ADVERTISEMENT

College football is gradually turning into a regional sport

C

COCoug

Hall Of Fame
Jan 23, 2004
2,336
309
83
Watching Alabama play Clemson again and again for the National Championship, it is hard to deny that college football is evolving into a sport of the Southeast. As discussed a few weeks ago on this Board, the once thriving JC leagues in the West and Southwest are gone or in serious decline. High School football participation is in free fall, and will continue to decline as more and more is learned about chronic traumatic encephalopathy. I think “Blue State” parents are just not going to let their sons play football. The two best college teams in the entire Pacific and Mountain time zones were in Washington, and neither would have been competitive in this game. Programs like USC and UCLA are exposed so regularly now it is routine, and they are in the coaching revolving door death spiral. Midwest football is basically just Ohio State, with Notre Dame or Wisconsin occasionally putting together a team, but mostly surviving on reputation and weak competition in the Big 10. Its been decades since there has been a nationally competitive team from the Northeast. It is inconceivable to imagine the NC game without a SEC team, and Clemson is almost a lock for the next two years. If not for Clemson we would probably be looking at two SEC teams in the playoffs pretty much every year.

I see college football in the future as centered in the Southeast, just like college hockey is in the Northeast/upper Midwest, wrestling in in the Midwest, lacrosse is in the Northeast, beach volleyball is in the West, ect. There will of course be exceptions, and programs that survive across the United States given the long tradition of the sport, but to me the long-term trend seems undeniable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chipdouglas, Fab5Coug, PINGDUDE4 and 2 others
COCoug said:
Watching Alabama play Clemson again and again for the National Championship, it is hard to deny that college football is evolving into a sport of the Southeast. As discussed a few weeks ago on this Board, the once thriving JC leagues in the West and Southwest are gone or in serious decline. High School football participation is in free fall, and will continue to decline as more and more is learned about chronic traumatic encephalopathy. I think “Blue State” parents are just not going to let their sons play football. The two best college teams in the entire Pacific and Mountain time zones were in Washington, and neither would have been competitive in this game. Programs like USC and UCLA are exposed so regularly now it is routine, and they are in the coaching revolving door death spiral. Midwest football is basically just Ohio State, with Notre Dame or Wisconsin occasionally putting together a team, but mostly surviving on reputation and weak competition in the Big 10. Its been decades since there has been a nationally competitive team from the Northeast. It is inconceivable to imagine the NC game without a SEC team, and Clemson is almost a lock for the next two years. If not for Clemson we would probably be looking at two SEC teams in the playoffs pretty much every year.

I see college football in the future as centered in the Southeast, just like college hockey is in the Northeast/upper Midwest, wrestling in in the Midwest, lacrosse is in the Northeast, beach volleyball is in the West, ect. There will of course be exceptions, and programs that survive across the United States given the long tradition of the sport, but to me the long-term trend seems undeniable.
Click to expand...
I put a like on your post but, damn, what maudlin thoughts. Sounds all too true, however.
 
Be honest about which teams are “all in” about their football programs.... then look at where they are on the map.

Tough to have a great football program or any program when youre funding and commitment end at words.

The Southeast universities put their own $ down. Their communities are committed at the high school level. They live in an entirely different world than a lot of other regions.

I dont think it’s just CTE that is driving kids away. The time and effort now expected is just more than 25 years ago. Youre seeing the bottom 20% of the roster disappear. Are there some big time athletes that arent on the field? Yes. I’d wager that isnt the norm though. Overall the participation decline, I believe, wont be felt as hard at the college level. Not everyone gets to play college football.
 
I think sports are cyclical. UCLA in the 60's and early 70's made basketball a West Coast sport. Saban won't be around forever, Alabama was desperate enough to hire Price at one time lol. Kelly will likely make UCLA relevant again. USC will ultimately find a coach to turn the program around.

Football has some major issues to resolve from a player safety perspective and the game will evolve and may not have the following in the future that it has now but it will evolve.

Only 2% of high school athletes play college and only 2% of college athletes go pro. The math is fine for player participation.

Personally, my oldest was a great high school football player with offers but played lacrosse in college. My youngest could be a great high school football player but I'm done with letting my kids play football and he will likely be a soccer goal keeper in college. Everyone makes personal choices but there will be more than enough kids to play football and the rules will change to make the game safer. Truthfully, based on the data, no kid needs to be playing tackle football before the 9th grade.

