Eric Biever writes:
 
>Still, somebody has to pay for the arena. Mariucci Arena is not being paid
>for with tax dollars. I have no problem with that; I don't see why anyone
>other than hockey fans should pay for it.  In order to reduce ticket
>prices, though, the University must replace that revenue with something
>else.  There is already advertising on every imaginable surface, so I don't
>know how much farther they can go with that.  The bottom line appears to be
>that ticket prices will remain high unless a compelling argument can be
>made for subsidizing them.
 
How is that UNH, which has a facility somewhat comparable to Mariucci can
get away with charging students zippo (beyond the athletic fee) while an
enormous Big Ten school such as Minnesota, with revenue from football,
basketball (Final Four last year) and hockey has to charge kids big bucks.
I know that Mariucci costs more to build than the Whit but then, UMinnesota
has 4 times as many students and, presumably 4 times the budget.
 
I've said it before, college athletics should be, first and foremost, for
the college students.  Without them then the whole spectacle is gone and
the games are no more than another version of minor league.
 
Greg Ambrose, UNH '72
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.