RVANews

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:58:33 +0000

[ur]Richmond[/ur] (26-8, No. 25 RPI -- NCAA tournament)
ODU (26-8, No. 27 RPI -- NCAA tournament)
Virginia Tech (23-8, No. 59 RPI -- NIT)
William & Mary (21-10, No. 58 RPI -- NIT)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (22-9, No. 66 RPI -- CBI tournament)

Ho there, reader of RSS feeds! Do you ever want to support RVANews in a real and tangible way? Or at least pay a small penance for reading ad-free content? If so, support us on Patreon for a couple bucks a month!

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:57:48 +0000

[ur]Richmond[/ur] (24-7, 13-3 in A-10, No. 24 RPI)
ODU (26-8, 3-0 in CAA Tournament, No. 33 RPI)
Virginia Tech (23-7, 10-6 in ACC, No. 50 RPI)
William & Mary (21-10, 2-1 in CAA Tournament, No. 56 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (22-9, 2-1 in CAA Tournament, No. 65 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:57:44 +0000

[ur]Richmond[/ur] (23-7, 12-3 in A-10, No. 28 RPI)
ODU (23-8, 15-3 in CAA, No. 38 RPI)
Virginia Tech (21-7, 8-6 in ACC, No. 52 RPI)
William & Mary (19-9, 12-6 in CAA, No. 60 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (20-8, 11-7 in CAA, No. 66 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:05:35 +0000

[ur]Richmond[/ur] (22-6, 11-2 in A-10, No. 26 RPI)
Virginia Tech (21-5, 8-4 in ACC, No. 43 RPI)
ODU (21-8, 13-3 in CAA, No. 41 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (19-7, 10-6 in CAA, No. 62 RPI)
William & Mary (18-8, 11-5 in CAA, No. 48 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:07:10 +0000

[ur]Richmond[/ur] (20-6, 9-2 in A-10, No. 27 RPI)
Virginia Tech (20-4,7-3 in ACC, No. 50 RPI)
ODU (20-7, 12-3 in CAA, No. 33 RPI)
William & Mary (17-7, 10-5 in CAA, No. 51 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (17-7, 9-6 in CAA, No. 67 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:55:17 +0000

[ur]Richmond[/ur] (18-6, 7-2 in A-10, No. 31 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (17-5, 9-4 in CAA, No. 52 RPI)
Virginia Tech (18-4, 5-3 in ACC, No. 65 RPI)
ODU (18-7, 10-3 in CAA, No. 39 RPI)
UVa (14-7, 5-3 in ACC, No. 95 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:21:30 +0000

The average RPI for F.T.'s top five is 47.8. UVa dropped of the list this week after losing to Wake Forest.

ODU (16-5, 8-1 in CAA, No. 36 RPI)
[ur]Richmond[/ur] (15-6, 4-2 in A-10, No. 41 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (13-5, 5-4 in CAA, No. 49 RPI)
Va. Tech (15-3, 2-2 in ACC, No. 69 RPI)
William & Mary (13-5, 6-3 in CAA, No. 44 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:07:48 +0000

William & Mary (13-3, 6-1 in CAA, No. 29 RPI)
[ur]Richmond[/ur] (14-5, 3-1 in A-10, No. 30 RPI)
ODU (14-5, 6-1 in CAA, No. 40 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (12-4, 4-3 in CAA, No. 45 RPI)
UVa (11-4, 3-0 in ACC, No. 100 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:56:22 +0000

William & Mary (11-3, 4-1 in CAA, No. 23 RPI)
[ur]Richmond[/ur] (12-5, 1-1 in A-10, No. 26 RPI)
ODU (12-5, 4-1 in CAA, No. 40 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (10-4, 2-3 in CAA, No. 55 RPI)
VT (12-2, 0-1 in ACC, No. 71 RPI)

F.T. Rea’s Virginia top five

F.T.Rea — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:18:39 +0000

Editor's note: So I love this feature Terry does over on SLANTblog called "SLANTblog's VA Top Five." Each week he ranks the top five Division I Virginia basketball teams. I like it so much that I asked him if we could syndicate it -- and he said yes.

So here, for the first time this season is F.T. Rea's Virginia top five:

William & Mary (9-2, 2-0 in CAA, No. 2 RPI)
[vcu]VCU[/vcu] (9-2, 1-1 in CAA, No. 14 RPI)
[ur]Richmond[/ur] (11-4, 0-0 in A-10, No. 22 RPI)
VT (12-1, 0-0 in ACC, No. 60 RPI)
ODU (9-5, 1-1 in CAA, No. 39 RPI)

Baseball on the ballot

F.T.Rea — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:56:37 +0000

Professional baseball isn’t being played in Richmond this summer. Those who follow local news to do with baseball know that it’s likely a Double A team, which is currently situated in Connecticut, is heading here next year.

Surely, that’s good news to Little Leaguers in the metro area.

The last time Richmonders didn’t have a local team to pull for was 1965. That was the year between the Richmond Virginians’ departure for Toledo and the arrival of the Richmond Braves. In 1966, the R-Braves took what had been the Atlanta Crackers’ slot in the International League, because the Milwaukee Braves relocated to Atlanta.

This time around the process of putting a minor league team on the field has been more complicated than it was in 1966. Now we can see Richmond’s baseball fans got lucky then. Now the minor leagues are more structured and there are fewer franchises in existence. And, 43 years ago there was no argument about where the baseball field ought to be.

The pair of seats above was acquired at the last game played at Parker Field in 1984. With the help of my then-girlfriend, Tana, we literally ripped them up from their platform. The authorities actually allowed/encouraged it. A few days later the old grandstands were torn down.

Over the last decade a number of proposals have surfaced that would have moved professional baseball to other parts of town, even to the suburbs. No need to rehash all that.

In 2009 the matter seems to have boiled down to two distinct options in different parts of town:

Refurbish The Diamond/or build a stadium nearby
Build a new stadium in Shockoe Bottom

After years of presentations and studies and quibbling it has come down to a choice between keeping baseball on the Boulevard, or moving baseball to Shockoe Bottom.

Yet, after watching the Braves leave town, at least somewhat out of frustration with Richmond’s squirrelly moves, our City Council is still struggling with what to do. They don’t want to be wrong.

Mayor Dwight Jones doesn’t want to be wrong, either. So Jones wants to continue to study the matter. Now it seems we’ve descended into studying studies.

For several months the local blogosphere has been bubbling with posts and comments supporting one location or another. Both sides, Boulevard and Bottom, have Facebook pages and have sought mightily to influence the general public’s view on the issue. Where to play baseball has become a political issue of such magnitude that it’s time for something to break the spell.

Well, at the Fan District Hub, we have a solution — it’s called democracy.

Although it’s not easy in Virginia, it is possible to have the voters weigh in where elected officials fear to tread.

It took studies and a campaign and eventually a citywide referendum, in 2003, to get rid of the old weak-mayor system in Richmond. Now voters in Richmond elect their mayor directly. Put plainly, Richmonders opted for pure democracy, without modifiers, when they got the chance.

Once the General Assembly saw the eye-popping results, which overwhelmingly called for the change, Richmond’s City Charter was amended. Mayor Jones, who once opposed that same change, now seems OK with it, too.

It says here, the question of where to play baseball should be put before the voters in much the same way. A non-binding resolution could be placed on the ballot in November.

Obviously, prudent Virginians don’t want a string of frivolous ballot issues to clutter up every election. But sometimes the only way to settle something is to let the people decide.

City Registrar Kirk Showalter tells me there’s not much real extra expense to the taxpayers to run such a referendum, when there‘s already an election taking place.

In my view, the voters of Richmond will turn out in droves to put the kibosh on the plan to build in Shockoe Bottom. But maybe I’m wrong. Either way, putting it on the ballot will provide political cover for Jones and other elected officials.

Maybe I’m out of touch with how it is today. I’ve certainly been told as much by supporters of Shockoe Bottom’s baseball fever. Maybe their campaign to win support has been so successful that they could win such a test at the ballot box.

Of course, dear reader, some of the most ardent supporters of the proposed Shockoe Bottom real estate project may be afraid to take a chance on democracy. Some might say the ordinary guy is too dim to know what’s best. And, if they do, I’ll be willing to take my chances with how their asserting that position will play with John Q. Public, too.

