Do you sometimes wish that we weren't in the Cities?

Donate To GopherHole
?

>'.'<

Gopher
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Since we're kind of in that period of when there's not too much to talk about. I was thinking about us being in a pro sports dominated market. Do you think that if our campus was built further away from the Twin Cities, like in Rochester, we would be better at sports? We would have more of a college campus/town atmosphere, thus getting better recruits and better a fan base. We also would be in a city with no pro sports.

The football powers, Ohio State (Columbus-no pro football), Florida (Gainesville), Michigan (Ann Arbor), USC (LA- no pro football), etc...

Just some food for thought
 

It's really hard to say. The campus would be more insular and homogenous and maybe that would mean more school spirit, but look at Indiana, they're in the middle of no where and they have zero football tradition. If we want good football here we just have to have to be committed and have the right people. It can happen here, but it will just take more time and effort than at other places.
 


It is time to stop whining about the circumstances and start taking responsibility for them...the reason the U is not competitive in Football and Basketball is because we have not made the investment to be competitive. It isn't where the school is located or the weather or the Vikings that are the reason...the reason is 40 years of administrative indifference, a total lack of consistent fund raising and promotion of our sports at a high level and a complete failure to invest in top facilities, coaches, support staff and equipment.

I do believe that we are starting to turn the corner on these issues - we have a new Prexy that loves to win at sports, we will have a new AD that will be empowered and supported to win, we have the bank and will get an upgrade to our BB facilities in the next few years and I am confident that I will start hearing from fundraisers far more often than I do now and we will start to put a far greater emphasis on reaching out and including alumni and current students in the U's athletics.
 

GopherinPhilly said:
It is time to stop whining about the circumstances and start taking responsibility for them...the reason the U is not competitive in Football and Basketball is because we have not made the investment to be competitive. It isn't where the school is located or the weather or the Vikings that are the reason...the reason is 40 years of administrative indifference, a total lack of consistent fund raising and promotion of our sports at a high level and a complete failure to invest in top facilities, coaches, support staff and equipment.

I do believe that we are starting to turn the corner on these issues - we have a new Prexy that loves to win at sports, we will have a new AD that will be empowered and supported to win, we have the bank and will get an upgrade to our BB facilities in the next few years and I am confident that I will start hearing from fundraisers far more often than I do now and we will start to put a far greater emphasis on reaching out and including alumni and current students in the U's athletics.
Click to expand...

+999,999. I would have given you the full million, but you used "Prexy," like Wren would.
 


While I wholeheartedly agree with GopherinPhilly, I will answer the question anyway.

I think that being in a metro area helps us in our current state of athletics. If we were in a college town then we would be just another college town school with average football and basketball at best. I think we would get lost in the shuffle between other more dominant schools within the big 10. Being in a metro area not only sets us apart from places like Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, and Wisconsin, but it also adds selling points those places don't have (internship opportunities, more nightlife, etc).
 

I think you have to deal with the reality of your situation. We have a metropolitian campus and we probably always will (flu epidemic, alien invasion, or locus?). The Twin Cities have pro sports but that can be be a selling point. Its a waste of time to think about the U being somewhere else...the Twin Cities is the only place it will be and its a great place to be.
 

As much as I love sports (I'm pursuing a career in it), even if moving to a more college-towny location would instantaneously improve our athletics program I still wouldn't want to do it. The location within the Twin Cities is one of the things that makes the U so great. I love my school, and I love my city, I wouldn't want to change a thing about it.
 

Whenever I read somebody whining about the U and it's location and having to compete with pro-sports I always come back to comparing the U to Temple.

Temple is in a bad part of a really bad city. Temple plays at the pro stadium for football, which is about 5 times further from Temple than the dome was from the U. Temple is Philly, second only to Boston for colleges per capita in a metro area. Except for their pharmacology school, Temple is a crappy school.

I have dozens of friends and co-workers that went to Temple and support Temple...and never, not once, not ever have I heard one of them say that, "Gee, if only the Eagles would leave town or if our school was located in Pennsyltucky like Penn St., we could win it all" The argument is ridiculous, moronic and a complete waste of breathe.
 




GopherinPhilly said:
It is time to stop whining about the circumstances and start taking responsibility for them...the reason the U is not competitive in Football and Basketball is because we have not made the investment to be competitive. It isn't where the school is located or the weather or the Vikings that are the reason...the reason is 40 years of administrative indifference, a total lack of consistent fund raising and promotion of our sports at a high level and a complete failure to invest in top facilities, coaches, support staff and equipment.

I do believe that we are starting to turn the corner on these issues - we have a new Prexy that loves to win at sports, we will have a new AD that will be empowered and supported to win, we have the bank and will get an upgrade to our BB facilities in the next few years and I am confident that I will start hearing from fundraisers far more often than I do now and we will start to put a far greater emphasis on reaching out and including alumni and current students in the U's athletics.
Click to expand...

