Sleeping Giants of college football? - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > National Football League > NCAA College Football

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06.07.2011, 12:19 PM
Goodfry's Avatar
Goodfry Goodfry is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 22.06.2009
Posts: 5,792
Default Sleeping Giants of college football?

While learning the sport what intersted me was looking at some programs there should be huge programs which just don't appear to be able to recruit talent or even for some draw crowds.

Looking at Illinois huge state produces great talent and only has to contend with the less than impressive on field North Western. This college should be up there with any SEC team, Penn State or OSU. Chicago loves there football but for some reason they don't produce a relevant program compare to what they could be achieving. Minnesota same story the twin cities produce some top talent high school talent and they are pretty much isolated up north. Colorado copy and paste what was said about Minnesota. Maryland has a big metro population to recruit from but end with a lacklustre end result. Boston College good producers of NFL talent but should be bigger with a much stronger contenders with their recruiting population.

Syracuse and Rutgers a state with 20 million population and only two major college teams average less than 80,000 a week between them and can't attract much if any major talent. Washington big state struggles to get talent. Even UCLA a team which should be much bigger than they are.

Compare it to North and South Carolina both with numerous top programs with massive crowds and regular producers of top draft picks racking in 280k average crowds per week for all of their 6 major programs. Alabama two teams which average out 160,000 a week between them massive football factories;, it's not a big state. Iowa small state supports teams putting 110,000 a week in the stand for both combined, produced another good NFL talent producer in the Hawkeys. Indiana with 4 Div one schools averaging about 170k a week between them, Kentucky about 90k a week between their two major programs. The list goes on.

.Even with the German football bonus of cheap seats going for them the crowds’ size are amazing. For anyone any knowledge how did some schools with so much potential become nothing but minnows of college football?

Website used for attendance figures.
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2009/Intern...ATTENDANCE.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06.07.2011, 03:17 PM
Go UL Vikings's Avatar
Go UL Vikings Go UL Vikings is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 02.09.2004
Posts: 1,316
Default

I think South Florida is a sleeping giant. They have a huge student population - over 47,500 - the 8th biggest in America. They are in a BCS conference. They are in arguably the most talent-rich state in the country.

A similar situation would be UCF. They have the second biggest student population in the country after Arizona State, they have a great new on-campus stadium, and again, are in a state saturated with talent. They have to compete with 6 other in-state schools, including the big three of Florida, Florida State and Miami, but there's more tahn enough talent to go around.

In New York, most of the population is in the city, and honestly, most of them could not give a crap about college football. Plus, it's a trek to get to any of the games. Half the people in the city don't have cars, they rely on public transport. And getting to Rutgers, UConn or Syracuse from the city without a car is a huge hassle. People in the city would rather do other things with their Saturdays. Pro football draws far more interest. As does baseball, basketball, hockey, and even soccer.

My opinion is that college football tends to thrive outside the big metropolis, and usually in cities that don't have an NFL team - Austin, Tuscaloosa, Norman, Gainesville, Lincoln, Ann Arbor, Columbus, Tallahassee, Athens, Knoxville, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06.07.2011, 05:12 PM
HolyRoller10's Avatar
HolyRoller10 HolyRoller10 is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 26.10.2008
Posts: 13,373
Default

Clemson and UCLA should always be better; there's no excuse with those two.

No one really pays attention to college football in the Northeast which is college basketball and MLB country so Rutgers is understandable. Plus the homegrown talent isn't there compared to California, Texas and the South.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06.07.2011, 05:29 PM
VABrit's Avatar
VABrit VABrit is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 18.10.2008
Posts: 3,016
Default

It's a nice discussion point. As HR stated the Northeast really isn't too interested in college football compared to pro football and baseball. This logic probably extends as far down as Maryland.

A lot of the South (east) has college football as the number 1 sport. Places such as WVU, Virginia Tech, Alabama, Clemson, Auburn are a fair way from pro teams (or originally were) and often the whole community and area "adopts" the college team as their own. I know a lot of VT and WVU fans who don't even acknowledge the existence of the NFL.

Also a lot of recruits are drawn to "football factories." If a player from NY/NJ area is getting recruited by Florida, Alabama, Tennessee etc then they are more likely going to go to a "football factory" than stay in state.

In regards to USF/UCF, I do believe they are two programs on the rise. It seems however that USF still have trouble drawing a decent crowd and really need their own facility. UCF is going from strength to strength. Their new football facility looks amazing, their Basketball facility is much improved and their campus is very modern with a lot of new developments in the area yet retains a decent atmosphere. I actually think if UCF can carry on with a more little success then they could well eventually claw up the ranks. They already have a great location, facilities and their academics are improving.

Last edited by VABrit; 06.07.2011 at 05:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07.07.2011, 12:40 AM
falcon_91's Avatar
falcon_91 falcon_91 is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 05.05.2006
Posts: 6,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HolyRoller10 View Post
Clemson and UCLA should always be better; there's no excuse with those two.
If UCLA cant take advantage of USC, Haurbaugh leaving Stanford, and if Oregon do get done, then they need a massive internal investogation

And Clemson, they recruit so well they only have themselves to blame.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07.07.2011, 01:48 AM
VABrit's Avatar
VABrit VABrit is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 18.10.2008
Posts: 3,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon_91 View Post
If UCLA cant take advantage of USC, Haurbaugh leaving Stanford, and if Oregon do get done, then they need a massive internal investogation

And Clemson, they recruit so well they only have themselves to blame.
UCLA never seem to "aim high." Some of their recent coaching hires have been suspicious and they seem lackluster at recruiting. The location, academics are all there but they seem a little behind in a conference where programs seem to be rising every year.

And then there is Clemson. Don't know how we do it but every year we implode despite having quality on the football field. Since I was there we have imploded and we still do now. I think that mentality has settled in a little and is gradually wearing off a little now after changing to Dabo as coach. Also Terry Don Phillips (our AD) doesn't seem to share the same enthusiasm or expectations from the football program that the fanbase, alumni and student body does which holds us back a little more than we would like.

I could write a whole thesis on Clemson in the past 10 years but really a sigh and saying "there is always next year" is a lot easier. Heck even Wake Forest has had more success than us recently (my other half loves to remind me of this)!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07.07.2011, 05:37 PM
biffer's Avatar
biffer biffer is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 04.11.2004
Posts: 2,376
Default

Washington
Colorado
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08.07.2011, 12:18 PM
Finley's Avatar
Finley Finley is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 10.09.2005
Posts: 164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodfry View Post
While learning the sport what intersted me was looking at some programs there should be huge programs which just don't appear to be able to recruit talent or even for some draw crowds.

Looking at Illinois huge state produces great talent and only has to contend with the less than impressive on field North Western. This college should be up there with any SEC team, Penn State or OSU. Chicago loves there football but for some reason they don't produce a relevant program compare to what they could be achieving. Minnesota same story the twin cities produce some top talent high school talent and they are pretty much isolated up north. Colorado copy and paste what was said about Minnesota. Maryland has a big metro population to recruit from but end with a lacklustre end result. Boston College good producers of NFL talent but should be bigger with a much stronger contenders with their recruiting population.

Syracuse and Rutgers a state with 20 million population and only two major college teams average less than 80,000 a week between them and can't attract much if any major talent. Washington big state struggles to get talent. Even UCLA a team which should be much bigger than they are.

Compare it to North and South Carolina both with numerous top programs with massive crowds and regular producers of top draft picks racking in 280k average crowds per week for all of their 6 major programs. Alabama two teams which average out 160,000 a week between them massive football factories;, it's not a big state. Iowa small state supports teams putting 110,000 a week in the stand for both combined, produced another good NFL talent producer in the Hawkeys. Indiana with 4 Div one schools averaging about 170k a week between them, Kentucky about 90k a week between their two major programs. The list goes on.

.Even with the German football bonus of cheap seats going for them the crowds’ size are amazing. For anyone any knowledge how did some schools with so much potential become nothing but minnows of college football?

Website used for attendance figures.
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2009/Intern...ATTENDANCE.pdf
You have to remember about Illinois is that whilst in different states, South Bend (Notre Dame) is only an hour from the border of Illinois and actually closer to Chicago that Champaign–Urbana, where the Illini play. There's no question which of the two has more history and appeal when it comes to both recruiting the best High School prospects and catchment area of fans.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08.07.2011, 03:08 PM
vann_mcelroy's Avatar
vann_mcelroy vann_mcelroy is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 23.08.2004
Posts: 17,449
Default

When Tom Ramsey and later Troy Aikman were at UCLA, it really looked like they would kick on and be better. They have everything in place to challenge USC. And be one of the top 5 programs in the country.

Except the ambition.

The Campus is great, location is out of this world..Hello? Hugh Heffners Bel Air mansion is like 1/2 mile from Hilgard Ave.

Academics are great if not outstanding. Climate etc etc.
Smoking hot co-eds
94.000 seat stadium( sometimes less than half full)

And yet they flounder around like a rich mans San Diego St.

Last edited by vann_mcelroy; 08.07.2011 at 03:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12.07.2011, 06:02 PM
MattXG's Avatar
MattXG MattXG is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: 27.07.2009
Posts: 940
Default

UNC

They have some football talent in those parts and they can recruit well but the team is rarely ever even on the radar...

Illinois suffers from the same kind of setup as the Northeast really. They have a massive, wealthy city with a long history of legendary pro-sports teams so they never really got into the college teams like the more impoverished South.

I think you can trace it back to the early 1900's, if you lived near a major US city that was very wealthy, you'd be all about Pro-sports. Yankees, Football Giants, Red Sox, Cubs, White Sox, Bears....the South didn't have the money to keep up with the wealthier, more condensed big cities of the north, so their colleges became obvious rallying points.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 01:49 PM.