FC: So now, the Pac 12 players demand a 50/50 split in revenue.

[PSU2UNC]

I've actually heard this theory before. Other sports such as baseball & hockey have minor league systems. Farm systems. What if D1 football basically became the "farm system" of the NFL? No pretending. No scholarships. A guy could ;play football for Penn State, Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson ... and not even attend classes. They are just at a D1 football program to be in the "minor leagues". If a guy "wants to" attend classes, then that's on him and he can negotiate the costs of tuition into his salary. If a guy does not want to attend classes, then fine, he can just "use" a D1 program as his 'minor league' system for 2-3 years before going into the NFL Draft. Make the minor league contracts standardized. Or a simple 2-level minor league D1 football contract. One level contract, say for $40k/year with no tuition. And another level contract for say $10k/year with tuition included.

Make a minor league, similar to the G league for the NBA. Make it have ZERO to do with universities.

Players that don't want to go to the minor leagues can play in college. This model works for baseball and hockey. The only reason it hasn't happened in football is that the NFL has no incentive to make a minor league because anything it started would be a money loser.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

I've actually heard this theory before. Other sports such as baseball & hockey have minor league systems. Farm systems. What if D1 football basically became the "farm system" of the NFL? No pretending. No scholarships. A guy could ;play football for Penn State, Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson ... and not even attend classes. They are just at a D1 football program to be in the "minor leagues". If a guy "wants to" attend classes, then that's on him and he can negotiate the costs of tuition into his salary. If a guy does not want to attend classes, then fine, he can just "use" a D1 program as his 'minor league' system for 2-3 years before going into the NFL Draft. Make the minor league contracts standardized. Or a simple 2-level minor league D1 football contract. One level contract, say for $40k/year with no tuition. And another level contract for say $10k/year with tuition included.

If the goal is to circumvent Title IX, the University would have to divest itself of all interest in the team outside of the outside team owners paying rent for Beaver Stadium as a concert would, and receiving naming rights revenue from the outside owners for the use of the name Penn State as they now charge radio stations. No tuition negotiation could happen, and no income could go to the players from Penn State.

Even then, you may still have to deal with some court challenges.

 

[Kiber]

Make a minor league, similar to the G league for the NBA. Make it have ZERO to do with universities.

Players that don't want to go to the minor leagues can play in college. This model works for baseball and hockey. The only reason it hasn't happened in football is that the NFL has no incentive to make a minor league because anything it started would be a money loser.

I think if they had a minor-league for football such as a "G-League" outside of, or in addition to D1 football, then you'd be hurting both. That "league" would obviously take players away from D1, so D1 would be hurt. And some guys would want to go to college, so that league would never reach full potential.

But, why not simply combine the two? Right now, for example NBA has a G-League and it's teams in places like Delaware, Providence, Tulsa..... The NHL has a minor league system and it's teams like Reading and Lehigh Valley.... But what I'm saying is that the D1 schools officially become the minor league system for football. So "Penn State" or "Alabama" simply become official minor league football teams. Their 85-man roster, or whatever number they want, are guys who have to be 17-22 years old, and they are a combination of guys just playing football and guys going to college. This way, D1 football and the "football G-League" are not stealing from each other.

 

[Kiber]

If the goal is to circumvent Title IX, the University would have to divest itself of all interest in the team outside of the outside team owners paying rent for Beaver Stadium as a concert would, and receiving naming rights revenue from the outside owners for the use of the name Penn State as they now charge radio stations. No tuition negotiation could happen, and no income could go to the players from Penn State.

Even then, you may still have to deal with some court challenges.

True. The team "officially" would not be "Penn State University" and they would have to lease Beaver Stadium from the school. I'm sure a lease of $1/year could be negotiated for Beaver Stadium. The name "Penn State" is a generic name and could be used. ... just not "Penn State University". Just like Alabama is a name of a state. So the team playing in Bryant Denny Stadium could easily be called the Alabama Crimson Tide, just not "The University of Alabama Crimson Tide". The schools have the ability or the discretion to enforce branding rights. For example, there are many high schools around the country who go by the name "Wolverines" and have winged helmets. The University of Michigan decides if they want to enforce branding rights issues vs. those high schools.

 

[PSU2UNC]

I think if they had a minor-league for football such as a "G-League" outside of, or in addition to D1 football, then you'd be hurting both. That "league" would obviously take players away from D1, so D1 would be hurt. And some guys would want to go to college, so that league would never reach full potential.

