Post 1961 football Program Decline

Recently someone asked why Minnesota football declined after we beat UCLA in the 1961 Rose Bowl. I believe there are two possible factors. One is the creation of the Vikings whose first season was that year. The other is what I understand was a University de-emphasis of the program about that time.
Before the Vikings, Minnesota was like Nebraska, the focus of Minnesota football fans was on the Gophers. Playing for the Gophers was most Minnesota high school players dream. The Vikings changed that. To be sure, our success in the 1960 an 1961 seasons was in large part due to our ground breaking recruitment of African-American players, such as Sandy Stephens, Karl Eller and Bobby Lee Bell, with the help of Star Tribune columnist, Carl Rowan. But for years we had been able to keep most of the crème de le crème of Minnesota football talent in state. After the Vikings, I believe the Gophers lost their luster with in-state players which declined further as our on field success declined.
As for the University's de-emphasis of the program, the 1960 and 1961 seasons were my junior and senior years at the University (yeah, I'm an old guy). My recollection is that there was an initiative at that time within the Minnesota Faculty Senate to follow the lead of the University of Chicago and drop intercollegiate football, which was thwarted by our 1960 Rose Bowl invitation. Because bowl revenues are shared , there was supposedly pressure from both alumni and the Big Ten conference to accept the invitation. (declining the invitation, as I understand it, would have permitted the Rose Bowl to invite a non Big Ten team.) But while the Rose Bowl invitation may have saved the program, I suspect that funding for the program was significantly cut.
I tried to research whether this is true. I reviewed "The University of Minnesota 1945-2000", by Sanford Lehmberg and Ann Pflaum, but there is nothing in that publication that either confirms or rebuts this possibility. Can anyone shed further light on this?

I thin I've heard a lot about the factors you mention. I'd add the move to two platoon football. Single platoon football required 11 great players. Modern two platoon football with substitutions requires 25-30. I think this is tough on a state that only produces 8-10 D1 players a year.

Football suffered under Moos, McGrath, and Keller tenures. I don't quite understand if it was lack of commitment to focus on sports at the U, or if Gopher football lost its luster due to competition with pro sports in town. Whatever it was, most of the Big Ten caught up or surpassed the Gophers in football in that period. That is fifty years in the doldrums. It is time to wake up Rip Van Winkle.

Hate to say it but integration greatly curtailed the exodus of top black players to Minnesota and the rest of the conference. It fueled the rise of the SEC and contributed to the decline of the Big 10 to its present state.

I believe all of the above comments correctly illustrate some of the causes that have led to the long term decline in Gopher football and the forty-five years since its last conference championship (1967 Tri-Champs with Indiana and Purdue).

My take, however, is that Minnesota's problems have been more internal and started long before 1961 or 1967. Harvey Mackay, in his book "Swim With The Sharks Without Being Eaten Alive (1988), mentioned poor customer service provided by the U in the 1950s. In short, it was a systemic posture that proved costly. Gopher football was the only show it town (state) and the U took the program and its fan base for granted at best and could have cared less at worst. (Strange how people still complain about poor customer service.) Memorial Stadium was already starting to fall in disrepair and the U didn't take any steps to correct the problems. And we all know what happened following the 1981 season.

Additionally, training facilities were non-existant and remained so until Holtz came on board and insisted that an indoor practice facility was paramount if the Gophers were to be competitive. (Construction was started in 1984.) No doubt the lack of training facilities hurt the recruiting efforts of Murray Warmath as well as those of Cal Stoll and Joe Salem. It should be noted, however, that Minnesota was not the only Big Ten school that had poor facilities. Bo Schembechler inherited a crumbling stadium and non-existent training facilities when he was hired in 1968. Michigan, however, had an innovative AD in Don Canham (sp?) and things changed immediately for the Wolverines, and the rest is history. (From 1968-77 the Big !0 was the Big 2 (Michigan and Ohio State), but Michigan State tied Ohio State for the Big 10 title in 1978 and then Iowa did so in 1981. Since that time every Big 10 team has gone to the Rose Bowl except Minnesota and Indiana.) Not surprising, all of the conference schools, including Indiana, have upgraded their training facilities and expanded or improved their stadiums. The U chose not to be competitive in so many ways for many years, and it's hard to play catch up, especially with the advent of major professional sports garnering most of the attention in the sports pages and over the air waves.

