Football Is Needed To Remain Elite

[Guy Fieri's Dad]

Whether you like it or not football is needed. If we want to remain in a elite conference football is needed. This is highlighted by the fact that all of the realignment is based on football revenue. The only thing I care about as far as MU athletics goes is the basketball program remaining elite. To do this they need exposure. A strong conference gives us exposure. An A10, catholic conference will only solidify second tier status. If we want to control our basketball status we need football to provide the extra leverage.

If that means from a compliance basis ending all the men's athletics except for basketball so that we have the ability to start football I'm fine with it. For one reason and one reason only it gives #mubb the chance to bargain and determine its place in the world and not have it dictated to them.

While its to late to make any difference now we do have opportunity to change in the future. Hopefully, mu athletics will stop denying reality!

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Can we just drop threads like these from now on. Its too late, I'm sorry. Football isn't going to ride in here and save us. Maybe if we had a decade already under our belts and a stadium erected then perhaps we could creep into some kind of new "high mid" conference for football and basketball. But its a decade out and probably at least a half-billion dollar investment before our team would be a non-laughing stock.

Then where do we go? We wouldn't fit into the mega-ACC, just look at Louisville and Cincinatti. You're crazy if you throw out the Big #; we are a small catholic school. We'd end up in the cast-off conference of the BEast and Big 12, or maybe not even make it into that. The whole idea is just ludicrous.

[Clam Crowder]

Read Broeker's interview, and you will realize that your dream will never be a reality. Anonymous Eagle does a tremendous job in outlining why your dream should never be a reality. Stop living in a fantast world, and realize that simply having a football team does absolutely nothing for us at this point.

[MUFC9295]

Let's just retire the "C" in NCAA.  No one is even talking about Marquette or the other schools as an institution of higher learning anymore.

[chapman]

About a decade too late.  Starting a football program now has no benefit.  Even if we did get to FBS status ten years, a couple hundred million bucks, and a lot of luck from now you're assuming the landscape is the same as it is today and for some reason a high major conference wants to add the small private school in Milwaukee...the only other small, private schools switching conferences and still ending up in a BCS conference are TCU and possibly Baylor, in football hotbed Texas and have long established programs with FBS success...still TCU was by a desperate Big East and Baylor will be forced to switch and piggyback on others.

If that means from a compliance basis ending all the men's athletics except for basketball so that we have the ability to start football I'm fine with it

Until we added lacrosse we were already at the minimum number of sports allowed.  So nice dice there either.  And I'm sure it wouldn't look desperate and pathetic to a high major conference to be the one school not competing in any other sports besides basketball and football.  

[PJDunn]

Unless you are part of the soon to be "chosen 64" in the superconferences, football is a loser.  This re-aligment puts the nail in coffin for the non BCS football programs.  Marquette will take some collateral damage due to this mess, but our damage is insignificant compared to the new reality of that BYU, Boise State, etc. will face.  As long as the NCAAs remain open to all of D1 (don't see that changing), then a bball only conference is probably our best bet.  

[TallTitan34]

Teams like West Virginia and Louisville are struggling to find a home.  What chance would we have?

[Guy Fieri's Dad]

If you read the post at all it said football wouldn't solve this situation. However, if mu athletics learns a lesson from this hopefully they can plan for the future and next time things shake up we will be ready/safeguarded. Likely, this would need to involve football.

Also, if I may make a bold prediction basketball isn't going to overtake football anytime soon in revenues so, the issue of having football will need to be discussed in the future.

Also check your enrollment Villanova pulls of football just fine. Even if it has ruffled some feathers.

I'm not saying we go ahead and add football tomorrow because it won't change a thing. If mu though wants to be able to be prominent long term they either need to figure out how not to be on the sidelines of the conference shake ups next time they happen...which they will (look at history).

As an alum I'm not eager to regress to the 80's-90's Marquette conference status. I have grown accustomed to our privileged conference status and would like to keep it and ensure it long term.

[TallTitan34]

If you have no conference for your football to play in what is the point?

[79Warrior]

Teams like West Virginia and Louisville are struggling to find a home.  What chance would we have?

Exactly. It is laughable this whole start football stuff. Established programs are twisting in the wind.

[TJ]

Also check your enrollment Villanova pulls of football just fine. Even if it has ruffled some feathers.

Villanova restarted football 26 years ago after just a 4 year absence, and has had a relatively successful team in that time.  Yet still they are only in a marginally better situation than us right now.  Villanova will not be invited to one of the top 4 conferences as a football member and they will not have any extra pull in this situation because of its football program.  So you're talking about a major investment that in 25 years still probably won't bring back the results you're looking for.  Either there's another way or MU is screwed regardless.

[GGGG]

Also check your enrollment Villanova pulls of football just fine.

What good has it done them?  They sink a bunch of money in a program that is leaving them at the exact same place as Marquette.  They don't have a sufficient stadium to move up.

As an alumnus, I would rather them throw those resources at their academic programs rather than flush it down the football toilet.

[Ellenson Guerrero]

If you read the post at all it said football wouldn't solve this situation.

I read your post a second time. Just as dumb.

[Guy Fieri's Dad]

If they can fund it we can. Marquette has 8,000 (11,000 total) undergrad. Schools that have football with smaller enrollment:

• Notre Dame
• Stanford
• Duke (larger with graduate if totaled)
• Boston College (larger if grad students included)
• TCU
• wake forest
• smu
• lousiana tech
• rice
• tulane
• Dayton
• Idaho
• Tulsa
• Most of the Ivy league
• Most of what was d2

So don't tell me its impossible when other schools with similar student populations have done it. Obviously it would be a long term end and not solve the current situation. However, to dismiss it so quickly is short sighted. Long term it could be feasible none of the musings at anonymous eagle are insurmountable not by a long shot. Funding (we got alumni and sorry people don't donate to women's basketball for the most part (ie unless banners are raised) no matter how much Terri Mitchell's program deserves it), stadium no reason we can't buy land (we love buying property), title IX other schools have done it next. If anything the stadium would be the most difficult issue.

Also, you cannot assume a program would fail just because you say it will (that's not an argument). Just as I cannot make the argument it would succeed just by saying so. Nobody knows how a program would fair on the field.

Don't come back with it doesn't solve the situation today. Everybody knows that it doesn't solve today's problem. However, it could put mu in a better position next time something like this happens. For that reason alone its worth examining.

[brewcity77]

Once you come up with a stadium, start-up money, and figure out where the extra 100 or so Title IX scholarships, this is worth a thread. Until then, the topic is a complete and utter waste of bandwidth.

And will take a minimum of 30 years to be relevant.

[79Warrior]

If they can fund it we can. Marquette has 8,000 (11,000 total) undergrad. Schools that have football with smaller enrollment:

• Notre Dame
• Stanford
• Duke (larger with graduate if totaled)
• Boston College (larger if grad students included)
• TCU
• wake forest
• smu
• lousiana tech
• rice
• tulane
• Dayton
• Idaho
• Tulsa
• Most of the Ivy league
• Most of what was d2

So don't tell me its impossible when other schools with similar student populations have done it. Obviously it would be a long term end and not solve the current situation. However, to dismiss it so quickly is short sighted. Long term it could be feasible none of the musings at anonymous eagle are insurmountable not by a long shot. Funding (we got alumni and sorry people don't donate to women's basketball for the most part (ie unless banners are raised) no matter how much Terri Mitchell's program deserves it), stadium no reason we can't buy land (we love buying property), title IX other schools have done it next. If anything the stadium would be the most difficult issue.

Also, you cannot assume a program would fail just because you say it will (that's not an argument). Just as I cannot make the argument it would succeed just by saying so. Nobody knows how a program would fair on the field.

Don't come back with it doesn't solve the situation today. Everybody knows that it doesn't solve today's problem. However, it could put mu in a better position next time something like this happens. For that reason alone its worth examining.

now that is funny. Do yourself a favor, check out the endowments of the schools you mentioned. We are not on the same planet as your list. Those schools are Neiman Marcus, sadly we are Walmart in that regard.

[Jim Sawdust]

To paraphrase Father Pilarz's comment in yesterday's On the Issues interview:

If we had $200 million to spend, would football be the wisest way to spend it?

http://www.marquette.edu/inauguration/webcast-on-the-issues.php

[tower912]

Where near campus?   N, and W will require that the city of Milwaukee allow us to re-route and eliminate major streets.   E requires we build it in the middle of Lake Michigan.   So South.    In the industrial valley down by the casino.     In superfund central.    A stadium and a practice facility.   Yummy.    So buying the property, springing for the groundwater clean up.... oh, yeah, and finally start building.   How big?    Father Pilarz is right.    If MU had $200 million burning a hole in its pocket, is this the best use for it?     Non-starter

[Brewtown Andy]

If they can fund it we can. Marquette has 8,000 (11,000 total) undergrad. Schools that have football with smaller enrollment:

• Notre Dame
• Stanford
• Duke (larger with graduate if totaled)
• Boston College (larger if grad students included)
• TCU
• wake forest
• smu
• lousiana tech
• rice
• tulane
• Dayton
• Idaho
• Tulsa
• Most of the Ivy league
• Most of what was d2

All of those schools except recent TCU and Stanford teams are bad at football.

Read this and knock it off with the football garbage.

[GoMarquette32]

I would want a fball team regardless if we were good or not.

[muhs03]

I would want a fball team regardless if we were good or not.

What kind of football team? One like Dayton or one like Tulane? Having one that is like either of those will get the ADept nowhere. So whats the point?

[Brewtown Andy]

I would want a fball team regardless if we were good or not.

Why not just burn the university's money in a barrel instead? At least it would generate some heat.

[Guy Fieri's Dad]

Actually most of the schools listed even the Louisiana Tech's of the world run a profit on their football programs. So, it might not be burning the schools money.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

[MUMac]

Actually most of the schools listed even the Louisiana Tech's of the world run a profit on their football programs. So, it might not be burning the schools money.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

Yeah, they all have the same start up costs that MU has, right?  It is burning the schools money.

[Brewtown Andy]

Actually most of the schools listed even the Louisiana Tech's of the world run a profit on their football programs. So, it might not be burning the schools money.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

How long will it take to turn a profit after you build a stadium? The $100 million just to build the stadium is the money I was talking about.

Go read the link I posted already. We're having arguments already covered there.