That 1960 Football Decision May Become a Nightmare!!!!

[dgies9156]

Back in 1960, Marquette had what was arguably a marginal Division 1 football program. We played many of the usual suspects and had a record that perhaps only Vanderbilt could be proud of. We had one bowl appearance -- the first Cotton Bowl in 1936. We, of course, lost.

Our stadium was falling apart and to extent that we needed a large stadium, County Stadium was our home. Of course, we didn't need it very often because our football program was "off the radar." Our basketball program was just beginning to have some visibility, though arguably, in those days as perhaps now, basketball didn't matter.

The Jesuits of the day elected after 1960 to drop football. We became a basketball only school. The decision was begrudgingly applauded a the time as a means of assuring fiscal responsibility. At least that's what the older Jesuits said in the 1970s. We shed the Medical School at about the same time.

What was a seemingly brilliant decision in the 1970s is now one that I'm wondering seriously about. How would things be different for us if we had nurtured our program? Joined a conference. Invested in great coaching and somehow found a way to a Vanderbilt-style facility. You look at Vanderbilt and football generates enormous revenue, even though the team has only been to marginally more bowls than Marquette. They're in a conference and sharing Alabama's football take. Could that have been possible? Perhaps we'd be in better shape vis a vi the ACC if we had found a way to keep football and nurture a following.

[brewcity77]

I'm not sure we'd be better off, and might be worse off. Instead of joining the MCC, we probably would have joined the MAC. We wouldn't have had any interest in the Great Midwest. As a result, it seems unlikely we would have bolted the MAC for C-USA in 1995, which would have meant we likely didn't tag along with DePaul nor would we have built relationships with Cincy and Louisville that helped get us into the Big East. The Big East never even looked at the MAC for expansion until bringing Temple back, and a small all-sports school in Milwaukee simply wouldn't have made much sense.

I would guess that had we kept football, we would be in the MAC with a national profile on par with Akron's. Revisionist history may be fun, but in this case, I don't see it at all as pie-in-the-sky.

[Tugg Speedman]

Can we blame LW for something that happened 52 years ago?

Seriously however, you're 180 degrees wrong.  Everyone always looks a successful programs and assumes we would have been them.  Not true, not even remotely close to being true.  Here is what I posted in the other thread.

----

The big losers are Uconn and Rutgers.  B10 and ACC are "full."  They are both football schools with hopes of being a major BCS powers.  That is not going to happen in the BEast and today's move leaves them with no apparent home.

Cincy/Lousiville/USF next biggest losers.  Same problem as above but they might still be able to join the "Misfit BCS football conference" otherwise known as the B12.  Most likely they are not all going to the B12 so one or more of them are going to move into the Uconn/Rutgers camp of being totally shafted.

Who is OK for now are the non-football schools of the BEast.  They still have a decent conference for the next few years and have the realistic option of forming a decent basketball only conference after that.  Of course this has to happen.

----

I believe their are only two "private city schools" in the entire country that have successful football programs .... "The U" (Miami) and USC.  They have the advantage of nice weather and big talent pools in their back yard and traditions of winning.  MU football never had any of this which is why we dumped football before everyone here was born.

If MU football survived the last 52 years, it would have, at best, been UConn and/or Rutgers (and probably worse).  No scenario has MU football being anywhere as successful as Vanderbilt or even Northwestern.  That is message-board fantasy.

And if it survived, we would be in a much worse position today than we currently are.  Finding a home for a basketball only school is much easier than a basketball school with a suspect football team, as Uconn is showing.

[oldwarrior81]

...or possibly joined the Missouri Valley where even a stronger bind was tied with Cincinnati, Louisville and Memphis.

[TallTitan34]

Someone talk Dick Strong into donating the $XXX million dollars needed to restart a football team (and matching women's sports).

[Tugg Speedman]

...or possibly joined the Missouri Valley where even a stronger bind was tied with Cincinnati, Louisville and Memphis.

How is The Valley an uptick from Big East Football?  Same level of second-rate football and crappy basketball.

Answer it is not and would be a move that destroys their programs.

