Using facebook likes by zip code

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/...l-map.html

Only 82 teams made the cut.

UNC must have been left out of the survey. There's no way the Tarheels are not in the top 3 of any zip code in the entire state of North Carolina.

(10-03-2014 07:58 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Using facebook likes by zip code

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/...l-map.html

Only 82 teams made the cut.

Seems a lot more realistic than the other one based on hits.

(10-03-2014 02:56 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  UNC must have been left out of the survey. There's no way the Tarheels are not in the top 3 of any zip code in the entire state of North Carolina.

Cal is also massively messed up. Oregon is the most popular team in Berkeley?

(10-03-2014 03:48 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 02:56 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  UNC must have been left out of the survey. There's no way the Tarheels are not in the top 3 of any zip code in the entire state of North Carolina.

Cal is also massively messed up. Oregon is the most popular team in Berkeley?

There is another thread on this map that has the article. Cal doesn't have a football facebook page, only an athletic one, so they don't get the likes.

UNC and Indiana have since been updated.

If you look at the NYC, specifically Manhattan, Philly and DC the top 3 are consistently B1G Ten oriented. Outside of the Maryland and Rutgers locals, there is pretty good representation for Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan in those areas too.

Interesting to see Florida getting exposure in NYC as well, I can only assume it has to do with all the people that have moved or live in between NY, Conn, NJ and Florida. Florida seems to have more people from NY and NJ than native born Floridians.

(10-05-2014 10:43 PM)Waterloo Wrote:  If you look at the NYC, specifically Manhattan, Philly and DC the top 3 are consistently B1G Ten oriented. Outside of the Maryland and Rutgers locals, there is pretty good representation for Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan in those areas too.

Interesting to see Florida getting exposure in NYC as well, I can only assume it has to do with all the people that have moved or live in between NY, Conn, NJ and Florida. Florida seems to have more people from NY and NJ than native born Floridians.

huh?

Manhattan is 7% Syracuse, 6% Michigan, 5% Florida.
Bronx is 8% Syracuse & Florida, 6% Ohio State
Brooklyn is 7% Syracuse & Florida, 6% Ohio State
Queens is 8% Syracuse, 7% Florida, 6% Notre Dame
Staten Island is 10% Notre Dame, 8% Florida, 7% Penn State

Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk) is 9-10% Notre Dame, 8% Syracuse and 6-7% Florida.

DC is 15% Florida, 13% Maryland, and 11% Florida State.

Philly is 36% Penn State, 5% Notre Dame, and 4% Florida.

My guess is that Florida and FSU showing up has more to do with recent success (ie. bandwaggoners) and a particular area's low general loyalty to a single team (near or at single digit %s).

I drilled all the way down to the zip codes. That's probably where we're off, and note that I wrote consistently, not always.

Have fun with it, it's pretty cool actually. Check out the Denver and N. Colorado zip codes and check out all the UConn support. Weird.

(10-06-2014 12:05 AM)Waterloo Wrote:  I drilled all the way down to the zip codes. That's probably where we're off, and note that I wrote consistently, not always.

Have fun with it, it's pretty cool actually. Check out the Denver and N. Colorado zip codes and check out all the UConn support. Weird.

It's interesting, but flawed like most of these sorts of maps. Demographics for facebook users obviously aren't equal across the board, so this skews to a younger demographic, etc.

Wait, Facebook data is flawed?

Damn.

(10-06-2014 12:37 AM)Waterloo Wrote:  Wait, Facebook data is flawed?

Damn.

To be sure, the Facebook data is almost certainly as good as you'll get on this topic. Its demographics aren't as young as I think a lot of people believe. This isn't the Facebook of even 5 years ago - it has become as ubiquitous as email. The average Facebook user is a little over 40 years old today. By comparison, the median age in the US today is a little over 36 years old. Yes, mean and median are different measures, but the point is that Facebook users are pretty reflective of the general population at this point. If anything, you're seeing a trend of more teenagers not using Facebook at all because it has become the network for "older people".

Also, I like the Facebook data because (a) it's taking from a huge base of people that's generally evenly distributed geographically in the US (so it's almost impossible for coordinated PR campaigns to manipulate this data, unlike Twitter and surveys like the Common Sports Census map) and (b) it's completely self-reported data without the use of prompting questions (such as a poll). You're getting people that care enough about a team to click "like" without prompting them, which is a fairly solid indicator of a legit sports fan. It's not perfect data, but I'd honestly trust it more than any type of poll. The only other data that would be more insightful is local Nielsen ratings data over a long period of time (as that shows what people actually "do" in terms of teams that they actually watch as opposed to what people "say" in terms of teams that the like).

The data by zip code looks OK, but the data by county is completely jacked up for many areas. For LA and Orange county they show Fresno State as the top team in both counties(lol!!!) but Fresno State doesn't show up in the top 3 in any zip code in either county.

Tuscaloosa County, Alabama:
Arizona 22%
Arizona State 13%
Alabama 11%

Oooooo yea superior data set ya got there.

But I could of told you that with the claim that Spartanburg County, SC is 2 to 1 Gamecock to Clemson. It is the exact opposite.

(10-06-2014 07:44 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Tuscaloosa County, Alabama:
Arizona 22%
Arizona State 13%
Alabama 11%

Oooooo yea superior data set ya got there.

But I could of told you that with the claim that Spartanburg County, SC is 2 to 1 Gamecock to Clemson. It is the exact opposite.

LOL...I realized this one is just as flawed as that quad one a year or two back. NYTimes don't release crap like this until you get the bugs out. NFW UConn is Colorado's Team, etc...

Most of the data seemed pretty realistic but some was really bad.

(10-06-2014 02:16 AM)TomThumb Wrote:  The data by zip code looks OK, but the data by county is completely jacked up for many areas. For LA and Orange county they show Fresno State as the top team in both counties(lol!!!) but Fresno State doesn't show up in the top 3 in any zip code in either county.

It looks like they took down the ability to view the data by county.

I think the level of support it shows for the Gators in New England is also probably the result of some kind of glitch.

(10-06-2014 11:57 PM)opossum Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 02:16 AM)TomThumb Wrote:  The data by zip code looks OK, but the data by county is completely jacked up for many areas. For LA and Orange county they show Fresno State as the top team in both counties(lol!!!) but Fresno State doesn't show up in the top 3 in any zip code in either county.

It looks like they took down the ability to view the data by county.

I think the level of support it shows for the Gators in New England is also probably the result of some kind of glitch.

That or all those patriots/Aaron Hernandez fans forgot to unlike uf on Facebook.

i lived in the carolinas for 15 years. NCSU and Duke have a fairly large share of NC. the SC part is complete and utter garbage. it's a 50/50 split at worst between Clemson and the gamechickens. the map is a conversation piece with little or no bearing on reality.

(10-06-2014 07:44 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Tuscaloosa County, Alabama:
Arizona 22%
Arizona State 13%
Alabama 11%

Oooooo yea superior data set ya got there.

But I could of told you that with the claim that Spartanburg County, SC is 2 to 1 Gamecock to Clemson. It is the exact opposite.

I wish they would have put FCS teams in there as well - In states like Montana, the Dakotas, etc, the FCS team would be the most popular.