brentashton
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2018
- 14,598
- 21,145
AXING ELKS REBRAND SHOULD TOP THOMPSON’S TO-DO LISTGERRY MODDEJONGE [email protected] X.com: @GerryModdejonge
Edmonton Journal
Aug 15, 2024
Opening up old wounds carries some risk, but fans clearly yearn for return of Eskimos
Sure the Edmonton Elks are getting a new private owner, but will it just be a different standup comic delivering the same old punchline?
The team has become nothing short of a joke both on the field and off since the name change, dropping the old Eskimos moniker in July 2020.
Barely winning. Barely anyone showing up any more. Every decision a bad one that only seemed to compound the problem. Too many old white guys making up the fan base (yes, tragically, they actually complained about that at one point).
The punchline came when the Elks — in a display so far removed from the glory days of the Eskimos winning five
Grey Cups in a row it might as well have happened in another universe — failed to win in front of their home fans in a drought that spanned an unthinkable 1,415 days between victories at Commonwealth Stadium.
Most everyone who has the gumption to still call themselves Elks fans in public would like to forget how the team set a new North American professional sports record of 22 straight home losses. Twenty of those losses came right after the rebranding, leading to talk of a curse that lasted three years.
But the jokes didn’t end there. For the past two seasons, the
Elks have stumbled out of the gates to horrendous starts of 0-9 and 0-7, respectively, generating snickers behind the scenes at Commonwealth Stadium.
Rick LeLacheur — who stepped in as interim president and CEO after his predecessor,
Victor Cui, mysteriously vanished last summer amid a cloud of secrecy and gag orders — might as well change his name to Rick Loss-Assured.
The only remaining question, aside from “How much did the Elks lose by?” was “Have they finally hit rock bottom?”
Now, with news breaking this week of the community-owned club switching to private ownership for the first time in its 75-year existence, with local construction magnate Larry Thompson stepping forward to buy his beloved Elks even though they’re but a shadow of their former selves, his No. 1 priority has to be attracting fans back to the stands.
And that means distancing himself from the mess things have become under the Elks banner.
Let’s face it, another losing season stuck spinning their tires at the bottom of the standings and their fight song will have to be changed to Gordon Lightfoot’s The Wreck of the Edmonton Fitzgerald.
Joking aside, if there was one thing Thompson could do to make an immediate impact while also offering symbolic restitution to longtime fans who carried the club through thick and thin, it would be undoing the rebranding that was forced upon the franchise four years ago.
Yes, a return of the Edmonton Eskimos.
Whether or not you agree with the idea, it would pave the way for a return to respectability in the eyes of many Edmontonians who have since steered clear of Commonwealth Stadium.
Back then, the name got lumped in with all the other sports clubs across the continent that drew their inspiration from native American life, from the amateur to the pro ranks. All of a sudden, it somehow turned into a mockery, or cultural appropriation, to use a term from the time.
You have to remember, this was the same summer as the murder of George Floyd at the hands of police, which led to riots in the streets and a hypersensitivity surrounding minorities and the pursuit of equality.
Fast-forward to today and the socio-political landscape has once again shifted.
With Trump Era version 2.0 possibly on the horizon, there has been a pushback to more traditional views, if you will. Not everything is wrong just because somebody said so on social media. And though there is a segment of the population that will continue to argue the Eskimos name was inappropriate, this is a clearcut case of majority rules.
And the majority has spoken — with their mouths and their wallets. And while pressure from sponsors is what led the Double-E to change the name in the first place, the blowback from the fan base over the seasons to follow has been every bit as severe, if not more.
The franchise is in a financial tailspin. The emergency fund is nearing depletion. The team can’t remember how to win.
And by the time they get things turned around on the field, there might be no one left in the stands to witness it.
Of course, reversing the rebranding would open an old can of worms that plagued the club over two decades. Whenever they found success that placed them in the national spotlight, it would reopen the debate and invite a who’s who of politicians to gang tackle the club.
There is no denying the term Eskimos was thrust upon members of the Inuit community in the spirit of imperialism, and will always carry a dark history. But the flip side has seen the football team proudly wave the Eskimos banner on the way to historic runs and 14 Grey Cup championships.
At this point, Thompson and company have to weigh the good and the bad and determine initial steps in plotting a course for the dawning of a new era of private ownership, because carrying on business as usual is not the answer.
Edmonton Journal
Aug 15, 2024
Opening up old wounds carries some risk, but fans clearly yearn for return of Eskimos
Sure the Edmonton Elks are getting a new private owner, but will it just be a different standup comic delivering the same old punchline?
The team has become nothing short of a joke both on the field and off since the name change, dropping the old Eskimos moniker in July 2020.
Barely winning. Barely anyone showing up any more. Every decision a bad one that only seemed to compound the problem. Too many old white guys making up the fan base (yes, tragically, they actually complained about that at one point).
The punchline came when the Elks — in a display so far removed from the glory days of the Eskimos winning five
Grey Cups in a row it might as well have happened in another universe — failed to win in front of their home fans in a drought that spanned an unthinkable 1,415 days between victories at Commonwealth Stadium.
Most everyone who has the gumption to still call themselves Elks fans in public would like to forget how the team set a new North American professional sports record of 22 straight home losses. Twenty of those losses came right after the rebranding, leading to talk of a curse that lasted three years.
But the jokes didn’t end there. For the past two seasons, the
Elks have stumbled out of the gates to horrendous starts of 0-9 and 0-7, respectively, generating snickers behind the scenes at Commonwealth Stadium.
Rick LeLacheur — who stepped in as interim president and CEO after his predecessor,
Victor Cui, mysteriously vanished last summer amid a cloud of secrecy and gag orders — might as well change his name to Rick Loss-Assured.
The only remaining question, aside from “How much did the Elks lose by?” was “Have they finally hit rock bottom?”
Now, with news breaking this week of the community-owned club switching to private ownership for the first time in its 75-year existence, with local construction magnate Larry Thompson stepping forward to buy his beloved Elks even though they’re but a shadow of their former selves, his No. 1 priority has to be attracting fans back to the stands.
And that means distancing himself from the mess things have become under the Elks banner.
Let’s face it, another losing season stuck spinning their tires at the bottom of the standings and their fight song will have to be changed to Gordon Lightfoot’s The Wreck of the Edmonton Fitzgerald.
Joking aside, if there was one thing Thompson could do to make an immediate impact while also offering symbolic restitution to longtime fans who carried the club through thick and thin, it would be undoing the rebranding that was forced upon the franchise four years ago.
Yes, a return of the Edmonton Eskimos.
Whether or not you agree with the idea, it would pave the way for a return to respectability in the eyes of many Edmontonians who have since steered clear of Commonwealth Stadium.
Back then, the name got lumped in with all the other sports clubs across the continent that drew their inspiration from native American life, from the amateur to the pro ranks. All of a sudden, it somehow turned into a mockery, or cultural appropriation, to use a term from the time.
You have to remember, this was the same summer as the murder of George Floyd at the hands of police, which led to riots in the streets and a hypersensitivity surrounding minorities and the pursuit of equality.
Fast-forward to today and the socio-political landscape has once again shifted.
With Trump Era version 2.0 possibly on the horizon, there has been a pushback to more traditional views, if you will. Not everything is wrong just because somebody said so on social media. And though there is a segment of the population that will continue to argue the Eskimos name was inappropriate, this is a clearcut case of majority rules.
And the majority has spoken — with their mouths and their wallets. And while pressure from sponsors is what led the Double-E to change the name in the first place, the blowback from the fan base over the seasons to follow has been every bit as severe, if not more.
The franchise is in a financial tailspin. The emergency fund is nearing depletion. The team can’t remember how to win.
And by the time they get things turned around on the field, there might be no one left in the stands to witness it.
Of course, reversing the rebranding would open an old can of worms that plagued the club over two decades. Whenever they found success that placed them in the national spotlight, it would reopen the debate and invite a who’s who of politicians to gang tackle the club.
There is no denying the term Eskimos was thrust upon members of the Inuit community in the spirit of imperialism, and will always carry a dark history. But the flip side has seen the football team proudly wave the Eskimos banner on the way to historic runs and 14 Grey Cup championships.
At this point, Thompson and company have to weigh the good and the bad and determine initial steps in plotting a course for the dawning of a new era of private ownership, because carrying on business as usual is not the answer.
