Are Vikings to Blame for Poor Football Program?

Donate To GopherHole
Being in a major metro area is definitely a challenge for the U. In other places like Iowa or Madison its the only show in town. In the TC area, there are a huge number of options for entertainment dollars, attendance, etc.

I could see the Gophers being a hot ticket if the Vikes ever left, though. Outdoor football in the fall, only football team in town, etc. Hope it never happens, though.
 

FireCosgroveGuy said:
Being in a major metro area is definitely a challenge for the U. In other places like Iowa or Madison its the only show in town. In the TC area, there are a huge number of options for entertainment dollars, attendance, etc.

I could see the Gophers being a hot ticket if the Vikes ever left, though. Outdoor football in the fall, only football team in town, etc. Hope it never happens, though.
Click to expand...

The population of the state an metro area should more than offset this however.
 

RodentRampage said:
Wouldn't last long. If the Vikings leave, the state will move heaven and earth to get another team here.
Click to expand...

This is very true. The people wishing the Vikings to move need to get this through thier brain. So long as thier continues to be NFL teams in Jacksonville, Buffalo and Oakland, there will be a team in MSP. If the Vikings do move to LA, who will replace LA as the hot market for a struggling team to move to? I'll give you one guess. The #13 media market that has always gotten huge TV ratings and sold out every game for 13 years. Jacksonville or Buffalo will be playing in MSP in a new stadium within 5 years of the Vikings leaving.

The Gophers won't gain anything from that 5 year period except a few thousand extra tickets sold which will translate to exactly 0 additional wins on the field.
 

The Vikings are to blame for the poor performance of the Vikings. When they began to air it out in the second half, the Vikings started doing well. They had the same thing last year, where they did better when Childless let Favre play his game. Maybe Brewster needs to take over for Childress, and just do what Favre tells him to do.
 

idagopher said:
Here's the meaningful history in W/L for Gopher football

1900-1960 332-146-31 65% WINNING PERCENTAGE
VIKINGS ESTABLISHED SEPT 27, 1960
1961-2010 252-296-8 45% WINNING PERCENTAGE

Just a coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not.
Click to expand...

Coincidence, a much more relevant factor and one with a strong cause and effect relationship was the change in admission recruiting practices for schools in the south east during the mid to late 60's.
 


Law_Abiding_Gopher said:
viking town argument is garbage- The fact that the U of M exists in a city big enough to support 3 pro sports franchises, (4 if you count the Timberwolves) should be a positive thing. In a perfect world the local high school 3 and 4 star recruits would grow up dreaming of playing for the U of M in college, and the Vikings in the pros. There is no reason that the Vikings and the U cannot be mutually beneficial to one another.

I have always and will always hate the "Vikings" town argument. The reason I hate this is because the moment the Vikings start going downhill people abandon them as well. The fact that more people in the state currently follow the Vikings than the Gophers has to do with 50 years of lackluster product on the field at the U trying to compete with 4 Super Bowl berths, multiple regular season division titles, etc.

As evidenced with the 2003 Michigan game, this city and state are ready to embrace and would love to focus on the Gophers.
Click to expand...

There was an report just a couple years ago that talked about Denver and Mpls/St. Paul be saturated with pro teams and not able to support all of them. Someone will be out soon and it won't be the Wild or Twins.

I think our Pro teams has a lower average of fans in attendance that the U of M does. That tells me that the Vikes have a large affect.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
There was an report just a couple years ago that talked about Denver and Mpls/St. Paul be saturated with pro teams and not able to support all of them. Someone will be out soon and it won't be the Wild or Twins.

I think our Pro teams has a lower average of fans in attendance that the U of M does. That tells me that the Vikes have a large affect.
Click to expand...

Terrible, terrible, terrible. The only team coming close to moving soon would be the Timberwolves and the owner hasn't shown any inclination to do so. The logistics of a Vikings move don't work, Wilf would have to self at least controlling interest of the team to move to LA. He would then get much less of a return on the construction of a new stadium. I believe all three candidates for Governor have expressed some level of support for a new stadium.

