It’s a Wednesday afternoon, nearing 5 p.m., and you know you’ve forgotten to do something.
In years past, it wouldn’t have mattered, but now it does.
You’ve forgotten to redeem your ticket voucher to get a ticket into the big game with Georgia on Saturday, and now you’ll be stuck in your dorm watching it on ESPN.
No student wants to face this dilemma.
That dilemma was the way in which UA students received their tickets.
Instead of just purchasing a ticket that would be taken to the game along with scanning their ID card, students were required to buy vouchers that would be redeemed on the Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday leading up to that week’s game.
Upon returning your voucher, the student receives the actual game ticket that in previous years, they had just received from the beginning.
University officials said that the reasoning behind the change in administering the tickets was a trend that had developed in the previous couple of seasons.
Even though the Hogs were performing well on the field, the student section wasn't filling up like it was supposed to.
With a change in both the head football coach and director of athletics, a serious look was taken on how to increase the efficiency of ticket sales and get students in the seats.
The athletic department figured that if the students weren’t going to fill up the section that it could sell the unused tickets just like any other ticket in a different section of the stadium and make more money.
It seems like a viable solution to pouring more money into athletics and getting the stadium to capacity on game days, but it’s not necessarily the most popular idea with students.
“It’s just a hassle,” said UA sophomore Chelsey Humble.
Other UA students have not liked the fact that they have to make the effort to go down to the ticket office or other locations on campus to redeem their vouchers.
They’ve cited long lines and only having that Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday to get it done as major drawbacks to having the voucher system.
“It’s a bit of a hassle, but if they fill up [the stadium], then I guess it’s alright,” UA sophomore Collin Sanders said.
Sanders is a former walk-on football player for Arkansas who now watches from the student section. He said he noticed a definite increase in the quality of the section and the passion of the students who came out in droves to the Georgia game.
Some students, though, are on the other side of the fence.
They feel that the change is doing a lot of good for not just the students, but rather all of the 74,000 people that on average attend Arkansas home games in Fayetteville.
“I think it’s a good idea,” UA junior Drew Marshall said. “It allows people who actually want to go to the game to go, and helps us fill up the student section which we never could before.”
Another positive for Arkansas students, was that the ticket price remained the same.
The economy may be in a recession, but it still only costs $1 for entry.
Whereas at other Southeastern Conference schools, it costs the same, if not more, as normal game tickets for students to watch their fellow students perform.
So while the voucher system may not be the most popular or the easiest option, the objective has been fulfilled of getting students in the seats.
2 comments:
Overall, this is a pretty solid topic about something changing. It kind of is a big deal because people just forget and have no chance of using the ticket they 'bought.'
The lede is pretty good. I think direct address ledes are either hit or miss. But since I've heard quite a bit about people missing the game, I think it works. People can associate with it.
Little things: Perhaps since people did miss out on tickets, you could have opened with an actual story of some missing out on the game. I guess it is just a style preference. But I think you might have wanted to get quotes more up top.
I agree with Harold about the lede, but I think this misses. In fact, I'm banning direct address ledes going forward. After Danny's, a number of students decided to go in the same direction. And it becomes a cheap way to get an anecdote at the top without doing the work to find a real one.
Plus, yours starts generalized and then ends talking about a specific game day. You need unity.
needs some explanation. you might say: "a new system implemented this year requires students to pick up a voucher..."
--students were required to buy vouchers that would be redeemed on the Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday leading up to that week’s game.
We need an actual statement from the athletic department. Did you interview anyone?
--The athletic department figured that if the students weren’t going to fill up the section that it could sell the unused tickets just like any other ticket in a different section of the stadium and make more money.
What does this mean?
--He said he noticed a definite increase in the quality of the section
You don't have evidence for this, just a quote from student. What does the athletic department say?
--So while the voucher system may not be the most popular or the easiest option, the objective has been fulfilled of getting students in the seats.
Overall, this piece is improved, but still has a ways to go. The lede strikes me as unambitious and needs better reporting. And speaking of reporting, you need to talk to the athletic department for this story. That is a huge omission in this story.
Post a Comment