But, why not simply combine the two? Right now, for example NBA has a G-League and it's teams in places like Delaware, Providence, Tulsa..... The NHL has a minor league system and it's teams like Reading and Lehigh Valley.... But what I'm saying is that the D1 schools officially become the minor league system for football. So "Penn State" or "Alabama" simply become official minor league football teams. Their 85-man roster, or whatever number they want, are guys who have to be 17-22 years old, and they are a combination of guys just playing football and guys going to college. This way, D1 football and the "football G-League" are not stealing from each other.

This is a terrible idea because pro sports has nothing to do with a college education.

The NFL minor league will be for player who do not want to go to college, or need to make money right away for personal reasons. This is the same as NHL and MLB.

As I've stated earlier, I don't care if the average 40 time in CFB drops by 0.1 second -- the product will still be entertaining.

 

[Art]

If the goal is to circumvent Title IX, the University would have to divest itself of all interest in the team outside of the outside team owners paying rent for Beaver Stadium as a concert would, and receiving naming rights revenue from the outside owners for the use of the name Penn State as they now charge radio stations. No tuition negotiation could happen, and no income could go to the players from Penn State.

Even then, you may still have to deal with some court challenges.

You've just become an automatic qualifier for the long jump at the next Summer Olympic Games.

 

[Agoodnap]

well that horse left the barn many years ago
100,000 seat stadiums, corporate sponsorship, luxury boxes for high rollers, mega million coaches salaries - lots of cheddar for everyone involved
so let's not pretend it's about some high minded principle that it's "college" football

It is to me. I enjoy college football BECAUSE it's being played by students, who are a part of the University. Change that and whole thing will quickly implode.

In a previous post I made a statement that I would like us to follow the Ivy model. The Ivy model has no athletic scholarships, but provides generous amounts of financial aid for those in need. The student athlete's have to gain acceptance to the University like other students at that institution. Athlete's that don't want to be college students will have to find something else to do.

 

[Art]

It is to me. I enjoy college football BECAUSE it's being played by students, who are a part of the University. Change that and whole thing will quickly implode.

In a previous post I made a statement that I would like us to follow the Ivy model. The Ivy model has no athletic scholarships, but provides generous amounts of financial aid for those in need. The student athlete's have to gain acceptance to the University like other students at that institution. Athlete's that don't want to be college students will have to find something else to do.

Adopt the Ivy model and college football as we know it today implodes, maybe not quickly, but eventually. Just look at the history of the Ivy League, or look specifically at Penn.

 

[Kiber]

This is a terrible idea because pro sports has nothing to do with a college education.

The NFL minor league will be for player who do not want to go to college, or need to make money right away for personal reasons. This is the same as NHL and MLB. As I've stated earlier, I don't care if the average 40 time in CFB drops by 0.1 second -- the product will still be entertaining.

Trying to have a football minor league AND trying to maintain a D1 quality level system as we all know it is a terrible idea.

If you have both, a minor league football system and a D1 system, I'll guarantee that within about 0.1 seconds the D1 system as we all know it will have the talent level of D2 football. If you want to attend a Penn State - Ohio State game, and see the talent level of about Delaware vs. New Hampshire, then bravo. But that is what it will become. I'd estimate that about 50% of the players on the big time D1 rosters, would opt for minor league football.

You think these power programs are going to be filling 100,000 seat stadiums when the talent level on the field is equal to D2?

 

[Nitt1300]

It is to me. I enjoy college football BECAUSE it's being played by students, who are a part of the University. Change that and whole thing will quickly implode.

In a previous post I made a statement that I would like us to follow the Ivy model. The Ivy model has no athletic scholarships, but provides generous amounts of financial aid for those in need. The student athlete's have to gain acceptance to the University like other students at that institution. Athlete's that don't want to be college students will have to find something else to do.

And I'd be fine with that, too-in fact I'd prefer it- but it would change the game back to what it was 50 years ago- smaller crowds, less revenue. One thing about returning to better times- it rarely happens.

 

[Kiber]

Adopt the Ivy model and college football as we know it today implodes, maybe not quickly, but eventually. Just look at the history of the Ivy League, or look specifically at Penn.

Yup. In "fantasy world" the idea of the Ivy League model sounds great.

 

[Kiber]

And I'd be fine with that, too-in fact I'd prefer it- but it would change the game back to what it was 50 years ago- smaller crowds, less revenue. One thing about returning to better times- it rarely happens.

The D1 programs would have to reduce capacity in their stadiums by about 70%

 

[Art]

Yup. In "fantasy world" the idea of the Ivy League model sounds great.

It's not "fantasy," it's just very different. There's probably more fantasy in the notion of college football that a lot of people carry around today.

 

[Kiber]

It's not "fantasy," it's just very different. There's probably more fantasy in the notion of college football that a lot of people carry around today.

It's "fantasy" to think that the Ivy League model would work at the D1 level and we'd see the same quality of football.

Ask this.... If "education" is so important to these guys, then why doesn't Stanford get the #1 recruiting class every year? By logic, if these guys were so interested in getting the free education, and education was so on the important list to these guys, then a school like Stanford would logically get to cherry pick the best players.

 

[Art]

It's "fantasy" to think that the Ivy League model would work at the D1 level and we'd see the same quality of football.

Ask this.... If "education" is so important to these guys, then why doesn't Stanford get the #1 recruiting class every year? By logic, if these guys were so interested in getting the free education, and education was so on the important list to these guys, then a school like Stanford would logically get to cherry pick the best players.

As I said, it would be very different. Places like LSU and Mississippi State wouldn't miss a beat. Northwestern would fall off of the map. But overall football wouldn't be played at the same level and attendance would go down the drain.

As far as the importance of education, you're not telling me something I don't know. That notion is part of the fantasy that a lot of fans have about today's game. They'll point to the metrics the NCAA has concocted as evidence. But the reality is that if one were to examine school records of graduates one would find a far different story than that which the NCAA depicts.

And the reason that Stanford doesn't have a top recruiting class every year is because it wouldn't admit enough players to compose one, even with diminished standards. Under the Ivy model, Stanford football would probably disappear, though there is an outside chance it would thrive.

 

[Kiber]

As I said, it would be very different. Places like LSU and Mississippi State wouldn't miss a beat. Northwestern would fall off of the map. But overall football wouldn't be played at the same level and attendance would go down the drain.

As far as the importance of education, you're not telling me something I don't know. That notion is part of the fantasy that a lot of fans have about today's game. They'll point to the metrics the NCAA has concocted as evidence. But the reality is that if one were to examine school records of graduates one would find a far different story than that which the NCAA depicts.

Yes. And they'll listen to the quotes these players make when a hot mic is in front of them and they know to say the right things. Put a hot mic in front of a player and ask him why he chose school "x" and he'll say the right thing for the camera "education". And some fans eat that up and believe it to be true. Not saying these guys don't like the education, or don't want the education. Just that on the list of importance, education is down pretty far.

 

[PSU2UNC]

It is to me. I enjoy college football BECAUSE it's being played by students, who are a part of the University. Change that and whole thing will quickly implode.

In a previous post I made a statement that I would like us to follow the Ivy model. The Ivy model has no athletic scholarships, but provides generous amounts of financial aid for those in need. The student athlete's have to gain acceptance to the University like other students at that institution. Athlete's that don't want to be college students will have to find something else to do.

Well stated. This is why love college football and am only a casual NFL fan.

 

[PSU2UNC]

Trying to have a football minor league AND trying to maintain a D1 quality level system as we all know it is a terrible idea.

If you have both, a minor league football system and a D1 system, I'll guarantee that within about 0.1 seconds the D1 system as we all know it will have the talent level of D2 football. If you want to attend a Penn State - Ohio State game, and see the talent level of about Delaware vs. New Hampshire, then bravo. But that is what it will become. I'd estimate that about 50% of the players on the big time D1 rosters, would opt for minor league football.

You think these power programs are going to be filling 100,000 seat stadiums when the talent level on the field is equal to D2?

As I stated earlier in the threat, it doesn't matter if every school drops down to what you call "D2 level" talent. So long as PSU/OSU/Michigan etc are all in the same ballpark of talent, the games will be exciting and people will watch. I don't care if our starting RB runs a 4.2 or a 4.7, so long as he is playing against guys of similar talent.

By your logic no one should watch college because the NFL is better talent wise. This is obviously not the case. College stadiums are BIGGER than NFL stadiums, not the other way around.