I would also be careful about grandiose statements on blue states and red states. Many regions of the west are pretty red in an otherwise blue state. Atlanta, Miami, Charlotte, Austin, Nashville, RTP and others are pretty blue in an otherwise red region.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PINGDUDE4
COCoug said:
Watching Alabama play Clemson again and again for the National Championship, it is hard to deny that college football is evolving into a sport of the Southeast. As discussed a few weeks ago on this Board, the once thriving JC leagues in the West and Southwest are gone or in serious decline. High School football participation is in free fall, and will continue to decline as more and more is learned about chronic traumatic encephalopathy. I think “Blue State” parents are just not going to let their sons play football. The two best college teams in the entire Pacific and Mountain time zones were in Washington, and neither would have been competitive in this game. Programs like USC and UCLA are exposed so regularly now it is routine, and they are in the coaching revolving door death spiral. Midwest football is basically just Ohio State, with Notre Dame or Wisconsin occasionally putting together a team, but mostly surviving on reputation and weak competition in the Big 10. Its been decades since there has been a nationally competitive team from the Northeast. It is inconceivable to imagine the NC game without a SEC team, and Clemson is almost a lock for the next two years. If not for Clemson we would probably be looking at two SEC teams in the playoffs pretty much every year.

I see college football in the future as centered in the Southeast, just like college hockey is in the Northeast/upper Midwest, wrestling in in the Midwest, lacrosse is in the Northeast, beach volleyball is in the West, ect. There will of course be exceptions, and programs that survive across the United States given the long tradition of the sport, but to me the long-term trend seems undeniable.
Click to expand...

While some of your generalizations are accurate.....those are some pretty sweeping generalizations. USC is a good football coach away from being relevant nationally and always will be a threat to be good.I guess you are saying that Oklahoma is in the Southeast, but I guarantee that people that live there don't think they are.

The biggest issue that I see in college football is that the SEC has successfully buffaloed the rest of college football and nobody is trying to make them play by the same rules. By playing an extra FCS creampuff late in the schedule, their conference gets an extra bye week plus has 7 less losses as a whole. Vanderbilt likely doesn't get to a bowl game if they don't have Tennessee State as their 4th OOC game. South Carolina ends up with a losing record if they don't get Chattanooga late (plus another re-scheduled FCS creampuff). The ACC is Clemson and a bunch of nobodies. They were 4-5 outside of Clemson. The mighty SEC went 6-6 in bowl games.

Oregon, Utah, UW, and USC all lost at least one game to teams that they should not have lost to. Failure to beat inferior teams kept Utah from finishing 11-3, Oregon at 10-3, UW at 11-3 and USC at 9-4. That happens in football but it happens less in the SEC than it does in the Pac-12. Part of it is the fact that their is a greater talent disparity in the SEC and their top teams are really, really good. Part of it is scheduling. In our conference, any given team might miss one of our top teams. In the SEC, it's possible to easily miss three of them.

As mentioned above, in the current cycle, the SEC is considered great and the Pac-12 is considered weak. Not that long ago, the Pac-12 was considered a great conference. Unfortunately, the media loves to focus on the top teams and they only love teams that finish high consistently. WSU is already starting to benefit from that this year with our #13 "way too early" preseason ranking on ESPN. Despite losing arguably our best player, they are giving Leach some leeway to find a new QB to run the show now that we've shown that we aren't going away easily. For things to change, we need to have USC beat ND instead of keeping close, Cal to find an offense, and Utah to find a way to keep their QB healthy. Like it or not, we need the Ducks and other teams to quit being so flaky in the games that they should win. That, or we can enjoy being the big fish in a smaller pond.
 
More the reason why we need to create men’s soccer team. As football declines, we’ll need to fill the void. Soccer, Hockey and Basketball are the future of college sports. Invest now, or potentially lose the PAC-12 affiliation down the road.
 
NCCoug8500 said:
I think sports are cyclical. UCLA in the 60's and early 70's made basketball a West Coast sport. Saban won't be around forever, Alabama was desperate enough to hire Price at one time lol. Kelly will likely make UCLA relevant again. USC will ultimately find a coach to turn the program around.

Football has some major issues to resolve from a player safety perspective and the game will evolve and may not have the following in the future that it has now but it will evolve.

