Dr. Saturday - NCAAF

Dr. Saturday

Wed Jan 21, 2009 6:47 pm EST

What the Rivals 100 recruiting map says (and does not say) about the state of college football

By Matt Hinton

From deep in the bowels of MGoBlog's diary section, here's your Google map of this year's top 100 recruits according to Rivals' latest list:

This is nothing more than a curiosity, but for the sake of commentary, you might want to refer to this post by the Sports Economist's Dennis Coates last December, which itself was a response to the Wall Street Journal article, "What the Rise in Southern Football Says About America," which had as its thesis, "College football has been conquered, in nearly every respect, by the Deep South."

I don't know if I agree with that, necessarily, but obviously the South is where the players are, and have been for a while. The December Journal article attributed "Southern dominance" to a confluence of historical fanaticism over college football (pro franchises are sparse and relatively young) and the obvious economic/demographic shift to the Sun Belt over the last quarter century. As of last July, among key regional pipeline states not recently devastated by the most hellacious natural disaster in American history, the U.S. Census would back that up:

The same trend might help explain some of the recent success of fast-growing Utah, as well (the Utes have landed rare five-star and four-star commitments this year from their own backyard, though they had to go into Texas for another). Of course, Nevada and Arizona are exploding, population-wise, and doing zip on the field; Boise State, another success from a big growth state, barely recruits Idaho, for obvious reasons. And there are still more people in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania than in Florida, Georgia and South Carolina. As an explanation, "Demographics" is not really, you know, in depth.

Not that I want to be; I have no argument. I just like maps. I do, however, tend to agree less with the WSJ's hypothesis than with Dennis Coates, Stewart Mandel and, yes, even the reviled Jim Delany: When it comes to on-field "dominance" -- if such a trend exists at all, which you can't prove with maps or any other decent set of data -- it's all cyclical.

