Itâ€™s been one year since the powers that be removed alcohol from Bulldog Stadium, and student reaction remains mixed.
Jason Trevino, a senior history major, said the no-alcohol policy was notable in the home football opener against Sacramento State.
The ban also means less money for the athletic department and ultimately the university, he said.
â€œI donâ€™t think they should have banned it,â€ he said. â€œI think they should bring it back, maybe control it for just a section.â€
Dietetics senior Clint Lara didnâ€™t go to the game, but said the fans would probably be less boisterous.
â€œIt kind of kills the home team momentum,â€ he said. â€œItâ€™s good and bad.â€
There are other ways for unscrupulous students.
â€œNow we have to sneak it in instead of buying it,â€ he said.
Others arenâ€™t sure why the policy went into effect.
Lara said itâ€™s to promote a family atmosphere, but Carly Cahoon, a health science senior, said it had to do with curtailing underage drinking.
â€œI think itâ€™s worse off because people just get belligerently drunk before a game,â€ she said.
Freshman Grace DeMarco, a liberal studies major, called the ban pointless.
â€œPeople just get drunk before the games,â€ she said. â€œPeople are still drunk during the games.
â€œI donâ€™t think it makes any sense. Either way, people are going to drink.â€
Steve Rendon, a junior history major, said he likes to drink.
â€œIâ€™m a drinker,â€ he said. â€œ[The ban is] bad.â€
Rendon was more practical about it.
â€œIf weâ€™re not going to do so well this season, we need something to keep our minds busy.â€