I filled out the stadium survey that the Ticats sent me yesterday, and had some mixed feelings about it. I was very appreciative that the team is looking for input from the fans. And, overall, I'm consistently blown away by how good the team keeps in-touch with the fans.
However, it felt to me like there was some research bias being built into that survey. I've been a part of many studies just like this and keeping things objective isn't easy (and, in a lot of cases, the research companies are briefed on what the client wants to get out of it). It just seemed that some of the questions were constructed in a way that ensured I'd choose parking/highway access -- almost as if the objective of the survey was so the team could say "see, look at this -- our fans don't really want an urban stadium".
I just got the sense that (and I know this is a researcher/survey tactic) to make things black or white. For example, I like elements of tailgating, but I also prefer, ideally, to arrive at the stadium via public transit. The survey, if I remember correctly, doesn't really allow me to chose a wishy-washy grey area like that.
Obviously, I don't want to cloud anyone's judgement - I could totally be reading something that's not there. And, I did answer everything as accurately and as honestly as possible to ensure they get the best info (...and, perhaps, get 'rational/ factual' answers rather than my preconceived notions of where I, emotionally, want a stadium to be. Anywhoo..
So, was just wondering if anyone else felt the same.
Regardless, I am looking forward to hearing the results. My guess (if my survey is anything like anyone elses), 'sightlines' will probably be far and away the most important, and everything else will be mushed in the middle.