DJT Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 From The Edmonton Sun through Canoe: Are the Aviators due for a crash landing? By SCOTT ZERR, EDMONTON SUN Sputter, choke, sputter ... Attention all passengers: Buckle your seat belts and hold on. We're in for a bit of turbulence. It must be a bumpy ride over at the Edmonton Aviators' office because there just couldn't be that many more ways things could be going wrong for the expansion A-League soccer club. The men's team has yet to win in seven games and is coming off a 6-0 drubbing to the Portland Timbers Thursday night. The loss was dubbed a "valuable lesson" in the post-game press release. Just how worthwhile is it getting handed a blowout loss? And that pounding is heaped onto the fact the Aviators are having a dreadful time trying to figure out how to score. And then there's the release of all-star defender Rick Titus, who expressed his displeasure about the team upon his departure. To put a cherry on this melting sundae, there's the fact that the team is - to put it mildly - struggling at the gate. Yes, their home opener was a miserable day weather-wise, but the fact that less than 3,500 fans showed up for their second home date was a major disappointment. A NHL playoff game didn't keep that many away. The team has a huge image problem. Piddly things nag at some people - like Aviators not being the greatest nickname in the world. But there are valid points that take much greater precedence. SERIOUS SCHEDULING PROBLEMS Through no fault of their own, the Aviators were dealt a serious scheduling problem (thanks to the Eskimos), with just one weekend home date remaining for their inaugural season. The thousands of discounted passes handed out to kids registered in minor soccer are in large part worthless because the team is playing on weeknights - school nights until the end of this month. The second half of their doubleheaders don't end until at least 10:30 p.m. and that puts a big-time hit on a young crowd even during the summer months. But maybe the biggest detriment has been the team's desire to play in Commonwealth Stadium. Management's plan was to attract more than 11,000 for home games, with both the men's and women's teams situated in North America's largest natural-turf complex. It's not working. And now tickets for Tuesday's double-dip have been dropped to a mere $10. Lowering the price may draw a few more faces, but doesn't that go further to stating the desperate nature of the team? By the state of affairs both on and off the field, it isn't a good bet that the Aviators will now start to attract crowds that hit five digits. Time and time again, since the Aviators first launched, it's been wondered aloud by local soccer afficionados why the club didn't opt to utilize either Clarke Park or Foote Field. Both would have needed significant upgrades to jack up seating capacity to hit the A-League's bylaw-enforced minimum of 5,000 seats. But would it have been smarter for the club to put some money into either one of those facilities to have its fan base tucked into more intimate surroundings? COMMONWEALTH CAVERN It's not something the brass even considered, yet more than half of the teams in the league are playing in facilities more akin to Foote and Clarke than Commonwealth. The idea of making your team look first class by playing in a first-class building is all right if the team is going to draw crowds worthwhile of the facility. Right now, it's small pockets of bodies scattered about a giant cavern. Wouldn't it have been the better move to fill Foote or Clarke to the brim, with access to better availability to play more weekend games for the first season and then make the move to Commonwealth in Year 2 or 3? If image is everything, recent events are making the Aviators look more like bush pilots than airline captains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 For an Edmonton reporter he sure doesn't know much about bush pilots, who are some of the most able professionals we have in Canada. Talented and reliable men and women spanning the Canadian frontier. Apart from that the article is simply hindsight guised as analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Aside from saying that the Aviators isn't the greatest nickname, what insight did he offer into bush pilots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allison A Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Maybe I'm missing something, but what does "....both the men's and women's teams situated in North America's largest natural-turf complex." mean? Largest in what way? Obviously it's not capacity he's referring to, so how is it the largest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. For an Edmonton reporter he sure doesn't know much about bush pilots, who are some of the most able professionals we have in Canada. Talented and reliable men and women spanning the Canadian frontier. Apart from that the article is simply hindsight guised as analysis. Zerr should know more about Foote than what he admits. He'a a reporter that covers U of A sporting events. The way he reported in this case shows he has a long way to go. Sadly, we always end up with reporters like these covering the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted June 13, 2004 Author Share Posted June 13, 2004 quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead Aside from saying that the Aviators isn't the greatest nickname, what insight did he offer into bush pilots? I think Jeffrey is referring to the last sentence: "If image is everything, recent events are making the Aviators look more like bush pilots than airline captains." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 The author confuses bush with bush league. Bush is not always a generically negative adjective (George W notwithstanding). For someone in Edmonton not knowing that a bush pilot is probably more competent and respectable than an airline captain is pretty bad, since it is one of the large cities in Canada most reliant on their great services and skills for everything from shuttling rural and native leaders, supporting those in the field doing geology or taking foreign hunters out to frozen lakes in the middle of winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strobe_z Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 I've got to say, for me, this has been the low point for Zerr's coverage of the Aviators to date. I really enjoyed his piece on Titus' departure, but I think I'm not quite understanding the point of this article. Seems to me like he visited the Hangar, jotted down some of the gripes and whipped it up to a "story". "Valuable lesson" or not.. Losses (and big ones) are to be expected in a first year club in any sport, no? The same can be said for the lack of scoring prowess as well. As for the struggling at the gate... well.. by who's standards? As has been pointed out elsewhere, Edmonton is far from last place in attendance figures in the A-League. We're no where near the 10,000+ that was predicted by the team management, but give that that was a pie in the sky dream anyway... The scheduling problems is on target, and maybe I shouldn't comment on Commonwealth Stadium - although I will say I'm not sure why being "intimate" as a fan-base is such an important argument for some people. Zerr's not a mouthpiece for the Av's mangament, he's supposed to be a reporter. If there's a negative story to be told, so be it... the Titus piece wasn't exactly a glowing report on the Aviators either. His job is not to promote the Aviators, but neither is it to detract from them either. To me, this piece serves no real purpose other to put a negative spin on events without providing the reader with any real perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin lechelt Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 I agree Strobe. Most of Zerr's articles have been fairly balanced until this last one. Why not quote management on their reasons for Commonwealth instead of picking up the negative singsong about Foote et al that just doesn't seem to go away? I had to wonder if the article was ghost written or whether he had better things to do that day than put effort into the story. To me, one disturbing aspect of the "anywhere but Commonwealth" song is the implicit assumption that the Avs would be financially stronger playing out of a smaller stadium. The terms of their deal with the City on Commonwealth are not (I don't think) public knowledge, so who can say that they would be better off putting their money into expanding a small stadium? A stadium someone else (like the U of A) owns by the way. I suggest management is bang on to put their efforts into growing crowds to fit the stadium than the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strobe_z Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 I forgot to mention it earlier, but weren't Calgary playing out of more "intimate" venues? Most of them have the exact same problems that the venues being discussed in Edmonton (lack of lighting, inproper stands and facilities) have. For good or evil the Mustangs took the opposite road, starting out in small crappy stadiums before moving to the only really proper (and much larger) facility - which is still not even close to Commonwealth. I go to watch the action on the pitch, all this nattering about small intimate settings is best left to the hollywood romance movies. Neither option is going to affect the size of the crowds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishman Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 No one should be surprised by this article by Zerr...doesn't it echo much of the sentiment thrown about in this forum? My father was a bush pilot in this province, in addition to serving the the RCAF for 25 years as an officer, and I didn't take offence to Zerr's associated comment...leave that alone. It is hardly the point of the piece - I think we know what he was driving at. Speaking of leaving things alone...the issue of Commonwealth is overdone...stick a fork in it. It would be nice to be in a smaller park, with the seats much closer, with steep terraces...but this isn't Europe / South America / Anywhere but North America...we just don't have those kinds of facilities. I was one that openly pined about "intimate settings" and my point wasn't Harlequin in nature. It was the desire not to be spread about a massive stadium. The theme of the article - that things ain't that rosy - is reality. And the perception given to me, at least, is that management didn't have a Plan B should tickets not be snapped up a la Stafford's comments about pending line-ups for duckets and erasing Seattle's record crowd. Most businesses have a contingency for such things..."what do we do if our pie-in-the-sky projections don't pan out?" Cutting ticket prices ain't the best thing...they might as well give 'em away if that is the approach. And before you jump on me...I don't have the answer as to what they should do now...because I wouldn't have approached it as they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 quote:Originally posted by strobe_z The scheduling problems is on target, and maybe I shouldn't comment on Commonwealth Stadium - although I will say I'm not sure why being "intimate" as a fan-base is such an important argument for some people. As I mentioned on the Aviator board, come to Vancouver for our game July 4th against your Aviators, and you'll see difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.