Has anyone conducted an objective study comparing the winning percentages of college hockey programs to the cost of subsidizing "one and done" or "two and done" players on those teams? A substantial percentage of short-timer hockey recruits are rewarded with scholarships - at a substantial economic expense to the colleges involved.
Do these guys demonstrably contribute to the success of the programs which pay their freight, or are institutions of higher learning exempt from financial accountability? There are other, perhaps more productive ways to spend the money dedicated to short-time students.
Do these guys demonstrably contribute to the success of the programs which pay their freight, or are institutions of higher learning exempt from financial accountability? There are other, perhaps more productive ways to spend the money dedicated to short-time students.
Comment