Go Gophers!!! Booze at The Bank?

Donate To GopherHole
Ron Johnson Super Fan said:
I think that our disagreement is one of semantics so let me try and layout my position more clearly. I do not believe that there is any sort of "scheming" or "conspiracy" going on here. What the U of M (and virtually every other college and university) is trying to do with their alcohol policy is extremely transparent. They want to reduce the amount of alcohol fueled bad behavior that goes on inside the stadium as much as possible.

Is what they are trying to do "controlling the masses?" I can see why you think that that rhetoric goes too far. However, there is no doubt that their policy represents at a minimum an attempt to influence (or control, if you will) the behavior of fans at the game. I don't think that stating that fact implies that there is any sort of sinister intent on behalf of the people responsible for putting the policy in place.
Click to expand...

Thanks RJSF. My wife has her Masters in communication (specifically, rhetoric) so I've become much more aware of the power that words have. Sometimes (ok, probably often) it makes me very nitpicky. So my apologies for that. :)

I would agree that their decision does exert a basic level of control over what people can do. I think it was the "masses" portion of the original comment that got me going (too close to the charge of elitism for me…and as you note, ultimately semantics). But it is also their right to do so. And they do it in a multitude of ways that no one cares about (like banning certain projectiles and objects). This is just the hot button item.

As I note above, I am ultimately ok with either outcome. I have at least 1 beer at every Twins game I go to and the same would be true at TCF.
 

To those that claim the U is "wasting" an chance at additional money, where does it stop? Many high school athletics programs are strapped for cash. Should they sell beer at high school football games? I think one of the main reasons the U wont sell booze in the general area, and why other schools refuse to, is because this is a school. It is a school where the majority of its students are under age. The regents are responsible for those students when the are attending the U. Providing them with this access to booze (and dont give me the "ID them" bit, because we all know that is a joke at sporting events) is not in the best interest of the safety and well being of those students.

By the way, I am in my late 20's, 8 year season ticket holder, and sit on the benches without access to any suites or club rooms. And I do like to drink, but I can think rationally and understand where the U has to stand on an issue like this, and why.
 

Enough Is Enough

I can't beer this string any longer. Enough is enough.

It is now time to move on to whether the Gopher's field should be changed from green to gold. Personally the thought of this happpening makes we see blue.
 

DLguy said:
To those that claim the U is "wasting" an chance at additional money, where does it stop? Many high school athletics programs are strapped for cash. Should they sell beer at high school football games? I think one of the main reasons the U wont sell booze in the general area, and why other schools refuse to, is because this is a school. It is a school where the majority of its students are under age. The regents are responsible for those students when the are attending the U. Providing them with this access to booze (and dont give me the "ID them" bit, because we all know that is a joke at sporting events) is not in the best interest of the safety and well being of those students.

By the way, I am in my late 20's, 8 year season ticket holder, and sit on the benches without access to any suites or club rooms. And I do like to drink, but I can think rationally and understand where the U has to stand on an issue like this, and why.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely clueless about this issue. Guys like you criticize the NCAA, the Big 10 and other conferences, and the individual schools for almost everything but their policy on beer at football games. How can they be wrong about so many other issues but have the wisdom of King Solomon about beer in college football stadiums? The answer is they are wrong about this issue too.

People like you have bought into the concept of the Nanny State. Beer is a LEGAL product. If you don't want to be around people who drink beer then watch the game on TV, or listen to it on the radio.

There are numerous ways to sell beer at the Gopher's Stadium without underage students getting access to it. The primary way is a BEER GARDEN. You can't get in without an ID, and you can't leave with a beer in your hand. That is all they have to do to solve this problem. Let's get it done.
 

Go4Broke said:
You are absolutely clueless about this issue. Guys like you criticize the NCAA, the Big 10 and other conferences, and the individual schools for almost everything but their policy on beer at football games. How can they be right about this and wrong about so many other issues? The answer is they are wrong about beer at college football games too.
Click to expand...