Getting back to 1950s, I believe there was envy and dislike among certain administrative/faculty members about the attention that the Gopher football program received in the 1930s and 1940s. They weren't alone in their envy and suspicion concerning college football. Notre Dame tried to deemphasize Irish football after Frank Leahy left the helm, but they changed their tune and their fortunes resurged with the hiring of Ara Parseghian. Minnesota, unlike Notre Dame or Michigan or Wisconsin or Iowa, etc., chose not to change course. As a result, a once proud tradition withered because of several years (decades) of neglect.

Professional football, until 1958, was considered an after thought - college football was what mattered. Times have changed, however; but Minnesota failed to change with the times and Gopher football is now an after thought at best. It'll take a lot of hard work, investment and winning seasons to change the sports scenery. A couple generations of potential fans have been lost.

Good topic. I look forward to reading more comments on the subject.

It would nice if a would be sports journalist (investigative reporter) would conduct an indepth study related to the demise of a once proud program. A Christmas wish that'll probably remain just that.

Go Gophers!!

DL65 said:

It would nice if a would be sports journalist (investigative reporter) would conduct an indepth study related to the demise of a once proud program. A Christmas wish that'll probably remain just that.

Go Gophers!!

Click to expand...

DL65, do you truly believe an investigative reporter, in the interest of the Rise and Fall of The Gopher Mystique, would actually work hard enough to raise such a controversial issue of interest to tens of thousands of us that really care?

I do NOT believe there is anyone ambitious enough to pursue such a complex subject.

I can only remember what once was, and is no longer at this point in time.

Something to think about...If the Vikes win or lose, it has no effect on my life.

Whether or not the Gophers win, be it in FB or BB, has an effect on my life.
If the Gophers win, I am ecstatic; if the Gophers lose, I am remorseful. If the Vikings win or lose, I don't care.

So I will repeat...

GO GOPHERS!!!

Every comment makes total sense. I agree with DL seeing a study would be a nice gift.

DL65 said:

It would nice if a would be sports journalist (investigative reporter) would conduct an indepth study related to the demise of a once proud program. A Christmas wish that'll probably remain just that.

Go Gophers!!

Click to expand...

I will actually go a little further and say it would be nice if the U of M would do that study, learn from it and start making changes based off the results.

There are many reasons for the decline of Gopher football since 1967 when they last won the Big 10 Championship. But it all comes down to the fact that four straight presidents (Malcom Moose, C. Peter McGrath, Ken Keller, and Nils Hasselmo) were allowed to deliberately de-emphasize or just plain neglect intercollegiate sports at the U from 1967 when O. Meredith Wilson left office until 1997 when Mark Yudof became president.

WHO allowed those four presidents to get away with this travesty? The answer is easy - the Gopher fan base and one of the largest college alumni groups in America. We have met the enemy and he is us.

WHY we allowed the people who run the U to get with it is a much more complex answer. But there is no denying that the Vikings four Super Bowls, four conference championships, and 18 division championships since 1968 played a huge role.

Lakeville Goldy said:

I will actually go a little further and say it would be nice if the U of M would do that study, learn from it and start making changes based off the results.

Click to expand...

I agree. Understanding what caused a problem should improve the chances of effectively dealing with it.

The Vikings were a huge downer for the U program and a series of really bad coaching hires made things worse (Salem, Gutekunst, Wacker, Brewster); the two-platoon system hurt, too, as did the lack of facilities and a decaying stadium. But I'd put the Vikings at the top - even Nebraska would decline in attendance and income if, for example, Omaha got a pro franchise.

Great Plains Gopher said:

The Vikings were a huge downer for the U program and a series of really bad coaching hires made things worse (Salem, Gutekunst, Wacker, Brewster); the two-platoon system hurt, too, as did the lack of facilities and a decaying stadium. But I'd put the Vikings at the top - even Nebraska would decline in attendance and income if, for example, Omaha got a pro franchise.

Click to expand...

+1

We know what needs to happen. GH needs to keep involved with the U to keep the team and game as an athletic program priority. 'nuff said.

The little darlings do make a huge difference. Of course most of the fan base are borderline alcoholics, malcontents, and proably a few felons mixed in

I don't get the blaming the Vikings card. So many other states have pro football and major college football and fans support both products. I've never heard of the college fans of say Wisconsin hating the Packers the way some of our fans hate the Vikings. There are a lot more people in Minnesota than Nebraska or Iowa, so Minnesota should be able to support two teams the way a similar sized state like Wisconsin does.

