Recent editorials from Alabama newspapers:
___
April 18
Tuscaloosa News on sport championship events potentially selling alcohol:
According to national reports, the NCAA is expected to bring an end to a long-standing prohibition on alcohol sales at its championship events. The NCAA Division I Council is expected to vote soon on a proposal to abolish the alcohol ban.
The move comes after the council has used a waiver the past two years to sell alcohol at some championship competitions, such as the College World Series in Omaha, Nebraska. The waivers would no longer be necessary if the council approves the proposal during meetings in Indianapolis this week.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll be able to grab a beer at the concession stand at Bryant-Denny Stadium any time soon. And if you want an adult drink to calm your nerves while watching the Tide roll to another SEC title in Atlanta, you’ll likely have to sneak a flask of bourbon into the stadium. That is because the SEC still has a ban on stadium-wide alcohol sales.
There’s a push by some SEC schools to overturn that ban. LSU, Texas A&M and Auburn are a few of the schools that would like to see the league change its policy. Texas A&M and Auburn opened beer gardens in their baseball stadiums this season. Auburn’s Plainsman Park received a special retail license from the Auburn City Council so that the beer sales could begin on what they call the Plainsman Patio. It costs $5 dollars on top of your ticket fee to gain entry onto the patio, where you can then purchase a beer. The beer must be consumed on the patio and fans can’t leave the designated area. LSU began experimenting with alcohol sales in Tiger Stadium this past football season at select locations outside of skyboxes and suites. But all of these new alcohol sales are happening in designated spaces and are not stadium-wide.
Of course, at Bryant-Denny, one can purchase a ticket to The Zone, where a locker can be rented for the purpose of housing your beverage of choice. And there’s booze aplenty in many of the skyboxes. But this also involves restricted access to those willing to pay more for tickets where they can bring their own booze without having to sneak it in.
Other universities in other conferences have been selling alcohol stadium-wide for years, and cashing big checks as a result. Even Wake Forest University, a North Carolina school with Southern Baptist roots, began stadium-wide alcohol sales in 2016.
Anyone who has attended a football game here knows booze and beer flow like the Black Warrior River through town on game day. Allowing it to be sold inside the stadium is not likely to result in more drunks. If anything, it might cut down on the binge drinking that happens before kickoff. If cold beer is available it also might cut down on harder liquor that was sneaked in with mini bottles and flasks.
There is more money to be made. If the change doesn’t happen this year, it will soon.
Online: http://www.tuscaloosanews.com
___
April 10
Opelika-Auburn News says Gov. Kay Ivey and Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle will make the race for governor interesting:
Alabama voters will go to the polls on June 5 to cast votes in the Republican and Democratic primaries, with the winners squaring off in the Nov. 6 general election.
Two names headline the governor’s race on the Republican ticket, the winner of whom will be the clear front-runner to win the office in November.
Those two names are current Gov. Kay Ivey and Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle.
Voters should start paying attention now to what they’re saying and what they’re doing; and more so, what they plan to do and how they plan to do it.
Both candidates deserve your consideration.
Ivey did exactly what the state of Alabama desperately needed by steadying the political ship being torn apart in a violent storm of ethical, legal and mudslinging disaster.
The question is: Was that mission such low-hanging fruit that anyone holding office without a criminal record was qualified?
Regardless, she took on the job and seems to have rebranded herself with the new and much more important role of governor, and she has done so in good fashion. She has, in short, returned respect to the office, and that is an important accomplishment.
Ivey also is an Auburn University graduate, meaning, she knows and understands the issues facing east Alabama better than probably do most of her opponents.
So now voters must ask, how can she raise the bar over the next four years, and does Ivey have the ability to take Alabama where it needs to go next?
Tommy Battle says he does, and he says he has a proven record that backs his argument.
In the tit-for-tat sideline battle for credit in bringing 4,000 new jobs to Alabama with a new Toyota-Mazda plant, Battle probably should be declared the winner of that one. He no doubt played an important role in the many hurdles faced getting to the point of such a major announcement, given it is in his backyard.
Battle claims 90 percent of the vote in back-to-back victories as mayor of the state’s most futuristic and bustling city in Huntsville, home to the likes of NASA and plenty of high-tech industry, and he says he can do for the state what he has done for the city.
That would be an incredible challenge, but also most certainly an incredible accomplishment.
Look for more to come as this race heats up, but look harder for what you need to know about both candidates and any others you deem worthy of attention.
This will be an important election for the state of Alabama.
Deciding it should be voters who are well informed.
Online: http://www.oanow.com/
___
April 17
The Gadsden Times say replay for regular-season high school football is overkill:
Some thoughts on the recent announcement by the Alabama High School Athletic Association that it will permit the use of instant replay in high school football games this fall …
The details for those who missed them: The AHSAA has obtained a waiver from the National High School Federation (whose rules actually prohibit instant replay) to try it in Alabama for three years as a first-in-the-nation experiment (at least for regular-season games).
No school will be required to use it; the AHSAA expects a quarter to 30 percent of them will. The same vendor that provides replay services for Southeastern Conference games will supply the system.
Shortest version of how it works: Officials can tap into a team’s existing video feed. Coaches will get two challenges a game (penalties aren’t subject to review, only things like “was the player in or out of bounds when catching a ball”). The referee and an official not involved in the disputed play will decide them using a portable device like an iPad. An unsuccessful challenge will cost a team a timeout (or a delay of game penalty if it has no timeouts left).
Whether it’s fans who metaphorically live or die with their teams, or coaches whose continued employment depends on the outcome of these games, those who want officials to get their calls right, whatever it takes, period, case and discussion closed, are cheering.
That’s particularly true if their team has at some point been burned by what proved to be human error. A local high school coach once described the dilemma to one of our sports writers: “This is my vocation, and my future is in the hands of people to whom this is an avocation.”
Conversely, there are folks who still like the idea that sports are judged or officiated by imperfect human beings, even if there’s a risk of them getting a call wrong. They detest the breaks in game action, with officials standing around while plays are “under review.” They’re booing this decision.
Where are we? Call us understanding of those cheering, closer to those booing and concerned both about the logistics, execution and necessity of this idea, and the caste system it potentially could set up among schools.
The cost of the replay equipment was described as “minimal” by the AHSAA. However, a Class 7A school in an affluent urban area would have a different definition of that word than a rural Class 1A school that struggles to stock enough toilet paper, let alone educational materials.
So, one school might be operating with a single camera, compared to another school that might ring its stadium with cameras to catch every possible angle of a play. Is it fair to have schools - literally, not as a cliché - on two different playing fields?
That discrepancy also could affect replay decisions. If you’re tasked with making sense of an iPad video, with a grumbling, impatient crowd waiting for your assessment, would you rather have that video recorded and watch it in a nice, well-lit stadium, or a place (and there still are some in Alabama) where people need miner’s hats to see?
Also, could the AHSAA’s “not mandatory” attitude stiffen a little should the number of schools using instant replay not prove satisfactory?
Neither will ever say it directly, but we imagine the NHSF and the AHSAA would really like to see this work. Ultimately, that will require a complete buy-in, and that’s not going to happen until “it’s there if you want it” becomes “do it.”
Basically, we don’t see the need for this in every regular-season game. It’s overkill and an unnecessary expense. Reserve it for playoff or championship games.
That doesn’t mean regular-season games aren’t important. We know they are to players (most of whom will never play a down of football past high school), coaches, fans and communities. That doesn’t mean officials shouldn’t have a commitment to calling plays right in those games, either.
Just how far do you want to go - how much money do you want to spend; how much hassle do you want to incur - to try and get there?
Online: http://www.gadsdentimes.com
Please read our comment policy before commenting.