(02-25-2021 06:53 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Yeah, Temple had a list of problems. The lack of leadership and commitment to that level of football was the unforgivable one. I’m pretty sure that if Temple gave even a little more, much (like the venue and attendance) could be forgiven. Probably because committing more to the sport would have improved stuff like attendance. I know Philly gets this “pro town” label, but I suspect success would have gotten them good press and coverage in the region. It wouldn’t perhaps cringe as much when a Miami came to town.

Case in point with Rutgers. Irrelevant in football, maybe even more so than Temple, but investing in on-campus facilities earned them a pass, if not respect. Even if the product on the field took time to improve, and never consistently, they did what major programs do: spend and build. That initiative and commitment earned their permanence in the Big East (unlike Temple) and probably got them their Big Ten spot.

There was one year in the Big East where Temple had only 4 home games. Their attendance was only 17,000----for the entire year!

That was easily the worst attendance of any FBS school, at least since the 90s and probably since the I-AA split.