The main (but I assure you, not the only) problem I have with Paul Vattakavanich’s articles is that he continues to refer to them as “rebuttal” and “debate.” If you will recall, my first article was written to draw attention to the fact that I believed the SMU Police Department acted wrongly in throwing students out of the SMU vs. Memphis game. In Paul’s most recent installment in our “debate” he agreed that he “would like to hear the SMU PD’s reasons for their particular responses at the game.” My purpose in writing “We Fought Memphis” was to “question the motives behind (SMU PD’s) actions at the game.” Paul is wondering the same thing I am wondering. End of debate.
However, to make this article lengthy enough for publishing (and to ruffle a few feathers) I will take issue with more than just that. I am confused as to where I attacked Paul Vattakavanich’s character in my previous article. I understand that sarcasm permeates my writing, so maybe when I said “I enjoy his antics” Paul actually thought I meant he looked stupid. That is not the case. I love seeing him sprint across the football field in his band ensemble. The tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum hat totally makes the outfit. In fact, I think maybe we should suit him up for the football team; we could use that kind of speed on special teams (OK, maybe that was sarcasm). Really though, I do notice him giving his best effort to pump up the crowd at various SMU sporting events. If every fan were as loyal and enthusiastic as Paul, there would be no bashing of student fan attendance whatsoever.
Which brings me to my next point: the fact that meager student attendance does not go unnoticed and the students catch heat for it. Allow me to cite some sources in order to clarify the manner in which this bashing has occurred. There is a blog Web site called PonyFans.com on which SMU alumni, students and fans can post about anything and everything concerning sports. For almost every single discussion involving a home game, there is mention of the “quiet,” “weak” or “nonexistent” student section. The weak attendance is not just for basketball either. For example, ESPN2 cameras only showed about one-eighth of Ford Stadium on television for the SMU vs. UAB football game. Want to know why? Because the rest of it was empty. When SMU men’s soccer played Tulsa at home, I would be willing to bet that there were about as many Tulsa students as there were Mustangs. You haven’t heard about it in the DC because there are so few students actually at the games that no one takes the initiative to write about it. Stop fighting it, Paul, SMU students just don’t go to games. That was the main point of your first article. Why are you going against it now? Maybe you should join in on the bashing and put some more butts in the seats.
Concerning other minor points, my inclusion of “scantily clad girls” in my last article was actually a page taken from Paul’s playbook; I included it on purpose, “using humor to get my point across.” Also, my condemnation of the band’s song selection was a minor point, but if you would like we can make it a major issue. Mainly, playing “La Bamba” for Bamba Fall. That is just awful. Paul needs to throw his senior weight around and maybe make some changes.
To summarize, I think this “debate” over SMU athletics has come to a close. Paul and I both question the actions of the police at the SMU vs. Memphis game. We both think that SMU students should attend more athletic events here on campus. That being said, put Paul’s character, the band, the student section and everything else aside, I think SMU athletics is on its way back to its former glory and the students can make all the difference. Hopefully no one will disagree with that.
About the writer:
Zachary Upcheshaw is a sophomore finance major. He can be reached at [email protected].