Only 2% of high school athletes play college and only 2% of college athletes go pro. The math is fine for player participation.

Personally, my oldest was a great high school football player with offers but played lacrosse in college. My youngest could be a great high school football player but I'm done with letting my kids play football and he will likely be a soccer goal keeper in college. Everyone makes personal choices but there will be more than enough kids to play football and the rules will change to make the game safer. Truthfully, based on the data, no kid needs to be playing tackle football before the 9th grade.

I would also be careful about grandiose statements on blue states and red states. Many regions of the west are pretty red in an otherwise blue state. Atlanta, Miami, Charlotte, Austin, Nashville, RTP and others are pretty blue in an otherwise red region.
Click to expand...


Not to quibble...Miami is indeed blue (as are most all metro areas), but Florida is purple (not particularly red). Not sure what/where RTP is though.
 
CrimsonDisciple said:
More the reason why we need to create men’s soccer team. As football declines, we’ll need to fill the void. Soccer, Hockey and Basketball are the future of college sports. Invest now, or potentially lose the PAC-12 affiliation down the road.
Click to expand...
There is no revenue in college soccer. None
 
  • Like
Reactions: WASH ST A&M FAN
COCoug said:
Watching Alabama play Clemson again and again for the National Championship, it is hard to deny that college football is evolving into a sport of the Southeast. As discussed a few weeks ago on this Board, the once thriving JC leagues in the West and Southwest are gone or in serious decline. High School football participation is in free fall, and will continue to decline as more and more is learned about chronic traumatic encephalopathy. I think “Blue State” parents are just not going to let their sons play football. The two best college teams in the entire Pacific and Mountain time zones were in Washington, and neither would have been competitive in this game. Programs like USC and UCLA are exposed so regularly now it is routine, and they are in the coaching revolving door death spiral. Midwest football is basically just Ohio State, with Notre Dame or Wisconsin occasionally putting together a team, but mostly surviving on reputation and weak competition in the Big 10. Its been decades since there has been a nationally competitive team from the Northeast. It is inconceivable to imagine the NC game without a SEC team, and Clemson is almost a lock for the next two years. If not for Clemson we would probably be looking at two SEC teams in the playoffs pretty much every year.

I see college football in the future as centered in the Southeast, just like college hockey is in the Northeast/upper Midwest, wrestling in in the Midwest, lacrosse is in the Northeast, beach volleyball is in the West, ect. There will of course be exceptions, and programs that survive across the United States given the long tradition of the sport, but to me the long-term trend seems undeniable.
Click to expand...

Good post. I find, more and more, that I am more interested in Pac12 football and less interested in the rest of the country. I would honestly rather watch Oregon vs Cal than Alabama vs LSU. Rather watch ASU vs Utah than Michigan St vs Wisconsin.

I'm more excited about beating Oregon, Stanford and Utah and less concerned with where we rank nationally.

Kind of feels like being a fan of a minor league baseball team, but I just don't think I care anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrayOnGray and SDCoug
College football is, basically, the only pro sport in the South. Ergo, their teams are going to be pretty good. Have you seen their stadiums? My lord.

Edit: I should add that college baseball is pretty popular (and also very good) in the South as well. The ballparks there are cathedrals. This is so despite competition from "real" pro teams, such as minor league teams.
 
CrimsonDisciple said:
There will be. Soccer is the #1 sport worldwide and it’s not even close.
Click to expand...
How do you define #1? Is it revenue generated? Game attendance? TV viewership? Or just a measure of # of people who follow it based on soccer basically being the only sport played in many underdeveloped countries (largely due to economics)? I seriously doubt college and pro soccer will overtake football, basketball, or even baseball in my generation or even that of my kids.

Glad Cougar
 
  • Like
Reactions: WASH ST A&M FAN
Fab5Coug said:
Good post. I find, more and more, that I am more interested in Pac12 football and less interested in the rest of the country. I would honestly rather watch Oregon vs Cal than Alabama vs LSU. Rather watch ASU vs Utah than Michigan St vs Wisconsin.

I'm more excited about beating Oregon, Stanford and Utah and less concerned with where we rank nationally.

Kind of feels like being a fan of a minor league baseball team, but I just don't think I care anymore.
Click to expand...

I have a question related to this.

If you had a choice between watching Alabama vs LSU or Georgia or, say, Arizona vs Colorado in a typical season (and you could only watch one), which one would you likely watch?

I ask this because I found myself making the choice to watch Alabama vs LSU (in an admittedly hyped up game) instead of a similar Pac-12 game last fall (at least until it was clear LSU could not score against Alabama...which didn't take long to figure out...then I switched to the Pac-12 game).

For me, it usually depends on the specific Pac-12 match up. Obviously, I will watch Pac-12 North teams first, but will also be drawn to league games involving Utah, USC, and UCLA. I am a little less interested in ASU, Arizona, and Colorado games vs a marquee SEC or Big 10 match up though.

It's an interesting subject.
 
With minor exceptions, the only two revenue sports are football and men's basketball. Baseball in the southern crescent (Carolinas to California) can be revenue positive. College lacrosse and college hockey are largely regional with a few outliers. Soccer is widely played collegiately but with a bias towards professional leagues does not remotely generate sufficient revenue. With the exception of women's basketball in fewer than five universities (UConn, Tennessee, maybe a couple of others), no women's sports generate sufficient revenue.

None of this is likely to change substantially in the coming decades.
 
How_did_this_happen? said:
I have a question related to this.

If you had a choice between watching Alabama vs LSU or Georgia or, say, Arizona vs Colorado in a typical season (and you could only watch one), which one would you likely watch?

I ask this because I found myself making the choice to watch Alabama vs LSU (in an admittedly hyped up game) instead of a similar Pac-12 game last fall (at least until it was clear LSU could not score against Alabama...which didn't take long to figure out...then I switched to the Pac-12 game).

For me, it usually depends on the specific Pac-12 match up. Obviously, I will watch Pac-12 North teams first, but will also be drawn to league games involving Utah, USC, and UCLA. I am a little less interested in ASU, Arizona, and Colorado games vs a marquee SEC or Big 10 match up though.

It's an interesting subject.
Click to expand...

Six or seven Saturdays a season, I'm in Pullman which greatly reduces my TV viewing. On road game Saturdays, my must watch games are WSU and whatever I consider to be the best matchup of the day. I can usually watch two complete game on any given Saturday. My preference for "best matchup" is usually a Pac-12 game. I recall wanting to watch uw-Oregon, Oregon-Stanford, the Red River Rivalry, tOSU-Michigan. I caught snippets of big SEC matchups, including LSU and A&M, which was a game that would not end.
 
How_did_this_happen? said:
I have a question related to this.

If you had a choice between watching Alabama vs LSU or Georgia or, say, Arizona vs Colorado in a typical season (and you could only watch one), which one would you likely watch?

I ask this because I found myself making the choice to watch Alabama vs LSU (in an admittedly hyped up game) instead of a similar Pac-12 game last fall (at least until it was clear LSU could not score against Alabama...which didn't take long to figure out...then I switched to the Pac-12 game).

For me, it usually depends on the specific Pac-12 match up. Obviously, I will watch Pac-12 North teams first, but will also be drawn to league games involving Utah, USC, and UCLA. I am a little less interested in ASU, Arizona, and Colorado games vs a marquee SEC or Big 10 match up though.

It's an interesting subject.
Click to expand...
My .02 worth, I'm a busy freakin man. I'm lucky if I can watch all the WSU games, live. Let alone other matchups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cougcowboy, GrayOnGray, Alpine Cougar and 1 other person
I would love to see WSU add a men's soccer team but it is not going to happen in the near future if ever. As others have mentioned- no revenue. The school certainly cannot add another non revenue sport at this time. Not sure of our current numbers but suspect that this would entail adding another women's sport, which would also be non revenue, at the same time because of title nine. Too bad but there it is.

As an aside comment, I noticed that the Mountain West has more, three, teams in the final top 25 than the Pac12 which has two. Rather depressing but echoes comments made regarding conference strength made by other posters.
 
kayak15 said:
I would love to see WSU add a men's soccer team but it is not going to happen in the near future if ever. As others have mentioned- no revenue. The school certainly cannot add another non revenue sport at this time. Not sure of our current numbers but suspect that this would entail adding another women's sport, which would also be non revenue, at the same time because of title nine. Too bad but there it is.

As an aside comment, I noticed that the Mountain West has more, three, teams in the final top 25 than the Pac12 which has two. Rather depressing but echoes comments made regarding conference strength made by other posters.
Click to expand...

Boise State’s game was canceled. Not sure how they were able to move up without playing a game.
 
