If MU ever decides to pick up FB again, do you think they'd join these guys?

[GGGG]

5k really isnt that much. Thats half the student body and I know more than a few people who refuse to go to basketball games but would hapilly go to hockey games. Plus the fans who just love going to MU sporting events would go regardless. The biggest problem for me is the lack of other high caliber D1 hockey teams. You have the boston schools, the big 10 schools and really nobody else besides really small schools.

The Admirals get about 5,600 per game.  I really doubt they would outdraw them.  And even if they do, I'm not sure what the point of adding the sport would be.

But there are a bunch of schools in the midwest that play hockey.  The NCHC is a very good conference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Collegiate_Hockey_Conference

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Not denying that.  I'm just saying that WI can still be considered a Hockey state even though it doesn't measure up to say Minnesota.

Okay, it's a Hockey state.

Still doesn't mean MU should have a team.

Not enough support or interest.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The Admirals average 5,624. They reached their best in 11-12 with 6,226.  It's safe to assume that a handful of those are hardcore hockey fans that we could draw.  In terms of NCAA attendence similar schools like BC average 6,384 and Notre Dame 4,885 .  Numbers 6 and 13 respectively.  It should be noted that in order to house D1 hockey the arena does not have to be that big.  Heck there's smaller ones than the AL out there.  So if you put in the hockey capacity there that's one option.  Option two is the bradley center only renting the lower bowl, which I believe the admirals do for a lot of games?.  

Well, that's sort of the problem. ND and BC are historically successful programs with generations of fans, and they don't draw huge attendance.

I'm not sure that a start-up program is really going to be able to get close to that.

PLUS: It's expensive to rent the BC, so unless MU can draw a decent crowd, it's a losing proposition. I'm not exactly sure how the Admirals business model works, or who is paying the players salaries and whatnot. They might not exactly be "profitable" either.

Hockey is a better idea than football, but I'm not sure that it's a "good" idea.

[Galway Eagle]

Well, that's sort of the problem. ND and BC are historically successful programs with generations of fans, and they don't draw huge attendance.

I'm not sure that a start-up program is really going to be able to get close to that.

PLUS: It's expensive to rent the BC, so unless MU can draw a decent crowd, it's a losing proposition. I'm not exactly sure how the Admirals business model works, or who is paying the players salaries and whatnot. They might not exactly be "profitable" either.

Hockey is a better idea than football, but I'm not sure that it's a "good" idea.

It was a worth it investment pre-lacrosse.  If we knew all the good lax schools were going to dip out it would've made more sense to invest in Hockey and hopefully turn a profit over time. 

True about ND and BC but BC has to compete with BU hockey, UMass, UMass Lowell, Bruins, etc.  ND isn't in a major market.  We'd have the admirals, maybe to an extremely small extent UW, and the Blackhawks. So the student section draw is really the only comparable factor.  I think it's fair to assume that the hockey market in our section of WI is largely untapped. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'm not sure what the point of adding the sport would be.

So they could replace one of the irrelevant sports with a sport that actually has a following and might benefit the university, even if its only in a small way.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Born and raised in WI, I have not known anyone that watches hockey unless UW is in the finals. I lived in MN 2 years and was amazed how many times I saw kids playing hockey instead of shooting hoops in the neighborhoods - never have I seen that in WI.

[Galway Eagle]

Born and raised in WI, I have not known anyone that watches hockey unless UW is in the finals. I lived in MN 2 years and was amazed how many times I saw kids playing hockey instead of shooting hoops in the neighborhoods - never have I seen that in WI.

Ah but where in WI? Cause that could be the reason. 

[GGGG]

So they could replace one of the irrelevant sports with a sport that actually has a following and might benefit the university, even if its only in a small way.

Hockey would be just as irrelevant. 

[Spotcheck Billy]

Ah but where in WI? Cause that could be the reason. 

Milwaukee, fair enough, maybe hockey is big up nort' and I never heard about it

[Galway Eagle]

Hockey would be just as irrelevant. 

As Lacrosse? Right now the club hockey team draws more fans than Lax an NCAA hockey team would be MUCH more relevant. 

[GGGG]

As Lacrosse? Right now the club hockey team draws more fans than Lax an NCAA hockey team would be MUCH more relevant. 

I think LAX was done for a specific purpose...to tie us more to the east coast BE schools.  It is also a cheaper sport.  12.6 scholarships v. 18 for hockey.  Lacrosse has a practice facility, hockey would have to rent theirs.  I'm sure renting Hart Park is cheaper than the BC. 

[Litehouse]

I think it's fair to assume that the hockey market in our section of WI is largely untapped. 

I think the Admirals attendance shows there isn't much of a market to tap.

[Galway Eagle]

I think LAX was done for a specific purpose...to tie us more to the east coast BE schools.  It is also a cheaper sport.  12.6 scholarships v. 18 for hockey.  Lacrosse has a practice facility, hockey would have to rent theirs.  I'm sure renting Hart Park is cheaper than the BC. 