digg delicious
more

32 Comments

Post a Comment
  1. James P
    1. Posted by James P Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:28 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Well where does California fit into that equation? It is my understanding that the population in Cali isn't growing very fast anymore. Yet they still have the recruiting hotbed.
  2. stinGTime
    2. Posted by stinGTime Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:11 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Sports Illustrated this week has a feature analyzing where all of the BCS schools and Notre Dame have been recruiting. SI writer Andy Staples apparently put the hometowns of the recruiting classes from the last 4 years (2004-2008).
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/01/20/recruiting/
    Quick summary: lots of players in the Sun Belt region of the US. However, a statistical model developed by DuMond, Lynch and Platania (see article) indicates that the #1 factor in choosing a school is distance from home.
  3. mangere_bridge
    3. Posted by mangere_bridge Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:12 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    California: 11% of Rivals 100, 12% of US population.
    What mystery there is (and maybe it's not much of one) is why SoCal is so much more fertile than NorCal.
  4. AgnosticTheocrat
    4. Posted by AgnosticTheocrat Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:27 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    The only problem with the demographic thesis, and it's a BIG one, is that the Big Ten has 10 million more people living in it than the SEC. Not only that, but the Big Ten either doesn't share or is the clear top dog in every state (Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Iowa are clearly bigger time than Cincinnati, Pitt, and Iowa State) with other BCS conferences. The lone exception is Notre Dame in Indiana. The SEC shares Georgia (Georgia Tech), South Carolina (Clemson), Florida (FSU, Miami, USF), and Kentucky (Louisville) with other programs. In the case of Florida, South Carolina, and Kentucky there are either equal or greater programs than the SEC program sharing the state.
    The Conference with largest base of population is in fact the Big East, but of course in most cases the Big East team places a distant second (or third, or fourth) in the hearts of the home state it occupies, or the state isn't a big football state.
    One last point, when discussing percentage growth, also realize that Alabama growing 3.3 percent is roughly an increase in the same number of people as Ohio growing 1.2%. So, excepting Florida, which can be considered an ACC state as much as and SEC state, and Georgia, SEC states are so big that even at 10% growth they may never catch most Big Ten states.
    The real demographic winners are the ACC, which encompasses both big AND fast growing states: North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Virginia. The ACC isn't bogged down by demographic millstones like Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.
  5. AgnosticTheocrat
    5. Posted by AgnosticTheocrat Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:27 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Just figured i'd go a little more in depth to support your "population isn't the cause" argument ;) I agree, it's a cyclical thing, and the difference in top100 recruits likely stems from a combination of selection bias and more emphasis in the south on high school football.
  6. CuseFanInSoCal
    6. Posted by CuseFanInSoCal Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:48 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    No mystery, #3. LA + San Diego has about five times as many people as the SF Bay Area. Also, all of CA has more Asians than African-Americans (and far more Hispanics than either), but that's even more pronounced in SF.
    #4 - the Big East's big problem is that New York State (which is where most of that 'largest population base' is tied up, even if you're feeling extraordinarily generous and award 1/2 of PA to Pitt and 1/4 of FL to USF) is terrible at producing BCS-level, or even FBS-level college football players. It's not quite the worst state per capita, but it's up there. Of course, basketball is another story entirely...
  7. AgnosticTheocrat
    7. Posted by AgnosticTheocrat Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:47 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    #6: That's my point. The Big East techically has the most people, but they aren't the top team in the states that matter, so it's no big deal. The Big Ten still has the largest population base, and the ACC is the most likely challenger, not the SEC.
  8. meathbob
    8. Posted by meathbob Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:32 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Agnostic Theocrat
    Actually, you need to analyse your argument more indepth. The key with the SEC over, say, the Big ten is that the SEC states demographically are far younger than states the aging Big Ten or in places in New York. More high school/college aged students as a %. Also, the ACC state still pale in comparison population wise to the Big Ten. There isn' t that many in NC and Virginia, and not enough to spread out to numerous difference schools per state.
  9. AgnosticTheocrat
    9. Posted by AgnosticTheocrat Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:47 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    #8: You could look deeper, which i decided to do. However, according to the Census Bureau, the Big Ten has 5.95 million college aged students, the ACC has 5.72 million, and the SEC has 4.91 million. So even among 18-24 year olds, the Big Ten has a decided advantage, as does the ACC. This is especially acute when you consider that the SEC splits Florida, and Georgia, it's two biggest states, with the ACC. The Big Ten only really splits Indiana with a meaningful competitor, which is it's second smallest state.
    Among 14-17 year olds, or high school students, the Big Ten holds 3.53 million, the ACC 3.35 million, and the SEC 2.93 million. So again, the Big Ten holds a dramatic demographic advantage.
  10. AgnosticTheocrat
    10. Posted by AgnosticTheocrat Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:47 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Also, North Carolina is the #11 state by population, with almost 10 million, and Virginia is #13 with 7.5 million. Considering North Carolina's growth rate is the highest in the nation, it's not much of a stretch to imagine it surpassing most Big Ten states in the next decade. That said, it's unlikely the ACC passes the Big Ten in population soon, and it's certainly possible that the Big Ten states start growing again while the ACC states stagnate. You can't predict the future. What is almost certain though is that the SEC will for the foreseeable future lag behind both in population.
    I said Indiana was the Big Ten's second smallest state, but it's actually ahead of wisconsin, minnesota and iowa. So it's the 4th smallest.
  11. John McCarron
    11. Posted by John McCarron Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:34 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Is there a correlation between the state's percentage of african americans and talent? Here's an article from a few years ago on rivals that looked at where nfl talent comes from. DC, Mississippi, Lousiana, South Carolina and Hawai were the top 5 per capita.
    "As the only entirely urban state, the District has the highest per capita African-American population (59.8%) and it's not going out on a limb to say a correlation exists there (Mississippi, Louisiana and South Carolina are the second through fourth highest per capita African American population states)"
    It does go on to mention that states with very low percentages of african americans also have high per capita nfl talent.
    "However, that makes states 10-12 & 14 on the list equally as interesting, as those states have extremely low per capita African American populations (Nebraska 4.1%, Washington 3.4%, Iowa 2.2%, Idaho less than 1%)"
  12. John McCarron
    12. Posted by John McCarron Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:34 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    sorry forgot the link
