Started By
Message
Has College Football Become Regional Sport? (From Colin Cowherd)
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:00 pm
Although I don’t care for Colin Cowherd at all, I was listening to his assessment of the College Football playoffs and he said something that I think now rings some truth. This YouTube needs to start at the 8:00 mark unless you want to hear his NFL ramblings:
LINK
In a nutshell he is stating that the South has dominated college football so much that other regions are tuning out…I think there is some truth to this. It’s not the South’s fault, or Clemson and Bama’s fault…It’s just the way things are.
All I can say to the other regions is recruit better and play better. The South doesn’t have nearly the variety of Pro-Teams these other regions have and the part of the Country goes all-in on college football.
27
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:01 pm to CU_Tigers4life
It's always been a regional sport.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:01 pm to CU_Tigers4life
Drew Brees' failed physical ruined college football.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:02 pm to CU_Tigers4life
It's always been a regional sport - there are basically 3 regions of the country that truly care deeply about college football : The South, the Midwest and Texas/Oklahoma. The West and the Northeast have never cared, as a whole, about college football. They didn't in 1970, then didn't in 1990 and they don't in 2019.
That's it, and I don't really think that has changed.
That's it, and I don't really think that has changed.
This post was edited on 1/3/19 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:02 pm to CU_Tigers4life
The NFL is the only sport in America that isn’t regional
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:32 pm to Glorious
Football on the Left Coast is DONE. OSU will always be good but the rest of the Big 10 are in trouble due talent. The Northeast don't matter and the better programs from the South/Southwest will cherry pick that talent. Hoover HS has more people at games than the PAC12 had for their CG.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:33 pm to Glorious
One way to help the non Southern regions would be for the NCAA to increase the minimum admissions standard schools must apply to recruits. While SEC schools often enroll "student" athletes with ACT scores of only 18, schools like Notre Dame simply do not or can not. But if elite non Southern schools raised this issue, it would lead to perceptions of racism, so not likely to happen!
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:34 pm to CU_Tigers4life
I've been saying this for years. Look at the Top 10 television markets for the New Years 6 games:
1. Birmingham- 27.3
2. Columbus- 20.6
3. New Orleans- 18.4
4. Dayton- 15.7
5. Greenville- 15.4
6. Tulsa- 15.3
7. Oklahoma City- 14.1
8. Cleveland- 14.1
9. Nashville- 13.9
10. Atlanta- 13.6
Every single one of the Top 10 markets is located in the SEC footprint + Ohio + Oklahoma
And the thing is, most of these markets are middle-sized markets.
Atlanta (#10 largest) is the only Top 10 National market to make the Top 10 for NY6 Bowl ratings this year.
Atlanta (#10) and Cleveland (#19) are the only Top 25 national markets to make the Top 10 in NY6 viewership.
Yes, CFB seems to be dominating the local markets in the deep south, but these are all relatively small or middle sized markets.
1. Birmingham- 27.3
2. Columbus- 20.6
3. New Orleans- 18.4
4. Dayton- 15.7
5. Greenville- 15.4
6. Tulsa- 15.3
7. Oklahoma City- 14.1
8. Cleveland- 14.1
9. Nashville- 13.9
10. Atlanta- 13.6
Every single one of the Top 10 markets is located in the SEC footprint + Ohio + Oklahoma
And the thing is, most of these markets are middle-sized markets.
Atlanta (#10 largest) is the only Top 10 National market to make the Top 10 for NY6 Bowl ratings this year.
Atlanta (#10) and Cleveland (#19) are the only Top 25 national markets to make the Top 10 in NY6 viewership.
Yes, CFB seems to be dominating the local markets in the deep south, but these are all relatively small or middle sized markets.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:35 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
The West and the Northeast have never cared, as a whole, about college football. They didn't in 1970, then didn't in 1990 and they don't in 2019.
They did back in the day, though. Cutting it off at 1970 seems a bit arbitrary. And they still care...they just know they're never going to recapture their glory days where they had all the money and influence. So they treat college football as something to sneer at while secretly wishing Syracuse would become the next Ohio State.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:36 pm to CU_Tigers4life
It is a fair point.
High School football participation is diminishing across the country for a variety of reasons. I remember a study earlier this year then indicated over 75,000 kids between 2015 in 2017 had stopped playing High School football.
It was not just because of concussion scares, but a variety of social, cultural and economic issues. Primarily, fielding a full roster at a typical high school is costly. With many states struggling economically to support school systems, it is a business decision to cut programs that do not draw attendance to cover costs. It Is much easier to field a basketball team, track or cross country squad with far less overhead. Plus, attendance is dropping as kids turn to social media as a primary means to socialize and connect vs going to a Friday night football game and cruising the strip afterwards.
Not to forget, kids tend to specialize in a sport now compared to athletics 15, 20, or 25 years ago. Fewer are playing multiple Sports throughout the year, as they go to camps or other specialized travel teams year round in their preferred sport.
So, it is small town America in the south, midwest and Texas/Oklahoma where HS sports as we knew them are still holding on. It is no wonder that most of the talent and more rabid college fanbases still reside in these areas.
It is a problem that will continue, and I think will alter the game. I'm not saying 6 man football or 7 on 7 is the future for all, but changes will occur if the current trajectories hold.
It all carries over to college student interest and attendance, as well.
So, I agree. It is a regional sport.
High School football participation is diminishing across the country for a variety of reasons. I remember a study earlier this year then indicated over 75,000 kids between 2015 in 2017 had stopped playing High School football.