As I have previously stated: the prexy can always get what the prexy wants IF the prexy wants to pay the price and make the committment. It's going to be quite awhile until we KNOW just what this prexy k is willing to do to insure that Gopher Revenue Sports are competetive in the TOP HALF of the Big Ten year in and year out. That means competing with Michgian, Ohio State, PSU, MSU, Nebraska, iowa and wisky EVERY year. Do you people HONESTLY think
that prexy k has shown us that he really IS committed to excellence in the revenue sports...in academics...in fund-raising?

Some of you people are pretty easy marks, I fear. You start out saying prexy k is committed? How do you know? We need to see results before we will know, as far as I am concerned.

I've been telling you people for a LONG time about lack of committment on the part of the prexys at the U. IF prexy k is committed you will ONLY see it in the results. prexy-speak is just too cheap to mean anything. Big Ten wins will tell us all we need to know. Too many Big Ten losses will negate any kind of "prexy-speak..." Either prexy k will make the committment...or he won't...There is NO in-between. Things will either drastically improve or things will remain as they have been for the past thirty nine plus seasons...

; 0 )
 

Good point about Temple. When I first moved out here I was surprised to see a nice looking (compared to the neighborhood, I've only seen it from a SEPTA train) campus in the middle of windowless vacant buildings covered in graffiti. Now, if the alumni of that university can still be content with their situation, why are we complaining?
 

USC and the former Los Angeles Rams & Raiders is/where located in a large spread out LA metropolis. USC has been very successful in football in this urban setting while the pro football teams not so much.

It seems what is critical to success starts with total commitment to winning from the top of the organization/administration and excellent coaches. USC also has strong alumni & local fan support. Winning is embedded in their DNA.

Gopher Football used to have all these until the 1960's about the time the Vikings rolled into town. IMO, it seems there was a gradual de-emphasis in and commitment to winning at athletics at the U of M.

I will not be surprised if many of those universities around the country with strong athletics winning traditions also have attracted major endowments from alumni and elsewhere.

Winning in athletics and a top university ranking in academics & research can go hand in hand. A winning Gophers Football program can co-exist with the pro teams. How many large metropolitan areas of the country have pro baseball, football, basketball, and hockey with several Fortune 500 companies with unlimited potential for great careers after college and a wonderful place to live after football?

Winning is infectious, and I would venture to think that all these aforementioned can become valuable assets in recruiting. Jerry Kill seems to know how to market these assets.:cool02:
 



Teams in Top 25 MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) who have gone to a BCS Bowl (or pre-1998 equivalent) and/or won a national championship in the last 25 years:

2. LA - UCLA, USC
3. Chicago - Northwestern
4. Dallas/Ft. Worth - TCU
8. Miami - Miami
9. Atlanta - Georgia Tech
14. Phoenix - Arizona St.
15. Seattle - Washington
22. Pittsburgh - Pitt

Minneapolis/St. Paul is the #16 MSA. But please, continue telling yourself it's because we're in a large metro area.
 

Sorry, but I don't see the point to this thread. It's like asking if the world would be different if it were flat vs. round. It is what it is...we live in a big market city, presumably by each own's choice, and have both advantages and disadvantages vs. small college towns. I prefer to embrace the many, many things that both the city and U have to offer, and believe Kill will end up being very successful in selling this combination to future recruits. Go Gophers!
 

BHgrappler said:
Sorry, but I don't see the point to this thread. It's like asking if the world would be different if it were flat vs. round. It is what it is...we live in a big market city, presumably by each own's choice, and have both advantages and disadvantages vs. small college towns. I prefer to embrace the many, many things that both the city and U have to offer, and believe Kill will end up being very successful in selling this combination to future recruits. Go Gophers!
Click to expand...
I would MUCH rather live in Minneapolis than a college town, personally.
 

I do not think it matters if the program is in a large city or small town. Perception of the players,school and fans is what matters. Look at the top programs, winning is expected. We as fans need to demand that winning is the only acceptably outcome. Of course it will costs us more dollars, big time athletics translates into large $ support by programs boosters. Look at our basketball team, I have heard for a few years how they need a practice facility. If this was Ohio State, this facility would have been built and in use. At the U, it is still in the discussion phase. Until we as fans, state, University develop the attitude that if the coach needs this to win, we will find a way to provide it. We will always be behind other schools in our conference.
 

I don't bemoan being in the Cities but when they originally were picking a site of the U, it came down to the present site, or by Lake Minnetonka. If they had located on Minnetonka we would of had one of the best campus sites in the world.
 


dpodoll68 said:
Teams in Top 25 MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) who have gone to a BCS Bowl (or pre-1998 equivalent) and/or won a national championship in the last 25 years:

2. LA - UCLA, USC
3. Chicago - Northwestern
4. Dallas/Ft. Worth - TCU
8. Miami - Miami
9. Atlanta - Georgia Tech
14. Phoenix - Arizona St.
15. Seattle - Washington
22. Pittsburgh - Pitt

Minneapolis/St. Paul is the #16 MSA. But please, continue telling yourself it's because we're in a large metro area.
Click to expand...