[GGGG]

I'm not sure we'd be better off, and might be worse off. Instead of joining the MCC, we probably would have joined the MAC. We wouldn't have had any interest in the Great Midwest. As a result, it seems unlikely we would have bolted the MAC for C-USA in 1995, which would have meant we likely didn't tag along with DePaul nor would we have built relationships with Cincy and Louisville that helped get us into the Big East. The Big East never even looked at the MAC for expansion until bringing Temple back, and a small all-sports school in Milwaukee simply wouldn't have made much sense.

I would guess that had we kept football, we would be in the MAC with a national profile on par with Akron's. Revisionist history may be fun, but in this case, I don't see it at all as pie-in-the-sky.

Or worse....we could be like Butler or Valpo and playing in non-scholarship football because we could no long afford the scholarships...and the Horizon League in other sports.

[Tugg Speedman]

Someone talk Dick Strong into donating the $XXX million dollars needed to restart a football team (and matching women's sports).

I thought someone will say this simplistic solutions (yes you put it in teal so I realize you're not serious).

See Boone Pickens, he has spent more money that Strong has on Oklahoma State and produced a few decent seasons and not they are on their way back to oblivion.

In all of human history no on has ever donated enough money to take a school with no team to the top.  Why on earth does MU think they will be the first?

[lab_warrior]

I'm not sure we'd be better off, and might be worse off. Instead of joining the MCC, we probably would have joined the MAC. We wouldn't have had any interest in the Great Midwest. As a result, it seems unlikely we would have bolted the MAC for C-USA in 1995, which would have meant we likely didn't tag along with DePaul nor would we have built relationships with Cincy and Louisville that helped get us into the Big East. The Big East never even looked at the MAC for expansion until bringing Temple back, and a small all-sports school in Milwaukee simply wouldn't have made much sense.

I would guess that had we kept football, we would be in the MAC with a national profile on par with Akron's. Revisionist history may be fun, but in this case, I don't see it at all as pie-in-the-sky.

+1  

who says having/keeping football wouldn't have been a complete disaster?

FYI, this would provided great material for the least acclaimed, poorly selling Philip K. Dick book, "Golden Avalanche" in which he expounds on an alternate, dystopian history where Marquette decided to keep its football program.

[MerrittsMustache]

It would be easy to say that having a football program, even a poor one, would be beneficial to Marquette but look at the current football schools remaining in the BE. None of those school have strong football programs and they're all caught in limbo just like MU. The difference is that they don't have the option of moving to a conference like the A-10 or forming their own conference. They're stuck with bad football teams in a crumbling conference.

Looking at other programs with enrollment near MU's...
- Vanderbilt was a founding member of the SEC in 1932.
- Wake Forest was a founding member of the ACC in 1953
- Northwestern was a founding member of the Big Ten in 1896

Marquette probably missed their football conference window when they had strong teams in the 1920s-30s. By 1960, they were a midwestern team with no one to align with and not enough success to be an independent power. Perhaps they could have joined the MAC in the mid-40s.

Other schools close to MU's size have all been a part of multiple conferences and many are currently in some state of limbo. Would you want MU to trade places with any of these programs?

- Rice, Tulsa, La Tech, UL-Lafayette, UL-Monroe, Marshall, SMU, TCU, Tulane.

[brewcity77]

...or possibly joined the Missouri Valley where even a stronger bind was tied with Cincinnati, Louisville and Memphis.

I don't think football would have pushed us to a conference in the 1960s or 1970s, and all three of those teams were out of the MVC before 1975.

[dgies9156]

Someone talk Dick Strong into donating the $XXX million dollars needed to restart a football team (and matching women's sports).

Yeah, and where are we going to play? County Stadium has been gone for 10 years. Miller Park is not an option. Marquette Stadium with its picturesque location in the heart of Milwaukee's Industrial Valley, was torn down more than 15 years ago. Maybe Dick has $300 million burning a hole in his pocket to build us a Stadium!

Do the Bradleys have any money left?????

[dgies9156]

Seriously however, you're 180 degrees wrong.  If MU football survived the last 52 years, it would have, at best, been UConn and/or Rutgers (and probably worse).  No scenario has MU football being anywhere as successful as Vanderbilt or even Northwestern.  That is message-board fantasy. And if it survived, we would be in a much worse position today than we currently are.  Finding a home for a basketball only school is much easier than a basketball school with a suspect football team, as Uconn is showing.

