But there is literally restaurants and bars across the street from the parking lots too, not just the really good area of High Street. I was amazed that all of this was in an easily walkable distance and in many cases visible from the tailgating lots. I'l use an example: we tailgated in the field house lot last year and just across the street (no more than 200 feet away) the building across W Lane Ave hosts a giants party every game. Or four blocks to the east is Buffalo Wild Wings, among a number of other places that are easily accessible by foot before and after a game. Frankly, Easton Ave. is a different hike across Landing Lane on narrow sidewalks and then through other side streets.
Blue Lot,Homecoming, New Normal???
- Thread starter Boz29
- Start date
But there is literally restaurants and bars across the street from the parking lots too, not just the really good area of High Street. I was amazed that all of this was in an easily walkable distance and in many cases visible from the tailgating lots. I'l use an example: we tailgated in the field house lot last year and just across the street (no more than 200 feet away) the building across W Lane Ave hosts a giants party every game. Or four blocks to the east is Buffalo Wild Wings, among a number of other places that are easily accessible by foot before and after a game. Frankly, Easton Ave. is a different hike across Landing Lane on narrow sidewalks and then through other side streets.
We have also decided to forgo the parking pass next year. I'd rather take a bus from the RAC than having to walk from out Mongolia to attend a game.
We have been in the blue lot for several years. The cops are everywhere and all the time. It does keep down general drunkenness. However, we saw a really obnoxious issuing of a ticket to a young woman probably for underage drinking. She was in a family setting with adult supervision. She was not visibly intoxicated. There was no rowdiness by the group. They seems to be having a good time but not one person appeared to have too much to drink. They pulled this young woman out into the pathway and made a public spectacle of her. Three cops stood around her. Two were severely lecturing her. A third was standing with his back to the girl to make sure that none of the family groups which were in all the surrounding tailgates attacked the two cops issuing the ticket. They must have taken 25 minutes to dramatically issue her two tickets. They wanted to make sure that all tailgaters around noticed and the girl would be publically shamed. They called out individually the man and woman running the tailgate. They publically lectured each and made sure we could all see the cop shake his finger in their faces. It was in our groups opinion totally unnecessary.
That's all I'm saying. We don't have to get rid of "the component", we just need less of them and move them out to the RAC or other parts of the game day area.
Again, it can be done. Don't get rid of them. Just use less of them and the ones still here put somewhere else.
Yes it is and borders on embarrassment.
Last edited:
Watching the dinosaurs act high and mighty about the drinking age is quite entertaining. They were all in their 40's when the age was raised. Knowing what I know about their generation, I would like to know how would have they handled a drinking age of 21.
Clearly, the Athletic Department and the Alumni Association need to work together on this moving forward, as a priority. That's key in building the program. A terrific game day experience is essential, creating memories, a sense of pride, helping to ensure students stay motivated well after their days on the Banks, and ensuring alumni grow their $ contributions over their lifetimes. Why this has not been optomized by the AD and the RAA thus far is perplexing.
You continue to be nothing other than a troll.
The drinking age in NJ was raised, gradually, starting in 1979 - from 18 to 19, then to 21.
There's nobody in this thread who was "in their 40s" when this happened.
Actually, if there was anyone in their 40's when this happened, then the drinking age was 21 when they were in school. In NJ, the drinking age was 21 through about 1971, when it was lowered to 18 with the lowering of the voting age to 18. Around 1980 it was then raised back to 21.
Good point. I was young, but I remember when both the voting and drinking ages were lowered as a direct result of the Vietnam war. The argument was that if young men could be drafted at the age of 18, then they should also be allowed to vote and drink.
As arguments go, it's logically flawed.
There was a complete lack of energy at this last game. I'm sure many factors, game time, PSU *** whopping, Kansas.... were much bigger part of it than underage drinkers staying away (as they should).
It was the smallest Scarlet Walk I have seen, less than 100 people.
Hopefully that changes
It was the smallest Scarlet Walk I have seen, less than 100 people.
Hopefully that changes
Um, the drinking age went up to 21 when I was 20. That was exactly 30 years ago. Who are the 70+ year-olds that you see "acting high and mighty"?
I have two brothers. One is 53, one is 52. The drinking age went from 18 to 21 when the older was 18 & the younger was 17 in 1981.
New Jersey raised the legal drinking age from 18 to 19 effective January 1, 1980. The drinking age was raised from 19 to 21 effective January 1, 1983.
I started attending RUFB games in 1993 when I got a job in New Brunswick. Back then with Rutgers being a perennial bottom football team we went solely for the tailgate and a very occasional win. Back then, you could walk right up to the gates with a beer and no one would say anything. I was a lot younger then but the tailgating atmosphere was awesome. Fast forward to 2007. Coming off our great 2006 breakout year, They really started to tighten up everything. more police, stricter rules, corralling of tailgaters, the infamous empty your beer cue. While the more frequent wins are nice, the tailgating atmosphere has significantly gone downhill.
I am in the Blue lot also, and the amount of harassment I have experienced and seen is much higher than prior to 2007.
For what it's worth, I noted above that I provided detailed feedback on the police to RUtgers in a survey they sent me. My ticket rep called me this week to say that Rutgers is absolutely aware of it and doing what they can. We both agreed that there is a delicate balance, but I made my point that there does not seem to be any reason why police should be walking up to tailgates that are quiet and well-behaved and start carding people. There was some agreement there.
Is ticketing underage drinking any different than:
Catching you with a radar giving you a ticket for speeding at 90mph up the Turnpike when the posted speed limit is 65 or getting caught in a drinking & driving checkpoint?
in all 3 cases you are doing something you know is illegal and you run the risk of getting caught and getting penalized in each case.
Catching you with a radar giving you a ticket for speeding at 90mph up the Turnpike when the posted speed limit is 65 or getting caught in a drinking & driving checkpoint?
in all 3 cases you are doing something you know is illegal and you run the risk of getting caught and getting penalized in each case.
Remember, everything in a big picture kind of way is new.
I would hope over time as we evolve into a B1G school in more than name only things will change.
Yes, 2 of those things are potentially dangerous to other people. The drinking age is some arbitrary number some politician came up with. In Europe they have lower drinking ages and less problems with binge drinking. Having a beer underage at a tailgate is a time honored tradition. Someone who is behaving responsibly should not be harassed.
when does "behaving responsibly" cross over to something dangerous to themselves? They all start sober and then get progressively drunk on the never ending 30 packs of Keystone that show up and then you get kids peeing and vomiting between the cars and passing out in between the cars or worse.
Do I think that giving grief to a couple of 20 y/o's tailgating with mom and dad is a bit over the top, yea. but the bottom line is that it is illegal. You play you gotta be ready to pay.
MrsScrew has it right. Whether you agree with the law or not, it is a strict liability crime. Doesn't matter your intent, and there is no defense, etc., but if you do it, you have to be willing to accept any potential punishment that is set forth in the law. Should they be harassing every individual for IDs, no; but if someone clearly looks underage and is drinking, that's a risk the individual has to face.
I've thrown people out of my tailgate who were underage. A few years ago a friend brought his younger brother who was 19 and looked it. He was stupid enough to walk right by the officer while holding a solo cup of beer. Of course he is going to get ticketed. Wasn't causing any problems but still in violation of the law.
Most posted speed limits on U.S., as well as the U.S. drinking age, are arbitrary numbers lacking a basis on civil engineering design and logic, respectively. Rather, they are based on a combination of emotion, insurance lobbies, and potential increased revenue to be garnered by strict enforcement on large numbers of "violators".
The analogy you've offered actually proves the point many of us are trying to make. If a state trooper pulls over a motorist for traveling at 80 m.p.h. with the general flow of traffic on the NJ Turnpike, they are being arbitrary in their enforcement and actually upsetting the established flow of traffic by likely effecting that particular driver to drive slower than the flow of traffic from then on. In practice, they (correctly) target drivers who weave in-between moderate traffic at 90-100 m.p.h. or drive the 65 m.p.h. left lane, which have both proven to be more dangerous by the concept of "speed differential".
Drunk driving is very dangerous and certain levels of intoxication are illegal, as they should be. But drunk driving checkpoints have constantly been challenged in the courts, the constitutionality of which is arguably borderline.
As for college football tailgates, police can and should ticket drunk people of all ages for crimes such as theft, public urination, and physical harassment/assault; just about none of us disagree with this. But by constantly ID'ing and harassing tailgaters who look "young" with Solo cups but are otherwise acting responsible/sober, police are upsetting the enjoyment of a large # of tailgaters and pissing off paying fans/donors to the point of decreasing attendance. There is a middle ground.
@RUsSKii see my second post. I think we are in agreement on the harassment of "young looking" people quietly tailgating with family & even friends, but I will totally disagree if you mean the large groups gathered around a pick up truck drinking copious quantities of Keystone Beer. they start as "responsible/sober" but end up in a totally different way.
but whatever way you want to spin it underage drinking, which is still 21 in this country, is illegal and the cops can pick on whomever they want...whether you or I or anyone else like it or not.
but whatever way you want to spin it underage drinking, which is still 21 in this country, is illegal and the cops can pick on whomever they want...whether you or I or anyone else like it or not.
@MrsScrew It sounds like we are in agreement. Large parties with pickup trucks/DJ Stages/Rockstar vehicles may have worked in the past in the Blue Lot, but got too big/crazy with B1G opponents such as PSU and got kicked out for interfering with other tailgates. I would support their return to a separate designated area outside of the existing lots (Hamsterdam didn't work for obvious reasons, and Werblin will continue to not work because it is enforced as "dry", but perhaps a paid "addendum" to the Blue Lot could work as proposed by 4Real.
As far as the illegality of underage drinking, I understand that it's the law but do not respect it, will constantly advocate changing it, and am not interested in giving the police (and apparently Rutgers) carte blanche to crack down on it to the point where they are harassing otherwise innocent tailgates of paying fans and donors, and responsible college students for that matter. There are consequences for that as well.
As far as the illegality of underage drinking, I understand that it's the law but do not respect it, will constantly advocate changing it, and am not interested in giving the police (and apparently Rutgers) carte blanche to crack down on it to the point where they are harassing otherwise innocent tailgates of paying fans and donors, and responsible college students for that matter. There are consequences for that as well.
I think next week's game will tell us a lot about how things will go in the Blue lot going forward. The game has maybe the three biggest factors that caused lots of problems in the past. It's a blackout, night game and national broadcast. Add in that Mich St is a top 5 team, and these are the things that would turn the front of the blue lot into a wild scene.
Hopefully it won't turn into Penn St, but I still want the lot to have the energy of a great tailgate before a big game that it should.
Hopefully it won't turn into Penn St, but I still want the lot to have the energy of a great tailgate before a big game that it should.