Only gopher BBall out draws the Timberwolves and that is only due to the current state of the Twolves. That is a ridiculous statement.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
There was an report just a couple years ago that talked about Denver and Mpls/St. Paul be saturated with pro teams and not able to support all of them. Someone will be out soon and it won't be the Wild or Twins.

I think our Pro teams has a lower average of fans in attendance that the U of M does. That tells me that the Vikes have a large affect.
Click to expand...

I believe MSP and Denver are the two smallest markets that have all 4. But if MSP can't support all 4, it's not the Vikings who would go and obviously not the Twins or Wild. If any team moves and doesn't return with another franchise it will be the T-Wolves. The Gophers have always been as/more popular so there wouldn't be huge outcry for basketball. And with having the Wild and Gopher hockey there's plenty of winter sports. That said, the Wolves will never leave as long as Taylor owns them, and there's really nowhere for them to go. I'd say 10 years from now, they'll simply have moved to St. Paul to get out of the Target Center. In any case, MSP has supported all 4 major sports for about 13 of the last 20 years, so I think they've dispelled the myth.

Your last statement doesn't even make sense. The pro teams draw less then the U therefore the Vikings are having an effect? Huh? Second, that's not true. The Vikings draw more then Gopher football. The Wild draw more then Gopher hockey and until the last couple of years the Wolves drew more then the Gophers. In all cases, it's mainly because they have a bigger arena/stadium and therefore doesn't really prove anything, though obviously the Vikings outdrew the Gophers when they were both in the Dome.
 

howeda7 said:
I believe MSP and Denver are the two smallest markets that have all 4. But if MSP can't support all 4, it's not the Vikings who would go and obviously not the Twins or Wild. If any team moves and doesn't return with another franchise it will be the T-Wolves. The Gophers have always been as/more popular so there wouldn't be huge outcry for basketball. And with having the Wild and Gopher hockey there's plenty of winter sports. That said, the Wolves will never leave as long as Taylor owns them, and there's really nowhere for them to go. I'd say 10 years from now, they'll simply have moved to St. Paul to get out of the Target Center. In any case, MSP has supported all 4 major sports for about 13 of the last 20 years, so I think they've dispelled the myth.

Your last statement doesn't even make sense. The pro teams draw less then the U therefore the Vikings are having an effect? Huh? Second, that's not true. The Vikings draw more then Gopher football. The Wild draw more then Gopher hockey and until the last couple of years the Wolves drew more then the Gophers. In all cases, it's mainly because they have a bigger arena/stadium and therefore doesn't really prove anything, though obviously the Vikings outdrew the Gophers when they were both in the Dome.
Click to expand...

Great Posting Mind
 



We should get Barriero for three reasons
1. he knew brew would fail.
2. he knew the twins would fail.
3. impregnated a 50yr old wife.
 

The problem with the football team can be traced back to lack of Administration support. It started with Malcom Moos and continued until President Bruininks. During that time, the Administration's attitude ranged from benign neglect, to outright hostility. The only effect the Vikings had was to provide an alternative.
 

The state is dying for the Gophers to be good. If they were they would bring in fans. You can say that the reason is the Vikings, but that is wrong. Name another school in the NATION that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish in the conference and has gone 40+ years without a conference title that draws 40k a game. The fact there is as much support for this team as their is speaks volumes.

Think about the twins. They were lucky to draw 1 million fans in the 70s. They created the domefield advantage in 87 when they were winning. They sucked in the 90s and attendance reflected that. Now they are winning and are almost as popular as the Vikings. In 2003 there were 60k GOPHER fans in the metrodome for that Michigan Game. You can bet that there would have been 60k for the state game the next week had they not blown the lead. With the gophers right now there is a collective "when are they going to crash back down to earth" attitude. When they actually WIN SOMETHING, this attitude will begin to fade away. When this attitude begins to fade away, the sarcastic articles will be fewer (but will still exist), the ticket demand will go up, the general excitement level surrounding the team will grow. Think about how the city got caught up with gopher fever in 97 basketball. That could and would easily happen in football if they ever won something. Win the Big Game. People talk about mason winning big games (99 Penn State, Ohio STate, ect), but he never won THE Big Game. He always found a way to lose (99 Wisconsin, 03 Michigan, basically any game after a nice win).

