Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I didn't question the die-hard fan base of a team like the Packers - who by the way are not in the Northeast. What I cannot agree with is the assertion that pro football popularity is the reason that college football isn't big in the Northeast...and lack of interest in pro football in the South is the reason college football is so huge.
Remember, we were also including the Midwest in this discussion...college football is just as big there as in the South.
I see what you're saying, but although there is a lot of tradition in Big Ten football, I think the South is a lot more fervent in their support of college football. In the Midwest it seems that the people supporting college football teams are largely alumni of those institutions or college educated people who grew up near their favorite college football team. College football in the Midwest doesn't have the "blue collar" base that you would find with NFL teams (with few exceptions such as Ohio State and Notre Dame). In the South, everyone represents for their favorite college football team, no matter if they're an alumni or not.
Let's turn the tables. A few posters here mentioned baseball. Why is it, IMO, that Major League Baseball's interest is so much more rabid in the northeast (predominately NY and Boston) than any other part of the country, by far? I'll add Chi Cubs and the Cardinals to the mix, but anyone in those cities knows that the NY-Boston interest in baseball exceeds it.
Why is NHL so much more popular in Toronto, Montreal and Detroit, than any other city? I think Lammius nails it: a combination of history, and in many cases, coupled with winning.
On a somewhat related note, here is a CommonCensus Sports map that shows pro. football team allegiances across the country. It's pretty notable how the Northeastern/Midwestern NFL teams tend to have more numerical support than the Southern NFL teams:
On a somewhat related note, here is a CommonCensus Sports map showing that shows pro. football team allegiances across the country. It's pretty notable how the Northeastern/Midwestern NFL teams tend to have more numerical support than the Southern NFL teams:
The sample size may not be adequate here to formulate boundaries, because for instance, it seems New England Patriots support predominates in Sussex County NJ, and likewise, the Cinncinati Bengals trump the Browns and Steelers in places like Zanesville (Muskingum County Ohio)? The Bengals are not a patch on the ass of either the Browns or Steelers in that area of Ohio. I had some relatives that lived in that area, and can tell you no one there rooted for the Bengals.
That makes the most sense...highly populated areas with professional teams in close proximity. The ones in the rest of the country tend to be spread out over greater land mass.
This whole, "Oh, we're so snooty awesome b/c we spend money on academics instead of athletics..." garbage; hey, that stuff is not mutually exclusive! You can do both.
And college basketball is pretty big up there, so how does that work out for your little theory?
Actually, I got to thinking. My theory made no sense. Many states have multiple NFL teams and other professional sports and are still very big on collegiate sports.
I know why the northeast is not quite as crazy about college football.
It’s because they generally suck at football. Wow, that's an obvious one.
It has a lot to do with where the talent is. The northeast is completely bare when it comes to football talent. Even the midwest, where football is popular, schools choose to come south to Florida and Texas for many of their college players.
This is from 2008, and for just a few examples of how many Division 1 football players were recruited from each state:
New Jersey high schools produced 50
New York high schools produced 24
Massachussetts high schools produced 7
Ohio high schools produced 146
Pennsylvania high schools produced 79
Illinois high schools produced 63
Florida high schools produced 358
Georgia high schools produced 158
Alabama high schools produced 95
Louisiana high schools produced 82
Mississippi high schools produced 74
you get the picture. It is hard for the northeastern schools to compete with their local talent. Boston College has 7 potential in-state prospects to choose from, LSU has 82. You can add up the entire northeast and it is about as talent-rich as the state of Georgia.
BOOM. I can't believe it took until the 4th page for this to get mentioned. There's your real answer. The best talent is Down South.Not trying to brag about it either. Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama. There isn't a region in the nation that can touch that depth. Midwest has Ohio. West Coast has California and the Northeast has Pennsylvania and New Jersey somewhat. Even in the DC area, they love football, but the talent in the area is below what you see in Houston, Miami, Atlanta, New Orleans, and Dallas. There's a reason why you see programs like Texas, OU (gets most of it's players from Texas), Florida, Bama, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Miami, FSU, and Auburn always up there every year. There's a reason why the state of Florida dominated the 90s. There's a reason why the state of Texas leads the nation in D-1 talent the past 30 years. There's a reason why the last three national championships came in states where I-10 runs through it.
BOOM. I can't believe it took until the 4th page for this to get mentioned. There's your real answer. The best talent is Down South.Not trying to brag about it either. Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama. There isn't a region in the nation that can touch that depth. Midwest has Ohio. West Coast has California and the Northeast has Pennsylvania and New Jersey somewhat. Even in the DC area, they love football, but the talent in the area is below what you see in Houston, Miami, Atlanta, New Orleans, and Dallas. There's a reason why you see programs like Texas, OU (gets most of it's players from Texas), Florida, Bama, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Miami, FSU, and Auburn always up there every year. There's a reason why the state of Florida dominated the 90s. There's a reason why the state of Texas leads the nation in D-1 talent the past 30 years. There's a reason why the last three national championships came in states where I-10 runs through it.
it's not the "reason" though. I agree the best talent as a whole is found down there, but it's because football is taken more seriously at younger ages, which produces better players who go to colleges where football is taken more seriously, and round and round it goes.
the larger question is - why is it such a big deal down there? i don't mean it as a put down, as I LOVE football, but it blows my mind that high school football draws such a huge crowd.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I cannot agree with is the assertion that pro football popularity is the reason that college football isn't big in the Northeast...and lack of interest in pro football in the South is the reason college football is so huge. 
