MountieBoyOz
Eater of Worlds
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
That's a big FU to them.
That's a big FU to them.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
- Thread starter bronconick
- Start date
- Status
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
See: Everything else about this college football musical chairs we have going on.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
And UConn was ridiculed because of their measly 38,248 average attendance.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
It's West Virginia. I figure the SEC schools at least require a pulse.
It's West Virginia. I figure the SEC schools at least require a pulse.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
And I would mock any BC fan that claims they have a huge following, too. Frankly, no one in New England can claim a huge following - there's too many schools and too many pro sports divviing up the market.
And I would mock any BC fan that claims they have a huge following, too. Frankly, no one in New England can claim a huge following - there's too many schools and too many pro sports divviing up the market.
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
It wouldn't surprise me. It also wouldn't surprise me if half of New England would call BC the team they follow most. Do you know this not to be the case?
See Green Color in New England...represents BC school most followed:
It wouldn't surprise me. It also wouldn't surprise me if half of New England would call BC the team they follow most. Do you know this not to be the case?
See Green Color in New England...represents BC school most followed:
Last edited:
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Perhaps, but given how many games one can watch nationally these days...
Perhaps, but given how many games one can watch nationally these days...
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Maps like this one are always problematic to interpret. There's three basic problems: the maps often do not represent depth of following, only its spread; the maps are not weighted for population; and a dot on the map represents a plurality, not necessarily a majority.
It does seem to show a wider interest than just the Boston area for the Eagles, but how solid is that following "outside of the beltway", so to speak? Is it representative of a true Massachusetts-wide following, or more reflective of another situation, like a generalized apathy for college football (such that one or two fans voting gives BC that region on the map), or since it's only based on I-A football, a variety of competing local interests? If, say, all colleges were on that map, BC probably would not have quite that large spread; local stats for UNH, Maine, and UMass might overwhelm BC (like, I'm sure, pockets of Connecticut and Rhode Island that are currently part of the solid green that UConn occupies might instead fall to URI or Yale).
It wouldn't surprise me. It also wouldn't surprise me if half of New England would call BC the team they follow most. Do you know this not to be the case?
See Green Color in New England...represents BC school most followed:
Maps like this one are always problematic to interpret. There's three basic problems: the maps often do not represent depth of following, only its spread; the maps are not weighted for population; and a dot on the map represents a plurality, not necessarily a majority.
It does seem to show a wider interest than just the Boston area for the Eagles, but how solid is that following "outside of the beltway", so to speak? Is it representative of a true Massachusetts-wide following, or more reflective of another situation, like a generalized apathy for college football (such that one or two fans voting gives BC that region on the map), or since it's only based on I-A football, a variety of competing local interests? If, say, all colleges were on that map, BC probably would not have quite that large spread; local stats for UNH, Maine, and UMass might overwhelm BC (like, I'm sure, pockets of Connecticut and Rhode Island that are currently part of the solid green that UConn occupies might instead fall to URI or Yale).
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Descriptive maps by their nature are not absolute, but rather directional and require some basic knowledge of local population. Your point about local schools is taken into account. If you look very close, local markets have varied shades...there are four or five in southern Maine.
In the end, data like this is very instructive. Common wisdom might say Cincy owns much of southern Ohio, but this is not the case as they are the top school only in the town of Cincinnati itself. Some like to stick to their preconcieved notions until so much hard data is piled on that they can't deny the truth any longer. By and large, the map don't detract away from the fact that BC has easily the top fan base in populous region of NE...but rather reinforces it.
Descriptive maps by their nature are not absolute, but rather directional and require some basic knowledge of local population. Your point about local schools is taken into account. If you look very close, local markets have varied shades...there are four or five in southern Maine.
In the end, data like this is very instructive. Common wisdom might say Cincy owns much of southern Ohio, but this is not the case as they are the top school only in the town of Cincinnati itself. Some like to stick to their preconcieved notions until so much hard data is piled on that they can't deny the truth any longer. By and large, the map don't detract away from the fact that BC has easily the top fan base in populous region of NE...but rather reinforces it.
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
FSU-OU Saturday night had higher ratings then the other three games on combined and the highest rated Saturday night game in two years, on a night including Ohio State-Miami, with their two "Top 15" fanbases in Silver's world, but yeah, FSU is 8th in the ACC.
Silver did the football equivalent of using a DailyKos poll on their website to guess the presidential election.
FSU-OU Saturday night had higher ratings then the other three games on combined and the highest rated Saturday night game in two years, on a night including Ohio State-Miami, with their two "Top 15" fanbases in Silver's world, but yeah, FSU is 8th in the ACC.
Silver did the football equivalent of using a DailyKos poll on their website to guess the presidential election.
WeWantMore
New member
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Well no **** it wouldn't surprise you to see them have that actual attendance. Because, you know, that's the actual attendance they had. It's a hard number, not a matter of opinion.
It wouldn't surprise me. It also wouldn't surprise me if half of New England would call BC the team they follow most. Do you know this not to be the case?
