02-29-2020, 10:21 PM
The CardBoard
/
C-House!
/
The CardBoard
/
Pac-12 schools discussing commissioner Larry Scott's future
Pac-12 schools discussing commissioner Larry Scott's future
03-01-2020, 04:51 AM
Can someone please enlighten me how modifying transfer rules is so complicated? I’m having trouble understanding what could possibly make deciding to allow athletes a one-time transfer without sitting out a year ever be couched in “are just beginning the process of discussing” language. Shouldn’t this be the conference office draws up some simple language and the CEOs simply vote yea or nay?
Can someone please enlighten me how modifying transfer rules is so complicated? I’m having trouble understanding what could possibly make deciding to allow athletes a one-time transfer without sitting out a year ever be couched in “are just beginning the process of discussing” language. Shouldn’t this be the conference office draws up some simple language and the CEOs simply vote yea or nay?
03-01-2020, 08:13 AM
(03-01-2020, 04:51 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Can someone please enlighten me how modifying transfer rules is so complicated? I’m having trouble understanding what could possibly make deciding to allow athletes a one-time transfer without sitting out a year ever be couched in “are just beginning the process of discussing” language. Shouldn’t this be the conference office draws up some simple language and the CEOs simply vote yea or nay?
given that in all but 5 Div 1 sports (football (FBS), MBB, WBB, Baseball, men's Ice Hockey) you can transfer once with no penalty you'd think this would be pretty easy.....
http://www.ncaa.org/student-athletes/cur...sfer-terms
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(03-01-2020, 04:51 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Can someone please enlighten me how modifying transfer rules is so complicated? I’m having trouble understanding what could possibly make deciding to allow athletes a one-time transfer without sitting out a year ever be couched in “are just beginning the process of discussing” language. Shouldn’t this be the conference office draws up some simple language and the CEOs simply vote yea or nay?
given that in all but 5 Div 1 sports (football (FBS), MBB, WBB, Baseball, men's Ice Hockey) you can transfer once with no penalty you'd think this would be pretty easy.....
http://www.ncaa.org/student-athletes/cur...sfer-terms
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
03-01-2020, 08:27 AM
(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
Pay wall. Pop up tells me I've reached my monthly limit of free articles, which apparently is zero, as it's early morning on March 1st and I've just fired up the computer.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
Pay wall. Pop up tells me I've reached my monthly limit of free articles, which apparently is zero, as it's early morning on March 1st and I've just fired up the computer.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
03-01-2020, 08:32 AM
(03-01-2020, 08:27 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
Pay wall. Pop up tells me I've reached my monthly limit of free articles, which apparently is zero, as it's early morning on March 1st and I've just fired up the computer.
Pro tip: use a different browser or re-set, clear all cookies, etc.
Basically, the gist is Scott isn't thinking about extension yet, with two years remaining on his contract. Pac-12 bosses will be voting shortly on whether they will extend or not. Even though 2024 media rights seem a long way off, it will take some time to recruit a replacement should they want one. And, there is a long lead time up to media deal negotiation.
(03-01-2020, 08:27 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
Pay wall. Pop up tells me I've reached my monthly limit of free articles, which apparently is zero, as it's early morning on March 1st and I've just fired up the computer.
Pro tip: use a different browser or re-set, clear all cookies, etc.
Basically, the gist is Scott isn't thinking about extension yet, with two years remaining on his contract. Pac-12 bosses will be voting shortly on whether they will extend or not. Even though 2024 media rights seem a long way off, it will take some time to recruit a replacement should they want one. And, there is a long lead time up to media deal negotiation.
03-01-2020, 08:39 AM
(03-01-2020, 08:32 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(03-01-2020, 08:27 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
Pay wall. Pop up tells me I've reached my monthly limit of free articles, which apparently is zero, as it's early morning on March 1st and I've just fired up the computer.
Pro tip: use a different browser or re-set, clear all cookies, etc.
Reality tip: An article in the Merc probably isn't worth the inconvenience.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
(03-01-2020, 08:32 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(03-01-2020, 08:27 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
Pay wall. Pop up tells me I've reached my monthly limit of free articles, which apparently is zero, as it's early morning on March 1st and I've just fired up the computer.
Pro tip: use a different browser or re-set, clear all cookies, etc.
Reality tip: An article in the Merc probably isn't worth the inconvenience.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
03-01-2020, 02:37 PM
(03-01-2020, 11:00 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(03-01-2020, 08:39 AM)cardcrimson Wrote: Reality tip: An article in the Merc probably isn't worth the inconvenience.
Wilner does a pretty decent job of covering Pac-12 business issues.
...and a horrible job of covering, you know, Pac-12 sports.
03-02-2020, 06:01 AM
(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
I really hope they come to the blindingly obvious conclusion...
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(02-29-2020, 10:21 PM)yvonne Wrote: From the Mercury News
I really hope they come to the blindingly obvious conclusion...
Audaces fortuna iuvat
03-02-2020, 01:18 PM
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...otice.html
I doubt USC would leave and go independent, but it's quite a shot across the bow (ditto suggestions that Oregon should also explore its options). While I don't expect anything to actually happen, the possibility that the Pac-12 breaks up or loses important teams cannot be discounted.
BC
I doubt USC would leave and go independent, but it's quite a shot across the bow (ditto suggestions that Oregon should also explore its options). While I don't expect anything to actually happen, the possibility that the Pac-12 breaks up or loses important teams cannot be discounted.
BC
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2020/0...otice.html
I doubt USC would leave and go independent, but it's quite a shot across the bow (ditto suggestions that Oregon should also explore its options). While I don't expect anything to actually happen, the possibility that the Pac-12 breaks up or loses important teams cannot be discounted.
BC
I doubt USC would leave and go independent, but it's quite a shot across the bow (ditto suggestions that Oregon should also explore its options). While I don't expect anything to actually happen, the possibility that the Pac-12 breaks up or loses important teams cannot be discounted.
BC
03-02-2020, 02:55 PM
IMO...
Oregon may be a strong brand, but it doesn't come close to the audience USC commands. Oregon needs the Pac-12. USC does not.
That said, as much as USC football could be a force, it is mitigated greatly by what you do with all the other sports. The Pac-12 will tell USC if it leaves for football, all the rest of its sports are out of the conference too. Good luck being an independent in MBB, WBB and Swimming.
Notre Dame was forced to join a conference for all sports but football, but since it was never in one before, it could get away with only a football scheduling commitment, not a full conference membership for football. USC simply doesn't have this option. So to me this is posturing by USC that voices frustration. I don't know what point it really serves other than like a baby crying, and for Bohn to let USC peeps see he is trying as the new guy on the block.
As for Conzano writing about this, it's clickbait.
Oregon may be a strong brand, but it doesn't come close to the audience USC commands. Oregon needs the Pac-12. USC does not.
That said, as much as USC football could be a force, it is mitigated greatly by what you do with all the other sports. The Pac-12 will tell USC if it leaves for football, all the rest of its sports are out of the conference too. Good luck being an independent in MBB, WBB and Swimming.
Notre Dame was forced to join a conference for all sports but football, but since it was never in one before, it could get away with only a football scheduling commitment, not a full conference membership for football. USC simply doesn't have this option. So to me this is posturing by USC that voices frustration. I don't know what point it really serves other than like a baby crying, and for Bohn to let USC peeps see he is trying as the new guy on the block.
As for Conzano writing about this, it's clickbait.
IMO...
Oregon may be a strong brand, but it doesn't come close to the audience USC commands. Oregon needs the Pac-12. USC does not.
That said, as much as USC football could be a force, it is mitigated greatly by what you do with all the other sports. The Pac-12 will tell USC if it leaves for football, all the rest of its sports are out of the conference too. Good luck being an independent in MBB, WBB and Swimming.
Notre Dame was forced to join a conference for all sports but football, but since it was never in one before, it could get away with only a football scheduling commitment, not a full conference membership for football. USC simply doesn't have this option. So to me this is posturing by USC that voices frustration. I don't know what point it really serves other than like a baby crying, and for Bohn to let USC peeps see he is trying as the new guy on the block.
As for Conzano writing about this, it's clickbait.
Oregon may be a strong brand, but it doesn't come close to the audience USC commands. Oregon needs the Pac-12. USC does not.
That said, as much as USC football could be a force, it is mitigated greatly by what you do with all the other sports. The Pac-12 will tell USC if it leaves for football, all the rest of its sports are out of the conference too. Good luck being an independent in MBB, WBB and Swimming.
Notre Dame was forced to join a conference for all sports but football, but since it was never in one before, it could get away with only a football scheduling commitment, not a full conference membership for football. USC simply doesn't have this option. So to me this is posturing by USC that voices frustration. I don't know what point it really serves other than like a baby crying, and for Bohn to let USC peeps see he is trying as the new guy on the block.
As for Conzano writing about this, it's clickbait.
03-02-2020, 05:31 PM
Could you imagine a scenario where the Big-12 looks to go to a 12-team league and wants USC plus one to get there?
BC
BC
Could you imagine a scenario where the Big-12 looks to go to a 12-team league and wants USC plus one to get there?
BC
BC
03-02-2020, 05:51 PM
(03-02-2020, 05:31 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Could you imagine a scenario where the Big-12 looks to go to a 12-team league and wants USC plus one to get there?I don't really think so, for the following reasons:
BC
-The Big 12 is the conference least well off after the PAC-12 and ACC, and barely so. So not likely to get much more money, and the media markets in the Big 12 are even worse.
-I can't see a universe where U$C buys into a conference in which it's automatically second banana to Texas and the Longhorn Network.
-The part of U$C that doesn't care about sports is also not going to be excited about the significant drop-off in academic prestige and selectivity. After UT, the dropoff is much starker. And I feel like the Baylor and TCU religious affiliation thing is going to irk a lot of U$C admins, etc.
-Losing the in-conference rivalries with UCLA, Stanford, and to some degree C.al will matter to a lot of U$C fans/alums. Other than UT, and maaaaybe Oklahoma, who do the Toejams get hyped up to play? Kansas? Oklahoma State? Baylor?
-As bad as some PAC-12 travel is (I see you, Pullman, WA), Big 12 is arguably worse because nearly all the schools outside of UT have extremely limited direct flights from LA, and none of the schools are a bus ride away.
(03-02-2020, 05:31 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Could you imagine a scenario where the Big-12 looks to go to a 12-team league and wants USC plus one to get there?I don't really think so, for the following reasons:
BC
-The Big 12 is the conference least well off after the PAC-12 and ACC, and barely so. So not likely to get much more money, and the media markets in the Big 12 are even worse.
-I can't see a universe where U$C buys into a conference in which it's automatically second banana to Texas and the Longhorn Network.
-The part of U$C that doesn't care about sports is also not going to be excited about the significant drop-off in academic prestige and selectivity. After UT, the dropoff is much starker. And I feel like the Baylor and TCU religious affiliation thing is going to irk a lot of U$C admins, etc.
-Losing the in-conference rivalries with UCLA, Stanford, and to some degree C.al will matter to a lot of U$C fans/alums. Other than UT, and maaaaybe Oklahoma, who do the Toejams get hyped up to play? Kansas? Oklahoma State? Baylor?
-As bad as some PAC-12 travel is (I see you, Pullman, WA), Big 12 is arguably worse because nearly all the schools outside of UT have extremely limited direct flights from LA, and none of the schools are a bus ride away.
03-02-2020, 06:17 PM
(03-02-2020, 05:51 PM)2006alum Wrote:(03-02-2020, 05:31 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Could you imagine a scenario where the Big-12 looks to go to a 12-team league and wants USC plus one to get there?I don't really think so, for the following reasons:
BC
-The Big 12 is the conference least well off after the PAC-12 and ACC, and barely so. So not likely to get much more money, and the media markets in the Big 12 are even worse.
-I can't see a universe where U$C buys into a conference in which it's automatically second banana to Texas and the Longhorn Network.
-The part of U$C that doesn't care about sports is also not going to be excited about the significant drop-off in academic prestige and selectivity. After UT, the dropoff is much starker. And I feel like the Baylor and TCU religious affiliation thing is going to irk a lot of U$C admins, etc.
-Losing the in-conference rivalries with UCLA, Stanford, and to some degree C.al will matter to a lot of U$C fans/alums. Other than UT, and maaaaybe Oklahoma, who do the Toejams get hyped up to play? Kansas? Oklahoma State? Baylor?
-As bad as some PAC-12 travel is (I see you, Pullman, WA), Big 12 is arguably worse because nearly all the schools outside of UT have extremely limited direct flights from LA, and none of the schools are a bus ride away.
Probably true, though
1) The Big-12 plus two of the top Pac-12 schools will be significantly better off than the current Pac-12
2) Agree
3) I have to laugh that the school most implicated in the college admissions scandal would have a leg to stand on here, but USC does care about the prestige aspect, so I will give you that. USC cares about the appearance of academics more so than actual academics, so I will give you that point. On the religious question, remember that USC was originally the USC Methodists, and though it doesn't make much of its religious affiliation any more, there is a historic aspect to it.
4) Agree
5) Agree, though not something that could not be overcome with money.
So, mostly I agree with you. However, if it looks like the Pac-12 is a sinking ship, I could see SC bailing despite the above.
BC
(03-02-2020, 05:51 PM)2006alum Wrote:(03-02-2020, 05:31 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Could you imagine a scenario where the Big-12 looks to go to a 12-team league and wants USC plus one to get there?I don't really think so, for the following reasons:
BC
-The Big 12 is the conference least well off after the PAC-12 and ACC, and barely so. So not likely to get much more money, and the media markets in the Big 12 are even worse.
-I can't see a universe where U$C buys into a conference in which it's automatically second banana to Texas and the Longhorn Network.
-The part of U$C that doesn't care about sports is also not going to be excited about the significant drop-off in academic prestige and selectivity. After UT, the dropoff is much starker. And I feel like the Baylor and TCU religious affiliation thing is going to irk a lot of U$C admins, etc.
-Losing the in-conference rivalries with UCLA, Stanford, and to some degree C.al will matter to a lot of U$C fans/alums. Other than UT, and maaaaybe Oklahoma, who do the Toejams get hyped up to play? Kansas? Oklahoma State? Baylor?
-As bad as some PAC-12 travel is (I see you, Pullman, WA), Big 12 is arguably worse because nearly all the schools outside of UT have extremely limited direct flights from LA, and none of the schools are a bus ride away.
Probably true, though
1) The Big-12 plus two of the top Pac-12 schools will be significantly better off than the current Pac-12
2) Agree
3) I have to laugh that the school most implicated in the college admissions scandal would have a leg to stand on here, but USC does care about the prestige aspect, so I will give you that. USC cares about the appearance of academics more so than actual academics, so I will give you that point. On the religious question, remember that USC was originally the USC Methodists, and though it doesn't make much of its religious affiliation any more, there is a historic aspect to it.
4) Agree
5) Agree, though not something that could not be overcome with money.
So, mostly I agree with you. However, if it looks like the Pac-12 is a sinking ship, I could see SC bailing despite the above.
BC
(03-02-2020, 06:17 PM)BostonCard Wrote: So, mostly I agree with you. However, if it looks like the Pac-12 is a sinking ship, I could see SC bailing despite the above.
BC
All my poo-pooing aside, I certainly think it's in U$C's interest to make the strategic feint, both to get the media's attention, and to alert other schools that at least a few of the (money grubbing) natives are restless.
My long-term view remains unchanged, however: Larry Scott or no Larry Scott, it's not so much that the PAC-12 deal is underpriced, but that other conferences' deals are overpriced and ahistorical due to a temporary but unstable equilibrium in media consumption. Cord-cutting will beget cost-cutting, and provided Sling and other alternatives continue to emerge, the PAC-12 Network's market saturation will only improve over time. The bigger question is simply whether the IP rights the PAC-12 has retained are worth the cost efficiencies lost from not partnering with an ESPN or Fox Sports for production and distribution.
But, critically and more importantly, no media deal renegotiation will change the fact that folks in Arizona, California, and Colorado just don't care all that much about college sports, and Oregon, Utah, and Washington are not sufficiently populated (or rich) markets to draw brobdingnagian numbers of eyeballs (and Utah's biggest home team is arguably BYU, which is not even in the conference). Cal hoops << Warriors. Stanford football << Niners. UCLA << Lakers. Sun Devils << Cardinals. Buffs << Broncos. Etc.
At the end of the day, for the foreseeable future pro sports will likely dominate in the larger media markets along the big cities in the West Coast, and college sports will dominate the more rural and state-school-dominated SEC markets with no or bad pro sports teams. The midwest largely comfortably splits the difference and is in the middle on both fronts.
(03-02-2020, 06:17 PM)BostonCard Wrote: So, mostly I agree with you. However, if it looks like the Pac-12 is a sinking ship, I could see SC bailing despite the above.
BC
All my poo-pooing aside, I certainly think it's in U$C's interest to make the strategic feint, both to get the media's attention, and to alert other schools that at least a few of the (money grubbing) natives are restless.
My long-term view remains unchanged, however: Larry Scott or no Larry Scott, it's not so much that the PAC-12 deal is underpriced, but that other conferences' deals are overpriced and ahistorical due to a temporary but unstable equilibrium in media consumption. Cord-cutting will beget cost-cutting, and provided Sling and other alternatives continue to emerge, the PAC-12 Network's market saturation will only improve over time. The bigger question is simply whether the IP rights the PAC-12 has retained are worth the cost efficiencies lost from not partnering with an ESPN or Fox Sports for production and distribution.
But, critically and more importantly, no media deal renegotiation will change the fact that folks in Arizona, California, and Colorado just don't care all that much about college sports, and Oregon, Utah, and Washington are not sufficiently populated (or rich) markets to draw brobdingnagian numbers of eyeballs (and Utah's biggest home team is arguably BYU, which is not even in the conference). Cal hoops << Warriors. Stanford football << Niners. UCLA << Lakers. Sun Devils << Cardinals. Buffs << Broncos. Etc.
At the end of the day, for the foreseeable future pro sports will likely dominate in the larger media markets along the big cities in the West Coast, and college sports will dominate the more rural and state-school-dominated SEC markets with no or bad pro sports teams. The midwest largely comfortably splits the difference and is in the middle on both fronts.
03-02-2020, 07:48 PM
Completely agree. A few other things:
1.) Here is the US population by time zone:
Eastern: 150 million (47%)
Central: 92 million (29%)
Mountain: 21 million (7%)
Pacific: 53 million (17%)
So events held in the Pac-12 footprint are in the same time zone as ~1/4 of the US population, while events held in the SEC or BigTen footprint are in the same time zone as 3/4 of the US population.
In addition to pro sports competition there is competition from lots of other cultural events in major metro areas. It's not just that Stanford football has to contend with the Niners, but that folks deciding what to do on a Saturday can also go to the SFMOMA or their favorite band playing a concert locally, or going out to any number of great restaurants, etc. The interesting thing is that it's not like there aren't major cities in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans, etc.), it's that the SEC schools are not located in them.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...tion-size/
[*]
Similar story (outside of Ohio State in Columbus and Northwestern which is close enough to Chicago to count) in the BigTen.
BC
1.) Here is the US population by time zone:
Eastern: 150 million (47%)
Central: 92 million (29%)
Mountain: 21 million (7%)
Pacific: 53 million (17%)
So events held in the Pac-12 footprint are in the same time zone as ~1/4 of the US population, while events held in the SEC or BigTen footprint are in the same time zone as 3/4 of the US population.
In addition to pro sports competition there is competition from lots of other cultural events in major metro areas. It's not just that Stanford football has to contend with the Niners, but that folks deciding what to do on a Saturday can also go to the SFMOMA or their favorite band playing a concert locally, or going out to any number of great restaurants, etc. The interesting thing is that it's not like there aren't major cities in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans, etc.), it's that the SEC schools are not located in them.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...tion-size/
[*]
Quote:The largest population centers in the SEC — Nashville and Lexington — also represent the programs with the lowest average attendance at football games. Go figure.
Similar story (outside of Ohio State in Columbus and Northwestern which is close enough to Chicago to count) in the BigTen.
BC
Completely agree. A few other things:
1.) Here is the US population by time zone:
Eastern: 150 million (47%)
Central: 92 million (29%)
Mountain: 21 million (7%)
Pacific: 53 million (17%)
So events held in the Pac-12 footprint are in the same time zone as ~1/4 of the US population, while events held in the SEC or BigTen footprint are in the same time zone as 3/4 of the US population.
In addition to pro sports competition there is competition from lots of other cultural events in major metro areas. It's not just that Stanford football has to contend with the Niners, but that folks deciding what to do on a Saturday can also go to the SFMOMA or their favorite band playing a concert locally, or going out to any number of great restaurants, etc. The interesting thing is that it's not like there aren't major cities in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans, etc.), it's that the SEC schools are not located in them.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...tion-size/
[*]
Similar story (outside of Ohio State in Columbus and Northwestern which is close enough to Chicago to count) in the BigTen.
BC
1.) Here is the US population by time zone:
Eastern: 150 million (47%)
Central: 92 million (29%)
Mountain: 21 million (7%)
Pacific: 53 million (17%)
So events held in the Pac-12 footprint are in the same time zone as ~1/4 of the US population, while events held in the SEC or BigTen footprint are in the same time zone as 3/4 of the US population.
In addition to pro sports competition there is competition from lots of other cultural events in major metro areas. It's not just that Stanford football has to contend with the Niners, but that folks deciding what to do on a Saturday can also go to the SFMOMA or their favorite band playing a concert locally, or going out to any number of great restaurants, etc. The interesting thing is that it's not like there aren't major cities in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans, etc.), it's that the SEC schools are not located in them.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...tion-size/
[*]
Quote:The largest population centers in the SEC — Nashville and Lexington — also represent the programs with the lowest average attendance at football games. Go figure.
Similar story (outside of Ohio State in Columbus and Northwestern which is close enough to Chicago to count) in the BigTen.
BC
03-02-2020, 08:10 PM
(03-02-2020, 07:48 PM)BostonCard Wrote: The interesting thing is that it's not like there aren't major cities in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans, etc.), it's that the SEC schools are not located in them.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...tion-size/
Quote:The largest population centers in the SEC — Nashville and Lexington — also represent the programs with the lowest average attendance at football games. Go figure.
Similar story (outside of Ohio State in Columbus and Northwestern which is close enough to Chicago to count) in the BigTen.
BC
Nashville has the Tennessee Titans and a similar array of fun things to do (being the home of country music and all), plus Vandy is a prestigious private school with a very similar small undergrad size to Stanford's and it isn't great at football anyways. Kentucky is a basketball blue blood. AFAIK they, like Indiana, Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, and even UNC to an extent, don't really care about the football team since the hoops squad is the main event in town. One of my friends who went to Indiana for undergrad told me her sorority would tailgate a football game, then go home and nap through the game to prepare for their nights out. Lol.
Re: Northwestern, see Vandy above. Re: Ohio State, note that there are no NFL, MLB, or NBA teams in Columbus. It is the second most populous city in the country without a "Big 3" sports team, after San Jose...which isn't exactly home to a collegiate blue blood.
(03-02-2020, 07:48 PM)BostonCard Wrote: The interesting thing is that it's not like there aren't major cities in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans, etc.), it's that the SEC schools are not located in them.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-fo...tion-size/
Quote:The largest population centers in the SEC — Nashville and Lexington — also represent the programs with the lowest average attendance at football games. Go figure.
Similar story (outside of Ohio State in Columbus and Northwestern which is close enough to Chicago to count) in the BigTen.
BC
Nashville has the Tennessee Titans and a similar array of fun things to do (being the home of country music and all), plus Vandy is a prestigious private school with a very similar small undergrad size to Stanford's and it isn't great at football anyways. Kentucky is a basketball blue blood. AFAIK they, like Indiana, Duke, Kansas, Syracuse, and even UNC to an extent, don't really care about the football team since the hoops squad is the main event in town. One of my friends who went to Indiana for undergrad told me her sorority would tailgate a football game, then go home and nap through the game to prepare for their nights out. Lol.
Re: Northwestern, see Vandy above. Re: Ohio State, note that there are no NFL, MLB, or NBA teams in Columbus. It is the second most populous city in the country without a "Big 3" sports team, after San Jose...which isn't exactly home to a collegiate blue blood.
03-02-2020, 08:51 PM
I *think* we agree, in which case thanks for the additional context. My point was that generally there is an inverse correlation between the availability of other stuff to do and football attendance.
Columbus is the largest city where college football reigns supreme, and, as you noted, it doesn't have any pro football/basketball/baseball teams (though it does have an NHL team).
BC
Columbus is the largest city where college football reigns supreme, and, as you noted, it doesn't have any pro football/basketball/baseball teams (though it does have an NHL team).
BC
I *think* we agree, in which case thanks for the additional context. My point was that generally there is an inverse correlation between the availability of other stuff to do and football attendance.
Columbus is the largest city where college football reigns supreme, and, as you noted, it doesn't have any pro football/basketball/baseball teams (though it does have an NHL team).
BC
Columbus is the largest city where college football reigns supreme, and, as you noted, it doesn't have any pro football/basketball/baseball teams (though it does have an NHL team).
BC
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »