Why Minnesota has not been a Football Success?

[Go Gophers Rah]

If I were to look back over the 12 years that I have been paying close attention to Gophers football, here are the top-5 systemic reasons that I think we do not succeed as well as our peer institutions of Iowa and Wisconsin:

1) Too much coaching turnover. This has been obvious during the 2006 - 2010 seasons. During that time: 2HC, 4OC and 4DC. On the defensive coaching side, however, this has been a problem for the Gophers since Glen Mason took the job in 1997. And isn't that the side of the ball that suffered? I think we've had some really good coaches at times (Imagine Ted Roof's defense after a few years coupled with the Mitch Browning offenses of 2000-06), but we've rarely had all the pieces in place at once.

At this point, I guess I would rather have a mediocre coaching staff in place for a long time (I'm not saying that I think the current staff achieves this level) than to have a Lou Holtz (or Lane Kiffen) type using us as a stepping stone.

2) The Metrodome. Fixed!

3) Recruiting. I know, I know. Brewster has recruited much better. We still really haven't seen the results of that because either the players never really materialized (not here anymore, duds, etc.) or because they are not yet experienced enough. The problem I have had with both Mason and Brewster is the failure to keep Minnesota talent at home. Also, Brewster my have gotten more "star points" but were they suited to a system? Which system? Has he found any unpolished gems?

4) Fan Support. As someone who's been to many of our bowl games, I have to say that I'm embarrased that we get out-traveled by the likes of Iowa State. In all the bowls I went to (except the 2006 Insight) we were vastly outnumbered by the opposing team. I've also been embarrassed by the way our stadium can empty out with 20 minutes left to play just because we're down by a score or two. I would think that this would have a big effect on recruiting both players and coaches. Maybe not, but I know it would affect my decision in their shoes.

5) We're jinxed. I don't know how else to say it. Ever since the 2003 Michigan game, we've gotten a funny bounce from the ball more often than not. I know we've been the beneficiary of some good calls, good bounces, etc., but never in a big time game. Maybe our coaches and players just choke in big game situations, but I prefer to think that we've just been plain unlucky in big games and that the law of averages will catch up sooner-or-later and we'll catch some big breaks in a marquee game or two.

Anyway, that's my list. My opinion is no more right or wrong than anybody's, but I'd love to see other people list of reasons that we just can't seem to consistenly compete in our conference.

Go GOphers.

 

[RodentRampage]

A case can be made that the problems began with the firing on Cal Stoll. Stoll has the last Gophers coach to win 6 Big Ten games in a season. If there had been as many bowl games then as there are today, he would have taken us to 4 bowl games in his six years. Plus, back then the Gophers played tough non-conference schedules. Then we hired Joe Salem. He did ok at first, but the team fell apart in 1982 after starting out 0-3. He really lost control of the team, and then we had the disastrous 1983 season.

 

[Eagan]

Why Minnesota has not been a football success

Reasons I've read on this site:

10) Too many woodwinds in the band
9) Minnesota Vikings (damn them!)
8) U of M students are lame / don't show up
7) KFAN / Danny B.
6) Reusse and Souhan
5) Dave Lee
4) Glen Mason
3) Art Vandelay
2) Too many old fans still alive and not standing on 3rd down
1) Not enough fans wearing gold/yellow

 

[metrolax]

It actually goes back much further.....

....Until about 1950, Minnesota could have written a book on how to succeed at
football. From 1900-1950, Minnesota was in the elite group of colleges in the sport,
alongside Notre Dame, Michigan, Army, and perhaps Yale.

Things changed in the early 1950's......

The Ivy Group came along and created the Ivy League, creating an atmosphere
of de-emphasis in football. This wave caught on with many schools, and many major schools
dropped their football programs entirely, such as NYU and Fordham. Others de-emphasized
in a major way.

I believe that there were enough admins at the U who likewise believed that Minnesota
should de-emphasize, much in the way Chicago had. Not enough to make that happen,
but enough to cause resistance.