BiggsCoug said:
I dont think it’s just CTE that is driving kids away. The time and effort now expected is just more than 25 years ago. Youre seeing the bottom 20% of the roster disappear. Are there some big time athletes that arent on the field? Yes. I’d wager that isnt the norm though. Overall the participation decline, I believe, wont be felt as hard at the college level. Not everyone gets to play college football.
Click to expand...
Not everyone gets to play college football, but they can all play Madden football. And Fortnite. And Halo, Call of Duty, etc. And they can make money doing it without risking any injury greater than eye strain and a callous on their thumb (which they already have from texting).
 
95coug said:
Not everyone gets to play college football, but they can all play Madden football. And Fortnite. And Halo, Call of Duty, etc. And they can make money doing it without risking any injury greater than eye strain and a callous on their thumb (which they already have from texting).
Click to expand...
Right. From texting.
 
95coug said:
Not everyone gets to play college football, but they can all play Madden football. And Fortnite. And Halo, Call of Duty, etc. And they can make money doing it without risking any injury greater than eye strain and a callous on their thumb (which they already have from texting).
Click to expand...

Be honest, how many kids addicted to Fortnite are really gonna be beast mode players on a Friday night?

Also, it is the job of the high school coach to get kids involved. If video games are doing a better
job of getting kids dont blame them. Blame the coach in charge of creating culture at the school.
 
FWIW, the Alamo Bowl was the highest rated bowl game outside the NY6. The Rose Bowl was the highest rated game outside the CFP games and nearly beat the Clemson-ND matchup. Two other Pac-12 bowl matchups finished in the Top 15. That doesn't include the Sun Bowl or Red Box Bowl that weren't shown yet. The Apple Cup was the 5th most watched game in week 13 with over 4 million viewers. It's not like the rest of the country completely ignores the conference. There are times where the country pays attention. Interest is declining but all it takes is a few key wins to swing the tide the other way. This bowl season was a first step, although it would have been nice for Utah and Cal to have done a better job in winnable games.

On the topic of soccer becoming the dominant sport.....it may happen, but I question if it happens in my lifetime.
 
95coug said:
Not everyone gets to play college football, but they can all play Madden football. And Fortnite. And Halo, Call of Duty, etc. And they can make money doing it without risking any injury greater than eye strain and a callous on their thumb (which they already have from texting).
Click to expand...
As weird as it is to think people can make coin playing video games on YouTube, I would venture to guess the chances of earning a college scholarship/pro contract in football is considerably higher than making a sustainable income playing video games on a YouTube stream. There’s about 1,500 guys making $500K-$30 mill in the NFL (not even counting other pro leagues) and another 25,000 ish getting all or some of their college education paid for. There’s a handful of people killing it in YouTube revenue. Football is a multi billion dollar industry. So the opportunities, while long shots in both, are considerably longer trying to make it being a gamer.
 
Play by the same rules is on of my criteria for expanding the playoffs, everyone play 9 conference games similar to the pac 12 set up, only one FCS school counts as a win, and everyone has to play another power 5 team outside of conference. No question the SEC is superior, but only at the top.
 
roses04 said:
Play by the same rules is on of my criteria for expanding the playoffs, everyone play 9 conference games similar to the pac 12 set up, only one FCS school counts as a win, and everyone has to play another power 5 team outside of conference. No question the SEC is superior, but only at the top.
Click to expand...

Their best team got there azz whipped. The top of the SEC didnt impress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M-I-Coug

Big 10 and SEC (ESPN) new contract ~ with revenue beginning in 2026...

Replies
1
Views
601
The Cougar Lair
cr8zyncalif
cr8zyncalif
M-I-Coug

Baseball & women’s swimming joining MWC as affiliate members

Replies
18
Views
1K
The Cougar Lair
BleedCrimsonandGray
BleedCrimsonandGray
T

A rumored ACC settlement and deal...

Replies
63
Views
7K
The Cougar Lair
dgibbons
dgibbons
M-I-Coug

What are the odds of a reverse merger? Also, the broken NIL...

Replies
28
Views
1K
The Cougar Lair
Loyal Coug1
L
M

This Video sums why PAC should rebuild the PAC with the BEST G5's, ACC leftovers NATIONWIDE

Replies
21
Views
1K
The Cougar Lair
mikalalas
M
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back