It is undeniable that the Terrapins men’s basketball team has enjoyed a remarkable home court advantage at Xfinity Center this season. Prior to losing to Wisconsin Feb. 13, the team was in the midst of a 27-game winning streak at home dating back to December 2014, all the while pushing the demand for seating to heights not seen since the early 2000s. Among those cramming into the 13-year-old arena is one of the most passionate and ravenous student body fan bases in the country.
Student attendance at Xfinity this season has been remarkable, with the student section being filled game after game with some of college basketball’s most engaged and creative fans; if only getting into the arena was as appealing as the experience within.
I have attended all but one home game this year and, for the vast majority of the games, I was at Xfinity before the gates opened 90 minutes before tipoff. Ordinarily, this means showing up within 30 minutes before the gates open. However, for some of the biggest matchups — the rivalry renewed matchup with crosstown foe Georgetown, the first AP top-10 matchup at Xfinity against Iowa and the “Red Out” game against ranked Purdue — I have joined the red-clad masses and braved the conditions while waiting outside for hours to secure the best seats available. For these games, I arrived at Xfinity as many as seven hours before tipoff. Though waiting in these long lines has led me to meet new people who have the same desire to be up close and personal with Maryland basketball, it has also opened my eyes to the flaws that exist with the system.
Usually, people who want to get the best seats will form groups and create a rotation that allows for at least one person to always be in line outside the arena while still allowing everyone to attend class. This practice is logical and completely fair when everyone waits his or her equal time in line, but problems arise when a group of three people in line quickly expands into a group of 15 or 20 people during the last 30 minutes before the gates open. For the Georgetown game, police officers monitored the line all day and cut it off when line-cutting became rampant. Inexplicably, law enforcement did not use the same practices for the Iowa and Purdue games — there was no line monitoring at all. For Iowa and Purdue, I counted no more than 15 people in front of my group when we arrived, but those 15 people turned into at least 100 by the time the gates opened. The process becomes unruly when late arrivals and line jumpers attempt to find any connection to an individual or group in line to gain access to the best seats in the arena. Not to mention walking up and hopping in line puts students in a potentially hostile situation that could be easily avoided.
It has been very frustrating to watch our antiquated seating system play out because it is unfair to the dedicated fans that wait all day for the best seats and end up being passed by students showing up just 30 minutes prior to the gates opening. I support the idea of creating groups of people who rotate all day before gaining entry into the arena. The problem arises, however, when these groups quickly become overrun with people who spend no time waiting in line. To alleviate this problem, I recommend groups of no more than five be allowed to form in line. Five students are enough to create a schedule that allows everyone in the group the ability to go to class while maintaining their position in line. In addition, limiting each group to five members would alleviate the pre-gate opening balloon effect of the line. It may not seem like a significant change, but it is a reasonable solution given the necessity of rotating people so students can still attend class. Furthermore, it should be standard practice to have a person of authority monitoring the line at least one hour before the gates open. This allows for some organization and gives students an authority figure to whom they can report unfair behavior.
Waiting in line to get seats to big games is commonplace across the country and is one of the many recognizable traditions associated with college sports basketball. At some schools, students literally camp out in tents for days leading up to big games. This practice was made famous by Duke, where students were notorious for living in the makeshift town of Krzyzewskiville before their matchup with rival UNC.
Duke has an extremely detailed 35-page policy detailing their line procedures. (Leave it to Duke to create such an elaborate system.) While I commend the effort taken to organize such a grand policy, much of it seems nitpicky and too complicated. Another one of Maryland’s ex-ACC rivals, the University of Virginia, has a loyalty system that rewards students for attending games. Using these loyalty points, students are divided into five different timed entry groups based on the number of loyalty points each student has accumulated. The students with the most loyalty points are given the best chance to be chosen to enter into the earlier entry groups. This process is far more logical, and would give students tangible rewards for attending multiple events while eliminating the need for a line at all. Also, this reward system could help bolster student involvement at some of the less-attended sporting events on the campus.
While there is probably no perfect solution to this problem, I believe a new system needs to be implemented to reward the most dedicated Terps fans who are willing to wait hours in the biting cold to show their loyalty. It is time we implement a system worthy of one of the best universities and best student sections in the country.
Chris Robinson is a freshman journalism major. He can be reached at crobin55@terpmail.umd.edu