Bud Wilkinson showed interest in becoming coach at the U, and word was out that
Bierman was to be the AD. The combination of Bierman and Wilkinson could have produced
multiple national titles, but I believe there was resistance to such a dynamic duo,
and hence the U "settled" for coaches like Fesler and Warmath.

Once Warmath took over, he had to fight for support from the U. There had been enough
follow-through from their great seasons to enable him to succeed, but things were
wearing around the edges of the program.

By the time Cal Stoll arrived, it was run on a shoestring. Game films sessions were
conducted in hallways with film shown on the hall walls. Strength & conditioning
was woefully behind the times. He couldn't pay assistance competitively, and basically
Salem confronted the same problem.

Holtz gave the program a slight boost in support, but left for ND when he realized he
wasn't gonna get any more than what he had been. Gutey struggled with low U
support, as did Wacker.

I guess the part that stands out the most was Nils Hasselmo, who when U president
suggested that football be replaced by soccer! What does THAT tell you.

For 50 years Minnesota had the gameplan for success. Since then, the U has
no clue to what extent a program needs to be funded to succeed, and the years
spent at the Dome reflect that.

Hope that helps.

 

[station19]

Why Minnesota has not been a football success

Reasons I've read on this site:

10) Too many woodwinds in the band
9) Minnesota Vikings (damn them!)
8) U of M students are lame / don't show up
7) KFAN / Danny B.
6) Reusse and Souhan
5) Dave Lee
4) Glen Mason
3) Art Vandelay
2) Too many old fans still alive and not standing on 3rd down
1) Not enough fans wearing gold/yellow

You've learned well.

 

[SMU GOPHS FAN]

....Until about 1950, Minnesota could have written a book on how to succeed at
football. From 1900-1950, Minnesota was in the elite group of colleges in the sport,
alongside Notre Dame, Michigan, Army, and perhaps Yale.

Things changed in the early 1950's......

The Ivy Group came along and created the Ivy League, creating an atmosphere
of de-emphasis in football. This wave caught on with many schools, and many major schools
dropped their football programs entirely, such as NYU and Fordham. Others de-emphasized
in a major way.

I believe that there were enough admins at the U who likewise believed that Minnesota
should de-emphasize, much in the way Chicago had. Not enough to make that happen,
but enough to cause resistance.

Bud Wilkinson showed interest in becoming coach at the U, and word was out that
Bierman was to be the AD. The combination of Bierman and Wilkinson could have produced
multiple national titles, but I believe there was resistance to such a dynamic duo,
and hence the U "settled" for coaches like Fesler and Warmath.

Once Warmath took over, he had to fight for support from the U. There had been enough
follow-through from their great seasons to enable him to succeed, but things were
wearing around the edges of the program.

By the time Cal Stoll arrived, it was run on a shoestring. Game films sessions were
conducted in hallways with film shown on the hall walls. Strength & conditioning
was woefully behind the times. He couldn't pay assistance competitively, and basically
Salem confronted the same problem.

Holtz gave the program a slight boost in support, but left for ND when he realized he
wasn't gonna get any more than what he had been. Gutey struggled with low U
support, as did Wacker.

I guess the part that stands out the most was Nils Hasselmo, who when U president
suggested that football be replaced by soccer! What does THAT tell you.

For 50 years Minnesota had the gameplan for success. Since then, the U has
no clue to what extent a program needs to be funded to succeed, and the years
spent at the Dome reflect that.

Hope that helps.

This was pretty much the best summation of Gopher football I have ever read.

 

[Eagan]

....Until about 1950, Minnesota could have written a book on how to succeed at
football. From 1900-1950, Minnesota was in the elite group of colleges in the sport,
alongside Notre Dame, Michigan, Army, and perhaps Yale.

Things changed in the early 1950's......

The Ivy Group came along and created the Ivy League, creating an atmosphere
of de-emphasis in football. This wave caught on with many schools, and many major schools
dropped their football programs entirely, such as NYU and Fordham. Others de-emphasized
in a major way.