My cynical nature aside, I agree with you, on reflection. I can't imagine Marquette making the investment to make football as prominent as basketball. The costs are astronomical and the stadium issue would have been a big one. Marquette Stadium was crumbling by the time I got there in 1974 and I suspect was a condemnable building long before then. County Stadium was a really lousy place to watch football.

Secondly, I doubt for one minute that the SEC would admit Vanderbilt if it were formed today. Vanderbilt has a 34,000 seat stadium (no it does not play home games at LP Field, though I suspect they will be someday).

And I was 4 when marquette dropped football.

[Dawson Rental]

Back in 1960, Marquette had what was arguably a marginal Division 1 football program. We played many of the usual suspects and had a record that perhaps only Vanderbilt could be proud of. We had one bowl appearance -- the first Cotton Bowl in 1936. We, of course, lost.

Our stadium was falling apart and to extent that we needed a large stadium, County Stadium was our home. Of course, we didn't need it very often because our football program was "off the radar." Our basketball program was just beginning to have some visibility, though arguably, in those days as perhaps now, basketball didn't matter.

The Jesuits of the day elected after 1960 to drop football. We became a basketball only school. The decision was begrudgingly applauded a the time as a means of assuring fiscal responsibility. At least that's what the older Jesuits said in the 1970s. We shed the Medical School at about the same time.

What was a seemingly brilliant decision in the 1970s is now one that I'm wondering seriously about. How would things be different for us if we had nurtured our program? Joined a conference. Invested in great coaching and somehow found a way to a Vanderbilt-style facility. You look at Vanderbilt and football generates enormous revenue, even though the team has only been to marginally more bowls than Marquette. They're in a conference and sharing Alabama's football take. Could that have been possible? Perhaps we'd be in better shape vis a vi the ACC if we had found a way to keep football and nurture a following.

The fallacy of this thread is you assume that MU had the option to continue football.  At the time that it was dropped, not only did MU football need a cash infusion, it had run up a huge debt.  One of the reasons it was decided to push the basketball program to greater heights was to earn enough income to retire the football debt.

[bilsu]

Think about it. Where would MU basketball be today, if the McGuire era did not happen? To think we would have been successful in football is not realistic and keeping football would most likely of changed everything. Maybe even McGuire coaching MU?

[MileHigh]

It would be easy to say that having a football program, even a poor one

Indiana are lucky they have football...securing a spot in the Big Ten

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Looking at other programs with enrollment near MU's...
- Vanderbilt was a founding member of the SEC in 1932.
- Wake Forest was a founding member of the ACC in 1953
- Northwestern was a founding member of the Big Ten in 1896

Well researched, and this is a fantastic point. MU was already in limbo in the 1960's. I doubt they would have landed in a major conference between 1960 and now... which would leave them in a similar position we are in now.

[Ari Gold]

The alternate timeline is a novel idea but like the others, I don't think Marquette would be in a better position today if it had football. As much as I wish Marquette would have made the decision to keep football. If you look at schools with defunct football programs and schools with bottom tier football programs, you might see that Marquette was ahead of its time in saving that money and saving the school from a mediocre football conference and the same with basketball

Its possible Marquette could have built the stadium in the valley sometime in the 1960s, the landscape was very different back then. A stadium there would have cost around $10-20m in today's dollars. They would have to play as an independent for another 18 years for a geographically logical conference (Mid-Atlantic) to form, assuming they wouldn't have been the 11th member of the big 10 and the big 8 was out of the question and the Big East football conference wouldn't be around until 1991... If MU had the football team when they made the jump to the Big East, another team would have had to come with as to have 10 football teams.

that's assuming we would have been able to draw good enough recruits to keep us competitive in a conference... and if MU continued to invest in football, would the 70s basketball happened?

[jsglow]

I think the point that the bottom feeder BEast football schools are in the toughest position is outstanding.  Be interesting to know how the 'Big East' name is controlled.  If the basketball-only schools could grab it leaving the football schools behind . . .

[Dawson Rental]

The alternate timeline is a novel idea but like the others, I don't think Marquette would be in a better position today if it had football. As much as I wish Marquette would have made the decision to keep football. If you look at schools with defunct football programs and schools with bottom tier football programs, you might see that Marquette was ahead of its time in saving that money and saving the school from a mediocre football conference and the same with basketball

Its possible Marquette could have built the stadium in the valley sometime in the 1960s, the landscape was very different back then. A stadium there would have cost around $10-20m in today's dollars. They would have to play as an independent for another 18 years for a geographically logical conference (Mid-Atlantic) to form, assuming they wouldn't have been the 11th member of the big 10 and the big 8 was out of the question and the Big East football conference wouldn't be around until 1991... If MU had the football team when they made the jump to the Big East, another team would have had to come with as to have 10 football teams.

that's assuming we would have been able to draw good enough recruits to keep us competitive in a conference... and if MU continued to invest in football, would the 70s basketball happened?

People still don't get it.  Investing in football wasn't an option.  Better question would be: if MU continued to invest in football, would MU have survived?  Probably, as a smaller school with no Division I sports.  St. Norbert's 2.0?

70s basketball happened because it had to to save the athletic department from financial ruin from the remaining football debt.

[Dawson Rental]

Think about it. Where would MU basketball be today, if the McGuire era did not happen? To think we would have been successful in football is not realistic and keeping football would most likely of changed everything. Maybe even McGuire coaching MU?

You've totally ignored the Nick Saban era of MU football.

[brewcity77]

Another factor to consider is the advent of Title IX. It would have been very difficult to match scholarships with football still in the mix. Even if we had kept football in the 1960s, it would have been hard to maintain more so in the 1970s. If we had football, which sports would we not have?

[bamamarquettefan]

Can we blame LW for something that happened 52 years ago?

Seriously however, you're 180 degrees wrong.  Everyone always looks a successful programs and assumes we would have been them.  Not true, not even remotely close to being true.  Here is what I posted in the other thread.

----

The big losers are Uconn and Rutgers.  B10 and ACC are "full."  They are both football schools with hopes of being a major BCS powers.  That is not going to happen in the BEast and today's move leaves them with no apparent home.

Cincy/Lousiville/USF next biggest losers.  Same problem as above but they might still be able to join the "Misfit BCS football conference" otherwise known as the B12.  Most likely they are not all going to the B12 so one or more of them are going to move into the Uconn/Rutgers camp of being totally shafted.

Who is OK for now are the non-football schools of the BEast.  They still have a decent conference for the next few years and have the realistic option of forming a decent basketball only conference after that.  Of course this has to happen.

----

I believe their are only two "private city schools" in the entire country that have successful football programs .... "The U" (Miami) and USC.  They have the advantage of nice weather and big talent pools in their back yard and traditions of winning.  MU football never had any of this which is why we dumped football before everyone here was born.

If MU football survived the last 52 years, it would have, at best, been UConn and/or Rutgers (and probably worse).  No scenario has MU football being anywhere as successful as Vanderbilt or even Northwestern.  That is message-board fantasy.

And if it survived, we would be in a much worse position today than we currently are.  Finding a home for a basketball only school is much easier than a basketball school with a suspect football team, as Uconn is showing.

This is one of the best posts ever at summarizing the situation.  Again, MU basketball turned a bigger profit than a majority of BCS FOOTBALL programs on the last year I have.  There is no way we have that kind of success if our basketball was carrying the anchor of a tiny football program that would never have been accepted to the Big East or I doubt even to CUSA.

We are far better off today than we would have been - and we will still be far better off even in a bad scenario.  I truly hope we keep Louisville and Cincinnati, and agree that Rutgers and UConn are more likely to stay today.  Remember, we were left behind as an independent in the 1980s and on the verge of not being a D1 school - it is amazing where we are as a program.

[Ari Gold]

People still don't get it.  Investing in football wasn't an option.  Better question would be: if MU continued to invest in football, would MU have survived?  Probably, as a smaller school with no Division I sports.  St. Norbert's 2.0?

70s basketball happened because it had to to save the athletic department from financial ruin from the remaining football debt.

Did you not read the first paragraph of my post?

[4everwarriors]

Dropping the Warrior nickname was the major boner.