Doug Peterson wrote:

> Don't forget the role of $$$$ in all of this.  The FF hockey tournament is a
> money maker for the NCAA, second after the basketball tournament.
> Locating the tournament in a place that might result in lowered attendance
> could be a risk the NCAA doesn't want to take.

That practical consideration shouldn't be ignored, although the degree of
emphasis on $$$$ could be relaxed slightly on a once-in-a-great-while basis.
Nobody should suggest the NCAA tournament embark on a multi-year road tour
through nontraditional, unprofitable areas just to preach the gospel.  But
neither should they reject the occasional use of good viable venues because they
don't meet the "my back yard" test.  Anaheim didn't ruin college hockey despite
all the bellowing and neither would a return to Anaheim.  Weed out poor choices
from the Anaheim/New Orleans/Atlanta/Santa Fe/Yuma/Oklahoma City/Reno/San
Antonio/Roswell/Jackson Hole/Tucumcari list, but don't just throw them out en
masse.

Why some school would be interested in sponsoring there, that's a separate
miracle.

boB