Poor Fan Behavior

[jimotis4heisman]

werent most of the problems up by norwich? i know 13th had a few incidents. but i though i remember norwich being the center of the problems for the texas game. thats a simple one to me. all those apartments (higher density of people) in a small area.

 

[Jeffcat]

werent most of the problems up by norwich? i know 13th had a few incidents. but i though i remember norwich being the center of the problems for the texas game. thats a simple one to me. all those apartments (higher density of people) in a small area.

the 13th and norwich incidents i was talking about were from 01 i believe. the texas game incidents were pretty spread out. they had 40 fires spread out all over the campus and then they had a couple areas that were a little more severe but i dont remember where exactly.

 

[Thump]

I blame it on too many kids coming from single parent homes and not ever getting any attention from daddy.

 

[BB73]

An interesting discussion.

First - jo, I think it was cincibuck (rather than Dubs) who made the post about Woody speaking to the students in 1968.

I think the 1961 incident is a better comparison to the post-football game problems in the campus area over the last several years. It was football related activity, rather than the anti-war and civil rights demonstrations of the late '60s and early '70s. But that does show that football-related things have a long history of potential trouble.

Everyone's views on the incidents are based on their own experiences. I wasn't at tOSU for the victories over TSUN in '68, '70, and '72 (which had a messy aftermath). I was at the '74 game (12-10 win, Klaban's FGs) and don't recall much of a problem after that game.

But I was also at the '05 Texas and '06 TSUN games, and didn't see any problems personally. That's because I headed across the river afterwards, back to the Fawcett tailgate areas in each case. The trouble usually occurs in or near the residential areas close to High St.

The property damage, burning couches, and arrests do give tOSU a black eye. I think a combination of things is needed to reduce them, many of which are underway. Clean-up of the areas near campus, more police presence, public service messages by JT, and the arrests of blatant troublemakers. I think actual jail time for one couch-burner will serve as a deterrent to others in the furure.

 

[wells]

werent most of the problems up by norwich? i know 13th had a few incidents. but i though i remember norwich being the center of the problems for the texas game. thats a simple one to me. all those apartments (higher density of people) in a small area.

From what I understand, the biggest fire was on Norwich in front of my apartment building. Although I was in Texas and unable to witness it, I was told the fire reached heights surpassing the buildings in the immediate surroundings.

 

[Steve19]

At a certain age, a certain segment of any generation lashes out at authority. I believe you are using Vietnam as an excuse for baby boomers.

How is getting drunk, burning a couch, and fighting with each other lashing out at authority?

Surely, if you want to take an Eriksonian perspective (i.e., the identity crisis), all adolescents engage in some form of resistance in order to establish their own identities.

Viet Nam war demonstrations were interspersed with the emergence of a radical change in American culture. But the main focus was to stop the government drafting kids and sending them off to fight a war in which we tied our hands behind our backs, propped up a corrupt regime that nobody wanted, and lost 7 GIs a day. Compare the Iraqi war today with the Viet Nam "conflict" (http://www.lies.com/wp/2003/10/20/us-deaths-in-vietnam-and-iraq-by-month/) and you might get an idea of why kids were standing in the streets.

Viet Nam demonstrations primarily consisted of sit-ins and peaceful marches.

Now then, how do those values express conflict between generations in a way similar to students getting drunk and rioting after an Ohio State win or loss at a football game? And why would an Ohio State football game become the "right time" to make a statement against authority?

The Viet Nam demonstrations were not only directed at authority but also on encouraging young people to resist the draft and to take an active part in a war that is very much accepted as having been wrong today. To a lesser extent demonstrations focused on changing social attitudes toward racism, toward green issues, toward materialism, and the like.

There are no social change or protest issues behind the Ohio State couch burnings and riots after football games in recent years. Instead, it seems that nothing is taking place except an expression of some kind of aggression.

It seems to me that if this were related to some kind of psychological issue, as you suggest, we would witness these riots at every university, as we did the Viet Nam war demonstrations. Which of course is not the case. If the riots were rooted in some kind of social or economic movement, then we would by now have witnessed some articulation of the underlying issues, which we haven't.

