I'm pretty sure there's about as many outdoor things to do around Eugene as Seattle.
The Huskies ruled this pro town for decades.
But by all means, drone on about how per capita popularity doesn't matter.
Of course it *matters*. The question is, is it cause or effect? Sure, abundance is probably the correct answer. But I believe it's more effect than cause, at least when looking at, say, Oregon versus Washington.
There is obviously a huge recency effect on display in this study. Especially since Facebook data is weighted more toward younger fans. But younger fans are the hearts and minds you need to win, in order to sustain long-term success. Every time I walk into Husky Stadium, it looks more and more like a nursing home. (Which is probably why they aim so nauseatingly young with the A/V content.)
The Hawks' late success is clearly taking a bite out of local fan enthusiasm for another middling Husky team as well.
But the data doesn't lie. The Huskies have been mediocre-at-best for twenty years, and the fans are apathetic. We all know this is true. I just think this map gives a stark reality check on how far behind we are from real CFB communities.
Peterman needs to win consistently for a period of years to overcome and reverse this problem.