I don't know enough about the de-emphasis of athletics under past presidents at the University of Minnesota, but I do think that Minnesotan's strangely don't want to acknowledge that college sports at the B1G level are essentially pro sports (probably why some also hate the Vikings?). It's all the same, it's an entertainment product that requires vast amounts of money to be put in to the product to make it successful. That means building palaces for the teams to practice in, nice dorms for the players to sleep in, and turning a blind eye to a kid who's driving a new model SUV or who has gained 30lbs and cut his 40 by .15 in an offseason. At Iowa they kept Kirk Ferentz (and his strength coach!) after workouts put more than a dozen kids in the hospital. There is ZERO chance a coach keeps his job at Minnesota under the same circumstances. College football and basketball are a big business and Minnesota has never seemed to get on board with that culture change that occurred in the 80's. If the University wanted to compete in the marketplace it would offer an obscene salary to an established coach and start to build the types of facilities that our competitors have. Instead, the past two head coaches have been hired at bottom of the Big Ten salaries. A sad example is the North Carolina fiasco. Instead of being outraged at Jerry Kill/Minnesota for not expecting to be able to defeat North Carolina in year 3 of his tenure, a larger number of Minnesotan's were outraged at the $800K it cost for Jerry to tuck his tail between his legs. It's not that $800 K is an insignificant amount of money, but it illustrates the difficulties in getting a mandatory $20 million dollar basketball practice facility built in Minnesota or paying 3 million a year (or more) to bring in a football coach who has won at the high major level.

Good discussion and points!

Dr. Don,
No. I don't expect there's a would be investigative reporter (not from the Twin Cities two periodcals) to look into the start and cause of Minnesota's downward spiral. (That's why I said it'll remain a wish.) That said, maybe someday there'll be a definitive sports history book on Gopher football that would address the topic. (Again, I can hope.)

Go4Broke,
Your point about presidents Malcolm Moos, C. Peter McGrath, Ken Keller and Nils Hasselmo is well taken. I would add the turnover of ADs (lack of continuity and some weak leadership) has been a problem as well. I didn't agree with the dismissals of Warmath and Stoll: coaching was not the problem, but the lack of adequate financial and administrative support were most definitely major factors in the degression of the storied program.

Your's and Great Plains Gopher's point about the arrival and success of the Vikings is also duly noted and taken. However, it must be noted that other schools with major league franchises at their doorsteps have enjoyed success, including national championships since 1967: Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Miami, Washington, and USC. (There location(s) for college football recruiting can not be ignored, however.) Nevertheless, the college team will always take a backseat to the local pro team in sports coverage. The NFL has a powerful marketing system.

But as I said in my earlier contribution to this thread, Minnesota's problems began before the 1960s, and I submit they kept growing and growing right into the late sixties, seventies, eighties and nineties.

In Allen Barra's "The Last Coach: A Life of Paul 'Bear' Bryant" we're told Bryant was interviewed for the Minnesota job after the 1950 season (Bierman's last year). On page 156, first paragraph of Chapter 5 (Gone to Texas) Barra wrote: "The falling out with Kentucky could not have come at a worse time for Bryant. In the last few seasons, he had turned down offers from Arkansas, Alabama, Southern California, and Minnesota, to name just the most prominent schools that approached him."

When Bryant declined the Minnesota job, he reportedly said (paraphrasing) there were problems in the Northland. Some have claimed he said land of the giants. In any case, he was referring to Minnesota's internal difficulties that he found troubling.

Many years ago, Sid Hartman, if my memory serves me correctly, alluded to administrative problems in the 1950s that adversely impacted the Gopher program. It's too bad, given his many sources of years ago - many now deceased - he could have written an informative expose.

That's my take, FWIW.

Go Gophers!!

Nomellini said:

Hate to say it but integration greatly curtailed the exodus of top black players to Minnesota and the rest of the conference. It fueled the rise of the SEC and contributed to the decline of the Big 10 to its present state.

Click to expand...

Ding ding ding. Minnesota's fortunes fell with the rise of the black athlete, particularly when he was allowed to play closer to home. It's primarily an issue of demographics, and equally explains why we win National Championships in hockey and wrestling, and Alabama doesn't (besides the fact that they don't even bother to try, of course)

Though some programs (Nebraska) have overcome it, the vast majority of the great programs are able to recruit the majority of their team close to home; we can't do that. That's not a terribly popular answer because it's not PC, and there isn't much to do about it, but that's our biggest problem. We just lost a recruit to USF for cripes sake, presumably because he didn't want to leave his Tampa home.

Gopherprof said:

Ding ding ding. Minnesota's fortunes fell with the rise of the black athlete, particularly when he was allowed to play closer to home. It's primarily an issue of demographics, and equally explains why we win National Championships in hockey and wrestling, and Alabama doesn't (besides the fact that they don't even bother to try, of course)

Though some programs (Nebraska) have overcome it, the vast majority of the great programs are able to recruit the majority of their team close to home; we can't do that. That's not a terribly popular answer because it's not PC, and there isn't much to do about it, but that's our biggest problem. We just lost a recruit to USF for cripes sake, presumably because he didn't want to leave his Tampa home.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but then why do programs like Wisconsin and Nebraska prosper? Moreover, I think the regional talent pool is better than many believe, and, within our region, we have little in the way of BCS competition for recruits.

"WHY we allowed the people who run the U to get with it is a much more complex answer. But there is no denying that the Vikings four Super Bowls, four conference championships, and 18 division championships since 1968 played a huge role."

Certainly.

vagopher said:

Perhaps, but then why do programs like Wisconsin and Nebraska prosper? Moreover, I think the regional talent pool is better than many believe, and, within our region, we have little in the way of BCS competition for recruits.

Click to expand...

Nebraska prospers because they've historically had a pipeline to Texas like no other; in the long run, the move to the B1G may bite them in the ass in that regard. I think Wisconsin has seen the absolute limit of their ceiling, and I'd hardly consider them a true national power. Lastly, while you can point to Nebraska, Wisconsin (or arguably Boise State as well), those are by far the exceptions to the rule, not the rule. I'm not saying it can't be done, but recruiting disadvantages is one main reason why Minnesota has languished for 40+ years.

I actually agree with you about the local talent, but the level of talent seems to be pretty shallow every year, especially at the skill positions. The local support for football simply isn't that high. If you're a local you'll have to trust me on that. I grew up in Ohio, where football is the one true sport and everything else is a diversion; Minnesota is nothing like that.

If we get 7 Minnesota scholarship kids per year (a high # on average), that leaves us with 60-70% of our scholarship roster to be filled out from elsewhere, which is exceedingly difficult to do properly when "elsewhere" is 1,500 miles away and we're one of 20 similar programs after the same kid.

Gopherprof said:

Nebraska prospers because they've historically had a pipeline to Texas like no other; in the long run, the move to the B1G may bite them in the ass in that regard. I think Wisconsin has seen the absolute limit of their ceiling, and I'd hardly consider them a true national power. Lastly, while you can point to Nebraska, Wisconsin (or arguably Boise State as well), those are by far the exceptions to the rule, not the rule. I'm not saying it can't be done, but recruiting disadvantages is one main reason why Minnesota has languished for 40+ years.

I actually agree with you about the local talent, but the level of talent seems to be pretty shallow every year, especially at the skill positions. The local support for football simply isn't that high. If you're a local you'll have to trust me on that. I grew up in Ohio, where football is the one true sport and everything else is a diversion; Minnesota is nothing like that.

If we get 7 Minnesota scholarship kids per year (a high # on average), that leaves us with 60-70% of our scholarship roster to be filled out from elsewhere, which is exceedingly difficult to do properly when "elsewhere" is 1,500 miles away and we're one of 20 similar programs after the same kid.

Click to expand...

I agree that there is not the commitment to football in Minnesota and environs that exists in other parts of the country, especially in the south. I have, in fact, lived on both coasts and in the south, but I think that is somewhat mitigated by the fact that for a large area we are the closest BCS school. I also think that MSP has a level of amenities that should help in recruiting, the cold climate notwithstanding. In case you missed it, Phil Miller - soon to be reassigned Gopher beat reporter - had a thoughtful article on point in Wednesday's Star Tribune. I think the basic point being that it will not be easy to restore the kind of winning tradition that we had decades ago, and I agree with that. Nevertheless, I think it is possible to do so.

Nomellini said:

Hate to say it but integration greatly curtailed the exodus of top black players to Minnesota and the rest of the conference. It fueled the rise of the SEC and contributed to the decline of the Big 10 to its present state.

Click to expand...

I'm going to disagree with this point. If this was the reason, then it wouldn't have affected us disproportionately more than other conference teams - especially Wisconsin and/or Iowa. In relative terms we were a top 3 or 4 Big Ten Team from 1900 to 1967 and we've been a bottom 3 or 4 team since then. If is is because of a lack of Black players, then apparently they just stopped coming to Minnesota, but continued to enroll at other northern schools. i don't think so.

Go Gophers Rah said:

I'm going to disagree with this point. If this was the reason, then it wouldn't have affected us disproportionately more than other conference teams - especially Wisconsin and/or Iowa. In relative terms we were a top 3 or 4 Big Ten Team from 1900 to 1967 and we've been a bottom 3 or 4 team since then. If is is because of a lack of Black players, then apparently they just stopped coming to Minnesota, but continued to enroll at other northern schools. i don't think so.

Click to expand...

Really?

There are far more black people across the midwest than there are in Minnesota. Even in Wisconsin, a state usually imagined as lily white, there are almost 100k more black people than in Minnesota (a significant difference when you consider that Minnesota only has 274k total African-Americans). Illinois has 1.8 million black people. Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania all have 1.4 million. Even Indiana has 600k. It's silly to consider all of the midwest equal in that regard.

The only traditional Big Ten state with less black people than Minnesota is Iowa, and Iowa has drawn heavily from nearby Chicago in their recruiting.

The day Wilbur Jackson accepted a scholarship offer from the University of Alabama changed the recruiting world for a lot of Northern teams, especially the Gophers, who had a great ability to recruit African-American players from all over the country (not just the South).

I lay most of the blame on the bad coaching hires post-Stoll (and one could argue that Warmath was driven out unfairly by the backers who wanted Stoll). More than the administration alone (which seems to be everyone's favorite set of whipping boys), I would argue that post-Giel, there has never been much coordination between the administration and the athletic department. The blame for that largely falls upon the administration, but there has been so much turnover at the athletic department post-Giel that it's been hard to get solid footing over there. Hopefully Teague sticks around for more than a year or two.

I can remember very distinctly when pres. Ken Keller declared that the U would "de-emphasize" the football program. The U was to become the "Harvard of the Midwest". It wasn't long after when we lost to Nebraska 84-0.
As Pogo said very eloquently "We have met the enemy, and they are us!"

surpher said:

I can remember very distinctly when pres. Ken Keller declared that the U would "de-emphasize" the football program. The U was to become the "Harvard of the Midwest". It wasn't long after when we lost to Nebraska 84-0.
As Pogo said very eloquently "We have met the enemy, and they are us!"

Click to expand...

Ken Keller was President of the U of M from 1985-1988. C. Peter Magrath was President in 1983 when we lost to Nebraska 84-13.

EG#9 said:

I don't get the blaming the Vikings card. So many other states have pro football and major college football and fans support both products. I've never heard of the college fans of say Wisconsin hating the Packers the way some of our fans hate the Vikings. There are a lot more people in Minnesota than Nebraska or Iowa, so Minnesota should be able to support two teams the way a similar sized state like Wisconsin does.

Click to expand...

Sorry you are wrong. Why? Green Bay, Madison and Milwaukee are all different markets supporting different teams. If the Gophers and Vikings were in different cities I believe the small college town would support them. Having the Packers and BADgers in different markets helps the BADgers.

vagopher said:

Perhaps, but then why do programs like Wisconsin and Nebraska prosper? Moreover, I think the regional talent pool is better than many believe, and, within our region, we have little in the way of BCS competition for recruits.

Click to expand...

I know everyone wants to think Minnesota has good football talent, but it just isn't so. Minnesota as a state has a very low percentage of players that make D1 FBS and a low absolute number.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/specialprojects/sports/starsearch/#intmap

In 2009 there were 82 Minnesota kids on any D1 FBS team. And I would bet that at least 1/2 if not 2/3 of them were on Minnesota.

Many of our best athletes play hockey and this ladies and gents may be one of the reasons why we are not seeing more football recruits in the state of Minnesota.

Gopherprof said:

Really?

There are far more black people across the midwest than there are in Minnesota. Even in Wisconsin, a state usually imagined as lily white, there are almost 100k more black people than in Minnesota (a significant difference when you consider that Minnesota only has 274k total African-Americans). Illinois has 1.8 million black people. Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania all have 1.4 million. Even Indiana has 600k. It's silly to consider all of the midwest equal in that regard.

The only traditional Big Ten state with less black people than Minnesota is Iowa, and Iowa has drawn heavily from nearby Chicago in their recruiting.

Click to expand...

Not to get on too much of a tangent,but does MPLS produce very many football players for being a good sized city? Doesn't seem like it to me. Other than Washburn, I can't think of any inter city schools producing talent. Maybe the youth level programs are not on par with other city programs? To me this is an area that both the Vikings and especially the Gophers could help with. Things like tickets for games and visits from players and coaches.