 

[Post_ShockTherapy_MackDaddy]

Scarface was just a metaphor for greedy boomers !

Yeah. Pretty much. They are (ahem) the bad man.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Berkeley has always been a place detached from reality. Didn’t they refuse to build a new stadium because it would cut down a tree that some endangered bird lived in? If Cal’s football team went away, I don’t think anyone else would care.

Please tell me more about this mythical tree/bird. I'm a Cal alum, and have never heard this story. Now there were some local idiots who went up in some of the very old trees in a grove of California live oaks just west of the Stadium (they earned the nickname "Tree People" in the media), but most of the the trees were ultimately cut down, and the Stadium was remodeled to make it much safer seismically.

As for Cal's football team "going away," don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. On second thought, please DO hold your breath.

 

[Art]

As I stated earlier in the threat, it doesn't matter if every school drops down to what you call "D2 level" talent. So long as PSU/OSU/Michigan etc are all in the same ballpark of talent, the games will be exciting and people will watch. I don't care if our starting RB runs a 4.2 or a 4.7, so long as he is playing against guys of similar talent.

By your logic no one should watch college because the NFL is better talent wise. This is obviously not the case. College stadiums are BIGGER than NFL stadiums, not the other way around.

Take in a game a the Yale Bowl or Franklin Field and you might have a different opinion, or, if your notion comes to fruition, the Big House when Michigan regularly gets clocked by Nebraska and throttled if they ever play LSU.

 

[Kiber]

As I stated earlier in the threat, it doesn't matter if every school drops down to what you call "D2 level" talent. So long as PSU/OSU/Michigan etc are all in the same ballpark of talent, the games will be exciting and people will watch. I don't care if our starting RB runs a 4.2 or a 4.7, so long as he is playing against guys of similar talent.

By your logic no one should watch college because the NFL is better talent wise. This is obviously not the case. College stadiums are BIGGER than NFL stadiums, not the other way around.

I believe you are in the minority. If D2 level talent were wearing Penn State & Ohio State uniforms it would not be the same. Yea, there would be football players wearing blue / white and scarlet / grey uniforms, but it would not be the same. And eventually fans would realize it was not the same and I'd predict after 1 year of watching D2 level talent wear Penn State uniforms, we'd see about 20,000 people inside Beaver Stadium on a Saturday.

 

[Art]

I believe you are in the minority. If D2 level talent were wearing Penn State & Ohio State uniforms it would not be the same. Yea, there would be football players wearing blue / white and scarlet / grey uniforms, but it would not be the same. And eventually fans would realize it was not the same and I'd predict after 1 year of watching D2 level talent wear Penn State uniforms, we'd see about 20,000 people inside Beaver Stadium on a Saturday.

I agree, but I think it would take longer than a year. Once the realization that anything that looks like a national championship is out of reach, the downward spiral of fan attendance and TV viewership accelerates.

 

[PSU2UNC]

Take in a game a the Yale Bowl or Franklin Field and you might have a different opinion, or, if your notion comes to fruition, the Big House when Michigan regularly gets clocked by Nebraska and throttled if they ever play LSU.

Why would Michigan get clocked by Nebraska?

The reason Yale Bowl or Franklin Field aren't the same as Beaver Stadium is due to the tradition and the wins/losses, not due to the quality of the football.

As I've said above, if your thesis (that the quality of the football drives interest/attendance) was correct, then the NFL would have much higher attendance than college and it does not.

Again, so long as PSU is playing opponents of similar skill levels (i.e. they are winning 80% of games), the tailgating lots are open and pitchers of Yuengling are flowing in downtown bars, State College will be packed on football weekends.

 

[PSU2UNC]

I believe you are in the minority. If D2 level talent were wearing Penn State & Ohio State uniforms it would not be the same. Yea, there would be football players wearing blue / white and scarlet / grey uniforms, but it would not be the same. And eventually fans would realize it was not the same and I'd predict after 1 year of watching D2 level talent wear Penn State uniforms, we'd see about 20,000 people inside Beaver Stadium on a Saturday.

Not the same how? Why do you think people care if the speed is slower and the size is smaller? They do not. If they did, the current NFL stadiums would be 100K and the college stadiums would be smaller than the NFL and that is just not the case.

 

[PSU2UNC]

I agree, but I think it would take longer than a year. Once the realization that anything that looks like a national championship is out of reach, the downward spiral of fan attendance and TV viewership accelerates.

