CFL 2024

[trick91]

Elks/Eskimos have never missed the playoffs 3 straight seasons in a row before the last 3 seasons. They have actually missed the playoffs the last 4 out of 5 years.

Edmonton recently went 1,415 days without a home victory, setting a new North American professional sports record of 22 consecutive home losses.

 

[joestevens29]

The team has had bad stretches before and the fanbase still supported them. The Eskimos never had attendance crater like this in their decades long existence.

The Oil kings are one of the best drawing teams in the WHL the last few years despite being bad. The Riverhawks as well, no problem drawing crowds despite not being competitive.


Edmontonians show up for their teams even if they are bad.

So confusing thought you were Arty Spooners basement

I guess Frank Costanza is more fitting to your pic.

Back to your post, the fans were leaving this club even when we won the grey cup. The organization/league alienated fans long before the name change.

People are making it seem like this is a new issue, but it isn't. It all started going downhill when they got away from CW's bar and the younger drinking crowd that would go and make the Esks their weekly night out.

This club/league hasn't be able to keep a pulse on how to run a successful organization in decades.

Gone are those days of the 2000's when 50k if not 60k was achievable for Roughrider games here on a Friday/Saturday or the Labor day Rematch.

Elks/Eskimos have never missed the playoffs 3 straight seasons in a row before the last 3 seasons. They have actually missed the playoffs the last 4 out of 5 years.

Edmonton recently went 1,415 days without a home victory, setting a new North American professional sports record of 22 consecutive home losses.

2017 since we actually won more games than loss. That simply isn't acceptable in a league this small

 

[bellagiobob]

We will support a losing team, but are smart enough to tell the difference between a few losing years and complete incompetence from top to bottom in an organization.

 

[trick91]

Elks had the 3rd highest average crowd of 24,774 in the CFL in 2023, a 4.1% rise over the previous year.

 

[bellagiobob]

Elks had the 3rd highest average crowd of 24,774 in the CFL in 2023, a 4.1% rise over the previous year.

Be interesting what this years STH count is. I think there were quite a few loyal fans who were willing to give Jones a pass after his disastrous year one, but things didn't really improve much, if any, last year. And now with the closing of the top of the stadium, lots of disappointed and displaced long time seat holders.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

Elks had the 3rd highest average crowd of 24,774 in the CFL in 2023, a 4.1% rise over the previous year.

A 4 percent rise over an all time low. That’s not good.

 

[Captain Fantastic]

Be interesting what this years STH count is. I think there were quite a few loyal fans who were willing to give Jones a pass after his disastrous year one, but things didn't really improve much, if any, last year. And now with the closing of the top of the stadium, lots of disappointed and displaced long time seat holders.

I didn't renew. Three years of shitty football was enough for me. Was not a fan of them closing the Upper bowl as well. Loved my seats. They called and emailed my at least a dozen times to renew so they're trying hard. No interest. They've turned me off in many ways.

 

[K1984]

I didn't renew. Three years of shitty football was enough for me. Was not a fan of them closing the Upper bowl as well. Loved my seats. They called and emailed my at least a dozen times to renew so they're trying hard. No interest. They turned me off in many ways.

Closing the upper bowl makes some sense in a vacuum, but it's a gamble. I know some season seat holders that had good 55 yard line seats in the upper bowl that basically got punted to the corners for the lower bowl and a requirement to pay significantly more to get an actual good view.

I imagine the calculus is that they will draw more fans with a better atmosphere that will make up for any seat holder attrition, but it is definitely a gamble.

 

[samiam]

Closing the upper bowl makes some sense in a vacuum, but it's a gamble. I know some season seat holders that had good 55 yard line seats in the upper bowl that basically got punted to the corners for the lower bowl and a requirement to pay significantly more to get an actual good view.

I imagine the calculus is that they will draw more fans with a better atmosphere that will make up for any seat holder attrition, but it is definitely a gamble.

After 15 yrs as an EE seat holder, I'm not renewing my season seats, along with the other 12 people we've sat with in our upper level section/area for the last dozen years. This is 100% strictly because of the closing of the upper level.
This has nothing to do with team performance (although that would be excuse enough), but rather the fact that they are choosing to no longer allow me to purchase my seats that I've had for the past 15 yrs.
They say they are starving for seat holders, and would have 12 more (13 including myself) that would gladly re-up, if they'd simply take our money, just like they have every year up until now.
They talk a good game, but based on their actions, it seems to me that they're really not that desperate at all for seat holders.
If they deem it too much of an expense to have both upper decks open for so few people, why not simply keep one side of the upper level open. This would reduce upper deck expenses for them by 50%, as well as appease all of the people who insist on only wanting to sit in the upper deck. Why not keep the east side open, where it would appear much more full opposite the tv cameras, than a completely empty upper deck, that won't look to good on tv. This idea would have saved them from losing many of their seat holders. (13 just in my group alone.)
Just my 2 cents.