It is not a lack of support because of the Vikings, it is a lack of success in general. The U hasn't been successful in hiring coaches, recruiting players, winning games, and have generally looked inept for roughly half a century.
 

Rosemountian said:
Name another school in the NATION that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish in the conference and has gone 40+ years without a conference title that draws 40k a game.=QUOTE]

Name another BCS school in the nation that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish and 40+ without a conference title.

That streak started about the same time that pro team arrived.
Click to expand...
 



josh087 said:
Rosemountian said:
Name another school in the NATION that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish in the conference and has gone 40+ years without a conference title that draws 40k a game.=QUOTE]

Name another BCS school in the nation that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish and 40+ without a conference title.

That streak started about the same time that pro team arrived.
Click to expand...

So if the team moved to st. Cloud or Duluth then the gophers would start winning, sure thing.
Click to expand...
 


josh087 said:
Name another school in the NATION that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish in the conference and has gone 40+ years without a conference title that draws 40k a game.=QUOTE]

Name another BCS school in the nation that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish and 40+ without a conference title.

That streak started about the same time that pro team arrived.
Click to expand...

The Vikes arrived in 1960.
Gophers place in the Big Ten 1951-1970
7th
4th
5th
4th
8th
2nd
8th
9th
10th
---Vikings Arrive---
1st (National Title)
2nd
2nd
9th
4th
3rd
5th
1st
3rd

In the 9 years prior to the Vikings, the gophers average finish in the Big Ten = 6.33
In the nine years after the arrival of the Vikes = 3.33

Place in the Big Ten the next 10 years = 5.2
4th
7th
6th
---Cal Stoll--
5th
3rd
7th
7th
3rd
5th
5th

In the next 10 years (79-88) = 6.9
---Joe Salem---
6th
5th
6th
10th
10th
---Lou Holtz---
8th
6th
---John Gutekunst---
3rd
6th
9th

From 1950-1989, the second worst decade was the 50s...and that was coming off the best decade in gopher history. It was also pre-Vikings.
The best decade was the 60s, when the Vikings were in town.

The gophers were BY FAR better in years 11-20 of the Vikings existence compared to the 10 years prior to the Vikings arrival. Gopher football did not collapse because of the Vikings. Gopher football was merely average following Bierman's first stint. Murray Warmath was able to get the program a couple of Big Ten titles and 1 National Title. Fact of the matter is that Murray averaged finishing 4.88 compared to Cal Stolls average finish of 5. Well into the late 70s the Minnesota program was no worse than it was in 1949.
The program didn't fall off to the bottom because of the Vikings, if it were because of them, it wouldn't have taken 20 years to have an effect. The gophers fell off from where they were because starting with Joe Salem, the gophers made a bunch of terrible hires in a row. The program (as a team) was in a better place when Cal Stoll left in 1978 than when the Vikings arrived in 1960. Terrible hires in the 80s combined with the inability to fix up Memorial (and then a move to the dome), is what ruined the program. Not the Vikings.

Have the Vikings had an impact on Gopher football? Definitely
Has it been a negative impact? There is no data (experimental or observational) that would suggest the impact has been negative.
Fact of the matter is, the gopher football program didn't fall apart when the Vikings arrived, in fact, it had 2 decades of football that were better than the decade preceding the arrival of the Vikings. The 1980s is when the program fell apart.
The Vikings are probably something hurting the comeback attempts, but in no way was it what was the downfall of the program. The downfall of the program were the ADs and Presidents that hired Joe Salem, Lou Holtz, John Gutekunst, Jim Wacker, moved the program to the Metrodome instead of fixing up Memorial Stadium, and refused to adapt to the major changes that happened in college football in the ESPN era. The end of good gopher football coincides with the year that ESPN went on the air more than the year the Vikings came to town.
 

