(06-20-2013 12:52 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't recall anybody saying the NCAA money was better for the G5, just that there's more money, or at least a larger fraction, that the P5 is NOT getting.

Yes, but the implication of saying that was that the money split between the P5 and G5 is closer (smaller split gap) under the NCAA money regime than under the BCS regime, and it is not. In the BCS revenue system, the typical P5 got about $24 million and the typical G5 got about $4.5 million, and in the NCAA basketball regime, the typical Power conference got about $18 million compared to $3.5 million for the typical G5. Same proportion.

(06-20-2013 03:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 12:52 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't recall anybody saying the NCAA money was better for the G5, just that there's more money, or at least a larger fraction, that the P5 is NOT getting.

Yes, but the implication of saying that was that the money split between the P5 and G5 is closer (smaller split gap) under the NCAA money regime than under the BCS regime, and it is not. In the BCS revenue system, the typical P5 got about $24 million and the typical G5 got about $4.5 million, and in the NCAA basketball regime, the typical Power conference got about $18 million compared to $3.5 million for the typical G5. Same proportion.

I didn't read that implication into it. The implication in unnecessary to make his point. Maybe I just missed a post somewhere.

(06-20-2013 03:42 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 03:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 12:52 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't recall anybody saying the NCAA money was better for the G5, just that there's more money, or at least a larger fraction, that the P5 is NOT getting.

Yes, but the implication of saying that was that the money split between the P5 and G5 is closer (smaller split gap) under the NCAA money regime than under the BCS regime, and it is not. In the BCS revenue system, the typical P5 got about $24 million and the typical G5 got about $4.5 million, and in the NCAA basketball regime, the typical Power conference got about $18 million compared to $3.5 million for the typical G5. Same proportion.

I didn't read that implication into it. The implication in unnecessary to make his point. Maybe I just missed a post somewhere.

Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I think there are. The AAC schools have a very large number of alums, particularly UCF, USF, Cincinnati and Houston which by themselves combine for approximately 1M graduates and 180K students. Many of the schools are also situated in very large markets and several of them have professional sports franchises. It would be easier for people in those markets to tune out to college athletics altogether if their local school gets the shaft and watch professional sports exclusively.

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I guess where we differ is that I do not think that being an alumnus is typically the point of entry to college football fandom. It's not like the typical man ignored college football until age 18, then suddenly becomes a fan when he enrolls at State U. No, most men who follow college football have done so from the time they were children, long before they went to college. They became addicted to spending Saturdays watching college football long before they developed an allegiance to an alma mater. E.g., the first game i recall seeing was Notre Dame/Texas in the 1969 Cotton Bowl at age five, 14 years before I attended USF. I have been a college football fan ever since then. I also think that major college football is watched by alumni of smaller schools - FCS schools and the like - that are not allowed to play in BCS bowls.

I think my experience is typical. It is a love of college football that has a focal point in one team (in my case, USF), but it extends well beyond that, which is why I watch tons of games each year that have no bearing on USF. And I am sorry, but I think it just beggars belief that USC-Alabama would garner lower ratings if it were part of a P5-only playoffs as opposed to a P5/G5 playoffs.

(06-20-2013 07:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I guess where we differ is that I do not think that being an alumnus is typically the point of entry to college football fandom. It's not like the typical man ignored college football until age 18, then suddenly becomes a fan when he enrolls at State U. No, most men who follow college football have done so from the time they were children, long before they went to college. They became addicted to spending Saturdays watching college football long before they developed an allegiance to an alma mater. E.g., the first game i recall seeing was Notre Dame/Texas in the 1969 Cotton Bowl at age five, 14 years before I attended USF. I have been a college football fan ever since then. I also think that major college football is watched by alumni of smaller schools - FCS schools and the like - that are not allowed to play in BCS bowls.

I think my experience is typical.