This is some pretty bad logic. "I think you are wrong on most things so you must be wrong all the time!" You think they are wrong. That's fine. But this is hideous logic to back up your opinion.

The logical extension of this argument is that someone who is consistently right is automatically right all the time. Oddly enough, most folks would question this logic. Apparently all it takes to ignore that is a thirst for beer and the involvement of a crappily run organization like the NCAA.
 


Go4Broke said:
There are numerous ways to sell beer at the Gopher's Stadium without underage students getting access to it. The primary way is a BEER GARDEN. You can't get in without an ID, and you can't leave with a beer in your hand. That is all they have to do to solve this problem. Let's get it done.
Click to expand...

Go convince the people who make the decisions then. Personally I don't see why the U wants to take up a sizable chunk of the common space on the plaza to pack people together so they can booze, but good luck!
 

Go4Broke said:
People like you have bought into the concept of the Nanny State. Beer is a LEGAL product. If you don't want to be around people who drink beer then watch the game on TV, or listen to it on the radio.

There are numerous ways to sell beer at the Gopher's Stadium without underage students getting access to it. The primary way is a BEER GARDEN. You can't get in without an ID, and you can't leave with a beer in your hand. That is all they have to do to solve this problem. Let's get it done.
Click to expand...

Answer the question posed earlier in the thread: why is it ok to sell beer at college games, but not at HS games?
 

Go4Broke said:
You are absolutely clueless about this issue. Guys like you criticize the NCAA, the Big 10 and other conferences, and the individual schools for almost everything but their policy on beer at football games. How can they be right about this and wrong about so many other issues? The answer is they are wrong about beer at college football games too. You and people like you have bought into the concept of the Nanny State. Beer is a LEGAL product. If you don't want to be around people who drink beer then watch the game on TV or listen to it on the radio.

There are numerous ways to sell beer at the Gopher's Stadium without underage students getting access to it. The primary way is a BEER GARDEN. You can't get in without an ID, and you can't leave with a beer in your hand. That is all they have to do to solve this problem. Let's get it done.
Click to expand...

I didnt know you knew my stance on those issues. Wow, interesting.

Beer is a legal product, and can be sold where ever a venue DECIDES to sell it, as long as they have a license to do so. That is the decision of venue, not yours. Your decision is whether or not you will pay to attend that venue. And as far as a beer garden, that may work. But then you are taking people away from the stands and out of the stadium. This would also promote binge drinking as people would slam their beers to get back to the game. Otherwise, you would go get a beer and spend 40 minutes away from the game. People would then complain about people not staying in their seats to watch the game. So I can see why they wouldnt do this either.

I ask you this. Why was it not a problem at Williams and Marriucci for so many years? How is this any different?
 

dpodoll68 said:
Answer the question posed earlier in the thread: why is it ok to sell beer at college games, but not at HS games?
Click to expand...

Heck, answer the other question...why is there no outrage over the beerless GA seats at The Barn or Mariucci?
 



DLguy said:
And as far as a beer garden, that may work. But then you are taking people away from the stands and out of the stadium. This would also promote binge drinking as people would slam their beers to get back to the game. Otherwise, you would go get a beer and spend 40 minutes away from the game. People would then complain about people not staying in their seats to watch the game. So I can see why they wouldnt do this either.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There is no incentive for the U to take the visually appealing plaza space and stick a beer garden in the middle of it. Not to mention the fact that the plaza isn't all that large and the beer garden would only be able to hold a couple of hundred people tops. Which really doesn't solve the purported issue.
 

I don't care about the policies of every other university or high school. I think it's stupid that they don't sell it at Williams or Mariucci, in the same way I think it's stupid that we send kids off to war before allowing them to drink. We've lost the notion of personal responsibility and have blamed everything on alcohol. Allowing beer sales at TCF isn't going to turn it into a vikings game. The same people will still being going to the game, they just won't be treated like children anymore.
 

