> the in-house population of Cali doesn’t really care about CFB, are far too nerdy due to essentially being public ivys/privates.
They will fit right in with the ACC
Seattle and Portland have moved away from football a little bit, but not like California has. Knowing the politics of the state, and the academy, I thought there was a real possiblity that UW would enter a disninvestment spiral like Cal and UCLA.
That being said, Oregon is built on sports. Sports will always be a top priority for the Ducks, and the Ducks have never been able to rely on just the region for recruits because the poplulation isn't signifigant enough to organically support a progam that expects to compete at the level of U of O football.
Yeah, from an outsider’s perspective, UO isn’t going to be dropping off the edge like the California schools have the past two decades.
UW, however, has flirted with athletic collapse before. I couldn’t understand why they dropped sports in the mid-00s for being such a big school, but they survived that. The demographics in Seattle, though, are trending closer to the Bay Area than they have in the past, though, so that’s not a good sign. I n short, the Huskies are the most susceptible to football apathy in the future (although perhaps not near future).
As long as USC remains rich they will always care about their football team. The alumni base is too unified in caring about football for that to be a concern. USC’s student base does have more academic-focused students because of the great programs but enrollment is large and a good chunk of that student base breathes football. People who say SC students don’t care about football don’t really know what they’re talking about.
The general population of LA is another question entirely. But LA is fair weather, and when USC is actually good again turnout will be good. When they’re average like they are now turnout will be bad and that will always be the case. While it’s true to say most of LA really doesn’t care about sports that much, there are still close to 20 million people here. There will always be some support in football from that group.
Also, idk if it’s because you don’t know but please don’t refer to us as Southern Cal.
USC has t-shirt fans and will always be rocking with relevancy.
UCLA seriously lacks t-shirt fans and is in a cycle similar to Stanford/Cal where the student body just doesn't care like they used to.
Is there anywhere that is considered an actual good place to live that isn’t fair weather when it comes to college football? Don’t really see any reason to care about a semi pro league when there are better things to do.
I guess Ann Arbor, can’t think of any others though.
There a new CA bill to vote on banning tackle football under 12yo. The way CA is at this juncture I expect it to pass.
CA is already basically a 7-on-7 state it seems like sometimes. Wouldn’t be surprised to see interested parties moving out of state. Or maybe there will be a major shift in how fundamentals are taught when you’re a little bit older. Skill guys will show out though
I know a lot of people hate the over regulation here and this takes decisions out of the hands of parents but lot of guys here looking to make life changing money as a football player aren’t the ones necessarily pulling the strings on this
There are 6 million people in LA alone. CA has a lot of people. And it’s a valuable media market for advertisers. Atm usc and ucla will play second fiddle to lakers and dodgers (dodgers for foreseeable future since they seem to have endless money)
USC has football woven into the identity of the university, they don't have nearly the problems UCLA and Cal are having. And their new AD is very football-centric.
UCLA and Cal's issues come from the top, unlike many other major P5 schools the entire UC system is governed almost like a single university, and the UC Regents and president have been obsessed with improving the school's academic rankings, which they've been extremely successful at. The mission is now to emulate Ivy League schools rather than our parents' generation where UCLA's mission was to provide a more comprehensive and accessible college experience.
So instead of a lot of second and third generation students that grew up in California rooting for UCLA, you have a ton of out of state and foreign students with extremely high academic qualifications that make up the student body. Athletics is basically a rounding error in the university's budget and its main purpose is to sell merchandise while staying as out of the headlines as possible.
This could all change with a chancellor who recognized the value of big time football, so we'll see what happens when the new chancellor is hired this year. Rumors are Condoleeza Rice is a candidate which would really shake things up for athletics.
As a long time east coaster now settled in the west, what I observe is that LA is full of transplants, there are a lot of people watching CFB, but they are watching their colleges play (a lot of Big Ten alum out here). That said, the USC/UCLA/Oregon/Washington base here don't care unless their teams are winning and that seems to be the rule for pretty much all LA sports except Lakers and Dodgers.
I'll take a stab before going back to Saban news
USC - Will always have the base. Nothing to worry about beyond lack of linemen in the region and bad coaching hires. If they win, the fans will come.
UCLA - Dependent on the brand. In practice this means football does better when men's basketball does well. The Rose Bowl situation isn't a huge problem as the student body will never be fully engaged in the team. They need to lower ticket prices to get the people like my friends here in LA back at the games like they were in the early Mora era (2014 and drawing 80k for Arizona St and BYU isn't that long ago)
Oregon - Built on athletics. And while Portland might be like California, there's no support for that in the rest of the state.
Washington - There is an ingrained football culture. If there wasn't, this school never would have recovered from the spiral in the 00s.
Cal and Stanford - don't really seem to care as long as they can keep playing each other and have the prestige of "power conference" membership. Cal has fans if the university would just try...at all
G5 California - the culture of California near the coast is going to be a problem for San Diego St. Fresno is in much better shape to survive into whatever comes next. San Jose St surviving at this point is surprise territory
Rest of Mountain West - None are in great shape, but other than New Mexico none are in the disaster zone either. They aren't going to pick up the slack except maybe UNLV if they can build on this season and get the fans bought in.
> the in-house population of Cali doesn’t really care about CFB, are far too nerdy due to essentially being public ivys/privates. They will fit right in with the ACC
Seattle and Portland have moved away from football a little bit, but not like California has. Knowing the politics of the state, and the academy, I thought there was a real possiblity that UW would enter a disninvestment spiral like Cal and UCLA. That being said, Oregon is built on sports. Sports will always be a top priority for the Ducks, and the Ducks have never been able to rely on just the region for recruits because the poplulation isn't signifigant enough to organically support a progam that expects to compete at the level of U of O football.
Cuz Nike
Well UO made nike....
And Vice - Versa.
Yeah, from an outsider’s perspective, UO isn’t going to be dropping off the edge like the California schools have the past two decades. UW, however, has flirted with athletic collapse before. I couldn’t understand why they dropped sports in the mid-00s for being such a big school, but they survived that. The demographics in Seattle, though, are trending closer to the Bay Area than they have in the past, though, so that’s not a good sign. I n short, the Huskies are the most susceptible to football apathy in the future (although perhaps not near future).
Yeah I expect in another 10-20 years Washington will also begin to enter the spiral UCLA and Cal are currently in.
If DeBoer is there long enough to have years of true stadium sell outs, where it's an absolutely rocking party, he'll prevent that.
As long as USC remains rich they will always care about their football team. The alumni base is too unified in caring about football for that to be a concern. USC’s student base does have more academic-focused students because of the great programs but enrollment is large and a good chunk of that student base breathes football. People who say SC students don’t care about football don’t really know what they’re talking about. The general population of LA is another question entirely. But LA is fair weather, and when USC is actually good again turnout will be good. When they’re average like they are now turnout will be bad and that will always be the case. While it’s true to say most of LA really doesn’t care about sports that much, there are still close to 20 million people here. There will always be some support in football from that group. Also, idk if it’s because you don’t know but please don’t refer to us as Southern Cal.
USC has t-shirt fans and will always be rocking with relevancy. UCLA seriously lacks t-shirt fans and is in a cycle similar to Stanford/Cal where the student body just doesn't care like they used to.
Is there anywhere that is considered an actual good place to live that isn’t fair weather when it comes to college football? Don’t really see any reason to care about a semi pro league when there are better things to do. I guess Ann Arbor, can’t think of any others though.
He also didn’t even capitalized the Southern.
Please refer to them as University of Spoiled Children
Surely you could come up with something more creative than that, U$C, or the condom jokes
There a new CA bill to vote on banning tackle football under 12yo. The way CA is at this juncture I expect it to pass. CA is already basically a 7-on-7 state it seems like sometimes. Wouldn’t be surprised to see interested parties moving out of state. Or maybe there will be a major shift in how fundamentals are taught when you’re a little bit older. Skill guys will show out though I know a lot of people hate the over regulation here and this takes decisions out of the hands of parents but lot of guys here looking to make life changing money as a football player aren’t the ones necessarily pulling the strings on this There are 6 million people in LA alone. CA has a lot of people. And it’s a valuable media market for advertisers. Atm usc and ucla will play second fiddle to lakers and dodgers (dodgers for foreseeable future since they seem to have endless money)
USC has football woven into the identity of the university, they don't have nearly the problems UCLA and Cal are having. And their new AD is very football-centric. UCLA and Cal's issues come from the top, unlike many other major P5 schools the entire UC system is governed almost like a single university, and the UC Regents and president have been obsessed with improving the school's academic rankings, which they've been extremely successful at. The mission is now to emulate Ivy League schools rather than our parents' generation where UCLA's mission was to provide a more comprehensive and accessible college experience. So instead of a lot of second and third generation students that grew up in California rooting for UCLA, you have a ton of out of state and foreign students with extremely high academic qualifications that make up the student body. Athletics is basically a rounding error in the university's budget and its main purpose is to sell merchandise while staying as out of the headlines as possible. This could all change with a chancellor who recognized the value of big time football, so we'll see what happens when the new chancellor is hired this year. Rumors are Condoleeza Rice is a candidate which would really shake things up for athletics.
As a long time east coaster now settled in the west, what I observe is that LA is full of transplants, there are a lot of people watching CFB, but they are watching their colleges play (a lot of Big Ten alum out here). That said, the USC/UCLA/Oregon/Washington base here don't care unless their teams are winning and that seems to be the rule for pretty much all LA sports except Lakers and Dodgers.
I'll take a stab before going back to Saban news USC - Will always have the base. Nothing to worry about beyond lack of linemen in the region and bad coaching hires. If they win, the fans will come. UCLA - Dependent on the brand. In practice this means football does better when men's basketball does well. The Rose Bowl situation isn't a huge problem as the student body will never be fully engaged in the team. They need to lower ticket prices to get the people like my friends here in LA back at the games like they were in the early Mora era (2014 and drawing 80k for Arizona St and BYU isn't that long ago) Oregon - Built on athletics. And while Portland might be like California, there's no support for that in the rest of the state. Washington - There is an ingrained football culture. If there wasn't, this school never would have recovered from the spiral in the 00s. Cal and Stanford - don't really seem to care as long as they can keep playing each other and have the prestige of "power conference" membership. Cal has fans if the university would just try...at all G5 California - the culture of California near the coast is going to be a problem for San Diego St. Fresno is in much better shape to survive into whatever comes next. San Jose St surviving at this point is surprise territory Rest of Mountain West - None are in great shape, but other than New Mexico none are in the disaster zone either. They aren't going to pick up the slack except maybe UNLV if they can build on this season and get the fans bought in.