Why do you think a national championship would be more out of reach than it is now?

Obviously there is no way to know, but I would assume that when some of the top end talent goes to the NFL developmental league, that would actually help teams like PSU because a lot of that high end talent comes from the south and a lot of that talent stays home.

 

[Art]

Why would Michigan get clocked by Nebraska?

The reason Yale Bowl or Franklin Field aren't the same as Beaver Stadium is due to the tradition and the wins/losses, not due to the quality of the football.

As I've said above, if your thesis (that the quality of the football drives interest/attendance) was correct, then the NFL would have much higher attendance than college and it does not.

Again, so long as PSU is playing opponents of similar skill levels (i.e. they are winning 80% of games), the tailgating lots are open and pitchers of Yuengling are flowing in downtown bars, State College will be packed on football weekends.

Because Nebraska as a school has lower admissions standards than Michigan.

As for Yale, Penn, and college football tradition, suggest you read some history. And when the Ivies face off against each other it's at "similar skill levels."

The NFL has lower attendance numbers than college football because it plays in smaller stadiums (I assume that you're allowing for fewer teams). Measure attendance on percentage of capacity and you'll come up with a different picture.

 

[Art]

Why do you think a national championship would be more out of reach than it is now?

Obviously there is no way to know, but I would assume that when some of the top end talent goes to the NFL developmental league, that would actually help teams like PSU because a lot of that high end talent comes from the south and a lot of that talent stays home.

Because it will never travel north of the Mason-Dixon line.

 

[PSU2UNC]

Because Nebraska as a school has lower admissions standards than Michigan.

As for Yale, Penn, and college football tradition, suggest you read some history. And when the Ivies face off against each other it's at "similar skill levels."

The NFL has lower attendance numbers than college football because it plays in smaller stadiums (I assume that you're allowing for fewer teams). Measure attendance on percentage of capacity and you'll come up with a different picture.

You have an very unusual logical approach to this.

Yale never had 107K people in attendance at their games, and never had another 100K tailgating in their lots. That's what I mean by different tradition.

The NFL has smaller stadiums because the demand for tickets isn't there. FedEx field is a great example. It is a college sized stadium (82K I think) and there was no demand for tickets. If you think that is due to the "Washington Football Team" being bad, check out the stands for a Sunday night late season Steelers game. There will be empty seats (and Heinz field only seats 68K).

College football fans are more ravenous and more numerous than NFL fans. If your "superior product" theory held water, this would not be the case.

 

[Kiber]

Not the same how? Why do you think people care if the speed is slower and the size is smaller? They do not. If they did, the current NFL stadiums would be 100K and the college stadiums would be smaller than the NFL and that is just not the case.

OK. Then by your logic, if it's all the same and people just care about 'fair' or 'equal' level talent, then what you are saying is that the ratings & viewership for the D2 Championship would be the same as the D1 Championship .... For example, a D2 Championship Game between Ga Southern and South Dakota St on ESPN would draw the same viewership as Bama - Clemson .... after all, it's equal talent and people do not care about speed or size. They just care about equal talent.

 

[Art]

Give us details. How many teams are there in your minor football league?

I've gone back through this thread and, for the life of me, can't find anywhere that I suggested a "minor football league" (whatever that is). Maybe you could point it out to me.

 

[Kiber]

You have an very unusual logical approach to this.

Yale never had 107K people in attendance at their games, and never had another 100K tailgating in their lots. That's what I mean by different tradition.

The NFL has smaller stadiums because the demand for tickets isn't there. FedEx field is a great example. It is a college sized stadium (82K I think) and there was no demand for tickets. If you think that is due to the "Washington Football Team" being bad, check out the stands for a Sunday night late season Steelers game. There will be empty seats (and Heinz field only seats 68K).

College football fans are more ravenous and more numerous than NFL fans. If your "superior product" theory held water, this would not be the case.

The "superior" product is the absolute best college level talent. There is a reason why D1 out-draws 1-AA, and why 1-AA outdraws D2 and D2 outdraws D3.... Even within D1, there is a reason why Bama, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Georgia.... draw bigger TV ratings than Wake Forest, Rutgers, Temple.... People are attracted to the best. D1 at the levels of the "power programs" is the absolute best in their sport of college football.

