Even though some of these categories overlap, I think there's different ways to define who has more ownership. From a purely monetary standpoint, I would think the boosters have a reasonable argument, given the amount of money they fork over for the program.
That said, I've never looked into season tickets or really paid attention to the money boosters donate. Overtime, could the average "fan" spend more money in season ticket fees than a booster spends in donations and other similar expenditures? My guess is no, but again, it's not something I pay close attention to.
But, personally, any fan has just as much right to ownership as the next in my opinion, regardless of how much money each respective fan has given to the university. I've grown up a huge Husker fan, and even though I went to UNL, I probably haven't given near as much money as others. But does that make me less of a fan, or mean I have less right to enjoy the team? I don't think it does. Right/ownership to fandom shouldn't rely on how much money you have.
That said, I've never looked into season tickets or really paid attention to the money boosters donate. Overtime, could the average "fan" spend more money in season ticket fees than a booster spends in donations and other similar expenditures? My guess is no, but again, it's not something I pay close attention to.
But, personally, any fan has just as much right to ownership as the next in my opinion, regardless of how much money each respective fan has given to the university. I've grown up a huge Husker fan, and even though I went to UNL, I probably haven't given near as much money as others. But does that make me less of a fan, or mean I have less right to enjoy the team? I don't think it does. Right/ownership to fandom shouldn't rely on how much money you have.