Talk:CF Montréal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bielo's W-L-D Record[edit]

This page has his record as 3-0-2, but he was the head coach for 4 matches from 2014-15 whenever Yallop was suspended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donutcity (talk • contribs) 17:41, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Team name[edit]

If they're linking to the Impact page, they're referring to them as the Impact, and they've openly stated the name of the team will be Impact, why wouldn't we put the article at Montreal Impact (MLS) or some variation? There is no question about what the name is for the new team. Gateman1997 (talk) 20:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

jinx --Blackbox77 (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Team name[edit]

Taken from the FAQ at montrealmls2012.com:

Q: Will the Impact keep its branding, including the name “Impact” and its 3 championship stars, once the leap will be made in MLS?

At the present moment, the organization’s intention is to maintain its name and global team image. [1]

And with that, I believe it is safe to say this team for the foreseeable future will be named the Montreal Impact. Not only does the Montreal MLS 2012 website explicitly say they will keep the Impact name, but throughout the space the future MLS team is consistently referred to as the "Montreal Impact". There is never any skirting around the issue as to what they will be called like in Vancouver. I believe this is a similar situation to Portland where they have said they will keep the "Portland Timbers" brand but could ultimately have a slightly different official name (e.g. Portland Timbers FC, etc.) This Montreal MLS club should be called the Impact with "Montreal Impact (MLS)" as an appropriate article title. --Blackbox77 (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Vancouver team has also confirmed they will have "Whitecaps" in their name, but could slightly have a different branding. So, until we find out for sure what the branding is, I say leave it at "Montreal MLS 2012". (Portland is different, because the Timbers USL logo is in their temporary MLS one). Tom Danson (talk) 21:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe your reasoning for the temp Portland logo is an official reason. Portland has specifically said they will remain the Timbers...just as Montreal has specifically said they will remain the Impact. This has nothing to do with temporary MLS expansion logos. On the reverse, Vancouver has specifically said they would like to remain the Whitecaps but are not yet sure it is possible. That is very very different than Montreal stating "the organization's intention is to maintain its name (Impact) and global team image." The name "Montreal Impact" is used over and over again in reference to the future MLS team. Vancouver never does this with the Whitecaps name. --Blackbox77 (talk) 22:38, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
People love to rush ahead of themselves on Wikipedia and update things as soon as possible. However, Montreal says they have the "intention" of retaining the Impact. That doesn't mean that they will. It just means that they would like too. Until there is an official announcement, I think this page should stay "Montreal MLS 2012." KitHutch (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to contradict reasoning for calling the Portland article Portland Timbers (MLS). Portland has said they intend on remaining the Timbers but still haven't sat down and announced the final official name yet. Like the Timbers, Montreal has not only addressed the fact they will keep the Impact name but elsewhere in their website refer to their future MLS team as the Impact. I think that is the key distinction. When their FAQ asks the question "Why does the Impact want to join MLS?" and responds with "It is the next logical step in the Montreal Impact’s progression as a professional soccer club," to me that sounds like there will be a team in MLS using the name Impact in 2012. It makes more sense to title this article "Montreal Impact (MLS)" than "Montreal MLS 2012" because the former isn't and will never be the name of anything. The only time the phrase "Montreal MLS 2012" is ever used is as a website, poster, or graphic header. When writing or talking about them, it is not even used as a stand-in placeholder name for the future team. If the official website refers to them as the Montreal Impact, that should be good enough for WIkipedia. --Blackbox77 (talk) 21:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The press conference specifically stated that the Impact will be joining MLS, and the MontrealMLS2012 FAQ would back that up. The article should be titled Montreal Impact (MLS), just like Portland (and Vancouver, though that page has never been changed to reflect the Whitecaps name). Generally, I think that any "brand changes" would mean a logo and/or color change. Any addition of "FC" or like qualifiers are minor, in my opinion. I think we should go ahead and rename the pages and deal with the extra "letters" if they happen. WeatherManNX01 (talk) 21:49, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There is no ambiguity here about what the team's name will be. They're using the Impact name, MLS is using the Impact name, the team has stated they intend to remain the Impact, the current USL/NASL owner is the owner of the MLS team so he doesn't have to purchase the rights to the name like Seattle did. The article should be moved to reflect the name of the new franchise. If they choose to add an FC or some qualifier later we can make that change then. Gateman1997 (talk) 04:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Guys, the team has officially been known as Montreal Impact FC since 1993, there isn't even a case of "adding a FC for MLS" as we've had a FC as long as we've had a team! Saputo and the MLS website have mentioned "the impact" joingin MLS, it should be Montreal Impact(MLS) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.246.78 (talk) 03:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Its been made clear in this discussion that they will be called the Impact and will still be the Impact organization. There's no reason to call them Montreal MLS 2012 just like there is no reason to make new articles about the old Impact teams that changed leagues. They're still the same organization from 1992, and that should be reflected in the Major League Soccer article. 174.93.236.217 (talk) 16:47, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're preaching to the converted. This needs to be addressed eventually bc there are numerous examples in Wikipedia where this is not done. Either they're wrong or these 4 articles are wrong, but some conformity is needed. Even if there are technicalities to the actual fiscal entities between the leagues, they should still be merged and have the infobox or the article's body reference the differences as has been done in other articles. Unak78 (talk) 07:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Evidence[edit]

As of right now, we know there will be a team in MLS in 2012 using the name "Montreal Impact" in some form. Therefore changing the article's name to "Montreal Impact (MLS)" is a reasonable course of action. Below are references backing up this statement.

  • From the Montreal-MLS FAQ: "At the present moment, the organization’s intention is to maintain its name..." Statement confirms the present name will be used in 2012. [2]
  • From the Montreal-MLS FAQ: "Why does the Impact want to join MLS? It is the next logical step in the Montreal Impact’s progression as a professional soccer club." Asking why the Impact wants to move up and saying MLS is a step in the Impact's progression very clearly states there is a future for the Impact name. [3]
  • Articles on impactmontreal.com referring to the future club as the Impact. The latest includes an article discussing youth development stating "with just 16 months from a debut in MLS, the Montreal Impact announced..." for example. [4]
  • Commissioner Don Garber refers to the 19th MLS franchise as the Impact. Garber: "Joey Saputo and his family will be in Toronto as well, the owner of the Impact, the 19th team that will join in 2012." [5]
  • The press refers to the future team as the Impact. [6] [7] While this alone does not imply an official name, it does indicate the Impact and their name are to be associated with MLS. Otherwise it can be reasonably assumed this would be discouraged.

With this evidence, I think it is safe to name this article "Montreal Impact (MLS)." Since "Montreal MLS 2012" is not the name of anything and the club has not wavered from referring to its future self as the Impact, the onus is on those who disagree to prove why this not true – not the other way around. --Blackbox77 (talk) 06:09, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed article moves[edit]

Since the 2011 NASL season is over, I'm proposing the following article moves:

  • Lower-tier Impact: Montreal Impact to Montreal Impact (1992–2011)
  • MLS team: Montreal Impact (MLS) to Montreal Impact

A fuller discussion is at the talk page for the current "Montreal Impact" article. I'll also mention it at WikiProject Football. — Dale Arnett (talk) 19:44, 20 November 2011 (UTC) Update: Looks like the process to post to WP Football is more convoluted than I thought. — Dale Arnett (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Montreal Impact - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 23:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Club culture and supporter club[edit]

why there is not club culture section yet?--> —Bouncenick 14:51, 3 Décembre 2011 2011 (UTC)

I'll venture a guess that no one has created a section yet. There is a small section on the French site that could be used as a template, but it's unreferenced. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:39, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is "culture" even supposed to be?

The template is pretty terrible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.163.62 (talk) 05:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Ching[edit]

Should we be including Brian Ching on the team roster? He has publicly stated several times and in several sources that he will never play a game for Montreal and is in fact retiring as a Houston Dynamo. 24.165.11.137 (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Ching may not have a say in the matter. When he is removed from http://www.impactmontreal.com/en/players then we should remove him from the roster here. He is under contract with MLS and he plays where he's told. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:25, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone can retire. Contract or no if he chooses not to play all the Impact can do is hold his rights. He's under no obligation to play and has stated he won't be doing so in Montreal. Gateman1997 (talk) 16:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again, no sources v sources. On Wikipedia, the latter wins. Then there's the fact that people can say anything they want, but it doesn't always come to pass. That's why primary sources are unreliable. When the club (or league) removes him from the roster, then we can take Brian Ching at his word. Until then, it's just words. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NBC work for you. http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2011/11/26/houston-dynamos-brian-ching-threatens-retirement-because-montreal-impact-drafted-him-in-expansion-draft/ Gateman1997 (talk) 19:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NBC is great. It's still his word against a contract. When he stops appearing on the club roster then we can let this cry baby off the hook. Until then we should not give him one more second of self-aggrandizing media. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Change in roster format[edit]

There was a discussion about the new roster format and we have had a trial at both the Timbers and Whitecaps articles and recently Cascadia Cup rival Sounders have converted. The idea is to move all club articles on Wikipedia to the new format as is discussed in the original discussion and more recently at the football project.

My suggestion is to complete the MLS team articles first, so if you could respond at this discussion, that would be ideal. In short, the new layout is slightly taller and less wide, but it correctly impliments WP:MOSFLAG and is better for visually impared users of Wikipedia and others who use readers. I plan to implement the change to this article by the weekend of January 20-22, however other editors could make the change sooner. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why "Impact"?[edit]

The "name" section discusses the club keeping its NASL name, but doesn't explain why that name was chosen in the first place. 12.239.145.114 (talk) 01:39, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Montreal Impact. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Blerim's status[edit]

Dzemaili was actually on loan at Bologna from the Montreal Impact and not the contrary. I have edited the roster to demonstrate that fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vlimar (talk • contribs) 15:12, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please provide WP:RS. Matthew_hk tc 12:50, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Full name[edit]

Full name is in both languages and thus should be represented in the infobox. Only having the English name is misleading. TrailBlzr (talk) 22:28, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The full name in English is not in both languages. The article can show both languages but not the infobox. As reference: the English name is not in the French project's infobox, most likely for the same reason. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:06, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I never said the full name in English was in two different languages because that wouldn't make any sense. I said the full name is in both English and French and thus needs to be displayed in the infobox accordingly. TrailBlzr (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We do not cater to other languages. There are English names that we use and there are foreign names. We use the English one in all cases where there is one, just as the French project uses the French name in all cases where there is one. Do not confuse the matter. On Wikipedia, we don't use the French name for official government bodies in a bilingual nation and we don't use the French name for sports teams: Montreal Expos, Montreal Alouettes (not sure what's up with Montreal Canadiens, but that's a different story because the infobox is wrong and the lede is right). I'm sure you're going to revert and then I'll take it to dispute resolution because you're not making cogent arguments or listening to what I'm saying. We do not present foreign-language names when there's an English exonym, which in this case, the name is an endonym! Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:59, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Impact announcing they are changing name[edit]

User:Walter Görlitz, I saw you reverted my edit about the team announcing they will be changing their name, but I don't understand why. It has been confirmed by the team and I cited a Reliable Source (Major League Soccer), which cites a direct quote from the team. This is, in my opinion, extremely relevant information pertaining to the team, and is not speculation or rumour, but verified information, which should thus be included in the article. You cited WP:NOTNEWS, but I don't see how that applies. It's not routine information, like what happened in a match, but a major fact that will impact the long-term notability of the team. RedPatchBoy (talk) 22:00, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit said nothing about a name change and while there are rumours that they will change their name, even the press reference offers no details and instead defers to the hype of the media machine by stating "We invite you to follow our platforms for more information". WP:NOTNEWS. When we know that there will be a name change or something concrete, then we write about it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The club commented: "the club confirms that it will undergo a major identity change that will be unveiled in 2021". If they have confirmed that are changing their identity, to me, that seems pretty concrete. I didn't post the speculation of the rumoured name, but they have announced that a major rebranding will occur very soon. RedPatchBoy (talk) 22:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I too have been following the news and rumours, but we're still at the NOTNEWS stage as the club is simply "changing identity" with no further details. Until it's official that the name, colours, location, official language or something else is changing, it's all irrelevant. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@RedPatchBoy: The news has hit! A lot of changes underway across the English project to reflect. 17:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 January 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move to CF Montréal. No such user (talk) 13:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Club de Foot Montréal → CF Montréal – place as common name. They won't be using the full name all the time, instead will most commonly go by CF Montréal. This rename will be consistant with club names across wikipedia and wikipedia standard naming conventions RedPatchBoy (talk) 16:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. RedPatchBoy (talk) 16:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC) [reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Montreal Impact (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:11, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Club Crest[edit]

The crest currently displayed in the article doesn't go into effect until the 2023 MLS season. Should it be reverted to the current crest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixo45 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Team colors[edit]

Messy Thinking (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2023 (UTC) I am told that this is the first-ever Montreal area major league sports franchise, if not among the first, in which red is not used in any manner. I have seen at least one such franchise not use blue, but never any that doesn't use red.[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CF_Montréal&oldid=1206602056"