Governor Pawlenty On Beer Sales at TCF on WCCO

[GoAUpher]

My question is what is the consequence of going against what the NCAA "recommends"? If the U decides to sell beer to everyone (of legal drinking age), is the NCAA going to not allow them to host Final Four regionals? Pull scholarships? Put us on double secret probation? What are the repercussions if we, as somebody else put it, "piss of the NCAA"?

Nothing so far as I know. IMO the NCAA plays no part in this.

 

[pharmacygopher]

I'm not sure, but it might have something to do with the fact that the Metrodome is owned and operated by the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission and TCF Bank Stadium will be owned and operated by the University. And the U takes less risks than the MSFC.

Personally, I feel that if you're worried about the liability, that is what insurance is for.

My question is what is the consequence of going against what the NCAA "recommends"? If the U decides to sell beer to everyone (of legal drinking age), is the NCAA going to not allow them to host Final Four regionals? Pull scholarships? Put us on double secret probation? What are the repercussions if we, as somebody else put it, "piss of the NCAA"?

I don't have a definite answer but why piss of the NCAA?? Right now everything is going good (academically, scandalwise). What happens if something happens where we are facing possible probation/sanctions or need a favor of some sort from the NCAA? Personally, I'd prefer for them to be on our side versus being against. To me it just seems natural to not have your 'boss' (the NCAA) pissed at you (U of M).

 

[howeda7]

If the Minnesota state legisluture was in charge of UND I think they'd pass a law requiring them to remain the Sioux, therefore screwing them with the NCAA. No need to have regard to that, just do what you think the random voter out there would want you to do. Oy.

 

[go4rob]

Beer in the Suites

yes, i'm fine with them selling beer in the premium (no punn intended) suites. If the U can make some money off of it and add some value to the people who are paying the big bucks, i frankly don't care. I'm sitting in the regular seats and I can go without a beer for 3 hrs, no biggie. The idea that the U had this all planned out and then the legislature had to step in and tell them how to do it, is what irks me!

 

[casual observer]

the beer garden is a VERY real option...

Ignoring the remainder of your post, I'll say this: the alcohol issue at TCF Bank Stadium is far from resolved. From what I understand, it's not an all-or-nothing proposition right now. Bruininks is mulling over following options on the table:

1) Snub his nose at the Legislature and do what was originally planned: sell in premium seating areas only. Apparently he can do this because the University was established before the state…or something to that effect. Doing this, he'd run the risk of ticking off the clueless idiots in St. Paul, possibly resulting in a less-than-favorable relationship between the U and the oh-so-wise Legislature.
2) Build a beer garden outside the stadium that all will have access to. I assume this would mean alcohol would then be sold in premium seating areas as well. This is a legitimate option that Bruininks is considering and which has not been discussed on here before.
3) Open alcohol sales to the entire stadium.
4) Ban alcohol sales in the entire stadium.

I have heard from associates at the U that a beer garden in the open end of the stadium (farthest point away from student section) is a very real option. There will be bracelets verifying id check, and a limit of beer sold per person and timeframe in which it will be sold. They have done revenue loss models based on a dry stadium and it was in the neighborhood of 600-700k.

 

[at the bar]

A beer garden at the open end of the stadium would be great! You could still watch the game while standing in line for a beer.

 

[HopHead]

A beer garden at the open end of the stadium would be great! You could still watch the game while standing in line for a beer.

I Googled stadium beer gardens and found this picture of one in a AAA baseball stadium in Portland. If they could put something like this on the open plaza area, it would be awesome (with Summit instead of Widmer of course).

 

[GoldInDirt]

A beer garden, if it meets the legislative requirement, would be a great idea. It would keep the value for the premium $uites so that there would be no revenue loss. People who really need to get a beer can get one. Those who want to focus on watching football without people totally focused on drinking could do so in their seats, and this would hopefully reduce the obnoxious factor. As a newer parent I have to worry less about bad examples and awkward situations as I'd like to take my daughter to as many games as possible.

I started the socialism, communism and egalitarianism question. If I took this on a bad tangent, I apologize but I was interested in the context of this situation. Egalitarianism appears the most applicable situation. I wonder if the legislature was truly egalitarian why they ignored that 1) there are different prices for different seats, 2) there are priorities for seat selection based on if/where you graduated, alumni membership, prior donations, 3) future seat availability to the masses will be limited as the stadium may be entirely sold out, 4) television access to the games is limited to those paying for cable, 4) the state is a minority supporter of the stadium. For the legislature to focus on alcohol is ridiculous and it's extremely bizarre that we might be the second school in the entire country to have alcohol with free/easy access in an on-campus stadium.

 

[casual observer]

The Guv should have kept his thoughts to himself.

"My view is we don't have a two-class society, so you can't just have a situation where you have a beer up in the skyboxes and then nobody else gets the beer."

I had to listen to the absurd comment, again, to actually believe the Governor said it...

We don't have a two class society...? I wish that were the case in regards to my taxes. T-Paw should have just said no comment on this subject. This is a classic example of shooting first and asking questions later on the legislature's part. 9 of 11 Big Ten Schools serve alcohol in their premium seat areas. Their State legislatures did not feel compelled to stick their noses in on the matter.

Some upstart representives, from 1 stop sign towns, wanted to get up on the soap box and get their name on an omnibus bill. This was under the guise of fighting for the little guy, and Minnesota "fairness". Meanwhile, they didn't even get a budget passed.

You cannot make it up. Crazy.

 

[anticallihan]

You're going to have a hard time finding people who get obliterated off of $7 3.2 light beer. Anybody who is wasted has been drinking beforehand, which won't stop unless they drop football entirely.

Who is mom and dad going to sue if a death did happen? The students friends for shot after shot after shot before the game?

Or the U for "putting" little Johnny "over the top" at the game?

I think all of us get and understand the situation. Anyone saying otherwise just wants to drink beer.

It is no coincidence that most college stadiums don't serve alcohol.

Even if they have insurance... nobody, especially major universities, can make that PR go away. It would never end.

 

[at the bar]

I've changed my mind

Most other schools only sell in the suites and we should always follow what the majority are doing. Also, we don't want to have any possible bad PR in case someone is overserved. So I'm sure everyone will also agree we need to eliminate the football program to eliminate any possible future cases of bad PR that may result from player actions on or off the field. I'm sure everyone would feel much safer with zero risk.

 

[hubbabubba]

My sources at the U say Bruininks is leaning towards providing alcohol to the entire stadium. It's simple really...money talks. Without beer getting served to the unwashed masses, you can say "buh-bye" to men's gymnastics. The money to be made by serving alcohol at TCF Bank Stadium (and, in turn, at Mariucci, Williams, the Sports Pavilion, etc.) is just too significant (to the tune of about $2 million per year) to overlook for the athletic department.

As much as I'm annoyed at the blatant pandering done by our Legislature/T-Paw, it will be nice to have the option of a beer at a football game. I just wish it didn't have to come about by the ridiculous notion that "it's only fair" that if the suite-holders get beer, then all should get beer. As long as we're using that logic, I'm going to demand cushioned seats, access to the DQ Club Room, an expanded food menu, etc....all stuff that premium seat-holders are getting.

Another thought - assuming they now decide to SELL alcohol to the general seating folks, it might be possible that they'll SERVE (not sell) alcohol to the premium seat-holders (not sure if the new law would have an effect here). With the money made from us in the cheap seats, they may choose to offer free booze to the premium areas. If that we're to happen (and I'm only speculating), well, talk about flying in the face of the "it's only fair" doctrine that came out of the Legislature/T-Paw.

 

[GoAUpher]

My sources at the U say Bruininks is leaning towards providing alcohol to the entire stadium. It's simple really...money talks. Without beer getting served to the unwashed masses, you can say "buh-bye" to men's gymnastics. The money to be made by serving alcohol at TCF Bank Stadium (and, in turn, at Mariucci, Williams, the Sports Pavilion, etc.) is just too significant (to the tune of about $2 million per year) to overlook for the athletic department.

I think you made some good points overall but I don't know where you are going with the reference to a non-revenue sport getting cut. Were there already plans to cut MGYM? 'Cause if not then serving beer to the whole stadium has nothing to do with the non-revenue sports avoiding cutbacks.

The money that talks isn't the cash from the cheap seats but the potential to lose those premium seat holders.

 

[howeda7]

I think you made some good points overall but I don't know where you are going with the reference to a non-revenue sport getting cut. Were there already plans to cut MGYM? 'Cause if not then serving beer to the whole stadium has nothing to do with the non-revenue sports avoiding cutbacks.

The money that talks isn't the cash from the cheap seats but the potential to lose those premium seat holders.

I assume the reference was that the loss of revenue from selling alcohol in the suites ($600-700K) would have led to the cut of a minor sport.

 

[GoAUpher]

I assume the reference was that the loss of revenue from selling alcohol in the suites ($600-700K) would have led to the cut of a minor sport.

Apologies if I misread the intent! That would make a LOT of sense.