Rosemountian said:
The Vikes arrived in 1960.
Gophers place in the Big Ten 1951-1970
7th
4th
5th
4th
8th
2nd
8th
9th
10th
---Vikings Arrive---
1st (National Title)
2nd
2nd
9th
4th
3rd
5th
1st
3rd

In the 9 years prior to the Vikings, the gophers average finish in the Big Ten = 6.33
In the nine years after the arrival of the Vikes = 3.33

Place in the Big Ten the next 10 years = 5.2
4th
7th
6th
---Cal Stoll--
5th
3rd
7th
7th
3rd
5th
5th

In the next 10 years (79-88) = 6.9
---Joe Salem---
6th
5th
6th
10th
10th
---Lou Holtz---
8th
6th
---John Gutekunst---
3rd
6th
9th

From 1950-1989, the second worst decade was the 50s...and that was coming off the best decade in gopher history. It was also pre-Vikings.
The best decade was the 60s, when the Vikings were in town.

The gophers were BY FAR better in years 11-20 of the Vikings existence compared to the 10 years prior to the Vikings arrival. Gopher football did not collapse because of the Vikings. Gopher football was merely average following Bierman's first stint. Murray Warmath was able to get the program a couple of Big Ten titles and 1 National Title. Fact of the matter is that Murray averaged finishing 4.88 compared to Cal Stolls average finish of 5. Well into the late 70s the Minnesota program was no worse than it was in 1949.
The program didn't fall off to the bottom because of the Vikings, if it were because of them, it wouldn't have taken 20 years to have an effect. The gophers fell off from where they were because starting with Joe Salem, the gophers made a bunch of terrible hires in a row. The program (as a team) was in a better place when Cal Stoll left in 1978 than when the Vikings arrived in 1960. Terrible hires in the 80s combined with the inability to fix up Memorial (and then a move to the dome), is what ruined the program. Not the Vikings.
Click to expand...

Thank you for making this point for me. The Gophers didn't collapse the instant the Vikings left just like if the Vikings left the Gophers won't instantly win the Big 10.

The fact is that the Gophers' situation is unique to that of any other team in the country. Yes, other teams play in NFL cities, but there is a lot more going on with the Gopher program than just the Vikings. For example, Miami plays in an NFL city, but they have a lot more top flite recruits in their backyard than the Gophers. Thus, they have an advantage. Texas plays in roughly the same area as the Cowboys, but a lot more resources are spent by the University and donors keeping Texas football at the top.

The reality is that it is useless to compare the Gophers to all these other NFL teams, as by doing so you are making the NFL the only constant factor in the experiment, which it most certainly is not.

The fact is that the Vikings are a negative to the program, as are many other things. You can't dismiss the fact that the Vikings impact the Gophers in a negative way. What you must do is figure out the ways you can create a competitive advantage in this market to negate the impact of not only the Vikings, but all the other negative factors that affect the program.
 

Rosemountian said:
The state is dying for the Gophers to be good. If they were they would bring in fans. You can say that the reason is the Vikings, but that is wrong. Name another school in the NATION that has gone 30+ years without a top 3 finish in the conference and has gone 40+ years without a conference title that draws 40k a game. The fact there is as much support for this team as their is speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

This is a great post and a good reality check IMO. For all the mediocrity and bad coaches and disappointment over the years, Gopher fans remain hungry for victories. Even as TCF Bank Stadium sees fewer fans by the week, the Gophers still draw a very good number each home game for a program in such disarray. Good perspective sir.
 

Clyde Tester said:
This is a great post and a good reality check IMO. For all the mediocrity and bad coaches and disappointment over the years, Gopher fans remain hungry for victories. Even as TCF Bank Stadium sees fewer fans by the week, the Gophers still draw a very good number each home game for a program in such disarray. Good perspective sir.
Click to expand...

It's actually a ridiculous claim, not some "reality check." The reality is that with one of the largest alumni bases and being in one of the top 15 media markets in the nation, we have the potential to be (and should be) drawing so many more fans than now. The fans we have now are a direct reflection to the strength of the program, not some indication that they are "thirsty for winning."
 

josh087 said:
It's actually a ridiculous claim, not some "reality check." The reality is that with one of the largest alumni bases and being in one of the top 15 media markets in the nation, we have the potential to be (and should be) drawing so many more fans than now. The fans we have now are a direct reflection to the strength of the program, not some indication that they are "thirsty for winning."
Click to expand...

I didn't claim they were thirsty for winning as evidenced by 40k people consistently in the stadiums. My evidence of how the town would love to have a winning gopher team and would support them if they did was the excitement that surrounded the gopher basketball team in the Haskins years. What the 40k fans a game, even in the dome, indicates is that despite how bad the program has been run the past 30 years, there is still a fairly solid base. Look at any school who hasn't won for 40 years and it will be hard to find them drawing 40k fans. Look at schools like Washington State (who has won more recently than the gophers), Look at UCLA (who has had more success and is in a bigger city than the gophers), Look at schools like Rutgers (pre-Schiano), Pitt, Indiana.

There is a good base here, and the base has the potential to get a lot bigger if the team could somehow pull off 1 good (better than above average) season. Vikings or not, this program could be very successful if the right people made the right choices. The Vikings no doubt have hurt attendance numbers once the gophers became bad in the 80s, but they in no way made the gophers bad. And the gophers attendance numbers are better than many programs with similar bad results.
 

Rosemountian said:
And the gophers attendance numbers are better than many programs with similar bad results.
Click to expand...

This is true, but because the Gophers are in a large city, in the big ten conference, and have one of the largest enrollments in the country, it makes sense that they should be able to draw a good amount of fans regardless of how the team performs.

One good season is not going to cut it for the bandwagon folk. There will need to be a sustained period of high success to significantly improve attendance to where we can even begin discussions about levels of Wisconsin and Iowa, which we should easily be able to attain because of our city size and alumni base.

What will be interesting to find out is that if we ever get being a top 3 BT team year after year, will our attendance (or at least demand for tickets) rise accordingly? If not, we will know that there are other factors out there besides winning that are playing a factor.
 

josh087 said:
This is true, but because the Gophers are in a large city, in the big ten conference, and have one of the largest enrollments in the country, it makes sense that they should be able to draw a good amount of fans regardless of how the team performs.
Click to expand...

In 2008 (pre TCF) The gophers have similar attendance numbers to a schools like Georgia Tech, Pitt, Miami, and have significantly better attendance than schools like Rutgers and Boston College

None of those are in small cities.
All of those schools have put up much better results in the past 20 years (except Rutgers)
All except Miami have put up much better results in the last 5 years (except Miami)
None of those cities have worse weather than MN
Miami is the only private university of the 5 I mentioned.
Except for Miami they are all large schools.

You give too much weight to the fact that Minnesota is one of the largest schools in the country. Take into account that MN is one of the largest commuter schools in the country. 75% of undergrads live off campus. Including 20-25% of freshman (from U of M website).

You don't give gopher fans enough credit. When the product has been as bad as it has, I don't care how many students you have. To draw 40k per game is a major accomplishment.
 


The primary issue is not how many fans have attended and continue to attend Gophers football games. The real issue is the fact that over the last 43 years the Gopher alumni and fan base have not held the Board of Regents and the U Administration accountable for the pathetic state of the football program. Students and fans cared more about the team in 1959 when they hung Murray Warmath in effigy than at anytime since. There are probably many reasons why Minnesotan's don't really care very much about the Gophers anymore, but it is ridiculous to say that the success of the Vikings since 1968 has not been a contributing factor. Any poster who believes that has zero credibility.
 