See Green Color in New England...represents BC school most followed:
Well no **** it wouldn't surprise you to see them have that actual attendance. Because, you know, that's the actual attendance they had. It's a hard number, not a matter of opinion.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
While that might be true (UConn I guess would be the competition?), it wouldn't surprise me if 95% of New Englanders said they didn't follow college football at all.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
I'm with you on this. I just don't see them becoming regional, even in the Big Ten. Look at Michigan, Ohio State, USC, Texas, Alabama, etc. Supposedly regional teams with enough exposure to be players in California while giving Florida the reacharound.
I'm with you on this. I just don't see them becoming regional, even in the Big Ten. Look at Michigan, Ohio State, USC, Texas, Alabama, etc. Supposedly regional teams with enough exposure to be players in California while giving Florida the reacharound.
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Being able to see a college football team in person really doesn't impact recruiting as much anymore. Being on tv is the big thing. As long as they continue to have games on ESPN/ABC/NBC whatever they will continue to get recruits. It doesn't matter what conference they are in or if they are independent.
Being able to see a college football team in person really doesn't impact recruiting as much anymore. Being on tv is the big thing. As long as they continue to have games on ESPN/ABC/NBC whatever they will continue to get recruits. It doesn't matter what conference they are in or if they are independent.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
I think teams like Boise, Utah, BYU, and TCU prove that to be 100% correct. There is no such thing as a truly regional team anymore. If you win, they will come to you.
Or you can fly them out to your school to watch a game.
I think teams like Boise, Utah, BYU, and TCU prove that to be 100% correct. There is no such thing as a truly regional team anymore. If you win, they will come to you.
Or you can fly them out to your school to watch a game.
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Portraits of Realignment (funny): http://www.rockmnation.com/2011/9/19/2436901/portraits-of-conference-realignment
Portraits of Realignment (funny): http://www.rockmnation.com/2011/9/19/2436901/portraits-of-conference-realignment
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
What about ESPN?? They have been the most responsible for the hype and weird scheduling just to get your team on TV.
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Turner Gill, Bruce Benson and Larry Scott are the highlights.
Turner Gill, Bruce Benson and Larry Scott are the highlights.
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Which even if true could easily result in a stronger following than all but about twenty or so schools (regardless of what WWM seems to think).
Hot off the press...OU and TX back the drawing board:
Pac-12 Conference: No expansion
By Jon Wilner.The Pac-12 just announced it will not expand.
Take a second to digest that …
OK.
The league just released an email saying it is sticking at 12.
Larry Scott’s statement:
“After careful review we have determined that it is in the best interests of our member institutions, student-athletes and fans to remain a 12-team conference. While we have great respect for all of the institutions that have contacted us, and certain expansion proposals were financially attractive, we have a strong conference structure and culture of equality that we are committed to preserve. With new landmark TV agreements and plans to launch our innovative television networks, we are going to focus solely on these great assets, our strong heritage and the bright future in front of us.”
While that might be true (UConn I guess would be the competition?), it wouldn't surprise me if 95% of New Englanders said they didn't follow college football at all.
Which even if true could easily result in a stronger following than all but about twenty or so schools (regardless of what WWM seems to think).
Hot off the press...OU and TX back the drawing board:
Pac-12 Conference: No expansion
By Jon Wilner.The Pac-12 just announced it will not expand.
Take a second to digest that …
OK.
The league just released an email saying it is sticking at 12.
Larry Scott’s statement:
“After careful review we have determined that it is in the best interests of our member institutions, student-athletes and fans to remain a 12-team conference. While we have great respect for all of the institutions that have contacted us, and certain expansion proposals were financially attractive, we have a strong conference structure and culture of equality that we are committed to preserve. With new landmark TV agreements and plans to launch our innovative television networks, we are going to focus solely on these great assets, our strong heritage and the bright future in front of us.”
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: College Football 2011: Enough of realignment and scandals. Gimme Footbaw!
Meanwhile, the president of UConn (who used to be a prof at Georgia Tech) insists they have not applied to the ACC. Strange, since the ACC had at least 8 schools apply after Pitt/Cuse came aboard. I can't imagine UConn wasn't one of those 8.
Meanwhile, the football members of the Big East met in NYC tonight and vowed to get new members and strengthen the conference, but President Herbst was reportedly at a different meeting, getting support for a jump to the ACC. Duke and Maryland support the move, BC is dead set against it.
UConn may not want to admit it, but they're one of the 8, and the odds are high they're already gone. The only thing that could gum up the works is Notre Dame and Texas joining the ACC.
Has anyone heard that Penn State is unhappy with the Big Ten? The BC fans on my twitter feed seem to be under the delusion that PSU will join the ACC.
That would sure screw up the BTHC
Meanwhile, the president of UConn (who used to be a prof at Georgia Tech) insists they have not applied to the ACC. Strange, since the ACC had at least 8 schools apply after Pitt/Cuse came aboard. I can't imagine UConn wasn't one of those 8.
Meanwhile, the football members of the Big East met in NYC tonight and vowed to get new members and strengthen the conference, but President Herbst was reportedly at a different meeting, getting support for a jump to the ACC. Duke and Maryland support the move, BC is dead set against it.
UConn may not want to admit it, but they're one of the 8, and the odds are high they're already gone. The only thing that could gum up the works is Notre Dame and Texas joining the ACC.
Has anyone heard that Penn State is unhappy with the Big Ten? The BC fans on my twitter feed seem to be under the delusion that PSU will join the ACC.
That would sure screw up the BTHC
- Status