 

[K1984]

After 15 yrs as an EE seat holder, I'm not renewing my season seats, along with the other 12 people we've sat with in our upper level section/area for the last dozen years. This is 100% strictly because of the closing of the upper level.
This has nothing to do with team performance (although that would be excuse enough), but rather the fact that they are choosing to no longer allow me to purchase my seats that I've had for the past 15 yrs.
They say they are starving for seat holders, and would have 12 more (13 including myself) that would gladly re-up, if they'd simply take our money, just like they have every year up until now.
They talk a good game, but based on their actions, it seems to me that they're really not that desperate at all for seat holders.
If they deem it too much of an expense to have both upper decks open for so few people, why not simply keep one side of the upper level open. This would reduce upper deck expenses for them by 50%, as well as appease all of the people who insist on only wanting to sit in the upper deck. Why not keep the east side open, where it would appear much more full opposite the tv cameras, than a completely empty upper deck, that won't look to good on tv. This idea would have saved them from losing many of their seat holders. (13 just in my group alone.)
Just my 2 cents.

You're probably on the right track.

A common sense compromise could have been something along the lines of lower bowl and upper bowl seats below row 55 and within the end zones are available for purchase. North Side End Zone seats covered as normal. Corners in both end zones are some combination of general admission, party area, knothole gang, etc. The "experience" seats.

You cover all bases. People that want to watch football are covered, people that want to watch football in the upper deck are covered, you improve fan density and atmosphere, and you also create a party space for those that are there just to drink/party/socialize.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

We will support a losing team, but are smart enough to tell the difference between a few losing years and complete incompetence from top to bottom in an organization.

Gonna stump for my hometown Blades up for this award : Blades named East Division nominee for WHL Business of the Year - Saskatoon Blades

Credit to the Oil Kings fans for supporting a down cycle in their well run program. Not sure if they operate similar to the Hitmen who are owned by the Flamers but there is/was significant benefit running as part of an immense vertical marketing conglomeration. When I moved to Cowtown early 2000's Hitmen tickets were a free, value add to their elite season ticket holders who often passed on tickets for use by others. Ability for cross promotion and marketing to segment young families to the cheaper junior product is a massive asset while nurturing a pathway for lifelong supporters through the pipeline from junior to NHL and its big ticket, top of market ticket pricing. With minuscule labour cost, junior hockey can still be a profit centre for such operations. Not a criticism, still great to draw big, sustaining crowds. Just very different world for the majority of smaller market junior clubs.

The Blades were poorly run for a long time and their season ticket base and game support eroded away as a result. Very happy to see a really strong team on-ice and some creativity in terms of engaging fans and broader community. The cross promotion with their baseball product, the Saskatoon Berries, in particular, is fun! Saskatoon Berries

Go Blades Go!

Back to CFL talk, I like the Riders signing QB Jack Coan and adding Chase Claypool to their negotiating list. Claypool likely lands a fourth NFL home based on ability, not attitude, but worth a negotiation list spot if it comes to CFL or bust.

 

[bone]

Would just be nice if they treated fans like they have a basic level of maturity to be able to handle the word "Eskimos" accurately used in historical context.

If they need to ban the word now, then fine. I just don't want to hear about the "'78 Elks" anymore. It's ridiculous and patronizing. Other organizations that have been brow beaten to change their names don't do this, seems to just be an "Elk" thing.

The zealous desire to simply eradicate the word entirely is concerning in a macro sense even beyond a football team. Could not be any more 1984.

I'm okay with this view of things. I just don't buy into the rhetoric that it's a different franchise. Has the current group been a good stewart of said franchise, I'd be hard pressed to agree, but it's the same franchise.

 

[brentashton]

Gonna stump for my hometown Blades up for this award : Blades named East Division nominee for WHL Business of the Year - Saskatoon Blades

Credit to the Oil Kings fans for supporting a down cycle in their well run program. Not sure if they operate similar to the Hitmen who are owned by the Flamers but there is/was significant benefit running as part of an immense vertical marketing conglomeration. When I moved to Cowtown early 2000's Hitmen tickets were a free, value add to their elite season ticket holders who often passed on tickets for use by others. Ability for cross promotion and marketing to segment young families to the cheaper junior product is a massive asset while nurturing a pathway for lifelong supporters through the pipeline from junior to NHL and its big ticket, top of market ticket pricing. With minuscule labour cost, junior hockey can still be a profit centre for such operations. Not a criticism, still great to draw big, sustaining crowds. Just very different world for the majority of smaller market junior clubs.