AO54 said:
I don't care about the policies of every other university or high school. I think it's stupid that they don't sell it at Williams or Mariucci, in the same way I think it's stupid that we send kids off to war before allowing them to drink. We've lost the notion of personal responsibility and have blamed everything on alcohol. Allowing beer sales at TCF isn't going to turn it into a vikings game. The same people will still being going to the game, they just won't be treated like children anymore.
Click to expand...

How have we lost anything? That would imply that there was a time when you used to be able to buy beer in general seating at college games. When was this Brave Old World where people used to be able to buy beer in college stadiums? And don't try to say "The Metrodome!", the only reason beer was sold there was the the U did not control what was sold. It's always been extremely rare, not just here, but all over the country. Not being able have a beer where ever and whenever you want is not being treated like a child. If you want to change the world, and have beer whenever or where ever you want, go right ahead and try, but recognize that you are the one proposing the radical change, it's not some "loss of personal responsibility".
 

Good thing people don't have access to beer on this board, or this "discussion" would be getting out of hand.
 



RodentRampage said:
How have we lost anything? That would imply that there was a time when you used to be able to buy beer in general seating at college games. When was this Brave Old World where people used to be able to buy beer in college stadiums? And don't try to say "The Metrodome!", the only reason beer was sold there was the the U did not control what was sold. It's always been extremely rare, not just here, but all over the country. Not being able have a beer where ever and whenever you want is not being treated like a child. If you want to change the world, and have beer whenever or where ever you want, go right ahead and try, but recognize that you are the one proposing the radical change, it's not some "loss of personal responsibility".
Click to expand...
Even if we never had personal responsibility, it's about time that we get it! Just because people made a bunch of rules concerning beer, doesn't mean they're good rules. It's not that hard to penalize an individual for their actions if they get out of hand, but it seems to be easier to penalize everyone instead.
 

Better start serving beer in Tedd Mann music hall, and why not in my Econ lecture hall, that should bring down the cost of my tuition with those added revenues. Where does it stop?

And personal responsibilities? What does that even mean? Should everyone just be accountable for their own actions? Do away with speed limits, parking restrictions, on and on and on.....
 

AO54 said:
Even if we never had personal responsibility, it's about time that we get it! Just because people made a bunch of rules concerning beer, doesn't mean they're good rules. It's not that hard to penalize an individual for their actions if they get out of hand, but it seems to be easier to penalize everyone instead.
Click to expand...

You only said "personal responsibility" in the first place because you thought it sounded good. Not having alcohol whenever or where ever you want is not a lack of personal responsibility. Change the world if you want, but you're the radical one.
 

This thread is getting really, really, stupid. Lock it up. Please.
 

Whatever the outcome is, shouldn't be the 'issue'. The issue is letting the INSTITUTION decide what to do vs. having the government tell the institution what to do.
 

Formo said:
Whatever the outcome is, shouldn't be the 'issue'. The issue is letting the INSTITUTION decide what to do vs. having the government unconstitutionally tell the institution what to do.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for you (aka: added the detail that annoys me most about this whole stupid saga). :)
 

Formo said:
Whatever the outcome is, shouldn't be the 'issue'. The issue is letting the INSTITUTION decide what to do vs. having the government tell the institution what to do.
Click to expand...

This matter involves a principle that is too important to place in the hands of the morons who run the U. Thank God we have the Governor and State Legislature to prevent them from making elitist decisions to the detriment of the average, hard working, football loving, and taxpaying Minnesotans who own the U and everything in it. I will be damned if I am going to allow teetotalling academics to make these kinds of decisions. The U used to be one of the greatest research Universities in the world until liberal weenies took it over in the 1960's and ran it into the ground along with a proud football tradition which resulted in six National Championships. We haven't won crap since they started running things. It is high time for changes at the U. Let's start with Beer at the Bank.
 

Formo said:
Whatever the outcome is, shouldn't be the 'issue'. The issue is letting the INSTITUTION decide what to do vs. having the government tell the institution what to do.
Click to expand...
If you don't want the taxpayers to have a say, don't take their money. As it is, taxpayers elect legislators who elect regents.
 

AO54 said:
If you don't want the taxpayers to have a say, don't take their money. As it is, taxpayers elect legislators who elect regents.
Click to expand...

So then what is wrong with having the regents decide?
 

Who is the Elitist?

The Pope of Dinkytown said:
This matter involves a principle that is too important to place in the hands of the morons who run the U. Thank God we have the Governor and State Legislature to prevent them from making elitist decisions to the detriment of the average, hard working, football loving, and taxpaying Minnesotans who own the U and everything in it.
Click to expand...

Ah, such moral outrage by somebody who believes that he clearly knows what is best. The irony is that he thinks that those who see things differently than him are elitist; yet he goes by the name "The Pope of Dinkytown". That sounds like a name a person would give himself if he was a deluded elitist.
 

Holy Jesus Martha. All I tried to do was bring up a point of possibility with my OP, and we have evolved into another worldly discussion. God I Love IT.


GO GOPHERS!!!
 

The Pope of Dinkytown said:
This matter involves a principle that is too important to place in the hands of the morons who run the U. Thank God we have the Governor and State Legislature to prevent them from making elitist decisions to the detriment of the average, hard working, football loving, and taxpaying Minnesotans who own the U and everything in it. I will be damned if I am going to allow teetotalling academics to make these kinds of decisions. The U used to be one of the greatest research Universities in the world until liberal weenies took it over in the 1960's and ran it into the ground along with a proud football tradition which resulted in six National Championships. We haven't won crap since they started running things. It is high time for changes at the U. Let's start with Beer at the Bank.
Click to expand...

Thank god we have a state constitution that grants the U Constitutional Autonomy.
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/clssumca.htm

I wish you could appreciate the irony of bemoaning the the "running to the ground" of a great academic and athletic institution only to say the first step in our return to greatness is Beer at the Bank. That is classic trolling or idiocy and I award you this round of applause emoticon as a prize for your good work. :clap:
 


harrys ghost said:
So then what is wrong with having the regents decide?
Click to expand...
The point is that the taxpayers and their legislators are above the regents and can change the rules about who gets to make decisions.
 

AO54 said:
The point is that the taxpayers and their legislators are above the regents and can change the rules about who gets to make decisions.
Click to expand...

No they can't. See the details on the constitutionally protected autonomy of the U: http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/clssumca.htm

EDIT: I'm referring specifically to the "change the rules about who gets to make decisions" segment of your statement. Obviously the taxpayers are able to work with their legislators to elect Regents who support policies they support. What I'm saying is that they can't simply change the rules about whether the Regents or legislature get to set internal University policy as the U's rights in this matter are spelled out in the state constitution.
 

Beer is not some sort of supreme principle. The luxury boxes themselves (along with the chairbacks on the sidelines seating) are more "elitist" that the U's alcohol policy.

And no, "paid for with tax money" does not equal "must have been whenever and where ever you want". Never has. Amend the State Constitution if you think this is so important that it merits overriding the U's constitutional autonomy.
 

So you want the same benefit as those in the luxury seats? I for one think my ticket prices are high enough. I do not want to see my prices go up so that people have a chance to drink. The reason suite tickets are more expensive is because they get perks. One being free drinks. If they serve free beer to the whole stadium, where is that money made up. The U is not in the business of selling booze, and they never have been. They give it away as a perk to the suite holders.

And will someone please tell me how TCF is any different then Ted Mann Music Hall? Is it because the pros sell booze? I think the Guthrie sells booze. And why arent you demanding they provide beer at high school games. Nobody has answered that one. See where I am getting with that? Or do you still have blinders on.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom