Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CL82, post: 3378115, member: 44"] I think people are missing the core point in this discussion. The XL Center is a perennial multi-million dollar money loser that is in need of $250M, at a minimum, of renovations. Realistically, if you want to make it a competitive facility, it should be knocked down and rebuilt at a cost of $500M, minimally. It's operations are largely supported by over-charging UConn to use the facility. It annually draws $2-$3M away from the UConn athletic department to mask the extent of its mismanagement. People are treating this discussion as if it were the scheduling of two equally viable venues. It's not. There is a lot collateral damage from our current arrangement. Playing off campus is a bad for look us and has been used against us for years. UConn subsidizing the XL center makes our financials look worse which is bad PR for us and probably negatively impacts our attractiveness as a program. Using the then brand new Hartford Civic Center made sense in 1975 when we were playing our home games in the Field House but somehow it has morphed into a claim of right. It shouldn't be. If the CDRA wants to keep UConn at the XL they should drop the high lease fees and split the profit of the games with UConn. Use of the XL should be judicious. Use it for big games and during break, that's it. But even then it makes zero economic sense to invest hundreds of millions in a facility that has reached the end of its useful life. With the addition of the concourse to Gampel, concessions will be improved and seats will be added and the flow will be better. Stop by Teds and have a few beers before the game and few more afterwards if you want. It's a little inconvenient but probably doesn't justify CT spending $250M it doesn't have to keep that dinosaur going another decade. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach