The Board of Trustees approved a $400,000 feasibility study last week to see if it is more cost-effective to renovate Rose Arena or to build a separate stand-alone facility.

While it makes sense to explore both options, the idea that a new events center could be cost-effective is almost laughable.

Athletics Director Dave Heeke estimated costs for a new freestanding building to be between $40 and $60 million, or more.

This is not the University of Oregon, Mr. Heeke. Spending that much money is not the right avenue to take.

"We could refurbish Rose for less money and take it from around 4,000 seats to about 6,500," said Jeff Caponigro, Board of Trustees chair, at last week's meeting.

Caponigro has right the right idea, although Rose currently seats 5,200 people.

Expanding Rose by moving the facility more toward Broomfield Road and by knocking down and expanding walls won't be cheap. But it's a better idea than building a state-of-the art facility that is sure to cost much more. And there are plenty of reasons why.

First, the new events center would seat about 10,000 to 11,000 people. Trying to fill half of Rose for a sporting event these days is hard enough. The men's and women's basketball teams aren't good enough to draw capacity crowds, and it could take many years for that to happen.

And even though the wrestling and gymnastics teams usually are great, there simply is not enough interest in those sports to draw 10,000 fans.

Another reason a new events center is being explored is to draw larger crowds for non-sporting events, such as graduation, concerts and guest speakers. Graduation crowds most assuredly would be larger, but filling 10,000 seats seems unlikely. But the real problem lies with concerts and guest speakers.

There have been only a handful of examples in the past few years when Rose was near or at full capacity - most notably with Michael Moore in 2004, the Rev. Jesse Jackson in 2006 and the Dave Matthews Band in 2003. Many more times, Rose has seen lackluster crowds for acts like Ludacris and Yellowcard in 2006.

In order to fill 10,000 seats, the university would have to spend a lot more money to bring big-name acts to campus, something with which CMU always struggles.

Thirdly, what happens with Rose if a new events center is constructed? Recently officials have expressed interest in expanding the Student Activity Center, and using Rose's space would make sense. However, Residence Life officials recently have talked about constructing a fitness facility somewhere on north campus.

Obviously the university can't have both. We've said in past editorials that constructing a north campus workout facility is better than expanding the SAC because it better caters to students and would help revive a part of campus that no longer compares to all the new buildings in its southern counterpart. Expanding Rose to a 6,500- to 7,000-seat venue, instead of building another new building south of Ottawa Court, could open the door for a north campus revival.

Also, considering plans already are in the works to revamp Rose with dual video scoreboards, it seems a Rose renovation is just the better option.

A new events center might sound nice, and students probably will think it's a great idea. But its novelty most likely will wear off not to long after its grand opening.

Renovating Rose is the better option.

It will be a shame, however, if the university comes to that conclusion $400,000 later.