 

[mplsbadger]

A beer garden, if it meets the legislative requirement, would be a great idea. It would keep the value for the premium $uites so that there would be no revenue loss. People who really need to get a beer can get one. Those who want to focus on watching football without people totally focused on drinking could do so in their seats, and this would hopefully reduce the obnoxious factor. As a newer parent I have to worry less about bad examples and awkward situations as I'd like to take my daughter to as many games as possible.

The only bad part of a beer garden in the plaza would be that the students would have to walk the length of the building to get there. One of the worst parts of the dome experience was fighting the students who came in at midfield on the upper deck home side and had to walk through the concourse and down the stairs to get to their seats. I missed the first quarter of the Iowa game waiting for a giant crowd to clear the upper deck concourse. During the fray, a couple people fainted and experienced other injuries. I believe it was exacerbated by an unrelated medical emergency but either way, I don't like the idea of all that traffic in the concourse.

 

[Maximus]

SO....if this happens:

You could now buy beer at Mariucci and Williams? I believe the law pertained to all of the athletic facilities, not just TCF?

 

[GoAUpher]

A beer garden, if it meets the legislative requirement, would be a great idea. It would keep the value for the premium $uites so that there would be no revenue loss. People who really need to get a beer can get one. Those who want to focus on watching football without people totally focused on drinking could do so in their seats, and this would hopefully reduce the obnoxious factor. As a newer parent I have to worry less about bad examples and awkward situations as I'd like to take my daughter to as many games as possible.

The only bad part of a beer garden in the plaza would be that the students would have to walk the length of the building to get there. One of the worst parts of the dome experience was fighting the students who came in at midfield on the upper deck home side and had to walk through the concourse and down the stairs to get to their seats. I missed the first quarter of the Iowa game waiting for a giant crowd to clear the upper deck concourse. During the fray, a couple people fainted and experienced other injuries. I believe it was exacerbated by an unrelated medical emergency but either way, I don't like the idea of all that traffic in the concourse.

Yea, but how many students are really going to take time to get the beer? Underagers are automatically excluded since they can't get in/get any booze handed out. Another important note is that the concourses will be twice as wide too.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Quote: My sources at the U say Bruininks is leaning towards providing alcohol to the entire stadium. It's simple really...money talks. Without beer getting served to the unwashed masses, you can say "buh-bye" to men's gymnastics. The money to be made by serving alcohol at TCF Bank Stadium (and, in turn, at Mariucci, Williams, the Sports Pavilion, etc.) is just too significant (to the tune of about $2 million per year) to overlook for the athletic department.

If this happens I will keep my record intact of never having been WRONG in GopherHole (it's true, you can look it up). This is no surprise to me, but I can't resist reminding all of the GopherHole weenies (everyone knows who they are) who have campaigned to prevent the hardworking and taxpaying season ticketholders who helped pay for Gopher Stadium from enjoying a beer while watching their favorite football team.

 

[MrGopher]

I have decided, after reading all of this discussion and thinking hard about it, that I am glad there will be no alcohol served at TCF. This is coming from a university student who enjoys beer. I dont really care much for the politics of it but here are my reasons.

a.) The liability of it could be a burden to the U's image, should something tragic happen.
b.) Less beer at the game will actually probably deter raging alcoholics from coming (wisky and Iowa fans), and im serious about that.
c.) No beer at the stadium means more beer sold before and after games in dinkytown, stadium village, etc. It will improve the economy of the neighborhood.
d.) Drinking before the game, followed by a three hour break, and then drinking after is much a much safer pattern than drinking the whole time.
e.) I'm a Viking fan, but i prefer that the Gophers can separate themselves from the drunken reputation Viking fans at the dome have acquired.
f.) I'd rather not piss off the NCAA if I can help it.

I dont care about the moral dilemma (is it right or wrong? socialist or whatever?). This is just what I hope happens. I DO, however, hope if they ban alcohol in the stadium, that they loosen up the regulations for tailgating.... some of those rules are way too ridiculous.

 

[Gold Vision]

Quote: My sources at the U say Bruininks is leaning towards providing alcohol to the entire stadium. It's simple really...money talks. Without beer getting served to the unwashed masses, you can say "buh-bye" to men's gymnastics. The money to be made by serving alcohol at TCF Bank Stadium (and, in turn, at Mariucci, Williams, the Sports Pavilion, etc.) is just too significant (to the tune of about $2 million per year) to overlook for the athletic department.

If this happens I will keep my record intact of never having been WRONG in GopherHole (it's true, you can look it up). This is no surprise to me, but I can't resist reminding all of the GopherHole weenies (you all know who they are) who have campaiged to prevent the hardworking and taxpaying season ticketholders who helped pay for Gopher Stadium from enjoying a beer while watching their favorite football team.

Do you not understand how the quote function works?

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

I love beer

I love drinking beer. I even loved paying $6.75 to drink a beer at the dome. I'm just that way.
However, my wife and I had already accepted that we wouldn't be able to drink at the Gophers new stadium. We accepted that people who paid thousand of dollars more than us would be able to drink. Made sense. The legislature getting involved is stupid.

 

[howeda7]

I have decided, after reading all of this discussion and thinking hard about it, that I am glad there will be no alcohol served at TCF. This is coming from a university student who enjoys beer. I dont really care much for the politics of it but here are my reasons.

a.) The liability of it could be a burden to the U's image, should something tragic happen.
b.) Less beer at the game will actually probably deter raging alcoholics from coming (wisky and Iowa fans), and im serious about that.
c.) No beer at the stadium means more beer sold before and after games in dinkytown, stadium village, etc. It will improve the economy of the neighborhood.
d.) Drinking before the game, followed by a three hour break, and then drinking after is much a much safer pattern than drinking the whole time.
e.) I'm a Viking fan, but i prefer that the Gophers can separate themselves from the drunken reputation Viking fans at the dome have acquired.
f.) I'd rather not piss off the NCAA if I can help it.

I dont care about the moral dilemma (is it right or wrong? socialist or whatever?). This is just what I hope happens. I DO, however, hope if they ban alcohol in the stadium, that they loosen up the regulations for tailgating.... some of those rules are way too ridiculous.

That all makes good sense. I think you've convinced me. Personally, I could care less one way or the other. I've never understood how one can desire a beer at 11 AM which is when so many of the games are or even 2:30 for that matter. I do hate to see the U lose significant revenue over the idiotic state legislature sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong.

 

[Maximus]

The legislature wants more people to drink alcohol. Hopefully next they lower the drinking age. It's not fair that college students should be split into two different classes.....under 21 and 21 and over. That's not fair.

 

[Maverick]

Reason G: Can you imagine how much easier it will be to clean and keep TCF looking like new without beer?

 

[hubbabubba]

Apologies if I misread the intent! That would make a LOT of sense.

Yeah, what I meant was that the loss of revenue from alcohol sales in general (whether in the stadium as a whole or just in the premium seats) would likely lead to the cutting of a non-revenue sport (men's gymnastics being first on the chopping block). The money from the Save Gopher Sports campaign from a few years ago is now gone - or close to gone - so from what I understand, the U was banking on alcohol sales as a source of revenue to, in part, keep men's gymnastics.

The $2 million figure I mentioned was the expected total revenue the U expects to get from alcohol sales at all athletic venues. Not sure how many venues would end up having alcohol. I have a hard time visualizing a beer tap at the Baseline Tennis Center or the Aquatic Center.

 

[at the bar]

Reason G: Can you imagine how much easier it will be to clean and keep TCF looking like new without beer?

Are you serious? Food doesn't make more of a mess? I'm sure we will clean up after each game. I'm amazed some fans could even attend games at the dome where beer was served. You must have been miserable!

 

[Maverick]

Are you serious? Food doesn't make more of a mess? I'm sure we will clean up after each game. I'm amazed some fans could even attend games at the dome where beer was served. You must have been miserable!

Are you serious? You don't know that BEER is the ONLY thing that makes a mess in stadiums? Nobody spills food!

And where exactly did I give you the impresssion that I was against beer in the stadium? I personally don't care.

Just because I wouldn't pay $7.00 for a watered down Miller Light at any stadium, doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to do so if you like.... Just don't spill it all over our nice new shiny stadium....

 

[hubbabubba]

Remember how I said Bruininks was leaning towards selling alcohol throughout the entire stadium? Well, the Regents squashed that notion (expect an announcement late this week/early next week). Thanks to pandering lawmakers in St. Paul, say goodbye to alcohol at athletic events at the U of M. That means no beer anywhere at TCF Bank Stadium, Williams Arena and Mariucci Arena. That also means a loss of significant revenue for the athletic department, not only in alcohol sales, but potentially (and I'd say likely) a loss of sales of premium seats in all three venues.

Brilliant job, Legislature/T-Paw/those who supported this law (you know who you are). By using your "it's only fair" logic in passing this law, you've undercut the ability of the athletic department to support itself without state funds. Nice work.

 

[Section2]

Can someone explain to me why they don't just offer beer in the whole stadium, but charge like $20 for it? If they really want to give premium seatholders their booze and restrict unruly drinking in the cheap seats, this seems like a good compromise, and a way around what the legislature is attempting.