NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Aug 01, 2014 9:33 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:38 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:30 am
Posts: 26
A fascinating article from the NY Times that speaks to a frequent question debated on this site -- how big is the market for a given team?

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?emc=eta1

The requisite grains of salt: I am not claiming that this analysis is 100% correct, the authors of the blog are not claiming this analysis is 100% correct, and (if you take a closer look at the websites from which the data was obtained) the data sources don't claim to be 100% correct. So it's reasonable to argue that the absolute numbers presented here don't have nearly the precision implied by the tables. But, as a concept, it all looks reasonable, and I'm willing to believe that the "real numbers" (whatever that means) are not too far off from these numbers, so I'm willing to take these at face value as a way to inform our discussions about market sizes.

So, in that spirit, here are some things that caught my eye:

  • If Nebraska is considered to be a home-run addition to the Big Ten, I don't see why Missouri wouldn't be considered to be a stand-up triple. This analysis estimates that they have more fans than five other Big Ten programs, and they aren't that much below Nebraska.
  • The argument that Penn State dominates the Pennsylvania market, including the city of Pittsburgh, is pretty well substantiated by this analysis, but it's not like Pitt is exactly chopped liver. The ACC's gain is the Big Ten's loss, from this analysis.
  • Of all the "powerhouse" programs, the one whose (estimated) fanbase was surprising low to me was Florida State. While having the (estimated) 38th largest fan base is nothing to sneeze at (just ask most of the Pac 12 schools), I would have guessed their fanbase would have been larger. (And, of course, it very well could be, if there are any inaccuracies in the analysis, but again I'm just taking these at face value.)
  • On the flipside, the program that was surprisingly high to me was Rutgers. Sure, being in the New York metro area is a plus, but I never would have pegged them for having the 32nd largest fanabase in FBS.
  • Among the non-AQ programs, props to Wyoming -- I would have put them down at the bottom of the barrel, but this analysis puts them near the top of the MWC.

I'd be interested to hear what other folks think about this.

Regards, Driver 8


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:46 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Driver 8 wrote:
A fascinating article from the NY Times that speaks to a frequent question debated on this site -- how big is the market for a given team?

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?emc=eta1

The requisite grains of salt: I am not claiming that this analysis is 100% correct, the authors of the blog are not claiming this analysis is 100% correct, and (if you take a closer look at the websites from which the data was obtained) the data sources don't claim to be 100% correct. So it's reasonable to argue that the absolute numbers presented here don't have nearly the precision implied by the tables. But, as a concept, it all looks reasonable, and I'm willing to believe that the "real numbers" (whatever that means) are not too far off from these numbers, so I'm willing to take these at face value as a way to inform our discussions about market sizes.

So, in that spirit, here are some things that caught my eye:

  • If Nebraska is considered to be a home-run addition to the Big Ten, I don't see why Missouri wouldn't be considered to be a stand-up triple. This analysis estimates that they have more fans than five other Big Ten programs, and they aren't that much below Nebraska.
  • The argument that Penn State dominates the Pennsylvania market, including the city of Pittsburgh, is pretty well substantiated by this analysis, but it's not like Pitt is exactly chopped liver. The ACC's gain is the Big Ten's loss, from this analysis.
  • Of all the "powerhouse" programs, the one whose (estimated) fanbase was surprising low to me was Florida State. While having the (estimated) 38th largest fan base is nothing to sneeze at (just ask most of the Pac 12 schools), I would have guessed their fanbase would have been larger. (And, of course, it very well could be, if there are any inaccuracies in the analysis, but again I'm just taking these at face value.)
  • On the flipside, the program that was surprisingly high to me was Rutgers. Sure, being in the New York metro area is a plus, but I never would have pegged them for having the 32nd largest fanabase in FBS.
  • Among the non-AQ programs, props to Wyoming -- I would have put them down at the bottom of the barrel, but this analysis puts them near the top of the MWC.

I'd be interested to hear what other folks think about this.

Regards, Driver 8



They put my Spartans dead last so I think it's a stupid article lol. It's cool though, I came for the Engineering program, not the football team.

But seriously, that is a heck of an article and it's exactly the things we debate. A school might be in a market, but does it carry that market? Does a school bring a national following? ect ect. Great find.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:15 am 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Driver 8 wrote:
A fascinating article from the NY Times that speaks to a frequent question debated on this site -- how big is the market for a given team?

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?emc=eta1

The requisite grains of salt: I am not claiming that this analysis is 100% correct, the authors of the blog are not claiming this analysis is 100% correct, and (if you take a closer look at the websites from which the data was obtained) the data sources don't claim to be 100% correct. So it's reasonable to argue that the absolute numbers presented here don't have nearly the precision implied by the tables. But, as a concept, it all looks reasonable, and I'm willing to believe that the "real numbers" (whatever that means) are not too far off from these numbers, so I'm willing to take these at face value as a way to inform our discussions about market sizes.