Obviously there have been teams located in a pro market who have had success in the past.

The question from the OP wasn't "is it possible to have a really good season despite being in a pro market?" The question was, if being outside of a pro market would make us better at sports in general - essentially, is it preferred athletic-wise to be in a pro market or not?

If you take the statistical sampling of records from teams in pro markets vs. teams outside pro markets, specifically for football (since this is the football board) the results are not even close.

HEck, just last year university heads all across the country gathered together with the sole purpose being discussing the best way to compete despite being in pro markets. You don't do that if being in a pro market is a desired feature.

It isn't the end-all-be-all to winning, but anyone who can possibly argue that being located in a pro market is a desirable feature for a university in terms of athletics alone isn't being honest with themselves.
 

What's the alternative? Madison or Iowa City?!? I don't think so. The Twin Cities is a lot better than most "college towns" and for that matter other major metropolitan areas. That said, I can see the allure of places like LA or Miami but that just the way it is so no sense fretting about it (there's a reason why many people want to live or vacation in certain places). Bottom line, find kids who want to come here and fit the system.
 


I think it would be more interesting and be good for the state if perhaps there was one large state university located in St. Cloud or Mankato. Given the population of the state I would think the school would be bigger than Iowa State. It would be great to have a true rival in hockey, basketball, and football and not have to worry about smaller regional schools that border the state. Wishful thinking but an in-state rival of roughly the same or smaller size would be great. It might hurt recruiting but it would be fun.

Go Gophers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

maroonfive said:
I think it would be more interesting and be good for the state if perhaps there was one large state university located in St. Cloud or Mankato. Given the population of the state I would think the school would be bigger than Iowa State. It would be great to have a true rival in hockey, basketball, and football and not have to worry about smaller regional schools that border the state. Wishful thinking but an in-state rival of roughly the same or smaller size would be great. It might hurt recruiting but it would be fun.

Go Gophers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Wait, are you saying that Wisconsin and Iowa are smaller schools? So you want a school bigger than Wisconsin in Minnesota?
 

I'm all for UMDuluth going D1 and possibly joining the B1G. An instate rival would be awesome. And not being in a "college" town is probably the number one reason why I went to the "U". 2 cents, paid.
 

t-docious said:
I'm all for UMDuluth going D1 and possibly joining the B1G. An instate rival would be awesome.
Click to expand...
A fun dream that stands absolutely zero shot at happening. :) I actually prefer the lack of in-state rivals in FB/BB myself, but that's mostly b/c the historical rivals in both are so strong. I'm of the opinion that the in state hockey rivalries sap at the support the FB and BB teams get.
 

Iowa State is the perfect example of how much the athletics department benefits from not being in a large town with other sports. And Washington State. And UTEP. And Virginia. And Missouri. And Ole Miss. And Oregon State...

I'm not saying the U of MN doesn't compete for fans with the pro sports here in the Cities, but to say they would inherently be better by not being in the Cities is an awful big assumption.
 

I sure as hell would rather have gone to school in MPLS than in Rochester or Bemidji. And like others, I think using our location as an excuse is bogus.

The one issue where I think the fate of our location hurts us is in recruiting. Roughly 2/3 of the MN population lives in the metro area. Most of the good HS football programs are in the 7 (or 13) county area, too. A certain percentage of kids, including athletes, want to get away from home for college. Nothing wrong with that, I did too. So I think occasionally we miss out on a kid who played at EP or CDH just because he wants to be more than 15 minutes away from his parents.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Teams in Top 25 MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) who have gone to a BCS Bowl (or pre-1998 equivalent) and/or won a national championship in the last 25 years:

2. LA - UCLA, USC
3. Chicago - Northwestern
4. Dallas/Ft. Worth - TCU
8. Miami - Miami
9. Atlanta - Georgia Tech
14. Phoenix - Arizona St.
15. Seattle - Washington
22. Pittsburgh - Pitt

Minneapolis/St. Paul is the #16 MSA. But please, continue telling yourself it's because we're in a large metro area.
Click to expand...

The area that probably does get hurt is attendance. Northwestern, TCU, Miami, Georgia Tech, and Pittsburgh all averaged under 50,000 per game last year.
 

GophersInIowa said:
The area that probably does get hurt is attendance. Northwestern, TCU, Miami, Georgia Tech, and Pittsburgh all averaged under 50,000 per game last year.
Click to expand...
This would be my thought too, but then you see Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue also have the same issues. So program history/quality of the team also plays into it obviously.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom