My feelings on the Vancouver Canucks’ performance of late? Well, they’d probably be best addressed directly to their chairman/owner Francesco Aquilini. Here’s what I’d tell him:
Dear Sir: What are you selling, hockey or jerseys? Johnny Canuck didn’t help you on a recent night at home against the Las Vegas team when you blew a two-goal lead with just under 15 minutes left in the game. It didn’t help you against Boston, Toronto or Montreal either.
What are you trying to establish here? All the different jerseys didn’t help when Pavel Bure was here or the Sedins — OK, they came close, but no Cup. It’s only been 52 years without one, Mr. Aquilini.
Tradition and pride in the uniforms are a bit of a stretch with your teams. I am prejudiced as I designed the “stick in the rink” logo in 1970 along with the blue and green uniforms. Blue and green is the West Coast look, “stick in the rink” is hockey. What are you trying to do with the image of the team? The smart look of a consistent logo and jersey creates a tradition and history, giving team players pride when they put it on like, for example, in Montreal, Toronto, Boston and Detroit.
Long-ago owner Frank Griffiths could not stand the money he was losing with poor attendance, so he went to California to get a new look. Then-coach Harry Neale joked that when they played in New York on Halloween, they won best costume.
My logo is already established with the shoulder look and the history, but the players must feel they are in a fashion show with the frequent changes, and that’s why they blow a two-goal lead in the final period against Vegas.
I guess the sweater business is doing OK for you — it’s Christmas. But I can only imagine the “stick in the rink” would look good beside the Stanley Cup.
Maybe our grandchildren will enjoy it one day, right Francesco?
Joe Borovich, graphics designer, West Vancouver
Surplus should be used to pay down debt
Re: How should government surplus be spent?
How to not spend surplus cash and get even more cash next year? The B.C.government should not look for artificial/contrived ways to spend the surplus.
The surplus should go to pay down the debt. A lower debt reduces the interest payment on the debt. Reduced interest can produce more surplus next year, which in turn can further pay down the debt or fund other programs.
No, I’m not a conservative. I’m just saying if the government doesn’t pay down the debt in surplus years, it certainly won’t be able to pay down the debt in deficit years. The higher the debt, the more money is required to pay the interest and the less money there is for essential programs. But isn’t that obvious?
Dale Laird, Vancouver
Letters to the editor should be sent to [email protected]
More news, fewer ads: Our in-depth journalism is possible thanks to the support of our subscribers. For just $3.50 per week, you can get unlimited, ad-lite access to The Vancouver Sun, The Province, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites. Support us by subscribing today: The Vancouver Sun | The Province.