So, in that spirit, here are some things that caught my eye:

  • If Nebraska is considered to be a home-run addition to the Big Ten, I don't see why Missouri wouldn't be considered to be a stand-up triple. This analysis estimates that they have more fans than five other Big Ten programs, and they aren't that much below Nebraska.
  • The argument that Penn State dominates the Pennsylvania market, including the city of Pittsburgh, is pretty well substantiated by this analysis, but it's not like Pitt is exactly chopped liver. The ACC's gain is the Big Ten's loss, from this analysis.
  • Of all the "powerhouse" programs, the one whose (estimated) fanbase was surprising low to me was Florida State. While having the (estimated) 38th largest fan base is nothing to sneeze at (just ask most of the Pac 12 schools), I would have guessed their fanbase would have been larger. (And, of course, it very well could be, if there are any inaccuracies in the analysis, but again I'm just taking these at face value.)
  • On the flipside, the program that was surprisingly high to me was Rutgers. Sure, being in the New York metro area is a plus, but I never would have pegged them for having the 32nd largest fanabase in FBS.
  • Among the non-AQ programs, props to Wyoming -- I would have put them down at the bottom of the barrel, but this analysis puts them near the top of the MWC.

I'd be interested to hear what other folks think about this.

Regards, Driver 8



They put my Spartans dead last so I think it's a stupid article lol. It's cool though, I came for the Engineering program, not the football team.

But seriously, that is a heck of an article and it's exactly the things we debate. A school might be in a market, but does it carry that market? Does a school bring a national following? ect ect. Great find.


I would assume that the SJSU football players also came for the engineering program and not the football team ;)

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 1:07 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:21 pm
Posts: 9
Interesting article... but, as you and the writers admit, tough to gauge how accurate...

Was a bit surprised to learn about Clemson's apparent high popularity. Just gives another valid reason why (to me) they're a natural fit for the SEC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 6:04 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:30 am
Posts: 26
Actually, the more I look at this, the less impressed I am. The big problem that I am having with this analysis is the use of the data from the CommonCensus Sports Map Project -- the numbers haven't been updated in almost a year, and the guy behind the CommonCensus project describes the map as "highly inaccurate". The comments to the NYT blog seem to pick up on the idea that programs located in/near large urban areas are overestimated as compared to programs in more rural areas (Georgia Tech vs. Georgia; Miami, FL vs. Florida State, etc.), which reflects the fact that there simply isn't enough data to fully resolve some of the media markets appropriately. (For example, the total number of votes around the metro Chicago area used in the CommonCensus map is about 900 or so -- versus the 1,756,048 college football fans estimated to inhabit this region. So each "voter" in chicago corresponds to roughly 2000 or so fans, which is pretty coarse as well as easily influenced by a local "bubble" of fans.)

Ultimately, I still like the idea, and I think it could (if enough data were collected) really give a good picture of the real "markets" for each program. But it's not quite ready for prime time yet, I think.

Regards, Driver 8


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:35 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:27 am
Posts: 478
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Driver 8 wrote:
A fascinating article from the NY Times that speaks to a frequent question debated on this site -- how big is the market for a given team?

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?emc=eta1

The requisite grains of salt: I am not claiming that this analysis is 100% correct, the authors of the blog are not claiming this analysis is 100% correct, and (if you take a closer look at the websites from which the data was obtained) the data sources don't claim to be 100% correct. So it's reasonable to argue that the absolute numbers presented here don't have nearly the precision implied by the tables. But, as a concept, it all looks reasonable, and I'm willing to believe that the "real numbers" (whatever that means) are not too far off from these numbers, so I'm willing to take these at face value as a way to inform our discussions about market sizes.

So, in that spirit, here are some things that caught my eye:

  • If Nebraska is considered to be a home-run addition to the Big Ten, I don't see why Missouri wouldn't be considered to be a stand-up triple. This analysis estimates that they have more fans than five other Big Ten programs, and they aren't that much below Nebraska.
  • The argument that Penn State dominates the Pennsylvania market, including the city of Pittsburgh, is pretty well substantiated by this analysis, but it's not like Pitt is exactly chopped liver. The ACC's gain is the Big Ten's loss, from this analysis.
  • Of all the "powerhouse" programs, the one whose (estimated) fanbase was surprising low to me was Florida State. While having the (estimated) 38th largest fan base is nothing to sneeze at (just ask most of the Pac 12 schools), I would have guessed their fanbase would have been larger. (And, of course, it very well could be, if there are any inaccuracies in the analysis, but again I'm just taking these at face value.)
  • On the flipside, the program that was surprisingly high to me was Rutgers. Sure, being in the New York metro area is a plus, but I never would have pegged them for having the 32nd largest fanabase in FBS.
  • Among the non-AQ programs, props to Wyoming -- I would have put them down at the bottom of the barrel, but this analysis puts them near the top of the MWC.

I'd be interested to hear what other folks think about this.

Regards, Driver 8


Nice find but seriously fllawed

EXAMPLES

1. Rutgers has more fans in NYC than Syracuse, Uconn and Notre Dame combined.
2. Troy more than Louisville, Cincinnati, SMU, Houston, Baylor
3. UCF more than Boise, TCU, Kansas State, and half the PAC 12, and all the Mountain West
4. Arkansas State more the Army, Navy, Air Force

Also see a lot twice as many FSU shirts nationally than Georgia Tech, not the other way around.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group