So I think Grant’s survey speaks for itself, and while it’s perhaps not entirely representative—he spoke to 18 anonymous players out a league with 19 teams with a max roster of 30 first team players on each team—it’s interesting to pretend it is so as to make broad extrapolations to “prove” a point. It’s called blogging, friends.
So what therefore can we conclude from a pan-Canadian perspective?
Well, along team management/ownership lines, Canadian clubs don’t really warrant much attention either positive or negative. Vancouver’s pitch sucks a bit. But neither are Canadian clubs particularly attractive destinations. Toronto tied with Chivas in clubs players would not want to play for. Perhaps the fact no other Canadian clubs stood out is proof that the whole problem of attracting foreign players is a myth?
No because the sample size is far too small.
Oh and no Canadian clubs headed the best MLS stadium atmosphere vote, so you can stop playing that card. And players were equally neither hot nor cold on any of the Canadian club ownership groups, including MLSE. So again, perhaps players around MLS don’t see the club like Toronto fans do?
Again, no, because 18 players is just not enough to draw conclusions about widespread attitudes in the league.
As for the intangibles like “most fun road city in the league” which could be translated as “most fun city to get loaded in and do drugs prolly,” Toronto got two votes out of 18. No other Canadian clubs made the list. Montreal—Montreal—got two votes for least fun road city in the league, which just goes to show that athletes are hella stupid.
Also, sample size problem.