The Sweet Sixteen comes to town
This article about the NCAA South Regional finals coming to Reliant Stadium this week is mostly about the work involved in changing the venue from rodeo to basketball. It's interesting enough, but what caught my eye was this:
At Reliant, giant curtains will block off the end zones, leaving about 43,000 seats. About 31,000 tickets have already been sold.
Twelve thousand unsold tickets? Really? You UT fans, you do know that the Longhorns will be playing in this event, right? How do you expect the
ticket brokers to make any money if this isn't a sellout?
I figure the place will be full before the opening tip, but seriously, I can't believe it isn't so already. And therefore I found this amusing as well:
Reliant is scheduled to play host to the NCAA South Regional again in 2010 and the Final Four championship in 2011, [Shea Guinn, president of SMG-Reliant, the company that operates the stadium,] said.
For those events, the curtains won't be used and between 72,000 and 74,000 seats will be available.
"Every seat will be a good one," Guinn said.
Actually, I'm pretty sure some of those seats won't be all that good. At least, not if proximity to the action is part of your criteria for determining what a good seat is. If all you care about is the atmosphere, then as long as they manage to sell the place out, I'd agree. Otherwise, I'd probably advise saving the money and watching on TV, where at least you'll know who has the ball at all times. And why they think they can sell 72,000 seats for another Sweet Sixteen when they haven't sold 43,000 yet for this one is a question I can't answer. I admire the can-do spirit, but if there are empty seats this weekend, I think they might want to give the arrangement for 2010 another thought.
Posted by Charles Kuffner on March 24, 2008 to Other sports
Are you aware of whom Bryan Hermann is?
It seems you have always favored Joe Jaworski yet you never attempted to learn about all of the candidates.
Now I notice you posted election resualts and still you omit Bryan Hermann.
I think to make your readers and yourself a well informed group you should attempt to get to know all of the candidates.
For example Joe Jaworski spent est $100k+ for the primaries while Bryan Herman spent $6k.
Bryan Hermann still got 41% of the vote. Is this coincidence?
Or is it because the people whom talked with him saw good qualities for State Senate?
Folks whom are not well informed of all candidates tend to vote for the one whom spends the most on advertising. Responsible reporting would dictate that you get to know the candidates and pass the information off to your readers.
Elections are not about money their about whom can do the job.
1. Yes, I am aware of who Bryan Hermann is.
2. This comment doesn't have anything to do with this post. I'll let it slide here, but please try to be on topic in the future.
3. I am and have been for Joe Jaworski because he's clearly an excellent candidate who has a well-articulated platform and has the ability to raise the funds he needs to get his message out. I've known Joe Jaworski for about a year now. This is the first time I've ever heard from you. Why shouldn't I be for Jaworski?
4. Speaking of which, you are aware that the primary was three weeks ago, and that perhaps it might have been better strategy to reach out to folks like me before the voting started, right? Just checking.
5. As was the case with candidates like Gene Kelly, some number of voters picked candidates based on insufficient information. Your showing was an aberration based on the extreme turnout.
Thanks for the feedback.