(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-27-2020 12:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 11:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at it mathematically, these are the states that have more population/P5 team than the average 5,049,000 (based on 2019 population estimates).

NY 19,453,561
OH 11,689,100 Cincinnati
CA 9,878,056 San Diego St, UC San Diego (I'm on board!!)
NJ 8,882,190
FL 7,159,246 Central Florida, South Florida
MA 6,892,503
PA 6,400,995 Temple...
IL 6,335,911
MO 6,137,428
MD 6,045,680
WI 5,822,434
TX 5,799,176 Houston, SMU, Rice
CO 5,758,736 Colorado St?
MN 5,639,632
GA 5,308,712

Here are the ones below the average:
MI 4,993,429
LA 4,648,794 Tulane...?
VA 4,267,760
WA 3,807,447
AZ 3,639,359
TN 3,414,587 Memphis
UT 3,205,958 BYU
AR 3,017,804
NC 2,622,021 ...East Carolina...
SC 2,574,357
AL 2,451,593
IN 2,244,073
KY 2,233,837
OR 2,108,869
OK 1,978,486
NE 1,934,408
WV 1,792,147
IA 1,577,535
MS 1,488,075
KS 1,456,657

The rest have none, but only Connecticut (3.5 million) and Nevada (3.0 million) have more than 2.1 million in total population.

Just my opinion...schools in states listed above that have a possibility, however remote, of joining a power conference are in red above.

In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-27-2020 12:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Just my opinion...schools in states listed above that have a possibility, however remote, of joining a power conference are in red above.

In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Yup - Eastern Kansas is Chiefs territory - just as much a Kansas Team as it is a Missouri team.

(01-29-2020 09:41 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I think, for football-only, AFA and Navy could be there. When Navy finally started considering the move, the Big East had some of the schools that are now in the ACC and Big XII. AFA was approached by the Big XII as a backfill for the likes of Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado, and TAMU, but declined. They threw their hat in the ring a few years ago, allegedly, but we know how that worked out.

I would consider both as potential movers in a post-Big XII world where they may be a best-of remnants conference.

BYU is there...but nobody wants to work with them.

Houston, Cincinnati, and UCF would follow a bit behind. For some reason, I could see Houston as an ACC school. Don't ask me how...but I think they could hang.

The academies are probably the 3 strongest brands outside the P5, but they couldn't compete week in/week out in the P5.

(01-29-2020 01:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 09:41 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I think, for football-only, AFA and Navy could be there. When Navy finally started considering the move, the Big East had some of the schools that are now in the ACC and Big XII. AFA was approached by the Big XII as a backfill for the likes of Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado, and TAMU, but declined. They threw their hat in the ring a few years ago, allegedly, but we know how that worked out.

I would consider both as potential movers in a post-Big XII world where they may be a best-of remnants conference.

BYU is there...but nobody wants to work with them.

Houston, Cincinnati, and UCF would follow a bit behind. For some reason, I could see Houston as an ACC school. Don't ask me how...but I think they could hang.

The academies are probably the 3 strongest brands outside the P5, but they couldn't compete week in/week out in the P5.

Perhaps, but, the kind of success Navy has experienced leading into the AAC and now within it suggests they could at least "hang" with some competency.

I don't know what Navy expected as a result had none of the Big East moves happened those years back when they finally came to the table.

To me, and I think the shift between the bottom of the AAC and ACC is huge, could Navy be at least competitive with the BC's, Wake's, Duke's, Pitt's, Syracuse's, and maybe a few others in the conference? I do. Not up for Clemson and Florida State, but at least good for a fight.

I suspect the same was true with AFA and the Big XII. In those down years, Kansas, Tech, ISU? Yeah, it's possible. They used to run with TCU, so, they might look at that as an equal, too.

It's not that they're driven to win their conferences, but be competitive enough within one that has likely access to the playoff. It's a recruitment tool.

I think it's more a question of, would either school be okay with down years with that competition, and are the conferences okay with it?

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-27-2020 12:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Just my opinion...schools in states listed above that have a possibility, however remote, of joining a power conference are in red above.

In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

I am sure that they do, but you have to figure that there are Kansas & K-State fans in Missouri too. This seems to be a foreign concept for you guys that a college team in one state can have fans in another state, except when it comes to teams like Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Air Force, and BYU.

There are a lot of Auburn fans in Georgia, Buckeye fans in Florida, and Oregon fans in California.

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-27-2020 12:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Just my opinion...schools in states listed above that have a possibility, however remote, of joining a power conference are in red above.

In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Fortunately there's no NFL team near UCSD or SDSU, unless you call 150 miles "closeby."

(01-29-2020 07:52 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

I am sure that they do, but you have to figure that there are Kansas & K-State fans in Missouri too. This seems to be a foreign concept for you guys that a college team in one state can have fans in another state, except when it comes to teams like Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Air Force, and BYU.

There are a lot of Auburn fans in Georgia, Buckeye fans in Florida, and Oregon fans in California.

The (original) topic is whether a state or region can support another P5 football program, and that requires P level donations and ticket revenue. Auburn is so close to the Georgia line that undoubtedly there are Auburn football donors and season ticket holders living in Georgia, but I doubt there is a significant percentage of Ducks season ticket holders living in California; Sacramento is about 500 miles from Eugene and even the northernmost part of the LA area is over 800 miles away.

(01-29-2020 08:00 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Fortunately there's no NFL team near UCSD or SDSU, unless you call 150 miles "closeby."

UCSD has no football program (will not be pursuing one either) and just joined Big West this year. In 4 years, they'll be out of the D2 to D1 transition phase and able to compete in the post-season. They're not touching a P5 conference. They don't want to nor need to. SDSU is the only viable choice in San Diego. USD isn't jumping from Pioneer, into the G5, and into P5 in 10 years.

(01-29-2020 07:52 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

I am sure that they do, but you have to figure that there are Kansas & K-State fans in Missouri too. This seems to be a foreign concept for you guys that a college team in one state can have fans in another state, except when it comes to teams like Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Air Force, and BYU.

There are a lot of Auburn fans in Georgia, Buckeye fans in Florida, and Oregon fans in California.

Florida is a retirement state. They probably have a lot of different college team fans. Have to believe that the Florida team s rule, though.

There will be no P5 in 10 years.

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-27-2020 12:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 11:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at it mathematically, these are the states that have more population/P5 team than the average 5,049,000 (based on 2019 population estimates).

NY 19,453,561
OH 11,689,100 Cincinnati
CA 9,878,056 San Diego St, UC San Diego (I'm on board!!)
NJ 8,882,190
FL 7,159,246 Central Florida, South Florida
MA 6,892,503
PA 6,400,995 Temple...
IL 6,335,911
MO 6,137,428
MD 6,045,680
WI 5,822,434
TX 5,799,176 Houston, SMU, Rice
CO 5,758,736 Colorado St?
MN 5,639,632
GA 5,308,712

Here are the ones below the average:
MI 4,993,429
LA 4,648,794 Tulane...?
VA 4,267,760
WA 3,807,447
AZ 3,639,359
TN 3,414,587 Memphis
UT 3,205,958 BYU
AR 3,017,804
NC 2,622,021 ...East Carolina...
SC 2,574,357
AL 2,451,593
IN 2,244,073
KY 2,233,837
OR 2,108,869
OK 1,978,486
NE 1,934,408
WV 1,792,147
IA 1,577,535
MS 1,488,075
KS 1,456,657

The rest have none, but only Connecticut (3.5 million) and Nevada (3.0 million) have more than 2.1 million in total population.

Just my opinion...schools in states listed above that have a possibility, however remote, of joining a power conference are in red above.

In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

And the you have the schools with some cross border presence due to location, such as San Diego State (San Diego/Tijuana), UTEP (El Paso/Juarez), and Buffalo (Western NY/Niagara Region). While the households on the other side of the border may not count for ratings, a surprising amount of their student population and alumni based are binational.

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-27-2020 12:38 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(01-26-2020 11:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at it mathematically, these are the states that have more population/P5 team than the average 5,049,000 (based on 2019 population estimates).