    http://rivals100.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=259347
  13. CuseFanInSoCal
    13. Posted by CuseFanInSoCal Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:48 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    #7, and my point is that this is entirely explained by New York State's general awefulness at producing football talent. If New York produced as many FBS-quality players per capita as Pennsylvania or California (which produces a ton of players because CA is half again the most populous state; it's pretty average per capita), my Orange would be an unstoppable juggernaut-level national power.
  14. CuseFanInSoCal
    14. Posted by CuseFanInSoCal Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:48 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    #12 - interesting article, though that really underscores my point. What the heck is up with high school football in New York State that it produces so little talent compared to nearby states, or with New York City that it produces so little talent compared to other major US cities (especially other major cities with a large African-American population)?
  15. Lauren T
    15. Posted by Lauren T Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:57 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    more than just raw population, you need to look at the cultural factors... How big a deal is high school football in, say, New York vs. Texas? For that matter, just how big a deal is college football? I know when I lived in Northern California, the vast majority of people paid only glancing attention to college football, and really thought the Cal-Stanford game WAS the big game... It's not in the least surprising that so few players come from that culture.
  16. CuseFanInSoCal
    16. Posted by CuseFanInSoCal Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:48 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    No one pays much attention to college ball in Philly or (especially) DC, yet tons of talent comes out of those cities. And neither California nor the midwest have the obsessive high school football culture of the south/gulf coast, yet still turn out a fair amount of talent. My point on New York -- and I know I'm harping on this excessively because I'm a Syracuse fan -- is that it's not just average or bad (compared to other states or cities) at producing FBS-level talent, it's cover-your-eyes awful. If New York improved to about 35th or 40th per capita, Syracuse and the rest of the Big East would benefit immensely (so would Penn State and BC, but you can't have everything).
  17. leo taxil
    17. Posted by leo taxil Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:26 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    At least with NYC, a lot of it has to do with horrible public schools. They have some players, but they can't get eligible. It's an expensive sport too.
    I'm not one of those "stars don't matter" people, but I think it's fairly obvious that Rivals and Scout pump up the ratings of teams that have the most subscribers on their sites. If you look at where a lot of the talent is coming from in this year's draft, from NJ alone you have Knowshon Moreno, Eugene Monroe, Malcolm Jenkins, B.J. Raji, Brian Cushing, Kenny Britt, Shonn Greene, and Donald Brown.
    Put all the hype aside. When it comes to actually getting through 3-5 years and succeeding on the field, things are a lot closer to what you would expect purely based on demographics. Our Yankee football is underrated.
  18. buckeyechad
    18. Posted by buckeyechad Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:46 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I cant help but notice that there are no marks in Pennsylvania despite two five star players (Dorian Bell and Corey Brown) coming from the same area of pennsylvania....
  19. Chitownhawkeye
    19. Posted by Chitownhawkeye Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:00 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I think you not only have to look at cultural factors, but economic ones. I would expect (but may be completely off base) that areas where football is celebrated as well as seen as a possible route out of economic hardship are the areas that will produce high numbers of highly recruited players.
    Not to say that there aren't plenty of kids who aren't looking for the NFL to be their meal ticket in across the country, but in areas where sports are viewed as the only way out, I would expect a higher proportion.
  20. buckeyebob
    20. Posted by buckeyebob Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:10 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I think weather also plays a factor into the situation. The ability of children to develop athletically is enhanced where the weather is warm and kids can stay outside all year long and be able to run around and play ball type games which will develop hand eye coordination, natural speed and athletic skills related to football. In the midwest, where you are indoors, you have a seasonal emphasis on sports like basketball and wrestling, which midwestern schools are better at. Staying inside, because it 8 degrees above zero and playing video games, also does not help out.
  21. CuseFanInSoCal
    21. Posted by CuseFanInSoCal Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:48 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    #17 - NYC's public schools are no worse than DC's (in fact, I'm pretty sure by most measures DC's are worse). DC still produces a fair amount of football talent. NYC produces tons of basketball talent, so it's not like the athletes don't exist. And New Yorkers seem to be almost as rabid about the Giants as they are about the Yankees, so it's not like they aren't football fans.
  22. NDfan
    22. Posted by NDfan Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:40 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Looks like "Black dominance" to me. The name of the game is speed. Most white boys can't run, either because they ride in or drive cars all their lives, especially when young. That may be about to change.
  23. Hurricane Mike
    23. Posted by Hurricane Mike Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:12 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    "The Big Ten still has the largest population base, and the ACC is the most likely challenger, not the SEC."
    Big Ten is largest population base yet the SEC sets attendance records year after year after year for what the past 12? That has more to do with this article than population bases.
    Obviously population isn't the reason, surprised the guy writing the article couldn't figure that out
  24. man29
    24. Posted by man29 Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:05 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    The south is the struggle !!! a fact..It's hot..and crime is thru the roof..Football is where young athletes can use there athletic talent and get some much needed guidance from good coaches with great highschool football knowledge...basketball in the south is ok...but compared to football..basketball has no chance in the south..football is tough and i think that's what the south brings to the rest of the world not just when it comes to football..It's tough living in the south and our football players play that way on friday nights...When you think about the south you say Football..When you think about the other parts of the world you say basketball or something else..But if you want good tough football players just come to the south where it's very hot and we love it !!! lol...I played for Univ of Texas...
  25. AgnosticTheocrat
    25. Posted by AgnosticTheocrat Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:47 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Hurricane Mike: That probably has a lot to do with the fact that the SEC has an extra team. It's easy to seat more people when you have 12 stadiums instead of 11.

Dr. Saturday

Add to My Yahoo! RSS

Matt Hinton

Dr. Saturday is a college football blog edited by Matt Hinton. Email him tips and feedback.

Contributors:
Holly Anderson, Doug Gillett, Dan Shanoff,

Related Photo Gallery

More NCAAF Photos »

Y! Sports Blogs

Dr. Saturday Recent Readers

(provided by MyBlogLog)