2/23 News

Burninator · 02-24-2006, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabble-rabble

A lot fewer people would be hurt. I for one would order PPV if Bush and Saddam were to put on the gloves.

That would be the moneymaker right there...

utah_heretic · 02-24-2006, 12:17 PM

Well, since you asked, I'll tell you.

Really it isn't even about the beer. Oh sure, I enjoy beer, but the reason beer, or alcohol in general are hot political issues, and the reason it is an issue that Dave is "thinking about a dry stadium" directly pertains to the cultural divide in Salt Lake. The fact is, if social drinking was acceptable among mormons, and Dave wanted to have a dry stadium, people would be less animated on this point. Many people in Salt Lake get the impression from how pervasive religious beliefs are in the culture that mormons would rather they pay their taxes and go away. Alcohol policies and attitudes are one of the most obvious demarcation lines where religious beliefs stray into public policy and belief structures. At some point, people who do drink want to say, "HEY!! I live here too!" "Stop making your dogma part of the socio-political structure." Alcohol becomes a bit of a rallying cry for people who feel politically and culturally isolated in this environment.

Now I'm not saying "Mormons are INTOLERANT!" or anything like it. To people who don't drink, I can certainly understand why this must seem mysterious. By the same token, for Utah to have all policies regarding the sale and distribution of alcohol made by a group of people wo don't by and large drink strikes me as completely assinine. It's like having men in charge of what femenine hygiene products you stock in the grocery store.

Sect. 37's point about courting mormon suburbia can't be so lightly dismissed in my view. For right now, since the stadium deal is still not a done deal, anything about the stadium that is released is about PR. Whether or not there is ultimately alcohol sales in the stadium is not relevant...if Dave wasn't trying to win points with the legislature and utah constituents, and this was all about Dave's policy decisions, we certainly wouldn't be hearing about it before they broke ground on the stadium...anybody who thinks otherwise is either dangerously naiive or simply fooling themselves.

Whether Dave personally wants to sell beer or not is not the issue here at all. Rather the issue is that RSL has decided to make this a political football in order to get stadium funding passed.

Aerick · 02-24-2006, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burninator

That would be the moneymaker right there...

I'd go for this, but only if we elected Republicans to office each time. A Democrat would get his butt whoopped too often. 😁

Aerick · 02-24-2006, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by utah_heretic

Well, since you asked, I'll tell you.

Really it isn't even about the beer. Oh sure, I enjoy beer, but the reason beer, or alcohol in general are hot political issues, and the reason it is an issue that Dave is "thinking about a dry stadium" directly pertains to the cultural divide in Salt Lake. The fact is, if social drinking was acceptable among mormons, and Dave wanted to have a dry stadium, people would be less animated on this point. Many people in Salt Lake get the impression from how pervasive religious beliefs are in the culture that mormons would rather they pay their taxes and go away. Alcohol policies and attitudes are one of the most obvious demarcation lines where religious beliefs stray into public policy and belief structures. At some point, people who do drink want to say, "HEY!! I live here too!" "Stop making your dogma part of the socio-political structure." Alcohol becomes a bit of a rallying cry for people who feel politically and culturally isolated in this environment.

Now I'm not saying "Mormons are INTOLERANT!" or anything like it. To people who don't drink, I can certainly understand why this must seem mysterious. By the same token, for Utah to have all policies regarding the sale and distribution of alcohol made by a group of people wo don't by and large drink strikes me as completely assinine. It's like having men in charge of what femenine hygiene products you stock in the grocery store.

Sect. 37's point about courting mormon suburbia can't be so lightly dismissed in my view. For right now, since the stadium deal is still not a done deal, anything about the stadium that is released is about PR. Whether or not there is ultimately alcohol sales in the stadium is not relevant...if Dave wasn't trying to win points with the legislature and utah constituents, and this was all about Dave's policy decisions, we certainly wouldn't be hearing about it before they broke ground on the stadium...anybody who thinks otherwise is either dangerously naiive or simply fooling themselves.

Whether Dave personally wants to sell beer or not is not the issue here at all. Rather the issue is that RSL has decided to make this a political football in order to get stadium funding passed.

All hail the wise one!

Although, I must disagree with your point on why you don't have people that drink making the drinking policies. It's just common sense that drunk people don't make good policy makers! 😁

Aero · 02-24-2006, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by utah_heretic

Really it isn't even about the beer. Oh sure, I enjoy beer, but the reason beer, or alcohol in general are hot political issues, and the reason it is an issue that Dave is "thinking about a dry stadium" directly pertains to the cultural divide in Salt Lake.

That's what I've been saying all along. This really has nothing to do with soccer at all. It's a much broader and more pervasive issue than whether or not beer will be sold in the new stadium. As such, I think having a conversation about the heart of the matter would be much more effective than talking about the easily visible part of the problem.

I think it would be a great discussion to have, but I'm just not sure that a soccer message board is the best place to do it since it clearly goes above and beyond soccer.

Deuce · 02-24-2006, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aero

That's what I've been saying all along. This really has nothing to do with soccer at all. It's a much broader and more pervasive issue than whether or not beer will be sold in the new stadium. As such, I think having a conversation about the heart of the matter would be much more effective than talking about the easily visible part of the problem.

I think it would be a great discussion to have, but I'm just not sure that a soccer message board is the best place to do it since it clearly goes above and beyond soccer.

Exactly my point!
Thanks Aero.

montgjules · 02-24-2006, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by utah_heretic

For right now, since the stadium deal is still not a done deal, anything about the stadium that is released is about PR. Whether or not there is ultimately alcohol sales in the stadium is not relevant...if Dave wasn't trying to win points with the legislature and utah constituents, and this was all about Dave's policy decisions, we certainly wouldn't be hearing about it before they broke ground on the stadium...anybody who thinks otherwise is either dangerously naiive or simply fooling themselves.

Whether Dave personally wants to sell beer or not is not the issue here at all. Rather the issue is that RSL has decided to make this a political football in order to get stadium funding passed.

It's also possible that the media is pushing this story, not Dave Checketts.

Quote:

The only inquiries about the issue, he added, seem to be coming from the news media.

luvmyboys · 02-24-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aerick

All hail the wise one!

Although, I must disagree with your point on why you don't have people that drink making the drinking policies. It's just common sense that drunk people don't make good policy makers! 😁

because, of course, all who drink must be drunks.....right?

Honestly, I enjoy soccer....period. I enjoy my son's games just as much as Real's. Heck, I even enjoy watching all the old farts that get together and play. (hee hee....luv ya guys!) I guess I just don't understand why this is such a big deal. Believe me, those "drunks" you speak of at the game will still be there and they'll still be drunk. Uncle Dave just won't make tons of $$$ from it.

Dadof3 · 02-24-2006, 02:03 PM

The explanation offered by heretic is right-on (in my opinion)...yet, Checketts could very well have avoided causing this problem by simply repeating his concern re people drinking and then driving, or concerns re Dram-shop liability, or concerns re dealing with the alcohol laws.

However, it wasn't until after the firestorm hit that he mentioned his concern re drunk people driving. His original quote was that he wanted to create a "family atmosphere" and did not think beer was conducive. THAT is what got a percentage of the fan base upset, not the question of whether the stadium is dry.

If you truly cannot see the distinction between the two, well, I guess I understand why there is a divide in the community.

fuegote · 02-24-2006, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvmyboys

because, of course, all who drink must be drunks.....right?

Honestly, I enjoy soccer....period. I enjoy my son's games just as much as Real's. Heck, I even enjoy watching all the old farts that get together and play. (hee hee....luv ya guys!) I guess I just don't understand why this is such a big deal. Believe me, those "drunks" you speak of at the game will still be there and they'll still be drunk. Uncle Dave just won't make tons of $$$ from it.

I think he was referring to this guy