Matt Wickey wrote:
 
>Here's a question: who's to say it's easier to be "high profile" in
>basketball than in hockey?  There are fewer hockey teams to contend
>with, especially when you have an existing program at the Div. I
>level.  Granted basketball itself is a more "high profile" sport
>with a larger fan base and more $$'s in play.  But, given the competition
>for those dollars, I don't think a university can guarantee a money
>making operation simply by "focusing" on the sport.  What if UIC chose
>to can basketball and focus on hockey?  Could they possibly be as
>successful monetarily with a top notch hockey program as they would
>be with a middle-of-the-pack basketball team?
 
Part of the answer revolves not just on how much money they wolud make, but
also on the fact that basketball is a much cheaper sport to run.  Fewer
players, less equipment, no ice plant, etc.  I suspect that they will
actually make more revenue off of it than hockey.  This is not to say that
either would ever actually make money.  Whenever an athlectic department
talks about making money on a sport, you have to take a close look at the
books to make sure they're not being cooked; most are.
 
J. Michael Jackson
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.