The implication is this is a NET profit for the NCAA? Does this include
the extra costs incurred by the host city , for security, police,
traffic control, etc.? I doubt it...your local taxes pay for that, and I
bet it is typically a large number.
 
On a different but related topic (revenue as a motivator) as far as I
know, there are only a couple of D-1 universities that actually make a
NET PROFIT from intercollegiate sports, one I am pretty sure is
MIchigan, with 104 K at each football game ... but most LOSE.
 
Here at Cal Poly, the students and the taxpayers foot the bill
difference. I guess they think it is worth it... they seem to be able to
build mega million sports complexes at the drop of the hat, but not
afford money for student graders.
 
Tony Buffa
Physics Dept, Cal Poly State Univ., San Luis Obispo
 
RPI '64, Illinois '66 and '69  ... whom, as most of you know, has a bad
taste in his mouth from enduring a big slush fund scandal at Illinois in
the late 60s.... but who is hypocritical enough to root for RPI in Div-1
hockey :-)
 
Go Engineers!!
 
===============================
 
[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > -  Expanding to 16 teams would generate about $236,000 in
> > revenue for the NCAA
>
> This actually has been corrected -- it should've said $336,000
>
> > -  Men's hockey is the second largest revenue generator of the NCAA
> > tournaments, trailing only squeakball (but Adam, I assume that's not
> > counting the football bowl games as a "tournament," correct?).
>
> correct.
>
> HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
> [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.