ARLINGTON, Texas—Across the nation, the sounds of crunching pads and loud cheers fill the air as college football gets off to another roaring start.
From 1959-1985, those sounds were enjoyed at the University of Texas at Arlington. But what was once a staple of campus life now lives only in memory and in the many ripple effects that led to the football program’s closure.
Program’s beginnings
Football at UTA can trace its roots back to 1919, when the school was known as Grubbs Vocational College. A few decades later, the school become Arlington State College and transitioned into a senior college in 1949. The team competed as the Arlington State Rebels. The program began to compete in the NCAA College Division II in 1959.
In March 1967, the university adopted its current name, and the team was known as the UT Arlington Rebels. A few years later, the school dropped the controversial Rebel mascot theme and adopted the Mavericks moniker. The team began playing in NCAA Division I competition in 1971.
While the team had an all-time losing record with a .463 winning percentage, the UTA football program won three conference championships in the 1966, 1967 and 1981 seasons. The team also won its first and only bowl game, winning the 1967 Pecan Bowl against the North Dakota State Bison.
The fumble that couldn’t be recovered
But without sustained success, the university on Nov. 25, 1985, decided to discontinue the football program. Low attendance stemming from a lack of engagement from students and the community, and the massive debt the program accumulated through the years, contributed to the decision. Another factor was that football required so much money that other sports could not be adequately funded.
![AR406-6 08/20/1985 #8199 [frame 14]](https://arlingtonsentinel.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/10008876.jpg)
“We just had a loser’s image hanging over the whole program,” UTA President Wendell Nedderman said at the time. “I found that unsatisfactory.”
Despite playing in a $6 million, 12,000-seat stadium, the team averaged fewer than about 7,000 fans per game in the last few years of the program. The program was operating at a $955,000 annual deficit, and it consumed about half of the athletic department’s budget.
The response from the community
While the decision drew heat from some quarters, some faculty and alumni saw the move as a step that could help improve other sports programs and maximize scholarships for student-athletes.
“I believe if some of the people objecting to this so verbally would take some time to think how many scholarships or other things could be done with this one million plus each year,” Jame T. Brown said.
Others expressed a more academics-first sentiment.
“Far too many people think of universities in terms of the prowess of their athletic teams,” Arthur E. Wible wrote in the Dallas Times Herald. “They forget that a school’s best overall measure is to be found, not in any win-loss record, but in the academic credentials of its faculty and students.”
The immediate reaction was emotional, with some criticizing the way Nedderman and the university came to the decision to end the football program. Head coach Chuck Curtis, considered one of Texas’ best high school football minds, had only recently taken over the team. Supporters believed he wasn’t given enough time to rebuild the struggling program, only having served as coach for one season before the program ended.
Another common complaint was that the university withheld from the public that the program was in such a dire state. Many alumni and community members came forward to complain that they would have helped financially and shown up to games to help the program recover from the debt that had accumulated.
“I do not recall receiving any information stating the financial situation of the program as in a mailer stating such difficulties and seeking help as does the business school seek donations,” Randall W. Garrett said.
Some of UTA’s biggest donors, such as Tom Cravens, pulled their financial support following the announcement.
“I was a major supporter, and sports is what I supported more than anything else,” Cravens told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “But I doubt we support the university to the level we used to.”
A Hail Mary
Despite a community-led effort, which included former Arlington Mayor Tom Vandergriff and the Maverick Club raising more than $300,000 in pledges, Athletic Director Bill Reeves estimated the $750,000-per-year needed to restart football was too high a mountain to climb. The university stood firm in its decision with the focus moving toward improving the rest of the athletic department.
In the years that followed, UTA reallocated funding across its athletic programs—sparking an athletic renaissance. Between 1985–86 and 1990–91, every sport saw significant budget increases.
Men’s basketball funding rose 45.5%, women’s basketball saw a 94.4% increase, and volleyball’s budget more than doubled. Track and field, softball, baseball, golf and tennis all received significant boosts.
Tangible benefits
The benefits were also tangible. For example, the volleyball team added an assistant coach for the first time, and it saw an increase in its travel budget from $21,000 to $35,000. The volleyball team was now able to offer the NCAA-maximum 12 scholarships to athletes. Baseball refurbished its field and expanded scholarships from four to 13. Both the men’s and women’s basketball teams added assistant coaches to help improve their teams.
UTA at the time boasted seven men’s and six women’s NCAA Division I sports. Many teams were able to offer full scholarships, and the women’s volleyball team made back-to-back NCAA tournament appearances, finishing the 1986 season ranked No. 17 nationally.
“True, women’s volleyball does not get the publicity as does football,” Nedderman said in a 1989 interview. “But what publicity we do get projects UTA as a winner.”
Maverick Stadium gets new life
The stadium that once hosted UTA football found new life. By 1989, it hosted The Athletic Congress’ National Track Championships, attracting more than 3,000 athletes. The Arlington Independent School District signed a 10-year, $150,000 contract to use the venue, including more than 110 soccer and football games for the 1988-1989 school year.
Though football is long gone, the debate over its place at UTA still lingers. Some say the decision brought clarity and balance to a growing university. Others feel a piece of its spirit was lost. But few deny that UTA athletics across nearly every other sport has grown stronger in the absence of its most expensive and least supported program.
Still, some said the team’s absence underscored its importance to campus life.
“I think if we ever had a football team again, we’d appreciate it more, having gone without one,” said Ruth Davis, then-executive director of the Maverick Club.
As of today, there are no official plans to reinstate football though some students want to bring it back. But the lessons of 1985 remain as a reminder of the importance of supporting university athletics and being involved in campus life.
To hear an audio version of this story, please click here.
Arlington 150 is an occasional series to mark Arlington’s sesquicentennial and is produced as part of a collaboration between the University of Texas at Arlington Libraries Special Collections and UTA journalism students. This series was made possible in part by a generous Teaching in the Archives grant from UTA Libraries.