Whatever, one thing is certain. At a time when Columbus needs to hold onto every job it can, each one of those little evenings of mayhem has convinced international investors that Columbus is a city starting to manifest "big city" problems and that it should be avoided.

The reputation enjoyed by the Chapel Hill, Raleigh, Durham North Carolina triangle as the best place to live in America (by many US polls), once was what we witnessed about Columbus. There is only one group of people with the motivation and means to regain that title, people living in Columbus, and it is my opinion that they should do what they can to address any real issues that exist and to stop these expressions of aggression.

 

[buckeyefool]

I think everything you said is a good reason why there have not been "riots" except the better students. There are plenty of people who go to Ohio State who study there ass off all week and then party all weekend long. That is why so many dont take classes on Friday, so they can start the weekend early.

The removing of dumpsters, cars, couchs are all reasons why things dont get destroyed. Police presense, stiffer plenalties by the police and the university are going to keep people from causing huge problems. Being able to go to the bar instead of having a party at someones house is going to help. See when you have a party in your house, someone is always going to try to crash it. When someone tries to crash it then that is going to lead to a fight of some sort. Sometimes that fight leads to a punch beinng thrown and that is it, and sometimes that fight leads to the destruction of property. When the students have places to go and meet up with the class they dont have to worry about their personal belongings being destroyed or stolen, so therefore there is less tense situations.

I was there starting in 94 and was there till 99, in that time the south campus bars all closed down, along with papa joe's burning down. As they closed down more and more problems started to move to the housing areas and it was spread out over the area. When the Bars were all in one area you had large metal wires running up and down high street to keep people from falling into the road and you had a ton of police down there on foot and horse. They had a moblie until set up and a paddywagon everyweekend to take those kids in. There were no riots because the police had the upperhand from the start. he first "modernday riot" as I;ll call it was the Earthday party on 12th ave. It was a warm spring day and just about every house on 12th had gotten a bunch of kegs. Some stories go as far as a few hundred total kegs. The beer ran out...people got pissed, cars started getting flipped, the cops show up and the rest is history.

Becuase of that incident laws such as how many kegs you were allowed to buy were sent into effect. Some stores stopped carrying glass bottles on the weekends. Overall it was a huge change, that started to sweep across the campus. There were a few "riots" here and there for a few years, but nothing that was a real riot just called that by the media. Then in 2002 there was another big one. In that time the university was raising standards the entire time, each class that was coming is was "better" than the last. So why is it there was a lull from 99 or so until 2002 and then the riot happened again dispite the fact that people couldn't just "back" in?

Another issue I have with your whole thing is the drug us on compus going down bcause of students being better that is a different story, but things I have heard from people is that drug use is probally worse on campus than it was 10 years ago.

the main topic im addressing is how the university has changed in the past decade or so. like many others said there are so many changes that really are not pertinent to what im even addressing which is the riot/drug usage/violence among the student body. this past year all went well besides the texas game and that looks like a mickey mouse operation compared to the situation after the 02 osu-michigan game and the 01 chittfest, 13th ave incident in which case riot squads came fully decked out with tear gas and batons and used them to their disgression(and rightfully so in most scenarios). a police unit getting involved in an off campus activity is about to be expected at a major university. the only discerning difference i see from any other university is our image of fires and couch burning. ive personally seen an improvement from then by policing being increased, penalties stiffened, and after the osu-michigan game last year i can stand pretty solidly and say it went off better than anybody could have expected. one way to explain this would be the enforcement which im sure played a large part but the students have to comply still and from previous events the students didnt despite riot police being on their doorstep. more fires were started, bottles and objects were thrown at the officers, and more cars were vandalized. what creates such a decrease in the amount of violence and burning these days? like i said i see it as the higher standard of living and education of the students evolving to more classy norms than the higher amounts of people that were able to just waltz into the university with below average academic standing just to get a watered down degree or drop out and still live around campus just to drink and cause trouble. in example you could use the dublin high school system as an example for the little amount of crime being committed in the area and their obviously high standard of living and their excellent school systems. you have to understand im looking at this to gain some respect of the people outside the university and so is the USG by starting their best fans in the land campaign. im not singling out you while you were in college or your friends but when you look at the whole university as one and look where it stands it sets the bar and people will want to aspire to that bar to be part of it. the biggest issue is dealing with being the largest public university and that out of the thousands of students only one group of osu or non-osu students have to start a problem in order for the media and outside world to feed the negative image of osu.

the 80s issue is interesting though. i really couldnt tell you whats all part of that because i wasnt there but one could infer that the economy was in a recession, the war had ended, and a lot of vets were getting govt spending towards a college education for jobs so thats just my take. theres a gazillion situational factors there just as there is today so ill let somebody that was here in the 80s give their opinion on the matter.

 

[BUCKYLE]

How is getting drunk, burning a couch, and fighting with each other lashing out at authority?

Surely, if you want to take an Eriksonian perspective (i.e., the identity crisis), all adolescents engage in some form of resistance in order to establish their own identities.

Viet Nam war demonstrations were interspersed with the emergence of a radical change in American culture. But the main focus was to stop the government drafting kids and sending them off to fight a war in which we tied our hands behind our backs, propped up a corrupt regime that nobody wanted, and lost 7 GIs a day. Compare the Iraqi war today with the Viet Nam "conflict" (http://www.lies.com/wp/2003/10/20/us-deaths-in-vietnam-and-iraq-by-month/) and you might get an idea of why kids were standing in the streets.

Viet Nam demonstrations primarily consisted of sit-ins and peaceful marches.

Now then, how do those values express conflict between generations in a way similar to students getting drunk and rioting after an Ohio State win or loss at a football game? And why would an Ohio State football game become the "right time" to make a statement against authority?

The Viet Nam demonstrations were not only directed at authority but also on encouraging young people to resist the draft and to take an active part in a war that is very much accepted as having been wrong today. To a lesser extent demonstrations focused on changing social attitudes toward racism, toward green issues, toward materialism, and the like.

There are no social change or protest issues behind the Ohio State couch burnings and riots after football games in recent years. Instead, it seems that nothing is taking place except an expression of some kind of aggression.

It seems to me that if this were related to some kind of psychological issue, as you suggest, we would witness these riots at every university, as we did the Viet Nam war demonstrations. Which of course is not the case. If the riots were rooted in some kind of social or economic movement, then we would by now have witnessed some articulation of the underlying issues, which we haven't.

Whatever, one thing is certain. At a time when Columbus needs to hold onto every job it can, each one of those little evenings of mayhem has convinced international investors that Columbus is a city starting to manifest "big city" problems and that it should be avoided.

The reputation enjoyed by the Chapel Hill, Raleigh, Durham North Carolina triangle as the best place to live in America (by many US polls), once was what we witnessed about Columbus. There is only one group of people with the motivation and means to regain that title, people living in Columbus, and it is my opinion that they should do what they can to address any real issues that exist and to stop these expressions of aggression.

There were riots at Michigan State also. My point was more that young adults at that age will do some crazy things. I think it's convienient to give the baby boomers so much "credit". Yeah, anytime riots by college aged kids happened before or after your generation are because the kids are assholes. You guys had a purpose.

 

[Steve19]

There were riots at Michigan State also. My point was more that young adults at that age will do some crazy things. I think it's convienient to give the baby boomers so much "credit". Yeah, anytime riots by college aged kids happened before or after your generation are because the kids are assholes. You guys had a purpose.

One of the things we are trying to bring across in BP is to raise the level of argument a bit. With all due respect, I don't think you do that here.

During the Viet Nam war era, there was not one university that did not have demonstrations and the demonstrations typically were every day during the Spring quarter or semester at universities. Demonstrations also happened off campuses, near military bases and government institutions like the State House in Columbus.

Riots after games at Michigan State do not make this any kind of universal movement or comparable. Anyone acquainted with the history of the time can verify that there is no comparison of these two social phenomena.

We are in agreement that young people are more impulsive, more emotional, and more likely to engage in behaviors considered to be taboo by their parents. Perhaps you might be more convincing if you said it that way and provided some evidence to back up your statement. Alternatively, state an opinion and we'll all acknowledge your right to hold it, but just don't expect anyone who is acquainted with the history of both times to agree with you.

 

[BUCKYLE]

One of the things we are trying to bring across in BP is to raise the level of argument a bit. With all due respect, I don't think you do that here.

Well excuse the fuck out of me.

We are in agreement that young people are more impulsive, more emotional, and more likely to engage in behaviors considered to be taboo by their parents. Perhaps you might be more convincing if you said it that way and provided some evidence to back up your statement. Alternatively, state an opinion and we'll all acknowledge your right to hold it, but just don't expect anyone who is acquainted with the history of both times to agree with you.

That's all I was trying to say. Sorry I'm not as educated as you. I won't pollute the poli board with my idiocy anymore. I guess I didn't realize I needed a link to prove college aged kids have been assholes since time began. I'll try and find one. Oh, and by the way, I couldn't give a fuck less if anyone agrees with me.

 

[Jeffcat]

I think everything you said is a good reason why there have not been "riots" except the better students. There are plenty of people who go to Ohio State who study there ass off all week and then party all weekend long. That is why so many dont take classes on Friday, so they can start the weekend early.

The removing of dumpsters, cars, couchs are all reasons why things dont get destroyed. Police presense, stiffer plenalties by the police and the university are going to keep people from causing huge problems. Being able to go to the bar instead of having a party at someones house is going to help. See when you have a party in your house, someone is always going to try to crash it. When someone tries to crash it then that is going to lead to a fight of some sort. Sometimes that fight leads to a punch beinng thrown and that is it, and sometimes that fight leads to the destruction of property. When the students have places to go and meet up with the class they dont have to worry about their personal belongings being destroyed or stolen, so therefore there is less tense situations.

I was there starting in 94 and was there till 99, in that time the south campus bars all closed down, along with papa joe's burning down. As they closed down more and more problems started to move to the housing areas and it was spread out over the area. When the Bars were all in one area you had large metal wires running up and down high street to keep people from falling into the road and you had a ton of police down there on foot and horse. They had a moblie until set up and a paddywagon everyweekend to take those kids in. There were no riots because the police had the upperhand from the start. he first "modernday riot" as I;ll call it was the Earthday party on 12th ave. It was a warm spring day and just about every house on 12th had gotten a bunch of kegs. Some stories go as far as a few hundred total kegs. The beer ran out...people got pissed, cars started getting flipped, the cops show up and the rest is history.

Becuase of that incident laws such as how many kegs you were allowed to buy were sent into effect. Some stores stopped carrying glass bottles on the weekends. Overall it was a huge change, that started to sweep across the campus. There were a few "riots" here and there for a few years, but nothing that was a real riot just called that by the media. Then in 2002 there was another big one. In that time the university was raising standards the entire time, each class that was coming is was "better" than the last. So why is it there was a lull from 99 or so until 2002 and then the riot happened again dispite the fact that people couldn't just "back" in?

Another issue I have with your whole thing is the drug us on compus going down bcause of students being better that is a different story, but things I have heard from people is that drug use is probally worse on campus than it was 10 years ago.

alright i can agree with all of that. as far as the drug use goes i personally say its gone down. it seems to be less of a problem these days from what i have seen. its still way out of control in my books and running out some of the glass shops and whatnot would be a good start. the drug issue kinda takes a part of the current day dilemna and i would put some money on the inference that the more drug usage by the students on campus is causation for a lower GPA because i know of very few people pursuing a PhD with an excellent GPA or a good GPA of say 3.3 or above that are doing a lot of drugs and if they are its to a far lesser degree than the other "students" that are failing out or doing poorly academically. thats why i brought up the academic issue from the beginning although i think it can have a stronger association with drug usage as opposed to rioting and the such.

i think the campus is heading in the right direction though. lots of work to be done and it will never be "done" but it can brighten up the image of the university. next falls academic requirements are going to be higher than those of miami(OH) which has pretty high requirements. programs and grad programs are absurdly difficult to get into and dont allow much room to screw up in your life otherwise you are going to have to be the odd one out. its gonna take time but i think the image will gradually improve and and the students body behavior will be more civilized. its always going to be a problem...its just something that has to be minimized.

i wasnt going to comment on the 99-02 comment and im kinda going to go off topic with something thats not really a fact but something more im going to infer on but do you think the 99-02 drop could be directly related towards the performance of the football team? the team was on a decline after the loss to FSU and coop left and i hate saying it but there are alot of people out there that kinda turn their head to the season if things are not going well(aka early 2004). just a thought that i thought was interesting. gives them less aggression and confidence to do things because of the team's performance and less of a reason to socially hang out in that manner on game weekends when its not going as well and kinda dulls the situation. let me remind you that i am not one of these people.

 

[BayBuck]

Well excuse the fuck out of me.


That's all I was trying to say. Sorry I'm not as educated as you. I won't pollute the poli board with my idiocy anymore. I guess I didn't realize I needed a link to prove college aged kids have been assholes since time began. I'll try and find one. Oh, and by the way, I couldn't give a fuck less if anyone agrees with me.

Why don't you cry about it, saddlebags? :tongue2:

 

[Jeffcat]

Why don't you cry about it, saddlebags? :tongue2:

i think somedody should make his outburst their permanent sig. thats some priceless stuff right there

 

[Steve19]

Well excuse the fuck out of me. That's all I was trying to say. Sorry I'm not as educated as you. I won't pollute the poli board with my idiocy anymore. I guess I didn't realize I needed a link to prove college aged kids have been assholes since time began. I'll try and find one. Oh, and by the way, I couldn't give a fuck less if anyone agrees with me.

I did not intend at any time to embarrass you or to claim that I was more educated and I apologize if that is how you took my comments. For the record, I have learned most in my life from people who have very little education and I earned every one of my degrees except the PhD while I did manual labor. So, there are no airs or fancy graces intended.

My point was that you twice dismissed the opinions of others posting in this thread, without any justification of substance except that the opinion differed from yours.

This is a discussion forum. That implies that we all try to move the discussion forward. Nothing more and nothing less. You imply that others are holding a less informed position, then you should expect others to tell you why they think they do not or to accept your point of view. That's what a discussion is.

For instance, I don't agree with your sweeping generalization of college kids above. The majority of folks involved in those riots were NOT students of The Ohio State University. What I said was, We are in agreement that young people are more impulsive, more emotional, and more likely to engage in behaviors considered to be taboo by their parents.

I don't think there were a lot of ROTC students taking part in the off-campus riots burning couches and autos. Most kids may stand and watch this behavior with a beer in hand, but not participate. At some point, the combination of alcohol and mob behavior may cause disinhibition and induce some kids that otherwise would not participate to take part. So, is it the alcohol, the mob behavior, their youth, what? To me, that is the interesting conversation in this thread, but I respect your right to disagree.

 

[osugrad21]

Sadly, this was bound to happen somewhere...this kid is a local. Carolina and Bama fans trashtalking after the game and it obviously escalated. Kid was pushed and fell headfirst in front of the tire.

Link

Post-game fight leads to death near stadium

John Monk - [email protected]



A man fighting with another man on Shop Road after the University of South Carolina-Alabama football game Saturday night fell under the wheel of a passing vehicle and later died.
?This began as a road-rage incident,? Richland County Sheriff?s Department spokeswoman Monique Mack said of the Saturday night fight that erupted on Shop Road just a block from USC?s Williams-Brice Stadium hours after USC beat Alabama.



Cont...

http://www.thestate.com/2010/10/10/1506910/police-looking-into-death-after.html#ixzz124z4nLyg​