Rosemountian said:
You give too much weight to the fact that Minnesota is one of the largest schools in the country. Take into account that MN is one of the largest commuter schools in the country. 75% of undergrads live off campus. Including 20-25% of freshman (from U of M website).
Click to expand...
You mean an apartment or frat house not owned by the University? 75% of undergrads aren't living in places like Blaine, Apple Valley and Buffalo and even if they did apparently they wouldn't want to attend Gopher football games at $90/season? You begin to win consistently students will go to games, become alumni, remember the good time they had cheering on Gopher football, support the team for a long time, and donate money.
 

UpnorthGo4 said:
The primary issue is not how many fans have attended and continue to attend Gophers football games. The real issue is the fact that over the last 43 years the Gopher alumni and fan base have not held the Board of Regents and the U Administration accountable for the pathetic state of the football program. Students and fans cared more about the team in 1959 when they hung Murray Warmath in effigy than at anytime since. There are probably many reasons why Minnesotan's don't really care very much about the Gophers anymore, but it is ridiculous to say that the success of the Vikings since 1968 has not been a contributing factor. Any poster who believes that has zero credibility.
Click to expand...

I think everyone agrees that the Vikings success has impacted the Gophers but it has only been as a result of the the Gophers lack of success. They key to be coming a great program lies squarely at the feet of the University and I think discussing external impacts that aren't going away is not constructive and deters from the fact that the University is the sole factor in the improvement of the football team and fanbase.
 

Gophers have made their own mess.

Sorry but the Gophers have made their own problems. The complete lack of promotion outside of the Twin Cities area for one. I know in the southwest part of the state you will never see a Gopher commercial outside of the Big Ten Network but in local media very little. If you cant see the team play every game it hurts your product and the fan base and sense the Gophers left the original MSC you cant see every game. Throw in bad coaches, poor win loss records over 30 years the fact the Vikings are here is the only thing that keeps the Gophers from being an even bigger joke to the fan base as most will tune them out.

If you go back a few years and the Gophers finish off Michigan like they should have we may not be talking about this at all.
 


MSC had a lot of problems. Gophers games were often tape-delayed, the Gophers weren't a priority for MSC. Most people with cable or satellite can get the BTN, but the BTN isn't always on the lowest package. The U should buy buying ads in all the local papers around the state. It's CHEAP, for one, promotes the Gophers (and the U itself), and builds up lots of goodwill. If the U is buying 1/4 page ads on a regular basis, and full page ads now and then, those papers are going to be very, very friendly to the Gophers.
 

RodentRampage said:
MSC had a lot of problems. Gophers games were often tape-delayed, the Gophers weren't a priority for MSC. Most people with cable or satellite can get the BTN, but the BTN isn't always on the lowest package. The U should buy buying ads in all the local papers around the state. It's CHEAP, for one, promotes the Gophers (and the U itself), and builds up lots of goodwill. If the U is buying 1/4 page ads on a regular basis, and full page ads now and then, those papers are going to be very, very friendly to the Gophers.
Click to expand...

MSC was great for it's own reasons, but the BTN has gotten perfectly good distribution. This is not the issue. Besides, we're about to appear on the ESPN family for the 4th time in 7 games and I believe our next two are as well.

One issue the BTN has caused for football and basketball is that they are rarely, if ever, on over-the-air television anymore. This is probably more noticable in basketball where the week-end conference games used to always be on free TV. MSP has one of the lowest cable/satellite rates in the US, only about 70%. So the Gophers are not available to about 1/3 of the population. That is unfortunate. That is also one of the reasons the Vikings are more popular. They are always available on network televison. But them moving to LA won't cause the Gopher games to show up on Fox 9. It's not uncommon for the Vikings to get a 70 share on Sunday. The Gophers would be physically unable to do so, even if every home with the BTN turned it on.

I agree the U needs to do more out-state marketing. I recall seeing ads in our tiny local paper as a kid with buy one/get one coupons and people did use them now and then. They may not need that with TCF but advertising would still help.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom