[Goose]

So while I think while your overall premise is sound, it ignores perhaps the biggest difference - student body attitudes. And my guess is there is a rather large indifference to Stanford sports, in general, amongst the student body and football in particular.

I think you might be correct, and wonder why. Saturdays at the old stadium were not to be missed events. Wake up, tailgate, go to the game, tailgate, shower, go to campus party somewhere. Great times. I think similar traditions still exist in the Big 10 and the SEC, but no longer out here. Why the demise?

I believe the "why" has been somewhat addressed. Stanford has more foreign students than before who have no "tradition" of attending "American" football games. Stanford has many more women percentage-wise, and (in general)  these women don't enjoy football very much. On the "west coast" high school football is declining in popularity and is no longer the preeminent social event of the school experience. This is probably a function of the fact that non-conformity is more common in this part of the country. It is "OK" to not follow the crowd, and when that is an option the size of the crowd goes down. When that "works", the crowd goes down even more. These students come to Stanford not "socialized" to the idea you watch football as a social event. It used to be that even "nerds" went to football games in high school :-). Now, they often don't, and therefore "nerd nation" isn't what it was.

IMO there is also a greater separation between the "average student" at Stanford and the athletes that play football. Back "in the day" it was actually possible to credit the idea the guys that played football were basically "like everybody else". They were obviously more athletic, but they weren't in general physically that different that the rest of the student body. The idea that they were "our lads" kind of worked. Today, the players are obviously bigger, stronger, and faster than the rest of the student body and it is not close. They are also more fully focused on football because many of them intend to make it a career from day 1. This tends to isolate them more from the rest of the student body and makes the idea that it is "Standford's team" less emotionally compelling. Couple that with unpredictable starting times and lots of night games and nobody really feels "obligated" to support them.

In other parts of the country these effects are present but at much lower levels. The high school population conforms more to the previous norms and as a result the students from those areas continue to do so in college. I believe that is changing, as some of the forces that brought change to the west coast are also at work, but it is going to be much slower.

[Goose]

So while I think while your overall premise is sound, it ignores perhaps the biggest difference - student body attitudes. And my guess is there is a rather large indifference to Stanford sports, in general, amongst the student body and football in particular.

I think you might be correct, and wonder why. Saturdays at the old stadium were not to be missed events. Wake up, tailgate, go to the game, tailgate, shower, go to campus party somewhere. Great times. I think similar traditions still exist in the Big 10 and the SEC, but no longer out here. Why the demise?

I believe the "why" has been somewhat addressed. Stanford has more foreign students than before who have no "tradition" of attending "American" football games. Stanford has many more women percentage-wise, and (in general)  these women don't enjoy football very much. On the "west coast" high school football is declining in popularity and is no longer the preeminent social event of the school experience. This is probably a function of the fact that non-conformity is more common in this part of the country. It is "OK" to not follow the crowd, and when that is an option the size of the crowd goes down. When that "works", the crowd goes down even more. These students come to Stanford not "socialized" to the idea you watch football as a social event. It used to be that even "nerds" went to football games in high school :-). Now, they often don't, and therefore "nerd nation" isn't what it was.

IMO there is also a greater separation between the "average student" at Stanford and the athletes that play football. Back "in the day" it was actually possible to credit the idea the guys that played football were basically "like everybody else". They were obviously more athletic, but they weren't in general physically that different that the rest of the student body. The idea that they were "our lads" kind of worked. Today, the players are obviously bigger, stronger, and faster than the rest of the student body and it is not close. They are also more fully focused on football because many of them intend to make it a career from day 1. This tends to isolate them more from the rest of the student body and makes the idea that it is "Standford's team" less emotionally compelling. Couple that with unpredictable starting times and lots of night games and nobody really feels "obligated" to support them.

In other parts of the country these effects are present but at much lower levels. The high school population conforms more to the previous norms and as a result the students from those areas continue to do so in college. I believe that is changing, as some of the forces that brought change to the west coast are also at work, but it is going to be much slower.

[cardcrimson]

Approximately 1 of 9 Stanford undergrad population is an ncaa athlete.  Nane another school with that high of a ratio

Even years ago, I can remember at least 7 varsity athletes in my freshman dorm of 80. Certainly I'm missing a couple, and remember two football players, two swimmers, one baseball, one track, and one volleyball.

[cardcrimson]

Approximately 1 of 9 Stanford undergrad population is an ncaa athlete.  Nane another school with that high of a ratio

Even years ago, I can remember at least 7 varsity athletes in my freshman dorm of 80. Certainly I'm missing a couple, and remember two football players, two swimmers, one baseball, one track, and one volleyball.

[Mick]

Approximately 1 of 9 Stanford undergrad population is an ncaa athlete.  Nane another school with that high of a ratio

Ivy League is similar, 14%, about 1 in 7. It's 18% at Princeton, about 1 in 6.

[Mick]

Approximately 1 of 9 Stanford undergrad population is an ncaa athlete.  Nane another school with that high of a ratio

Ivy League is similar, 14%, about 1 in 7. It's 18% at Princeton, about 1 in 6.

[cardcrimson]

Stanford has many more women percentage-wise, and (in general)  these women don't enjoy football very much. 

It wasn't about football. Bikini tops, dolfin shorts, beer and sunshine and the band. That there were the occasional Elway to Margerum heroics was superfluous, the team still had a losing record the four years I was there and never went to a bowl game. That wasn't the point. It was a great way to spend a Saturday.

[cardcrimson]

Stanford has many more women percentage-wise, and (in general)  these women don't enjoy football very much. 

It wasn't about football. Bikini tops, dolfin shorts, beer and sunshine and the band. That there were the occasional Elway to Margerum heroics was superfluous, the team still had a losing record the four years I was there and never went to a bowl game. That wasn't the point. It was a great way to spend a Saturday.

[Goose]

Stanford has many more women percentage-wise, and (in general)  these women don't enjoy football very much. 

It wasn't about football. Bikini tops, dolfin shorts, beer and sunshine and the band. That there were the occasional Elway to Margerum heroics was superfluous, the team still had a losing record the four years I was there and never went to a bowl game. That wasn't the point. It was a great way to spend a Saturday.

Exactly! It was a social event. Today, that isn't the "norm" for lots of people. They have developed alternatives, or at least a lot of them have. FWIW, Bikini tops and sunshine are woefully missing in  November at 8 PM.

[Goose]

Stanford has many more women percentage-wise, and (in general)  these women don't enjoy football very much. 

It wasn't about football. Bikini tops, dolfin shorts, beer and sunshine and the band. That there were the occasional Elway to Margerum heroics was superfluous, the team still had a losing record the four years I was there and never went to a bowl game. That wasn't the point. It was a great way to spend a Saturday.

Exactly! It was a social event. Today, that isn't the "norm" for lots of people. They have developed alternatives, or at least a lot of them have. FWIW, Bikini tops and sunshine are woefully missing in  November at 8 PM.

[81alum]

The 49ers don’t seem to have much problem.  Despite its political proclivities, pro football is King in the Bay Area. Followed by Pro Basketball.  Then pro baseball. 

Lex, if you look at the link I provided, you will find that pro football draws a very different demographic than college football.  Pro football is actually the most ideologically "neutral" of all the TV sports in terms of its fan base.  College football is quite different.

As for why the Saturday social scene has changed--I agree with many of the points raised above (especially the times of games) but would also point out Stanford's changing demographics in other ways.  Not only has the Stanford student body become more female and more foreign, it has become far more diverse.  Stanford's undergraduates are only 33% white now, and 7% Black.  While there are plenty of Hispanic and Asian-American fans and players (including on this board,) American football has never been as popular with these demographic groups.  I'm white, I dragged my Chinese-American girlfriend to a couple of football games when I was in college, and I am grateful that she eventually forgave me--and married me anyway.  She hasn't been to a game since in 42 years.  Purely a solitary anecdote, but football was once primarily a black and white sport, and that certainly does not describe Stanford today.