The Blades were poorly run for a long time and their season ticket base and game support eroded away as a result. Very happy to see a really strong team on-ice and some creativity in terms of engaging fans and broader community. The cross promotion with their baseball product, the Saskatoon Berries, in particular, is fun! Saskatoon Berries

Go Blades Go!

Back to CFL talk, I like the Riders signing QB Jack Coan and adding Chase Claypool to their negotiating list. Claypool likely lands a fourth NFL home based on ability, not attitude, but worth a negotiation list spot if it comes to CFL or bust.

Since the Brodsky family sold to the team to the Edmonton based Priestner family, things seem to have turned around for the better in Toon town. Steve Hogle coming in as part of the management group initially, was also a smart move.

 

[bone]

I know it doesn’t make sense to some but it just doesn’t feel like my team. I still go to games but that connection / pride is gone. People like Dustin Nielson will insist it’s just because the team is garbage (which doesn’t help) but that’s just not the case for me. I have supported teams through worse.

The organization slapped the fan base in the face imo and the elks logo is just a reminder of that.

I don't disagree with any of this, but I'll contend that this started well before the name change and recent management has done a piss poor job of being stewards of the franchise, but it is the same franchise that's going through it's worst time in history at the exact same time that the league itself has been going through a bit of an identity crisis.

 

[bone]

When you get public statements from your BOD president, basically saying it's time to move on from the older white guys and try to capture the younger, hip crowd with a new name, etc, you run the risk of losing loyalty. And that loyalty is longstanding and spread through that group with their friends, families, grandchildren, etc. Furthermore, those are the people with the bigger pockets. As we've seen the last few years, the younger hip crowd doesn't quite share the same enthusiasm to purchase tickets/merch/food/etc.

For sure, I think this was a horrible misstep by the board, which only goes to support my comments that recently we've had terrible stewards for the franchise. That doesn't mean the franchise folded and restarted as a new one.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Since the Brodsky family sold to the team to the Edmonton based Priestner family, things seem to have turned around for the better in Toon town. Steve Hogle coming in as part of the management group initially, was also a smart move.

Absolutely. The Priestners have done a great job all around. Winning on-ice and building up the Blades brand within the community along with requisite financial investment to have success in both areas. Waited a lonnnnng time to see the Blades at top of league standings. Lived through a lot of unfulfilled expectations over decades and decades.

 

[joestevens29]

Gonna stump for my hometown Blades up for this award : Blades named East Division nominee for WHL Business of the Year - Saskatoon Blades

Credit to the Oil Kings fans for supporting a down cycle in their well run program. Not sure if they operate similar to the Hitmen who are owned by the Flamers but there is/was significant benefit running as part of an immense vertical marketing conglomeration. When I moved to Cowtown early 2000's Hitmen tickets were a free, value add to their elite season ticket holders who often passed on tickets for use by others. Ability for cross promotion and marketing to segment young families to the cheaper junior product is a massive asset while nurturing a pathway for lifelong supporters through the pipeline from junior to NHL and its big ticket, top of market ticket pricing. With minuscule labour cost, junior hockey can still be a profit centre for such operations. Not a criticism, still great to draw big, sustaining crowds. Just very different world for the majority of smaller market junior clubs.

The Blades were poorly run for a long time and their season ticket base and game support eroded away as a result. Very happy to see a really strong team on-ice and some creativity in terms of engaging fans and broader community. The cross promotion with their baseball product, the Saskatoon Berries, in particular, is fun! Saskatoon Berries

Go Blades Go!

Back to CFL talk, I like the Riders signing QB Jack Coan and adding Chase Claypool to their negotiating list. Claypool likely lands a fourth NFL home based on ability, not attitude, but worth a negotiation list spot if it comes to CFL or bust.

Think it's probably a little easier to understand a slumping WHL club that literally just won the WHL title couple seasons back. Then after a horrible season had a real good bounce back year.

The cycle has really been there since they came back to the WHL. 4 bad years rebuilding than 3-4 years at the top.

CFL on the other hand it's just incompetence to be this bad for this long

 

[guymez]

I don't disagree with any of this, but I'll contend that this started well before the name change and recent management has done a piss poor job of being stewards of the franchise, but it is the same franchise that's going through it's worst time in history at the exact same time that the league itself has been going through a bit of an identity crisis.

Serious question...how can it be the same franchise when it is activley trying to distance itself from its own franchise history?

 

[bone]

Serious question...how can it be the same franchise when it is activley trying to distance itself from its own franchise history?

It hasn't once tried to distance itself from its franchise's history. Even to the extent they picked a name though there were possibly better ones out there just so they could keep the EE. Just the name they've tried to distance themselves from, which I'll agree is ill advised to try and completely whitewash the name.

 

[guymez]

It hasn't once tried to distance itself from its franchise's history. Even to the extent they picked a name though there were possibly better ones out there just so they could keep the EE. Just the name they've tried to distance themselves from, which I'll agree is ill advised to try and completely whitewash the name.

The obvious question becomes...how do you (or can you) seperate the name from the history?

 

[K1984]

It hasn't once tried to distance itself from its franchise's history. Even to the extent they picked a name though there were possibly better ones out there just so they could keep the EE. Just the name they've tried to distance themselves from, which I'll agree is ill advised to try and completely whitewash the name.

It's more than just the name. Off the top of my head:

- The dumb "Elks" logo that they originally promised not to introduce when they first announced the name change (whole point of a name starting with E was to keep the EE logo)

- For zero reason whatsoever they went away from the traditional gold letters/numbers on the uniforms that had been a standard since forever

- Began referring to all aspects of the organization as "Elks." "Elks legend Warren Moon; the '86 Champion Elks"

- The force feed of "antlers so cool!" type nonsense

- The dumb antlers on the helmets the first year that were mercifully changed, but not to the normal logo, but a weird hybrid substitute instead

Name and logo are a major, major part of a team's identity and history. It can't just be brushed off.

Honestly, they would have done a lot better to change absolutely nothing other than calling the team the "EE Football Club" or even just "Edmonton Football Club" and maintained every other aspect of the operation. "Esks" is the most common sense compromise that covers every base, but they chose to throw the baby out with the bathwater instead.

 

[bone]

The obvious question becomes...how do you (or can you) seperate the name from the history?

I've already said that in a previous post. You don't exclude Cassius Clay's history from Mohammed Ali's history. Yusuf Islam doesn't exclude songs in his setlist he created as Cat Steven's.

If the team folded and went through expansion etc, I'm with you, but literally nothing changed but the name on that fateful day, and unfortunately a team of buffoons were running the ship steering it every which way but the correct way and drove it into an iceberg. Would that management team miraculously had better results without the name change... same idiots making the same decisions, so I don't see why.

 

[K1984]

I've already said that in a previous post. You don't exclude Cassius Clay's history from Mohammed Ali's history. Yusuf Islam doesn't exclude songs in his setlist he created as Cat Steven's.

If the team folded and went through expansion etc, I'm with you, but literally nothing changed but the name on that fateful day, and unfortunately a team of buffoons were running the ship steering it every which way but the correct way and drove it into an iceberg. Would that management team miraculously had better results without the name change... same idiots making the same decisions, so I don't see why.

This just isn't true.

Also, the Cat Stevens and Mohammed Ali examples aren't in any way comparable. Their brand is their music and fighting skill not their name and uniform.

 

[bone]

It's more than just the name. Off the top of my head:

- The dumb "Elks" logo that they originally promised not to introduce when they first announced the name change (whole point of a name starting with E was to keep the EE logo)

- For zero reason whatsoever they went away from the traditional gold letters/numbers on the uniforms that had been a standard since forever

- Began referring to all aspects of the organization as "Elks." "Elks legend Warren Moon; the '86 Champion Elks"

- The force feed of "antlers so cool!" type nonsense

- The dumb antlers on the helmets the first year that were mercifully changed, but not to the normal logo, but a weird hybrid substitute instead

Name and logo are a major, major part of a team's identity and history. It can't just be brushed off.

Honestly, they would have done a lot better to change absolutely nothing other than calling the team the "EE Football Club" or even just "Edmonton Football Club" and maintained every other aspect of the operation. "Esks" is the most common sense compromise that covers every base, but they chose to throw the baby out with the bathwater instead.

Per my last post, the idiots steering the ship made stupid mistakes promoting the wrong things coming out of the name change. Some of which likely driven by a desire to move merchandise replacing outdated merchandise fans already (ie. the Elk logo and number colour change).

White washing any reference to any version of the word was a misstep, but it never seemed aimed at changing their history and accomplishments, it was about distancing themselves from a name. They should have taken a softer approach to this, but it's still the same franchise.

 

[bone]

This just isn't true.

Also, the Cat Stevens and Mohammed Ali examples aren't in any way comparable. Their brand is their music and fighting skill not their name and uniform.

So did they fire all of their management and executive and get new owners. Did they release every player on the roster putting them into a dispersal draft then in turn participated in an expansion draft.

Every person working for the Eskimos on its last day, was still working for them the next day when they became the Edmonton Football Team, and everyone working for the Edmonton Football Team on its last day worked for them the first day they were the Elks. All that changed was the name, and how they promoted the team in regards to the name (ie. logos, jersey numbers, etc).

They are the same organization and the same franchise. Albeit a franchise with a tarnished legacy for how it was handled.

I'd say Ali and Stevens are very similar. They changed their names because they found the old names offensive and insisted they get referred to by their new names but didn't turn their back on their achievements (granted Yusuf Islam was kind of forced to stop performing for some times and seems a little less militant on this as he's aged).