Author
Topic: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.
(Read 212373 times)

utee94 · « **Reply #2254 on:** **Today** at 10:43:02 AM »

Quote from: bayareabadger on Today at 10:41:15 AM

I was comparing metros. There’s 8 million or so Texans in the DFW. But they can only fill one mid-major stadium?

It’s almost like the metro area isn’t a determinant because the sport is richer and more dynamic than that.

Sort of, but not really. Compare living alumni in the LA area for USC and/or UCLA, and then living alumni in the Dallas area for SMU, and you're getting closer.

Most people in Dallas are fans of UT, A&M, OU, and Texas Tech. A handful are fans of TCU, SMU, or Baylor.

Again, add up average attendance for the top 10 schools in both states. That will give you a clearer picture.

847badgerfan · « **Reply #2255 on:** **Today** at 10:50:16 AM »

Northwestern is building a new stadiette, which will hold 35K people (that opposing fans will help them fill).

Much like MSP, Chicago is an NFL town.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #2256 on:** **Today** at 11:05:12 AM »

If similar interest is how New York State has little apparent affection for football other than pro. A lot of people, very few draft picks in football.

utee94 · « **Reply #2257 on:** **Today** at 11:05:16 AM »

Quote from: 847badgerfan on Today at 10:50:16 AM

Northwestern is building a new stadiette, which will hold 35K people (that opposing fans will help them fill).

Much like MSP, Chicago is an NFL town.

Yeah SMU rebuilt a relatively small stadium in 2000 and after subsequent renovations it seats about 32K but also has a TON of luxury suites and club level seats. They know how to cater to their richest base.

And the move to the ACC definitely increased attendance. In 2023 they averaged 22K but in 2024 it rose to capacity at 32K per game.

Gigem · « **Reply #2258 on:** **Today** at 11:05:53 AM »

Quote from: utee94 on Today at 10:36:58 AM

SMU got the death penalty in 1987 and it took them decades to recover. SMU is also a fairly small church school of 12,000 students. Comparing them to super-blue-blood USC (46K enrollment), or even to big state school UCLA (47K), is pretty silly. I can't think of a small private religious school in LA with a football team, but if there were one, then that's the appropriate comparison for SMU.

The appropriate comparisons for USC and UCLA are to UT and Texas A&M, each averaging 100K or more per game.

So if you really want to compare interest in college football in Texas compared to interest in college football in California, add up the average attendance of the top 10 schools in Texas versus the top 10 schools in California.

Not sure if it matters but you compared USC and UCLA to A&M and UT. FWIW USC is not a state school, it’s private.

utee94 · « **Reply #2259 on:** **Today** at 11:07:18 AM »

Quote from: Gigem on Today at 11:05:53 AM

Not sure if it matters but you compared USC and UCLA to A&M and UT. FWIW USC is not a state school, it’s private.

I don't think that really matters at all. USC is still 46K student enrollment and a true college football blueblood.

Gigem · « **Reply #2260 on:** **Today** at 11:09:14 AM »

SMU is just not a good example. I literally don’t even know of one single alumni, and very few Tshirt fans. TCU has had major success over the last 25 years and are located in the DFW metroplex and don’t fill their stadium either.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #2261 on:** **Today** at 11:12:39 AM »

Quote from: utee94 on Today at 10:43:02 AM

Sort of, but not really. Compare living alumni in the LA area for USC and/or UCLA, and then living alumni in the Dallas area for SMU, and you're getting closer.

Most people in Dallas are fans of UT, A&M, OU, and Texas Tech. A handful are fans of TCU, SMU, or Baylor.

Again, add up average attendance for the top 10 schools in both states. That will give you a clearer picture.

See, now we’re getting somewhere. Having millions of people around doesn’t really matter.

It’s the same reason Houston, a big school surrounded by Texans gets crushed in attendance by Fresno State, a school in Ca Farm country. There’s a rich tapestry to a fanbase and how it exists, is built and perpetuates.

I don’t need to add these things up in part because those numbers are all funny money. But it seems important say that Ca Schools, while definitely less supported, are done so for sort of rich and interesting reasons.

Perhaps that’s where I’m caught up. The answer is in part the state, but it’s more about the schools, their oddities.

utee94 · « **Reply #2262 on:** **Today** at 11:15:13 AM »

Quote from: Gigem on Today at 11:09:14 AM

SMU is just not a good example. I literally don’t even know of one single alumni, and very few Tshirt fans. TCU has had major success over the last 25 years and are located in the DFW metroplex and don’t fill their stadium either.

Well the real problem is the falsa analogy originally made comparing SMU which is at best the 6th or 7th most popular football team in Texas, to USC and UCLA which are easily the top 2 brands in California.

I don't even know what the #6 or #7 brand in California college football would be, but whatever it is, that's the appropriate comparison.

What's behind USC, UCLA, Stanford, and Berkley? Fresno State? San Diego State? SMU's comparison would come at the end of all of those.

bayareabadger · « **Reply #2263 on:** **Today** at 11:16:28 AM »

Quote from: Gigem on Today at 11:09:14 AM

SMU is just not a good example. I literally don’t even know of one single alumni, and very few Tshirt fans. TCU has had major success over the last 25 years and are located in the DFW metroplex and don’t fill their stadium either.

I thought TCU was pretty close, or I would’ve been banging on that too.

I think the point is that school matters more than place. So if we want to say, why is UCLA or USC not Texas, that’s a chat to have. Honestly a more interesting one.

utee94 · « **Reply #2264 on:** **Today** at 11:17:09 AM »

Quote from: bayareabadger on Today at 11:12:39 AM

See, now we’re getting somewhere. Having millions of people around doesn’t really matter.

It’s the same reason Houston, a big school surrounded by Texans gets crushed in attendance by Fresno State, a school in Ca Farm country. There’s a rich tapestry to a fanbase and how it exists, is built and perpetuates.

I don’t need to add these things up in part because those numbers are all funny money. But it seems important say that Ca Schools, while definitely less supported, are done so for sort of rich and interesting reasons.

Perhaps that’s where I’m caught up. The answer is in part the state, but it’s more about the schools, their oddities.

If the top two brands in Texas were located in DFW, the attendance numbers wouldn't drop to UCLA or USC levels. That's where the size of the metro matters. LA should be able to easily support the two most important brands in California. And yet it doesn't.

utee94 · « **Reply #2265 on:** **Today** at 11:20:53 AM »

And once again, I have no idea why you're attempting to argue against the original point that Californians just don't care about college football as much as other regions. Texas is one of them, but not the only one. This is widely known, it's not some new and surprising revelation.

It's one of the main drivers that led to the ultimate demise of the PAC-- and interestingly enough, why I always told PiratesRoost that the B12 was better situated to survive conference Armageddon than was the PAC. People in B12 area just care more about college football. They attend well but more importantly for conference realignment, they watch it on TV more.

To echo you, a more interesting discussion would be WHY Californians don't care as much about college football. That would be a discussion worth having.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #2266 on:** **Today** at 11:21:47 AM »

81 San Diego State 24,770

58 California 39,173

54 Fresno State 40,600

49 UCLA 46,805

19 USC 71,571

I'll throw Tech in there for comparison, large university, large metro area, attendance perked by visiting fans often as not ...

61 Georgia Tech 38,216

bayareabadger · « **Reply #2267 on:** **Today** at 11:26:31 AM »

Quote from: utee94 on Today at 11:17:09 AM

If the top two brands in Texas were located in DFW, the attendance numbers wouldn't drop to UCLA or USC levels. That's where the size of the metro matters. LA should be able to easily support the two most important brands in California. And yet it doesn't.

Ahhh, and now we’re getting somewhere even better.

Those top two Texas brands aren’t in major metros. And there’s a good chance their growth as brands exists in no small part because they’re not in major metros.

Major metros are by and large bad for CFB. I assume California would lag in this category no matter what. But the very structure of where its schools are and what they are all but determines their fate, which is fine and interesting.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

847badgerfan

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

Cincydawg

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

Gigem

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

Gigem

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

bayareabadger

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

bayareabadger

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

utee94

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

Cincydawg

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.

bayareabadger

Re: The Death of College Football - Realignment, NIL, Portal, Etc.