We’re only four weeks into Go Be Red, so it’s still too early to concretely assess the long-term success of the program. It isn’t, however, too early to take a critical look at some of the successes and failures that the program has caused, no matter how many also-rans believe it’s a waste of the senate’s time and resources. At this point, the program is really somewhat of a mixed bag.
At first glance, the program has achieved its main goal—to increase turnout and spirit at RPI sporting events. There’s no way, though, that the program has generated the increased turnout to its intended degree. The oft-cited apathy of the typical RPI student is shining through once again. While the GM was thrilled that 52 teams signed up for the program, calling it “a response … that none of us could have expected,” very few teams actually come to events. Field hockey games, for instance, are lucky to attract five or six GBR teams.
What’s even worse is that the GBR teams that do show up often cross the lines of basic decency and decorum. When a person yells obscene and vulgar comments in the name of “school spirit,” it leads me to question whether I want to support the same cause as that person. When Mark Andrews ’06, student senator and captain of a GBR team (how that’s not a conflict of interest is beyond me), suggests that a Union College soccer player commit suicide, more of the same questions pop into my mind.
Frankly, I’m a little bit surprised that these negative ramifications weren’t anticipated by the senate. After all, when you mix college students with the opportunity to be boisterous (and throw in some alcohol for some teams, just for good measure), is a fair amount of vulgarity unexpected? Of course not.
All unseemliness aside, however, the program has generated plenty of positivity. It does, after all, bolster turnout and noise for sports that tend to get overlooked. RPI parents in attendance also tend to appreciate when their child’s peers are cheering for their child. The players love it, too. After the men’s hockey team’s 13-3 thrashing of Ottawa, during which the impact of GBR was noticeable from a decibel perspective, the players beamed about the support. Senior captain Kevin Croxton said, “I can’t say enough about the fans tonight,” and junior forward Oren Eizenman added, “When they’re getting on guys in the [penalty] box, it’s great.”
The good contributions of the program to the Institute as a whole are undeniable, but I’m personally under the impression that the whole program would be better off if its participants tried being clever instead of going strictly for shock value in some cheers. It’s possible to dislike a school like Union or Clarkson and still respect its players as human beings. The line between being clever and crass is so fine that often you don’t realize where it is until you’ve gone well past it and into the realm of something like genitalia, sexuality, or suicide. Ideally, the line won’t be crossed any more this year, but I’m not getting my hopes up too high; if the student senate can’t look to one of its own to set a decent example for other teams to follow, where can it look?