I agree it was done for a specific purpose and at that moment it made sense.  Cheap sport to tie us closer into the BE w/I football.  But with most those schools gone it in hindsight probably would've been better doing hockey for an opportunity to possibly make some money over time.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Hockey would be just as irrelevant. 

I'm not sure if you are underestimating hockey or overestimating tennis/track and field

[swoopem]

"Niche" is the perfect word for it.

Not trashing hockey. I like hockey and thoroughly enjoyed this year's NHL playoffs. I used to enjoy the North Stars and Gophers. But I'm a realist.

The Flyers, Rangers, Blackhawks and Stars can sell out their arenas, but that doesn't make Penn, NY, Ill and Tex "hockey states." Even Detroit -- "Hockey Town" has far more Tigers and Lions fans than Wings fans. Probably even more Pistons fans.

Being from Detroit I can say that's not true. I'd say the Lions are number one, then the Wings and Tigers are tied for second depending on who you ask. The Pistons are very distant 4th and were even when they dominated the early-mid 2000s. Detroit loves their hockey.

[Dawson Rental]

The Admirals average 5,624. They reached their best in 11-12 with 6,226.  It's safe to assume that a handful of those are hardcore hockey fans that we could draw.  In terms of NCAA attendence similar schools like BC average 6,384 and Notre Dame 4,885 .  Numbers 6 and 13 respectively.  It should be noted that in order to house D1 hockey the arena does not have to be that big.  Heck there's smaller ones than the AL out there.  So if you put in the hockey capacity there that's one option.  Option two is the bradley center only renting the lower bowl, which I believe the admirals do for a lot of games?.  

What about just using Cellular One or whatever the former MECCA is called these days?

[Dawson Rental]

The Admirals get about 5,600 per game.  I really doubt they would outdraw them.  And even if they do, I'm not sure what the point of adding the sport would be.

But there are a bunch of schools in the midwest that play hockey.  The NCHC is a very good conference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Collegiate_Hockey_Conference

Do NCHC schools give out scholarships?  If so, wouldn't MU then have a Title VII problem?

[GGGG]

Do NCHC schools give out scholarships?  If so, wouldn't MU then have a Title VII problem?

If you mean Title IX...then yes they would.  

[GooooMarquette]

Ah but where in WI? Cause that could be the reason. 

You keep making a big deal about a sport that is popular 200 miles north of Milwaukee. Where do you think Marquette would be playing it's home games, Superior?  Maybe Rhinelander?

[77ncaachamps]

We need to have a write in campaign to get Derrick Wilson an invite to Next years NFL Combine.  I think some team would be willing to take a flyer on him.  That would be the closest Marquette comes to football.

But not as a quarterback: he can't pass.
j/k

[willie warrior]

MU will go back to football at the same time they change back to Warriors--never.

[Eye]

Would rather MU add hockey than football. Beyond that, would rather MU add baseball and softball.

[willie warrior]

But not as a quarterback: he can't pass.
j/k

Nah, he needs to stick with BBall. He keeps the defense honest. They honestly do not have to guard him.

[dgies9156]

Football is a black hole of expenses. I was involved in MU's Club Football back in the early '70's. The ASMU gave the Team $25,000 for a season. Not chump change at that time. I pointed out that at that same time Notre Dame spent a similar amount for athletic tape and similar training products.
MU had some good players when it folded the team but the money to keep up with the big boys of football  just wasn't there. Post World War II there was a growth spurt in collegiate football. Marquette tried to keep up but in the end the resources just weren't there
The start up money required to begin a team would need a huge capital investment and it would take years to make the program self sustaining much less a cash generator.
Even if MU could afford to field a team where would they play? Don't say Miller Park. That's impossible on so many levels.
No one would be happier than myself for a viable football team at MU. Perhaps starting in DIII or DII but I also would like Government to function in Washington DC too. One can dream but when you wake up you would need a tremendous will with very deep pockets to make it happen!

Amen Brother.

The obstacles to football are so huge on so many levels they don't make sense.

Let's see:

1) Stadium -- You mentioned the lack of an available stadium. I don't see the State, the City or some generous donor donating $500 million or more for a D1 stadium. Not now, not ever.

2) Athletes -- Uh, we would comet against the Big 10, Notre Dame and the SEC for quality football players. Unless we hired Jimmy Johnson or Nick Saban, we're not getting anyone for at least three generations.

3) Money -- If we suddenly went football and joined the ACC, first we assume they would have us. Second, what would the revenue split be. Uh, not much.

4) Fan interest -- Milwaukee is Buckytown and Packerland when it comes to football. Nothing else matters. It would take at least 100 years to break into fan support at that level.

We couldn't afford college football in 1960 and we sure as heck can't afford it today. If a program like Fordham dropped football years ago (seven blocks of granite land, Vince Lombardi) and there's no chance of bringing it back there, then it is a no-brainer for Marquette.

[muwarrior69]

I am not sure I would even follow MU football. Thirty seconds of dead time for every 15 seconds of action has made the game boring for me. And the two teams in the Championship is decided by a computer not a playoff.