A universal assumption, but not a safe one. Also, by my math, you went to USF way before USF had football. So you were a college football fan before you were a South Florida Bulls football fan. That's not the way it works at UConn--UConn football fans were mostly UConn basketball fans and NFL fans. I don't know the UCF/USF "Hey, we're FBS now!" is typical of Houston or SMU folks either. Not to mention what's typical for Memphis or Tulane or Temple, where football futility is basically expected, or ECU fans, or Cincinatti.

Quote:And I am sorry, but I think it just beggars belief that USC-Alabama would garner lower ratings if it were part of a P5-only playoffs as opposed to a P5/G5 playoffs.

After warning about generalizing from your own experience, I'm going to do the same thing. As a kid I knew plenty of old folks who hadn't watched a single major league baseball game since the Dodgers left Brooklyn. Some people will be mad enough to withdraw from the system.

(06-20-2013 07:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I guess where we differ is that I do not think that being an alumnus is typically the point of entry to college football fandom. It's not like the typical man ignored college football until age 18, then suddenly becomes a fan when he enrolls at State U. No, most men who follow college football have done so from the time they were children, long before they went to college. They became addicted to spending Saturdays watching college football long before they developed an allegiance to an alma mater. E.g., the first game i recall seeing was Notre Dame/Texas in the 1969 Cotton Bowl at age five, 14 years before I attended USF. I have been a college football fan ever since then. I also think that major college football is watched by alumni of smaller schools - FCS schools and the like - that are not allowed to play in BCS bowls.

I think my experience is typical. It is a love of college football that has a focal point in one team (in my case, USF), but it extends well beyond that, which is why I watch tons of games each year that have no bearing on USF. And I am sorry, but I think it just beggars belief that USC-Alabama would garner lower ratings if it were part of a P5-only playoffs as opposed to a P5/G5 playoffs.

I don't think that's typical. At least, in many areas of the country it isn't. If you grew up in a Ohio State family, or maybe had friends from OSU then maybe you root for them from a young age. Otherwise very few people who didn't go to college or who went to small colleges even follow college football. I didn't know anything about college football until I went to college. Same with everyone I know that went to college. If I had gone to a small college I wouldn't be on this board right now.

(06-20-2013 08:51 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't think that's typical. At least, in many areas of the country it isn't. If you grew up in a Ohio State family, or maybe had friends from OSU then maybe you root for them from a young age. Otherwise very few people who didn't go to college or who went to small colleges even follow college football. I didn't know anything about college football until I went to college. Same with everyone I know that went to college. If I had gone to a small college I wouldn't be on this board right now.

Isn't that the point, though? G5 schools mostly don't have "t-shirt fans", and t-shirt fans make up a huge slice of the TV audience?

(06-20-2013 08:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 08:51 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't think that's typical. At least, in many areas of the country it isn't. If you grew up in a Ohio State family, or maybe had friends from OSU then maybe you root for them from a young age. Otherwise very few people who didn't go to college or who went to small colleges even follow college football. I didn't know anything about college football until I went to college. Same with everyone I know that went to college. If I had gone to a small college I wouldn't be on this board right now.

Isn't that the point, though? G5 schools mostly don't have "t-shirt fans", and t-shirt fans make up a huge slice of the TV audience?

Not sure what the definition of a T-shirt fan is, but there are people that went to MAC schools that also root for a Big 10 team. Would they stop watching? I don't know. And then there are the fans like me, that would stop watching. G5 schools probably have more casual fans than T-shirt fans. At least for MAC schools, I can't speak for others, particularly those with large fanbases like ECU.

(06-20-2013 09:01 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 08:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 08:51 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't think that's typical. At least, in many areas of the country it isn't. If you grew up in a Ohio State family, or maybe had friends from OSU then maybe you root for them from a young age. Otherwise very few people who didn't go to college or who went to small colleges even follow college football. I didn't know anything about college football until I went to college. Same with everyone I know that went to college. If I had gone to a small college I wouldn't be on this board right now.

Isn't that the point, though? G5 schools mostly don't have "t-shirt fans", and t-shirt fans make up a huge slice of the TV audience?

Not sure what the definition of a T-shirt fan is, but there are people that went to MAC schools that also root for a Big 10 team. Would they stop watching? I don't know. And then there are the fans like me, that would stop watching. G5 schools probably have more casual fans than T-shirt fans. At least for MAC schools, I can't speak for others, particularly those with large fanbases like ECU.

"I'm a Cincinnati Bearcats fan because I went there. You're an Ohio State fan because you went to Walmart."

I think the definition of "t-shirt fan" is a fan of a program who isn't an alum, or at least a close relative of one.

(06-20-2013 08:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I guess where we differ is that I do not think that being an alumnus is typically the point of entry to college football fandom. It's not like the typical man ignored college football until age 18, then suddenly becomes a fan when he enrolls at State U. No, most men who follow college football have done so from the time they were children, long before they went to college. They became addicted to spending Saturdays watching college football long before they developed an allegiance to an alma mater. E.g., the first game i recall seeing was Notre Dame/Texas in the 1969 Cotton Bowl at age five, 14 years before I attended USF. I have been a college football fan ever since then. I also think that major college football is watched by alumni of smaller schools - FCS schools and the like - that are not allowed to play in BCS bowls.

I think my experience is typical.

A universal assumption, but not a safe one. Also, by my math, you went to USF way before USF had football. So you were a college football fan before you were a South Florida Bulls football fan. That's not the way it works at UConn--UConn football fans were mostly UConn basketball fans and NFL fans. I don't know the UCF/USF "Hey, we're FBS now!" is typical of Houston or SMU folks either.

Yes, i went to USF before USF had football. But point is, my experience would be the same even if USF had had football in 1983 when i first went there. I was a college football fan long before then, not just long before 1997.

College football was something I became addicted to at the same time i fell for the NFL - as a kid. It just seems unrealistic to me to think that the typical USF or ECU fan never cared about college football before they matriculated at those schools.

(06-18-2013 07:55 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 05:20 PM)UCbball21 Wrote:  If dropping conference members was a realistic scenario, the ACC would drop Wake Forest in favor of Cincinnati/UConn and possibly Boston College in favor of UConn. Wouldn't that be nice

I agree with your statement. Some schools are doing next to nothing, yet remain in elite conferences. Wake Forest and Boston College come to mind in the ACC, Purdue and Illinois in the Big Ten, Texas Tech in the Big 12, Washington State in the Pac 12. Also, look at the moves upward for WVU and Utah. Are they better off than the MWC and Big East? IT's certainly debatable. It's not always greener on the other side.

Boston College has done "next to nothing" in the ACC?? Just uninformed nonsense. Prior to the last 2 years, BC had gone to 12 straight bowls, had won no less than 7 games in any of those 12 seasons, had won back-to-back ACC Atlantic Division titles, and had won more games in its first 5 years in the ACC than any other ACC team except for VT (and I think one other team).

The last 2 years have been difficult due to a bad coaching decision. Lots of schools have had them. Louisville went through a similar period after a coaching mistake and look at where they are now.

Boston College has rectified its mistake and is on the way back. It has a new coaching staff in place and, BTW, it has a top 20 recruiting class to date - this coming off a 2 win season!

Hey, to borrow a well-used phrase, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, just not your own facts.

(06-20-2013 09:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 08:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I guess where we differ is that I do not think that being an alumnus is typically the point of entry to college football fandom. It's not like the typical man ignored college football until age 18, then suddenly becomes a fan when he enrolls at State U. No, most men who follow college football have done so from the time they were children, long before they went to college. They became addicted to spending Saturdays watching college football long before they developed an allegiance to an alma mater. E.g., the first game i recall seeing was Notre Dame/Texas in the 1969 Cotton Bowl at age five, 14 years before I attended USF. I have been a college football fan ever since then. I also think that major college football is watched by alumni of smaller schools - FCS schools and the like - that are not allowed to play in BCS bowls.

I think my experience is typical.

A universal assumption, but not a safe one. Also, by my math, you went to USF way before USF had football. So you were a college football fan before you were a South Florida Bulls football fan. That's not the way it works at UConn--UConn football fans were mostly UConn basketball fans and NFL fans. I don't know the UCF/USF "Hey, we're FBS now!" is typical of Houston or SMU folks either.

Yes, i went to USF before USF had football. But point is, my experience would be the same even if USF had had football in 1983 when i first went there. I was a college football fan long before then, not just long before 1997.

College football was something I became addicted to at the same time i fell for the NFL - as a kid. It just seems unrealistic to me to think that the typical USF or ECU fan never cared about college football before they matriculated at those schools.

Why does that seem unrealistic? Why follow college football, which is at a lower level than NFL football, unless you went to college or at least knew someone that went there and was already a fan?

(06-20-2013 09:13 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 09:01 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 08:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 08:51 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't think that's typical. At least, in many areas of the country it isn't. If you grew up in a Ohio State family, or maybe had friends from OSU then maybe you root for them from a young age. Otherwise very few people who didn't go to college or who went to small colleges even follow college football. I didn't know anything about college football until I went to college. Same with everyone I know that went to college. If I had gone to a small college I wouldn't be on this board right now.

Isn't that the point, though? G5 schools mostly don't have "t-shirt fans", and t-shirt fans make up a huge slice of the TV audience?

Not sure what the definition of a T-shirt fan is, but there are people that went to MAC schools that also root for a Big 10 team. Would they stop watching? I don't know. And then there are the fans like me, that would stop watching. G5 schools probably have more casual fans than T-shirt fans. At least for MAC schools, I can't speak for others, particularly those with large fanbases like ECU.

"I'm a Cincinnati Bearcats fan because I went there. You're an Ohio State fan because you went to Walmart."

I think the definition of "t-shirt fan" is a fan of a program who isn't an alum, or at least a close relative of one.

Sounds disparaging to me. E.g., I have no association with Georgetown yet have rooted for them for 35 years, including having season tickets for a few years. I'd reserve the term for any fan who is obnoxiously "bandwagon", wearing the colors proudly when the team is doing well but goes in to hiding and loses interest when they aren't.

(06-21-2013 07:49 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 09:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  College football was something I became addicted to at the same time i fell for the NFL - as a kid. It just seems unrealistic to me to think that the typical USF or ECU fan never cared about college football before they matriculated at those schools.

Why does that seem unrealistic? Why follow college football, which is at a lower level than NFL football, unless you went to college or at least knew someone that went there and was already a fan?

Because if you are an American male with a healthy level of testosterone and an interest in sports, football, especially football promoted where you can see it, on big TV networks, tends to appeal to you?

My dad never even went to college - straight into the military after high school - but instilled a love of college football in me from early childhood. Remember watching the 1973 Ohio State-Michigan game and him telling me about how the two coaches "hated" each other, about the history of their rivalry, etc. And he had no connection to either school in any way. Same thing with Army-Navy, USC-Notre Dame, etc. And then the next day it would be the NFL. Sure, the NFL is a higher level, but college has (or had, until the Florida teams of the 1980s changed the game) a different style of play and its own unique pageantry and traditions. Have never understood anyone who thinks its natural to choose between college and the NFL, any more than having to choose between college basketball and the NBA. Both are awesome.

With all my friends it was the same way. Thought every American male had the same experience. Go figure.

(06-20-2013 07:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 07:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Fair enough, but if his point is that TV viewership of P5-only playoffs would likely to be less than that of P5+G5 playoffs, then I don't see any basis for that belief. The idea that USF fans will tune in to USC-Alabama playoff game as long as USF had a theoretical chance, even if only very slim, of being in that game too but not if they have no chance to be in that game makes no sense to me.

It's not a hard or remote concept. If USF isn't a part of major college football, USF fans are liable to stop caring about major college football.

The question is, are there enough USF etc fans to matter, or is the G5 fanbase an ant-fart in a turd-tornado.

I guess where we differ is that I do not think that being an alumnus is typically the point of entry to college football fandom. It's not like the typical man ignored college football until age 18, then suddenly becomes a fan when he enrolls at State U. No, most men who follow college football have done so from the time they were children, long before they went to college. They became addicted to spending Saturdays watching college football long before they developed an allegiance to an alma mater. E.g., the first game i recall seeing was Notre Dame/Texas in the 1969 Cotton Bowl at age five, 14 years before I attended USF. I have been a college football fan ever since then. I also think that major college football is watched by alumni of smaller schools - FCS schools and the like - that are not allowed to play in BCS bowls.

I think my experience is typical. It is a love of college football that has a focal point in one team (in my case, USF), but it extends well beyond that, which is why I watch tons of games each year that have no bearing on USF. And I am sorry, but I think it just beggars belief that USC-Alabama would garner lower ratings if it were part of a P5-only playoffs as opposed to a P5/G5 playoffs.

This might be typical in Louisiana, but certainly not in the north.

(06-21-2013 08:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 07:49 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 09:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  College football was something I became addicted to at the same time i fell for the NFL - as a kid. It just seems unrealistic to me to think that the typical USF or ECU fan never cared about college football before they matriculated at those schools.

Why does that seem unrealistic? Why follow college football, which is at a lower level than NFL football, unless you went to college or at least knew someone that went there and was already a fan?

Because if you are an American male with a healthy level of testosterone and an interest in sports, football, especially football promoted where you can see it, on big TV networks, tends to appeal to you?

My dad never even went to college - straight into the military after high school - but instilled a love of college football in me from early childhood. Remember watching the 1973 Ohio State-Michigan game and him telling me about how the two coaches "hated" each other, about the history of their rivalry, etc. And he had no connection to either school in any way. Same thing with Army-Navy, USC-Notre Dame, etc. And then the next day it would be the NFL. Sure, the NFL is a higher level, but college has (or had, until the Florida teams of the 1980s changed the game) a different style of play and its own unique pageantry and traditions. Have never understood anyone who thinks its natural to choose between college and the NFL, any more than having to choose between college basketball and the NBA. Both are awesome.

With all my friends it was the same way. Thought every American male had the same experience. Go figure.

That's why they have the NFL. That's what we watched. But like I said, I'm in Bears country, and the media around here drone on about pro sports all the time and not much about college sports.

One other thing I noticed, on the thread where they're asking what everyone's most advanced degree is, 72% of the people have a degree from a school with a division I football program (21/29 so far). If you include Division I basketball it's 90% (26/29).

(06-21-2013 08:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 09:13 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  "I'm a Cincinnati Bearcats fan because I went there. You're an Ohio State fan because you went to Walmart."

I think the definition of "t-shirt fan" is a fan of a program who isn't an alum, or at least a close relative of one.

Sounds disparaging to me. E.g., I have no association with Georgetown yet have rooted for them for 35 years, including having season tickets for a few years. I'd reserve the term for any fan who is obnoxiously "bandwagon", wearing the colors proudly when the team is doing well but goes in to hiding and loses interest when they aren't.

It is disparaging, but it's a very useful term. If you can't attract support outside of your alumni base, you probably aren't delivering a sizable TV audience. I'm pretty sure that Houston's enrollment has always been bigger than SMU's, but in the SWC days SMU was able to market as "Dallas' college team" and so they competed on the same level, more or less.

(Also, if you aren't attracting T-shirt fans, you're probably less successful at keeping alumni as hardcore fans after they graduate.)

My mother went to St Johns, so I count as family-of-alumni, but I think it's a much bigger factor that when I was coming up, St Johns was the dominant college program in NYC.

(06-21-2013 09:37 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  [quote='quo vadis' pid='9428330' dateline='1371822296']

That's why they have the NFL. That's what we watched. But like I said, I'm in Bears country, and the media around here drone on about pro sports all the time and not much about college sports.

One other thing I noticed, on the thread where they're asking what everyone's most advanced degree is, 72% of the people have a degree from a school with a division I football program (21/29 so far). If you include Division I basketball it's 90% (26/29).

And Chicago is in Big Ten country. The same thing applies, x10, in the northeast.