It was not just because of concussion scares, but a variety of social, cultural and economic issues. Primarily, fielding a full roster at a typical high school is costly. With many states struggling economically to support school systems, it is a business decision to cut programs that do not draw attendance to cover costs. It Is much easier to field a basketball team, track or cross country squad with far less overhead. Plus, attendance is dropping as kids turn to social media as a primary means to socialize and connect vs going to a Friday night football game and cruising the strip afterwards.
Not to forget, kids tend to specialize in a sport now compared to athletics 15, 20, or 25 years ago. Fewer are playing multiple Sports throughout the year, as they go to camps or other specialized travel teams year round in their preferred sport.
So, it is small town America in the south, midwest and Texas/Oklahoma where HS sports as we knew them are still holding on. It is no wonder that most of the talent and more rabid college fanbases still reside in these areas.
It is a problem that will continue, and I think will alter the game. I'm not saying 6 man football or 7 on 7 is the future for all, but changes will occur if the current trajectories hold.
It all carries over to college student interest and attendance, as well.
So, I agree. It is a regional sport.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:38 pm to CU_Tigers4life
He is correct. They need to play the national champ game in areas where CFB is king. I don’t want to hear about fairness from a west coast perspective because you have two teams a.m. most as Far East as you can go traveling to a west coast game that no one cares about. The west coast doesn’t care about CFB.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:40 pm to Che Boludo
The comparison I'd make is MLB. MLB will never recover its heyday, but it somehow still goes strong and can still pay players obscene amounts of money. I'd suggest that CFB hasn't so much diminished as a sport as it doesn't grab so many sports headlines. There's still a huge groundswell of popularity, even in the regions of the country that aren't particularly dominant. It's not like major California universities are ready to shutter their programs any time soon, after all.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:43 pm to CU_Tigers4life
My favorite theory?
That came up on a proggy facebook group I troll. I thought it might be a fellow troll, but then everyone fell all over themselves agreeing with it.
quote:
Football is only alive in the south and midwest because the rest of the country has recognized it for the symbol of toxic masculinity that it is.
REAL men don't play aggressive sports.
That came up on a proggy facebook group I troll. I thought it might be a fellow troll, but then everyone fell all over themselves agreeing with it.
This post was edited on 1/3/19 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:43 pm to randomways
quote:
They did back in the day, though. Cutting it off at 1970 seems a bit arbitrary. And they still care...they just know they're never going to recapture their glory days where they had all the money and influence. So they treat college football as something to sneer at while secretly wishing Syracuse would become the next Ohio State.
Pockets of fanbases cared : Syracuse and maybe Boston College on the East Coast (and Penn State if you count them as Eastern), Southern Cal/Oregon/Washington/Utah on the West Coast. But as a whole, those regions don't pay attention to the sport and haven't for 2 generations.
Maybe if they rose up and were great they would, but the interest would still be on a much smaller overall level than the general population of the South/Midwest/Texas/Oklahoma.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:45 pm to CU_Tigers4life
.
This post was edited on 4/24/21 at 5:18 pm
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:45 pm to SummerOfGeorge
I will also add - I get that the sport has built itself up in a way that it has to make lots of money or collapse, but most of college football was TOTALLY regional up until really the BCS started in the late 90s.
That's why things like winning the league and getting to the Sugar Bowl were such big deals, winning the B1G and going to the Rose Bowl, etc. You paid attention to the rest of the country, but it wasn't one big league like it basically is now.
And from a purely fan standpoint, I enjoyed the old way more than I do the new way.
That's why things like winning the league and getting to the Sugar Bowl were such big deals, winning the B1G and going to the Rose Bowl, etc. You paid attention to the rest of the country, but it wasn't one big league like it basically is now.
And from a purely fan standpoint, I enjoyed the old way more than I do the new way.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:46 pm to CU_Tigers4life
The South has had the most dominant programs consistently since the 60's (integration)
The media kept the northeast and midwest artificially proppped up for a few decades.
The media kept the northeast and midwest artificially proppped up for a few decades.
This post was edited on 1/3/19 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:47 pm to Nobelium
quote:
Put better teams in the playoffs and people will watch. Notre Dame didn't belong and Oklahoma has a high school defense. Both teams were going to get dominated and everyone but the committee knew it.
That all sounds great but who else should have been there? Ohio State maybe? Ok, their best would certainly compete, but they would have been 10-14 point underdogs to Clemson and Alabama. Georgia? Ok, but they had 2 losses and had just lost to Alabama. Then who??????? Michigan? Florida? UCF?
Alabama and Clemson are really fvckin good right now - they've both been obliterating teams all season.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:47 pm to CU_Tigers4life
CFB matters in some areas out West
Oregon, Washington State and Washington have great fan bases. That's...about it though sadly. UCLA and USC fans are pathetically bad.
Oregon, Washington State and Washington have great fan bases. That's...about it though sadly. UCLA and USC fans are pathetically bad.
Posted on 1/3/19 at 2:48 pm to randomways
quote:
The comparison I'd make is MLB. MLB will never recover its heyday, but it somehow still goes strong and can still pay players obscene amounts of money. I'd suggest that CFB hasn't so much diminished as a sport as it doesn't grab so many sports headlines. There's still a huge groundswell of popularity, even in the regions of the country that aren't particularly dominant. It's not like major California universities are ready to shutter their programs any time soon, after all.
Yep - the current MLB model is much more like the old CFB model was. Local fanbases watch their team and their divisional teams, keep up with the rest of MLB but most rarely watch "national games". And as a MLB season ticket holder, I love it and have no problems with it.
MLB national ratings suck in the regular season, but MLB regular season local TV deals draw huge eyeballs 150+ nights a year if the team is any good at all.
This post was edited on 1/3/19 at 2:49 pm
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News