One final point, leaving out the political ideology argument and the demographic argument, there may be something simpler at work.  Stanford now admits a tinier percentage of applicants compared with prior decades.  It may be that its students are a whole lot more academically inclined than they were before, and they may be investing their time differently.  "Stanford hates fun" may not tell the whole story.  The truth may be that many more Stanford students may be working in labs, doing internships, reading books, writing papers, and doing the kinds of things that students do--on Saturdays, and they be be less inclined to blow off an afternoon than they were in my day.

[81alum]

The 49ers don’t seem to have much problem.  Despite its political proclivities, pro football is King in the Bay Area. Followed by Pro Basketball.  Then pro baseball. 

Lex, if you look at the link I provided, you will find that pro football draws a very different demographic than college football.  Pro football is actually the most ideologically "neutral" of all the TV sports in terms of its fan base.  College football is quite different.

As for why the Saturday social scene has changed--I agree with many of the points raised above (especially the times of games) but would also point out Stanford's changing demographics in other ways.  Not only has the Stanford student body become more female and more foreign, it has become far more diverse.  Stanford's undergraduates are only 33% white now, and 7% Black.  While there are plenty of Hispanic and Asian-American fans and players (including on this board,) American football has never been as popular with these demographic groups.  I'm white, I dragged my Chinese-American girlfriend to a couple of football games when I was in college, and I am grateful that she eventually forgave me--and married me anyway.  She hasn't been to a game since in 42 years.  Purely a solitary anecdote, but football was once primarily a black and white sport, and that certainly does not describe Stanford today.

One final point, leaving out the political ideology argument and the demographic argument, there may be something simpler at work.  Stanford now admits a tinier percentage of applicants compared with prior decades.  It may be that its students are a whole lot more academically inclined than they were before, and they may be investing their time differently.  "Stanford hates fun" may not tell the whole story.  The truth may be that many more Stanford students may be working in labs, doing internships, reading books, writing papers, and doing the kinds of things that students do--on Saturdays, and they be be less inclined to blow off an afternoon than they were in my day.

[Goose]

It may be that its students are a whole lot more academically inclined than they were before, and they may be investing their time differently.  "Stanford hates fun" may not tell the whole story.  The truth may be that many more Stanford students may be working in labs, doing internships, reading books, writing papers, and doing the kinds of things that students do--on Saturdays, and they be be less inclined to blow off an afternoon than they were in my day.

IMO this is a major, major factor. The students being admitted today do not view going to a football game as "fun". They have other go-to activities or are nerding out to the extent they have no time to go to a game.

[Goose]

It may be that its students are a whole lot more academically inclined than they were before, and they may be investing their time differently.  "Stanford hates fun" may not tell the whole story.  The truth may be that many more Stanford students may be working in labs, doing internships, reading books, writing papers, and doing the kinds of things that students do--on Saturdays, and they be be less inclined to blow off an afternoon than they were in my day.

IMO this is a major, major factor. The students being admitted today do not view going to a football game as "fun". They have other go-to activities or are nerding out to the extent they have no time to go to a game.

[Softball Fan]

My son never went to a Stanford football game.  He didn't even know who Andrew Luck was and this was back when Luck was a student.  My son's group of friends also didn't go to any football games.  With all my interest in sports it never rubbed off on him except he was on Stanford's ultimate frisbee team.  My son would join me in watching WVB matches but that was much more for us to spend time together than any interest in the matches.

[Softball Fan]

My son never went to a Stanford football game.  He didn't even know who Andrew Luck was and this was back when Luck was a student.  My son's group of friends also didn't go to any football games.  With all my interest in sports it never rubbed off on him except he was on Stanford's ultimate frisbee team.  My son would join me in watching WVB matches but that was much more for us to spend time together than any interest in the matches.