I believe that there were enough admins at the U who likewise believed that Minnesota
should de-emphasize, much in the way Chicago had. Not enough to make that happen,
but enough to cause resistance.

Bud Wilkinson showed interest in becoming coach at the U, and word was out that
Bierman was to be the AD. The combination of Bierman and Wilkinson could have produced
multiple national titles, but I believe there was resistance to such a dynamic duo,
and hence the U "settled" for coaches like Fesler and Warmath.

Once Warmath took over, he had to fight for support from the U. There had been enough
follow-through from their great seasons to enable him to succeed, but things were
wearing around the edges of the program.

By the time Cal Stoll arrived, it was run on a shoestring. Game films sessions were
conducted in hallways with film shown on the hall walls. Strength & conditioning
was woefully behind the times. He couldn't pay assistance competitively, and basically
Salem confronted the same problem.

Holtz gave the program a slight boost in support, but left for ND when he realized he
wasn't gonna get any more than what he had been. Gutey struggled with low U
support, as did Wacker.

I guess the part that stands out the most was Nils Hasselmo, who when U president
suggested that football be replaced by soccer! What does THAT tell you.

For 50 years Minnesota had the gameplan for success. Since then, the U has
no clue to what extent a program needs to be funded to succeed, and the years
spent at the Dome reflect that.

Hope that helps.

This is an excellent analysis. However, President Malcolm Moos (1967-1974) precided over the greatest period of downfall of the football team. I was young back then, but the late 60s was a time of protest against anything establishment, including football. I believe Moos had a lot of responsibility for de-emphasizing football on campus.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

You've learned well.

Why Minnesota has not been a football success

Reasons I've read on this site:

10) Too many woodwinds in the band
9) Minnesota Vikings (damn them!)
8) U of M students are lame / don't show up
7) KFAN / Danny B.
6) Reusse and Souhan
5) Dave Lee
4) Glen Mason
3) Art Vandelay
2) Too many old fans still alive and not standing on 3rd down
1) Not enough fans wearing gold/yellow
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And it only took Eagan 15 minutes of reading threads in GopherHole to figure out what the problems are. However, he missed the most important one. The band doesn't march down University Avenue before games at Gophers Stadium.

 

[GopherFB]

The more recent reasons have been:

#1- Lack of talent
#2- Lack of quality Coaching/Recruiting
#3- Metrodome hampering recruiting of coaches and players
#4- back log of mediocre at best history
#5- Lack of support. For whatever reason, Minnesota just never has gotten excited about Gopher football.

 

[Schnauzer]

Thanks for the great posts, Metrolax and Rah. Well said.

I hope that someone over there wakes up and realizes that they can't make the huge investment in the new stadium and end the effort to bring football back to the top with that building.

 

[husker70]

1. No visible or vocal booster or boosters willing to put there money where there mouth is or vise versa.

2. No committment from the University to winning football, rather they are committed to non revenue sports. When the football team can produce the revenue then you can have non revenue.

3. Coaching, either evaluate the talent and coach them up, or recruit the talent to a program. We spent 3 years doing the former to get to the latter and seem to be a year away.

4. Minneapolis is a front running crowd. Win and they come in, lose and they don't. That is true whether its pro or college. Whether the facility is top notch or not.

 

[DL65]

A very good summation, Metrolax. Well done! You're correct about the 1950s and some schools/presidents wanting drop or tone down their programs. As an example, a national power, Notre Dame, was afraid they were becoming a football factory, especially with the success Frank Leahy enjoyed. When he retired, Fathers Hesburgh and Joyce turned to a high school coach, Terry Brennan. He was followed by Joe Kuharich and Hugh Devore. The adminstration came to their senses, especially reallizing how much revenue flows to schools enjoying success on the gridiron, and hired Ara Parseghian. Parseghian's first year at Notre Dame was very good and except for a late game collapse against USC would have been national champs.

There's a very good book by Jim Dent, "Resurrection," which chronicles that season and the Irish turn around. More importantly, it details the importance of presidential/administrative support in having success on the gridiron. Another book by Jim Dent, "The Undefeated," which details the success and career of Bud Wilkinson at Oklahoma stresses the importance of administrative support.

Go Gophers!!

 

[maroonfive]

I agree for the most part

but I am not going to consider it poor fan support for not showing up to bowl games. The only bowl game that I would ever go to would be the Rose Bowl or the Orange Bowl. The other bowls are a dime a dozen.

Go Gophers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[littlebigboy]

Metrolax, very good. I would also like to address the reason that alot of kids in Mn. don't grow up wanting to be gophers like the kids in the 60's. Look at the archives of the Star Tribune and Pioneer press on sunday after a gopher game, home or away and there were pictures galore. sequence photos with names above all the players. Almost everyday there was an article on the Gophs. and 1 or 2 times a week there was a player feature. Ask anyone over 50 and I bet if they played FB in Mn. they wanted to be a Gopher. The Vikes were here in the 60's too, but now gopher coverage and hype has all but disappeared. Ask young kids now if they want to be Gophers??? Bet it's not like their folks or grandparents.

 

[Tee09]

I know whose fault it really is, and his name is Phil Kessel.

 

[RedPoo]

Very well said Metrolax.

There are two pieces of the original post that jumped out at me.

1) The premise that we haven't succeeded like our rivals, WI and IA. Both of those teams have had, generally, as much to overcome as we have. The biggest difference I can see (which is noted on the list) is that they both had a university that was dedicated to the program, and were both lucky enough to land a good coach who stuck around. The success of both of their programs, as well as our own, will likely be in flux as time passes. These things can build a solid program for a couple decades, but for any school in our situation (really, any school besides the historic national powers with huge, rich alumni bases...maybe 20-30 teams).

2) That fan support is issue more an effect of the teams struggles than a cause. I know fan support would help the program. But I'm a fairly young man (30) but I'm old enough to clearly remember a time when the Badgers were a bad team, and they couldn't GIVE tickets away. I've been to early season games where camp randall was less than 1/3 full. I've been to high school games there with better attendance. Fans come with success, and bring more success with them.

 

[BradDad]

There are a couple of other reasons in there: Ohio State & Michigan. They have lots of resources and (more or less) have been monster-big programs during the same 50 years when the Gophers program declined (especially back before there were limits on the # of scholarships).

The way up is like climbing a greased ladder. Getting better requires better player and winning helps you draw in better players. At some point (IMO), the Gophers need a group to come in and play "better than its talent" deserves, which will (hopefully) convince still better players to come to the U.

 

[Mulligan]

Good analysis that has brought out the main factors.. I think there is another one also, and that is the Southern schools becoming desegregated with their football teams. The 60's were the last decade that we had a solid program and those teams were a combination of Minnesota talent augmented by some tremendous black players. There was the Uniontown Pa. connection (Sandy Stephens, Bill Munsey, Ray Parsons), and those players would probably have ended up at Minnesota anyway. But the Gophers had a real pipeline out of North Carolina. I think Bobby Bell, Ezell Jones, Ed Duren, John Williams, Charlie Sanders, McKinley Boston, and Carl Eller were all from there. In addition, I remember Aaron Brown being from Texas. Many of these players were both on offense and defense so it was almost like having two players. It's really doubtful these players would have ended up in Minnesota if the SEC wasn't segregated back then.

Just at the time the U was de-emphasizing football, a pool of talent was also drying up for us. Poorer teams, poorer fan support, moving to the Dome, poor coaching hires, and before you know it we haven't been to the Rose Bowl for just about 50 years. Maybe not a perfect storm, but once it started going downhill, it's been really hard to stop.

We've got the new stadium, but it's like the job gets harder each year because the futility just keeps piling up. Doesn't help that we're on the edge of the Big Ten with a relatively small player base bordered by the Dakotas and Canada on two sides. Also with the national exposure, the few really elite players get cherry-picked by the powers because they certainly don't grow up wanting to be Gophers like Noel Jenke, Tom Brown, Jim Carter, Greg Larson, John Hankinson, Bob Stein, etc. did.

 

[Governor Sibley]

Vikings + Desegregation.

Everything else followed.

Don't over-think it.

 

[RedPoo]

Vikings.

Everything else followed.

Don't over-think it.

One might argue (and one would easily convince me, if they did) that you're dramatically under-thinking it. No offense intended.
Not saying the Vikings aren't a factor, but they're far from the only factor.

 

[Ewert86PC]

....Until about 1950, Minnesota could have written a book on how to succeed at
football. From 1900-1950, Minnesota was in the elite group of colleges in the sport,
alongside Notre Dame, Michigan, Army, and perhaps Yale.

Things changed in the early 1950's......

The Ivy Group came along and created the Ivy League, creating an atmosphere
of de-emphasis in football. This wave caught on with many schools, and many major schools
dropped their football programs entirely, such as NYU and Fordham. Others de-emphasized
in a major way.

I believe that there were enough admins at the U who likewise believed that Minnesota
should de-emphasize, much in the way Chicago had. Not enough to make that happen,
but enough to cause resistance.

Bud Wilkinson showed interest in becoming coach at the U, and word was out that
Bierman was to be the AD. The combination of Bierman and Wilkinson could have produced
multiple national titles, but I believe there was resistance to such a dynamic duo,
and hence the U "settled" for coaches like Fesler and Warmath.

Once Warmath took over, he had to fight for support from the U. There had been enough
follow-through from their great seasons to enable him to succeed, but things were
wearing around the edges of the program.

By the time Cal Stoll arrived, it was run on a shoestring. Game films sessions were
conducted in hallways with film shown on the hall walls. Strength & conditioning
was woefully behind the times. He couldn't pay assistance competitively, and basically
Salem confronted the same problem.

Holtz gave the program a slight boost in support, but left for ND when he realized he
wasn't gonna get any more than what he had been. Gutey struggled with low U
support, as did Wacker.

I guess the part that stands out the most was Nils Hasselmo, who when U president
suggested that football be replaced by soccer! What does THAT tell you.

For 50 years Minnesota had the gameplan for success. Since then, the U has
no clue to what extent a program needs to be funded to succeed, and the years
spent at the Dome reflect that.

Hope that helps.

Bravo!!!

 

[JPIIGopher]

It has everything to do with lack of demand. Since the arrival of the Minnesota Vikings the Gophers have been next to meaningless in this state. People have been getting their football fix on the Vikings ever since they have arrived and unfortunately that has left Gopher football in their wake.

It comes down to resources. The Vikings being here means less dollars available to spend on the Gophers, hence the program isn't in the same kind of demand it used to be. The Gophs are constantly being pushed to page three in the newspaper not because of some kind of media conspiracy, but because that's where the demand lies in this town.

 

[goldengophers]

It has everything to do with lack of demand. Since the arrival of the Minnesota Vikings the Gophers have been next to meaningless in this state. People have been getting their football fix on the Vikings ever since they have arrived and unfortunately that has left Gopher football in their wake.

It comes down to resources. The Vikings being here means less dollars available to spend on the Gophers, hence the program isn't in the same kind of demand it used to be. The Gophs are constantly being pushed to page three in the newspaper not because of some kind of media conspiracy, but because that's where the demand lies in this town.

This has easily become the snooziest argument for why the Gophers are mediocre.

 

[TAW]

Very well said Metrolax.

2) That fan support is issue more an effect of the teams struggles than a cause. I know fan support would help the program. But I'm a fairly young man (30) but I'm old enough to clearly remember a time when the Badgers were a bad team, and they couldn't GIVE tickets away. I've been to early season games where camp randall was less than 1/3 full. I've been to high school games there with better attendance. Fans come with success, and bring more success with them.

Which years were these Red Poo? Other than the dreadful Morton years, UW has enjoyed consistent fan support as shown by the chart below and my own recollection of games since 1971. I will give you that early pre-season games may not be fully attended, but I defy you to find a game that was less than 1/3 full, with the possible exception of the Morton years. Even using the current capacity of ~80,000, 1/3 gives you 26,666. It just isn't true that less than 30,000 were at games. Both the Badgers and the Brewers have shown that, given even a reasonably competitive game, the fans will support the teams.

The point in the original post that struck home to me was recruiting to suit the system. It has seemed to me, as an outsider, that Brewster has yet to define what "his system" is. Until you know that, you are recruiting randomly and hoping it will somehow work out.

**********
Camp Randall attendance:

Year Avg.
1921 11,962
1922 11,075
1923 16,387
1924 14,592
1925 15,118
1926 19,228
1927 18,512
1928 29,334
1929 21,560
1930 18,175
1931 15,068
1932 16,344
1933 13,579
1934 20,666
1935 15,889
1936 19,117
1937 24,121
1938 31,731
1939 23,726
1940 26,277
1941 26,212
1942 29,026
1943 14,374
1944 22,010
1945 32,666
1946 45,000
1947 44,200
1948 44,167
1949 44,200
1950 45,000
1951 46,151
1952 51,953
1953 51,652
1954 53,491
1955 53,491
1956 53,503
1957 47,683
1958 55,263
1959 53,317
1960 59,956
1961 47,143
1962 55,877
1963 61,223
1964 60,718
1965 56,428
1966 51,725
1967 52,495
1968 43,559
1969 48,898
1970 56,223
1971 68,131
1972 70,454
1973 60,400
1974 71,630
1975 73,962
1976 70,898
1977 72,682
1978 71,443
1979 73,979
1980 71,360
1981 71,640
1982 71,060
1983 69,787
1984 74,681
1985 71,613
1986 68,052
1987 59,256
1988 49,297
1989 41,734
1990 51,027
1991 49,676
1992 61,378
1993 75,507
1994 77,328
1995 78,222
1996 77,949
1997 77,880
1998 77,428
1999 78,081
2000 78,711
2001 78,333
2002 78,023
2003 78,486
2004 82,368
2005 82,551
2006 81,368
2007 81,747
2008 81,088
2009 80,109

 

[Monty519]

The point in the original post that struck home to me was recruiting to suit the system. It has seemed to me, as an outsider, that Brewster has yet to define what "his system" is. Until you know that, you are recruiting randomly and hop

First three years, yeah. I think he finally just got to that point, but now, patience has already ran out for him and he probably won't get a chance to see that through, hence why you don't hire first time coaches at Big Ten programs.

 

[CP Gopher]

Moving to the Dome.
Biggest....Mistake......Ever
A big thanks to Sid Hartman and the rest of the "geniuses" who championed the stupidest idea in the history of college football.

 

[Ewert86PC]

Moving to the Dome.
Biggest....Mistake......Ever
A big thanks to Sid Hartman and the rest of the "geniuses" who championed the stupidest idea in the history of college football.

Best. Post. Ever!

 

[JPIIGopher]

Ok, then give me some really keen insight

This has easily become the snooziest argument for why the Gophers are mediocre.

If you don't think it matters you are delusional. NFL cities, Major College team and results:

1 Atlanta Georgia Tech 3 Conference Titles 0 National Titles in 50 years
2 Baltimore -
3 Boston Boston College 1 shared CT, 0 Nt's in past 50 years
4 Buffalo -
5 Charlotte -
6 Chicago Northwestern 3 CT's 0 NT's in 50 years
7 Cincinatti Bearcats 5 Ct's (only 2 in major Big east conf) 0 NT's in 50 years
8 Cleveland -
9 Dallas -
10 Denver -
11 Detroit -
12 Indianapolis -
13 Jacksonville -
14 Kansas City -
15 Miami Hurricanes 9 CT's and 5 NT's in 50 years
16 Green Bay -
17 Minneapolis Gophers 2 CT's and 1 NT in 50 years
18 Nashville Vandy 0 everything
19 New Orleans -
20 New York Rutgers 0
21 New York Rutgers 0
22 Oakland -
23 Philadelphia -
24 Phoenix ASU 11 Ct's, 3 since joining the Pac 10, 2 since the arrival of the Cards
25 Pittsburgh 4 CT's (3 eastern, 1 Bigeast) 1 NT in 50 years
26 St Louis -
27 San Diego -
28 San Francisco -
29 Seattle Huskies 10 CT's 1 NT in 50 years
30 Tampa South Florida 0
31 Washington -
32 Houston -

Only 12 of 31 NFL cities can even support major college football.

Of those twelve only 3 have significantly better results than Minnesota in the last 50 years, Miami, ASU, and UW.

Of course this isn't any excuse, it just makes us have to think outside the box...maybe we should be like Boise St. and paint our field Gold It's all about getting noticed.

 

[GopherOhana]

don't forget, global warming

and just to waste a little bit of everyone's time

global warming causing buckeye trees to migrate north, maybe players aren't so far behind.

What U administrators and coaches can't do, perhaps global warming will do for us. Go Gophers in 2075

Gopher fans, players will come Gopher Fans. They'll come to Minnesota for reasons they can't even fathom. They'll turn up on our practice fields not knowing for sure why they're doing it. They'll arrive at our door as innocent as children, longing for the past when they could practice in pads and not collapse from heat exhaustion. Of course, we won't mind if they hang around, you'll say “It's only 4 or 5 years per player”. They'll pass over their LOIs without even thinking about it: for it is skill they have and a cool peaceful place to play they lack. And they'll walk out past the bleachers onto the field; sit in full pads in complete comfort on a perfect afternoon. They'll find they have more energy running somewhere along one of the yard lines, where they sat when they were children and cheered their heroes. And they'll play the game and it'll be as if they dipped themselves in magic waters. The memories they will create will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces. Players will come Gopher fans. …. Players will most definitely come.


sorry. promise never to do that again

 

[josh087]

If you don't think it matters you are delusional. NFL cities, Major College team and results:

1 Atlanta Georgia Tech 3 Conference Titles 0 National Titles in 50 years
2 Baltimore -
3 Boston Boston College 1 shared CT, 0 Nt's in past 50 years
4 Buffalo -
5 Charlotte -
6 Chicago Northwestern 3 CT's 0 NT's in 50 years
7 Cincinatti Bearcats 5 Ct's (only 2 in major Big east conf) 0 NT's in 50 years
8 Cleveland -
9 Dallas -
10 Denver -
11 Detroit -
12 Indianapolis -
13 Jacksonville -
14 Kansas City -
15 Miami Hurricanes 9 CT's and 5 NT's in 50 years
16 Green Bay -
17 Minneapolis Gophers 2 CT's and 1 NT in 50 years
18 Nashville Vandy 0 everything
19 New Orleans -
20 New York Rutgers 0
21 New York Rutgers 0
22 Oakland -
23 Philadelphia -
24 Phoenix ASU 11 Ct's, 3 since joining the Pac 10, 2 since the arrival of the Cards
25 Pittsburgh 4 CT's (3 eastern, 1 Bigeast) 1 NT in 50 years
26 St Louis -
27 San Diego -
28 San Francisco -
29 Seattle Huskies 10 CT's 1 NT in 50 years
30 Tampa South Florida 0
31 Washington -
32 Houston -

Only 12 of 31 NFL cities can even support major college football.

Of those twelve only 3 have significantly better results than Minnesota in the last 50 years, Miami, ASU, and UW.

Of course this isn't any excuse, it just makes us have to think outside the box...maybe we should be like Boise St. and paint our field Gold It's all about getting noticed.

Thank you. When are people going to put their feelings about the Vikings aside and just admit the significance they have on the Gophers. Doesn't mean you can't like the Vikings. Just ADMIT that it is a huge hurdle in the way of the program succeeding in the modern day environment of quick fixes and instant gratification.