about Floro, he made one VERY true statement, in that "It's hard to pull players playing in Europe and across MLS and get them together and on the same page, on the same system". So what does this have to do with MLS? Well, simply put there aren't enough players playing there to even attempt a cohesive team. There is never the problem of "Z is a better player, playing in Europe, but X and Y both play for TFC and are better together, we're sticking with them"
Third, is requirements, in that there still aren't any. Now don't get me wrong, the new MLS rules do now give an incentive for more top level Canadians to get minutes as domestics, but we're still drowned in the face of the US's population. Clubs develop talent, not the national team and Clubs only develop local talent when they either have to because the governing body demands it, or it's cheaper to develop them then to buy abroad. It's as a simple as that. Clubs are businesses the same as any other, and like any business it's up to the government body to reign them in for the benefit of the country. The problem is we can't reign in and force MLS to play more Canadians, and thus develop more Canadians. We can only request.

Now that all said, we do play in CONCAAF, which lets be honest, is not only one of the weakest federations, but also, when you think about it, one of the hardest to get into, if you aren't one of the top 3 countries. Two of the 3.5 spots will forever be locked by the US and Mexico (barring a civil war in either country) leaving 1.5 spots left, and Costa Rica has a pretty strong hold on one of those spots too. So I'm left asking, can MLS alone, get us to the point where Canadian soccer is better then Costa Rica and the next best guy? My answer has to be a no. The only way we get in, is when CONCAAF hosts and we slip into one of the spots that has opened up. Even when you take the better but still limited domestic rule in account, over time it may get us into the hex, but not much further then that. Too much of our population is disinterested in the sport, which is something that only local, independant teams can solve, because it's hard to invest in a team miles away or in a farm squad where my roster could be pillaged at any moment.
Thankfully, that's why we have the CanPL and why it needs to take off for us to get there. Not only from a development, academy standpoint, but to get butts in seat, money in CSA coffers, development programs started to target youths who can't afford to pay an academy when they have the skills and to educate the public as a whole on the game.

Totally disagree. Change in name at this point would come across as amateurish and I think the name has significant market recognition.

I agree.  Founders is just such a bad name.  

Founders makes me sad on both the inside and out. 

Founders makes me sad on both the inside and out. 

Founders makes me sad on both the inside and out. 

Founders makes me sad on both the inside and out. 

1) Glad I'm not alone, if they end up picking it part of me wants to see a twitter revolt that leads into a proper naming contest after such an awful name selection.
2) From my understanding, and maybe it's more of an Irish thing but I believe it has origins with the Celts wandering looking for a home, of which the Gaels eventually found in Scotland. I believe it may also have origins in the word Allaban and the original name of Alba for Scotland, but that is a bit of conjecture and I'm not that good a linguist. I believe there is also was a gentleman in the 1820s and 30s that Wandered the British isles Anonymously performing in towns entirely for charity due to a bet he lost, and he was known as the Wandering Piper, and everyone I know associates bagpipes with the tartan. Nevermind the fact that Nova Scotia was born of Scottish immigrants who wandered away from Scotland.
https://blog.nls.uk/just-who-was-the-wandering-piper/
3) Pretty sure whichever one is horses, I don't think a name with overt Christian overtones would go over well. This is why I said, I'd be wary of them using it in Saskatchewan to try to piggyback off the success of the Roughriders whose name is rumored to be due to Canadian troops who road to Theodore Roosevelt calavry unit of the same name, or possibly the Calgary Stampeders who are named after the rodeo, just for the sake of continuing the horse theme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rough_Riders

I have never heard of Founder being used as a term to describe a foundry worker/metalworker/foundryman, which are the names atypical of that occupation. Likely because of the duality it shares with Founder as someone who establishes an establishment. That said, it is in the dictionary, so you aren't wrong. I just think if you want to take that road, you go back to Steelers or go with a less potentially arrogant name.

So here's my take on the names.

Calvary - Marketable and bold enough, but a bit old timey if there isn't a good story behind it. If this though is an attempt to bottle the Roughriders lightening in a bottle, that's a dangerous proposition. Also encourages Vuluvezas ;D
Port City - This is a safe bet name that is easy to market with a nautical theme. So long as the locals aren't the kind to roll their eyes on this one, it can work. That said, this is pretty generic. I can't fault someone going with the safe bet, but I can't applaud it as groundbreaking either.
Calgary FC - This is generic, and don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with that, but it strikes me that it'd be easier to try to pull from the Foothills or come up with something from the locals. Once again, can't fault the safe bet, but can't be wowed by it.
Wanderers FC - A great name, connects with the region's heritage and soccer culture. Leans towards a tartan theme which is perfect for New Scotland. There's really nothing to complain about here.
York 9 - Simple, straight, to the point, connects with the communities in the area and leaves you options to come up with your own logo and marketing (see Indy 11). Posistive for the most part.

Founders FC - This is an awful name, and whoever conceived it should feel bad about themselves. First, it's arrogant and pretentious. The say we're the first that's what's important is sounding off on ego. Second, whenever I think Founders, I think a bunch of old men huddled around a table, and who wants that as their mascot. Third, rhymes with Flounder, Downer and there are any number of awful ways to make fun of it. Fourth, it makes it seem that the ownership and management are more important then the boys on the pitch. That making the league comes before the local club, which once again, the exact opposite thing you want. Last, the history here is tangential at best. The things Hamilton has done first aren't things you associate with the name Founders. We had the first telephone exchange, but we didn't found the telephone service. We had the first street lights, but we didn't found the electric grid (and mainly because Nikola Telsa was a nice guy). We might have had the first Tim Hortons but that was less a founding and more of an Amibitious man starting a business using a hockey player's name. About the only town I can see Founders working for is Charlottetown, and even then I'd think they'd be hesitant to go down that road. Seriously, this name has the prestige of those people on you tube who comment "First" on every video they come across. I've given this a week of though, and it's still awful and everyone who I have talked to about the name has pretty much said, it's either god awful, I prefer x name more or meh. Not a single person I am aware of has been wowed at all, and it's definitely not a safe bet name. I'd rather have Hamilton United or Steelers or any number of other names then Founders. Really hoping a naming contest occurs.

Next up YEG

I really don't know what the Esk's objection is here. From my understanding they have additional fields in Edmonton. Don't they also have access to Foote Field? I know the Ti-Cats generally use Ron Joyce or a nearby indoor soccer dome for many of their practices. I get the Huskies objections, but do they draw significantly to require a large facility?

Last York 9

Glad to see another team getting announced officially, where are they playing?

Well, part of that I would argue is fault of the Cats. There was a time limit on the contract for a reason. I mean, they could have gone out an gotten an NASL team at the time (despite the risks of the traffic scandal) and it might have saved that league and kept Ottawa in it. Then again, it likely still would have been the disaster it is now. MLSE or another party with an in at the CSA could have made a better case for a team and put one at THF to the Cats dismay. Given that the city extended the contract for the Cats and turned away the Lynx at the time with their incomplete bid I think speaks to the city trying to make it work for the Cats. They could have easily said no, and we're going to wait and see if the Lynx/TFC2 cleans up it's bid (which is moot now since the CSA is really pushing for the CanPL).

Now, it really depends on the contract verbiage of the current stadium deal and it's a private document. Regardless, the lawsuit in question isn't chump change. It has a known floor of at least 3 million and it is likely quite a bit more then that. How much is legitimate and how much is frivolous is the question? I get the impression, the team is engaging in massive positional bargaining and the city just wants it to go away without having to pay a dime (since they city is in a perpetual budget crunch) so it is what it is. Both sides likely have a completely fair case here, and both sides are being stubborn.

Basically the jist of it is Green feels that the lawsuit the Cats are pursuing in regards to the stadium is excessive. Part of the deal is the Cats are paid 3 million for the lost games that occured at Tim Hortons Field and Green (and I presume most of the council) is fine with that. However, there are deficiencies in the stadium. Some rooms are smaller then advertised, some rails were not done with plexiglass and obstruct sight lines, beer taps weren't installed and were part of the build order (which in turn costed the team money) etc. As to how much those claims are worth, I don't know but Green seems to be giving the impression the Cats are asking for a ludicrous sum to address these deficiencies. 
From my understanding, the framework of the stadium build deal is that the Cats must bring issues to the city and the city must basically act (and use it's lawyers) to then go after Infrastructure Ontario, who then goes after the builders. That claims, flow through the city and must be in good faith.  From my understanding the Cats have sued pretty much everyone who is involved with the build, city, province builder, etc. but mainly to protect their legal standing in case one of them goes awry. 

What Green is reiterating a city of Hamilton policy, which is that anyone who is involved in litigation with the city, doesn't get new business from the city unless the litigation is sorted out. The reasoning behind it is that it puts pressure on the party to settle its claims with the city, and that the optics of working with someone who is sueing you is less then ideal. In this case, I like to think it is more of a technicality, because the Cats and the City know that the province and the builder are to blame, but because the city needs to be this middleman, it's still technically litigation (that the city could be on the hook for). It also completely negates any chance of the city putting even a nickel towards a Grey Cup festival.

What this pretty much means unless there is some very strong legal verbage in the current contract that states the team has right to this many dates if they have a soccer franchise (and from what I can tell, Scott Mitchell seems to think there is, but he city seems to think there isn't) the city won't lease the stadium for soccer to the Ti-Cats until the rest of the litigation is resolved. Basically if there is any option that the city can say "No, we are not exercising that optional portion of the lease" their policy will dictate them using that doing so. It really is hard to say if the city or the Cats are playing games here trying to drag things out or play this game of chicken so they can get what they want (The Cats seeking a pay day which they do deserve but potentially not to the extent they are asking for or the city who just wants this issue to go away) which they pretty much did during the entire stadium debate.
All of the rumors and hearsay I've heard seems to contradict other rumors and hearsay so as far as I can guess both sides are too stubborn even get together, talk and get a real compromise done and neither side is really opening up and maintaining the level of communication that the other side deserves. This may be due to legal reasons since if the city hashes out a deal with them it could endanger getting paid by the province and builder. However given how long the city of Hamilton has been mismanaged by it's perpetually incumbent council, and how much of a managerial gong show the last two Ti-Cat seasons have been, I can't say either side's management is particularly impressive right now.

Basically the jist of it is Green feels that the lawsuit the Cats are pursuing in regards to the stadium is excessive. Part of the deal is the Cats are paid 3 million for the lost games that occured at Tim Hortons Field and Green (and I presume most of the council) is fine with that. However, there are deficiencies in the stadium. Some rooms are smaller then advertised, some rails were not done with plexiglass and obstruct sight lines, beer taps weren't installed and were part of the build order (which in turn costed the team money) etc. As to how much those claims are worth, I don't know but Green seems to be giving the impression the Cats are asking for a ludicrous sum to address these deficiencies. 
From my understanding, the framework of the stadium build deal is that the Cats must bring issues to the city and the city must basically act (and use it's lawyers) to then go after Infrastructure Ontario, who then goes after the builders. That claims, flow through the city and must be in good faith.  From my understanding the Cats have sued pretty much everyone who is involved with the build, city, province builder, etc. but mainly to protect their legal standing in case one of them goes awry. 

What Green is reiterating a city of Hamilton policy, which is that anyone who is involved in litigation with the city, doesn't get new business from the city unless the litigation is sorted out. The reasoning behind it is that it puts pressure on the party to settle its claims with the city, and that the optics of working with someone who is sueing you is less then ideal. In this case, I like to think it is more of a technicality, because the Cats and the City know that the province and the builder are to blame, but because the city needs to be this middleman, it's still technically litigation (that the city could be on the hook for). It also completely negates any chance of the city putting even a nickel towards a Grey Cup festival.

What this pretty much means unless there is some very strong legal verbage in the current contract that states the team has right to this many dates if they have a soccer franchise (and from what I can tell, Scott Mitchell seems to think there is, but he city seems to think there isn't) the city won't lease the stadium for soccer to the Ti-Cats until the rest of the litigation is resolved. Basically if there is any option that the city can say "No, we are not exercising that optional portion of the lease" their policy will dictate them using that doing so. It really is hard to say if the city or the Cats are playing games here trying to drag things out or play this game of chicken so they can get what they want (The Cats seeking a pay day which they do deserve but potentially not to the extent they are asking for or the city who just wants this issue to go away) which they pretty much did during the entire stadium debate.
All of the rumors and hearsay I've heard seems to contradict other rumors and hearsay so as far as I can guess both sides are too stubborn even get together, talk and get a real compromise done and neither side is really opening up and maintaining the level of communication that the other side deserves. This may be due to legal reasons since if the city hashes out a deal with them it could endanger getting paid by the province and builder. However given how long the city of Hamilton has been mismanaged by it's perpetually incumbent council, and how much of a managerial gong show the last two Ti-Cat seasons have been, I can't say either side's management is particularly impressive right now.

Basically the jist of it is Green feels that the lawsuit the Cats are pursuing in regards to the stadium is excessive. Part of the deal is the Cats are paid 3 million for the lost games that occured at Tim Hortons Field and Green (and I presume most of the council) is fine with that. However, there are deficiencies in the stadium. Some rooms are smaller then advertised, some rails were not done with plexiglass and obstruct sight lines, beer taps weren't installed and were part of the build order (which in turn costed the team money) etc. As to how much those claims are worth, I don't know but Green seems to be giving the impression the Cats are asking for a ludicrous sum to address these deficiencies. 
From my understanding, the framework of the stadium build deal is that the Cats must bring issues to the city and the city must basically act (and use it's lawyers) to then go after Infrastructure Ontario, who then goes after the builders. That claims, flow through the city and must be in good faith.  From my understanding the Cats have sued pretty much everyone who is involved with the build, city, province builder, etc. but mainly to protect their legal standing in case one of them goes awry. 

What Green is reiterating a city of Hamilton policy, which is that anyone who is involved in litigation with the city, doesn't get new business from the city unless the litigation is sorted out. The reasoning behind it is that it puts pressure on the party to settle its claims with the city, and that the optics of working with someone who is sueing you is less then ideal. In this case, I like to think it is more of a technicality, because the Cats and the City know that the province and the builder are to blame, but because the city needs to be this middleman, it's still technically litigation (that the city could be on the hook for). It also completely negates any chance of the city putting even a nickel towards a Grey Cup festival.

What this pretty much means unless there is some very strong legal verbage in the current contract that states the team has right to this many dates if they have a soccer franchise (and from what I can tell, Scott Mitchell seems to think there is, but he city seems to think there isn't) the city won't lease the stadium for soccer to the Ti-Cats until the rest of the litigation is resolved. Basically if there is any option that the city can say "No, we are not exercising that optional portion of the lease" their policy will dictate them using that doing so. It really is hard to say if the city or the Cats are playing games here trying to drag things out or play this game of chicken so they can get what they want (The Cats seeking a pay day which they do deserve but potentially not to the extent they are asking for or the city who just wants this issue to go away) which they pretty much did during the entire stadium debate.
All of the rumors and hearsay I've heard seems to contradict other rumors and hearsay so as far as I can guess both sides are too stubborn even get together, talk and get a real compromise done and neither side is really opening up and maintaining the level of communication that the other side deserves. This may be due to legal reasons since if the city hashes out a deal with them it could endanger getting paid by the province and builder. However given how long the city of Hamilton has been mismanaged by it's perpetually incumbent council, and how much of a managerial gong show the last two Ti-Cat seasons have been, I can't say either side's management is particularly impressive right now.