NY 19,453,561
OH 11,689,100 Cincinnati
CA 9,878,056 San Diego St, UC San Diego (I'm on board!!)
NJ 8,882,190
FL 7,159,246 Central Florida, South Florida
MA 6,892,503
PA 6,400,995 Temple...
IL 6,335,911
MO 6,137,428
MD 6,045,680
WI 5,822,434
TX 5,799,176 Houston, SMU, Rice
CO 5,758,736 Colorado St?
MN 5,639,632
GA 5,308,712

Here are the ones below the average:
MI 4,993,429
LA 4,648,794 Tulane...?
VA 4,267,760
WA 3,807,447
AZ 3,639,359
TN 3,414,587 Memphis
UT 3,205,958 BYU
AR 3,017,804
NC 2,622,021 ...East Carolina...
SC 2,574,357
AL 2,451,593
IN 2,244,073
KY 2,233,837
OR 2,108,869
OK 1,978,486
NE 1,934,408
WV 1,792,147
IA 1,577,535
MS 1,488,075
KS 1,456,657

The rest have none, but only Connecticut (3.5 million) and Nevada (3.0 million) have more than 2.1 million in total population.

Just my opinion...schools in states listed above that have a possibility, however remote, of joining a power conference are in red above.

In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

Dude, you would be dividing by 9, since the Giants and Jets play in New Jersey.

(02-01-2020 06:12 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 07:52 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

I am sure that they do, but you have to figure that there are Kansas & K-State fans in Missouri too. This seems to be a foreign concept for you guys that a college team in one state can have fans in another state, except when it comes to teams like Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Air Force, and BYU.

There are a lot of Auburn fans in Georgia, Buckeye fans in Florida, and Oregon fans in California.

Florida is a retirement state. They probably have a lot of different college team fans. Have to believe that the Florida team s rule, though.

They do, but if you look closely, the 3rd or 4th team around the state are teams like Notre Dame, Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan. In areas close to the state borders, Georgia and Alabama have significant fanbases as well.

(02-01-2020 08:03 AM)whittx Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 06:12 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 07:52 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

I am sure that they do, but you have to figure that there are Kansas & K-State fans in Missouri too. This seems to be a foreign concept for you guys that a college team in one state can have fans in another state, except when it comes to teams like Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Air Force, and BYU.

There are a lot of Auburn fans in Georgia, Buckeye fans in Florida, and Oregon fans in California.

Florida is a retirement state. They probably have a lot of different college team fans. Have to believe that the Florida team s rule, though.

They do, but if you look closely, the 3rd or 4th team around the state are teams like Notre Dame, Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan. In areas close to the state borders, Georgia and Alabama have significant fanbases as well.

Agree with the final statement, but the BIG teams and ND, you will have to show and tell. I lived there 40 years and have family there.

(01-29-2020 08:00 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  In every one of those states except Ohio, adding the teams you suggest would drop the state well below average in terms of saturation.

Also, the presence of major pro sports teams is probably the most important factor when questioning whether a state or region would support another P college football team with median or above P-level donations.

How about a chart of (state population) divided by (number of P5 programs + NFL + NBA+ MLB + NHL teams in the state or within 50 miles of the state). Then, for example, instead of dividing New York's population by 1 and getting 19.5 million people per team, we're dividing it by 11 and getting 1.8 million people per team.

True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Fortunately there's no NFL team near UCSD or SDSU, unless you call 150 miles "closeby."

The pros are not relevant unless they are in the same metro. The Dallas Cowboys and Houston Oilers/Texans never hampered Texas or Texas A&M.

Now they do hamper TCU/SMU/Houston/Rice. There are very few programs in NFL markets with good attendance. TCU, SMU, Rice and Minnesota all fell off the cliff in the 60s with the rise of the NFL (not that NFL was the only factor). Even USC and UCLA don't do well considering their success. Miami has drawn in the 20s when they had mediocre seasons. Washington is the only school in an NFL market that has really good attendance.

(02-02-2020 02:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:00 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Fortunately there's no NFL team near UCSD or SDSU, unless you call 150 miles "closeby."

The pros are not relevant unless they are in the same metro. The Dallas Cowboys and Houston Oilers/Texans never hampered Texas or Texas A&M.

Now they do hamper TCU/SMU/Houston/Rice. There are very few programs in NFL markets with good attendance. TCU, SMU, Rice and Minnesota all fell off the cliff in the 60s with the rise of the NFL (not that NFL was the only factor). Even USC and UCLA don't do well considering their success. Miami has drawn in the 20s when they had mediocre seasons. Washington is the only school in an NFL market that has really good attendance.

I think you are omitting a very important factor when comparing those three Texas programs. Yes, they have poor attendance, but they are also small private schools, unlike Texas and Texas A&M. TCU's attendance isn't bad, but a large portion of their attendance seems to come from visiting fans. Houston is beginning to carve out a nice following in Houston, largely because they are the 3rd largest university in Texas. I believe large public universities in Texas NFL markets can grow. I do not think the small private universities can gain sizable loyal following within the same NFL markets.

(02-02-2020 02:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:00 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Fortunately there's no NFL team near UCSD or SDSU, unless you call 150 miles "closeby."

The pros are not relevant unless they are in the same metro. The Dallas Cowboys and Houston Oilers/Texans never hampered Texas or Texas A&M.

Now they do hamper TCU/SMU/Houston/Rice/Pittsburgh. There are very few programs in NFL markets with good attendance. TCU, SMU, Rice and Minnesota all fell off the cliff in the 60s with the rise of the NFL (not that NFL was the only factor). Even USC and UCLA don't do well considering their success. Miami has drawn in the 20s when they had mediocre seasons. Washington is the only school in an NFL market that has really good attendance.

When did Pittsburgh fall off the map??

(01-30-2020 12:43 PM)VNova Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:00 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 11:57 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:03 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(01-28-2020 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  True! The first thought that hit my mind while perusing that list was not where teams need to be added, but where consolidation to reduce the number of teams would be beneficial. There are a few states that could handle another school by those numbers, but those also tend to be professional sports sites.

Some states need to be looked at as a combined entity. Best example I can give of this would be New York & New Jersey. NYC is located in both states, for all practical intents and purposes. I would do the same with Missouri and Kansas because they both share KC. You could make the argument for Tennessee and Mississippi too, because they share Memphis. You could probably throw Arkansas in here too.
The same could be done for Texas and New Mexico, since they both share the El Paso metro.
I'm trying to think of other places where that is the case.

Just thought of another one: Massachusetts and Rhode Island, because of Boston-Providence.

I wouldn't look at states as combined, but I would look at whether fans in one state follow pro teams that are very close by, for example, most people in Kansas live in the eastern third of the state and the Chiefs play a few miles from the eastern state line.

And since we're looking at college football, by far the biggest pro competition for football fans is the NFL, so whether there's an NFL team nearby carries much more weight than the proximity of teams in other pro sports.

Fortunately there's no NFL team near UCSD or SDSU, unless you call 150 miles "closeby."

UCSD has no football program (will not be pursuing one either) and just joined Big West this year. In 4 years, they'll be out of the D2 to D1 transition phase and able to compete in the post-season. They're not touching a P5 conference. They don't want to nor need to. SDSU is the only viable choice in San Diego. USD isn't jumping from Pioneer, into the G5, and into P5 in 10 years.

The OP said who's on the right path towards a P5 invite 10 years from now, not who will receive one. And UCSD will certainly be on the right path. Academic rankings and research, student population, financial endowment, all currently lean in UCSD's favor vs SDSU. So does the simple fact they're not a Cal State. At least as far as the Pac 12 is concerned.

The only thing UCSD is lacking is time playing in D1. I believe they are the one institution who won't need a football program to join the Pac 12 (although if they ever did receive a conditional invite, they'd gladly start it up).

(01-27-2020 08:24 AM)TerryD Wrote:  How are the schools in red going to pay for themselves plus boost the pay of others?

Which conferences will take the hit on their bottom line to add them?

Will the SEC and Big Ten take a haircut? Will anyone else?

The argument has always been that the money will come if the schools in question are playing a P5 schedule. If you look at Utah, TCU and Louisville, there seems to be some merit to that argument. But those ascensions occurred in the cable market share era. In a world where the evaluation is more BYOFandom, only UCF and BYU would add value IMO.

(02-03-2020 03:28 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  In a world where the evaluation is more BYOFandom, only UCF and BYU would add value IMO.

And with about 20,000 students in 1990 and about three and a half times that today, UCF is the one that is assured of having its BYOFandom number increasing over the decade ahead.

UCF would be one of the Universities best placed to leverage some big giant-killing wins in the coming decade ... but it's not enough to be in a position to benefit, you actually have to convert that opportunity into media value.