My understanding is that on at least one occasion, a home playoff game, Huesman got on the fans for not showing up en masse. I hope that he will not only voice concern but also see that steps are taken to remedy both the student and no-show ticketholder issues and help us change our football culture (landscape, if you will). I hope that he sees that the University's prohibition of pregame partying or tailgating is a large part of this problem and has Keith Gill and Dr. Crutcher address this problem very soon.
I still find it hard to accept any rationale as to why the University does not encourage the fraternities to party and then go to the games (except for the possibility that it might encourage some 18-20-year-old students to drink when they otherwise would not). Some of my favorite moments at UR were when I got together with friends before games, partied a bit, and then went to the games. It builds bonding between students as well as memorable experiences at alma mater.
45 States [including Virginia] allow exceptions to underage drinking in one form or another. The current law is like the marijuana law in that in 99% of cases, it does nothing to curb underage use.
The law needs to change and/or the universities in Virginia need to change their policies or treat it as the feds do marijuana (turn their heads). In our case at UR, a change ignoring drinking by students 18-20 (even if parental consent is required) and allowing the fraternities to tailgate and party before games in itself would go a long way toward filling the student section and bolstering crowd support.
I don't know what ever became of it, but Ed Ayers was involved with a bunch of other university presidents across the country to change the drinking laws to allow 18, 19 and 20-year-old students to drink under certain circumstances because of reasons like this and the fact that the schools spent a lot of time and resources policing an action they could not effectively enforce. If preventing drinking of 18-20-year-olds from drinking is the reason that the fraternities are not allowed to tailgate and party before games without limiting their other activities, then the University's rationale is unfounded and it needs to change its policy.
I would like to know whether others agree with me because I am considering writing to the higher ups at the University to change this policy if there is a consensus that it would do nothing but assist and bolster game support, tend to increase student and university bonding, and change the current alleged environment between students and players.
I still find it hard to accept any rationale as to why the University does not encourage the fraternities to party and then go to the games (except for the possibility that it might encourage some 18-20-year-old students to drink when they otherwise would not). Some of my favorite moments at UR were when I got together with friends before games, partied a bit, and then went to the games. It builds bonding between students as well as memorable experiences at alma mater.
45 States [including Virginia] allow exceptions to underage drinking in one form or another. The current law is like the marijuana law in that in 99% of cases, it does nothing to curb underage use.
The law needs to change and/or the universities in Virginia need to change their policies or treat it as the feds do marijuana (turn their heads). In our case at UR, a change ignoring drinking by students 18-20 (even if parental consent is required) and allowing the fraternities to tailgate and party before games in itself would go a long way toward filling the student section and bolstering crowd support.
I don't know what ever became of it, but Ed Ayers was involved with a bunch of other university presidents across the country to change the drinking laws to allow 18, 19 and 20-year-old students to drink under certain circumstances because of reasons like this and the fact that the schools spent a lot of time and resources policing an action they could not effectively enforce. If preventing drinking of 18-20-year-olds from drinking is the reason that the fraternities are not allowed to tailgate and party before games without limiting their other activities, then the University's rationale is unfounded and it needs to change its policy.
I would like to know whether others agree with me because I am considering writing to the higher ups at the University to change this policy if there is a consensus that it would do nothing but assist and bolster game support, tend to increase student and university bonding, and change the current alleged environment between students and players.