If public money is to be used to facilitate or leverage the building of a new baseball stadium in Richmond, it’s entirely proper to ask the voters where they want their money spent.

In the way of disclosure, I must admit that I’ve been a baseball fan since before I played my first season of Little League, 50 years ago. What’s left in my bank of memories includes some scenes at Parker Field, where I saw Satchel Paige pitch and Mickey Mantle hit.

Bottom Line: How about some 100 proof democracy … neat, with no chaser?

– Words and photo by F.T. Rea

Clinton’s strut out of style?

F.T.Rea — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 12:30:22 +0000

It’s less than a week into 2008 and already the so-called “inevitability” of Hillary Clinton’s nomination sounds so-o 2007. The Iowa caucuses popped that leftover bubble.

Once the Iowa votes were counted the national press promptly reduced the numbers down to a one-word common denominator for what voters in both political parties were calling for -- “change.”

Perhaps that’s a bit oversimplified but a one-word theme, which plays well as a headline, is as good as it gets for copywriters in the news biz.

Cast as insurgents, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mike Huckabee emerged from Iowa labeled as “agents for change,” as winners. For the also-rans in both parties that change theme might have a different meaning, as a verb rather than a noun -- either change your campaign’s style, or step aside, because this year there’s a new way of walking.

For Democrat Hillary Clinton that won’t be so easy. She’s been selling her “experience” as a U.S. Senator, piggybacked onto her First Lady years, as her strong suit. Now she’s hearing from the chattering pundits that a lot of voters, especially young voters, see her as representing a fading bygone era more than a brighter future.

If that 35 years of experience Clinton has been touting is actually looking more like “baggage” to restless Democrats, tired of faces all-too-familiar, she may have painted herself into a corner.

Can’t you hear that familiar tune in the background? Yes, it’s that old jazz standard, “There’ll Be Some Changes Made” (by Overstreet and Higgins).

I’m goin’ to change my way of livin’
If that ain’t enough
Then I’ll change the way that I strut my stuff

At Saturday night’s debate, in a revealing moment, Clinton cut her eyes toward Obama to say, “I’m not running on just a promise of change, I’m running on 35 years of making...”

How did “change” become the first big buzzword of Campaign ‘08?

Well, one has to go back to 1952 to find the last presidential election year in which there wasn’t an incumbent president or vice president in the hunt. Then there’s the fact the shadow being cast across the political landscape by the baby boomer generation is at long-last shortening.

Voters under 35 apparently aren’t so interested in re-fighting the battles of the ’60s forever.

Perhaps more important than either of those reasons is the fatigue factor that’s clearly in the air. Coast-to-coast, millions of Democrats, Republicans, Independents and you-name-it are obviously more than a little tired of a bitterly partisan, consultant-driven style of politics that can’t deliver solutions. Likewise, voters are fed up with a lobbyist-driven government that routinely shovels their tax money into bottomless pits of folly and graft.

In 2008 the horses of fear-mongering and empty cynicism may well have been beaten to death.

However, as Obama is subjected to more scrutiny and attack ads, which he surely will be, it will become increasingly difficult for him to stay on message. Modern thinking has it that such attacks must be answered/refuted. If he follows that conventional wisdom, he could easily end up sounding more ordinary, which could reveal weaknesses not yet apparent.

Which means that while Obama’s momentum seems authentic -- his victory speech in Iowa has drawn universal raves -- there’s no reason to say this early in the going that if he wins in New Hampshire, it’s all over for Clinton. Not at all. Her considerable skills and resources won’t have evaporated into the mists of history, merely on account of losing a handful of delegates in two small states.

In short, Hillary Clinton has to figure out a new way to strut her stuff without looking like just another copycat politician, dancing yesterday’s steps. Maybe she can still do that ... then again, maybe she can’t.

Most likely, all that’s really been settled at this point is that we know “inevitability” is last year’s buzzword.

The Byrd Theatre: 1928 Movie Palace Faces Its Future

F.T.Rea — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:05:06 +0000

Back in 2004, the new roof the Byrd Theatre is getting now — courtesy of an anonymous donor — was only a dream. In fact, before the Byrd Theatre Foundation entered the picture, the future of the 1928 movie palace looked anything but bright.

After some determined fundraising and lengthy negotiations the Foundation assumed ownership of the property in June 2007. That noteworthy accomplishment was due to the laudable efforts of two people, in particular — Bertie Selvey and Tony Pelling of the Byrd Theatre Foundation.

Selvey was a longtime supporter of TheatreVirginia, the live stage formerly in operation at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (1955-2002). After losing that stage, she soon saw that the Byrd was in trouble. Not wanting to lose another theater in her neighborhood, she founded the Byrd Watchers, a group of volunteers devoted to raising money to purchase and preserve the Byrd. Pelling, a retired Under Secretary from the UK Civil Service, has been the Foundation’s volunteer president since January of 2004.

“I need a cause,” explained Selvey.

In the 1960s and 1970s America’s cities saw unprecedented growth in their suburbs. New multi-screened theaters began popping up like mushrooms in shopping centers. More screens under one roof meant expanded customer options. In the process, single-screen houses without parking lots gradually lost their leverage with movie distributors.

That process undermined Carytown’s Byrd Theatre and urban cinemas everywhere. The list of darkened screens within Richmond’s city limits over the last three decades includes evocative names such as the Biograph, the Booker T, the Brookland, the Capitol, the Colonial, the Edison, the Loew’s, and the Towne.

Into the mid-1970s the Byrd continued to exhibit first-run pictures. With business falling off, the region’s distributors eventually decided it was no longer worthy of commanding exclusive runs of the most sought-after titles. By 1983 Sam Bendheim III, who managed the Neighborhood Theatres movie chain, could no longer justify keeping the Byrd open.

To the rescue came Duane Nelson, an assistant manager in the Byrd’s last days under Neighborhood’s auspices. Nelson, who had studied the development of historical properties at VCU, lined up a partner: Jerry Cable, creator of the Tobacco Company, in some ways the most significant restaurant in Shockoe Slip since the late-1970s. Together, in 1984, Nelson and Cable secured a lease and set about revitalizing the West Cary Street anachronism.

After a couple of years experimenting with a repertory schedule, Nelson and Cable parted ways and the booking policy changed to offering bargain-priced, second-run features. Thus the Byrd was saved from the wrecking ball, or perhaps being converted into a flea market.

Film-rental fees come out of box-office receipts in the form of a percentage; distributors generally take between forty and seventy percent. Consequently, most movie theaters, including the Byrd, lean heavily on revenue from their concession stands. On the other hand, by showing second-run movies the Byrd is not obliged to charge its customers the steep price of admission that distributors insist upon for first-run releases.

The $1.99 ticket scheme can be profitable as long as the crowds are large enough to buy plenty of popcorn. Naturally, the traffic this formula brings to the area pleases the Carytown retailers that surround the Byrd.

Although, under Nelson’s management the Byrd was taking in sufficient revenue to stay afloat on a day-to-day basis, putting away reserves to restore the building, remained out of reach. Eventually, even paying the rent on the building was difficult, at best. Then, just in the nick of time came the Byrd Theatre Foundation to once again save the Byrd from falling going dark.

The current manager Todd Schall-Vess, who also worked under Nelson, has continued with that basic second-run exhibition policy. On top of that flow of pop product, special events, such as live music shows, occasionally shoulder the movies aside; every spring the VCU French Film Festival takes over the Byrd for three days.

Currently, although Pelling and Selvey have little experience in the art of selling movies to the public, in truth, they join a long list of important players in Richmond’s movie theater history who had little in the way of credentials before taking the plunge. Keeping Schall-Vess as manager provided the theater’s new owners with some valuable experience and a measure of continuity.

Now that the roof will be secure, the other renovations planned — which will include repairs to the Mighty Wurlitzer and new seats! — can proceed. Of course, that will mean a lot more fundraising.

In 1928, as it was in Richmond, posh movie palaces opened in cities coast-to-coast. Few in those other cities have survived. As it has before, Richmond’s antique Byrd Theatre has somehow managed to imbue its newest stewards with enough of that same Roaring ‘20s optimism to keep the light on the screen.

Photo by: Jake Lyell