 

[PSU2UNC]

OK. Then by your logic, if it's all the same and people just care about 'fair' or 'equal' level talent, then what you are saying is that the ratings & viewership for the D2 Championship would be the same as the D1 Championship .... For example, a D2 Championship Game between Ga Southern and South Dakota St on ESPN would draw the same viewership as Bama - Clemson .... after all, it's equal talent and people do not care about speed or size. They just care about equal talent.

No, because you are ignoring the tradition aspect. If you make the players in Alabama Auburn slightly slower, people will still watch the game. There isn't the same alumni/fan base for DII.

The proper comparison in your analogy would be if you make a minor league and thereby lower the level of play at DI, you also lower the level at DII. So I would predict that DII attendance also wouldn't change.

Also, Georgia Southern is FBS....but whatever.

 

[Sullivan]

I've gone back through this thread and, for the life of me, can't find anywhere that I suggested a "minor football league" (whatever that is). Maybe you could point it out to me.

If you're paying football players that serves as a feeder program to the NFL, you have a minor league. You may not reference it as such, but that's what it is.

So again, how many teams do you have in your minor football league?

You're obviously not being very persuasive in this discussion. It's doubtful that you could persuade all of the University Presidents that they should drop nearly all of their sports programs

 

[PSU2UNC]

The "superior" product is the absolute best college level talent. There is a reason why D1 out-draws 1-AA, and why 1-AA outdraws D2 and D2 outdraws D3.... Even within D1, there is a reason why Bama, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Georgia.... draw bigger TV ratings than Wake Forest, Rutgers, Temple.... People are attracted to the best. D1 at the levels of the "power programs" is the absolute best in their sport of college football.

Right, so if you reduce each level's talent slightly, you won't affect the product.

If the absolute value of talent is all that mattered, the NFL would have the 100K seat stadiums, and that is not the case.

 

[Kiber]

No, because you are ignoring the tradition aspect. If you make the players in Alabama Auburn slightly slower, people will still watch the game. There isn't the same alumni/fan base for DII.

The proper comparison in your analogy would be if you make a minor league and thereby lower the level of play at DI, you also lower the level at DII. So I would predict that DII attendance also wouldn't change.

Also, Georgia Southern is FBS....but whatever.

No. You are wrong. Some of the smaller programs have fantastic traditions. I know they are D1, but by your logic Army & Navy would outdraw other D1 programs. They have equal talent and they are steeped in tradition. But I'd bet you a mortgage payment that if Bama-Auburn were on the exact same time as Army-Navy, that Bama-Auburn would double the ratings number of Army-Navy... how could that be, Army & Navy have tradition.

 

[Agoodnap]

I believe you are in the minority. If D2 level talent were wearing Penn State & Ohio State uniforms it would not be the same. Yea, there would be football players wearing blue / white and scarlet / grey uniforms, but it would not be the same. And eventually fans would realize it was not the same and I'd predict after 1 year of watching D2 level talent wear Penn State uniforms, we'd see about 20,000 people inside Beaver Stadium on a Saturday.

Where would all the D1 players be?

 

[Kiber]

Right, so if you reduce each level's talent slightly, you won't affect the product.

If the absolute value of talent is all that mattered, the NFL would have the 100K seat stadiums, and that is not the case.

AAA baseball teams have equal talent. You watch 2 AAA baseball teams and they have very equal talent. But why is it that on the exact same night, LHV Iron Pigs will draw 5,000 fans to a home game but 50 miles down the road the Phillies will draw 40,000. In LHV you have equal competition, your ticket is about 1/2 the cost, your parking & concessions are much cheaper. So why is it that people will voluntarily pay more to see a game at the MLB level vs. the AAA even though those two AAA teams have equal talent as each other.

 

[Kiber]

Where would all the D1 players be?

Try reading the thread and practicing reading comprehension 101

 

[PSU2UNC]

AAA baseball teams have equal talent. You watch 2 AAA baseball teams and they have very equal talent. But why is it that on the exact same night, LHV Iron Pigs will draw 5,000 fans to a home game but 50 miles down the road the Phillies will draw 40,000. In LHV you have equal competition, your ticket is about 1/2 the cost, your parking & concessions are much cheaper. So why is it that people will voluntarily pay more to see a game at the MLB level vs. the AAA even though those two AAA teams have equal talent as each other.

Tradition and media coverage. No one grows up a Carolina Mud Cats fan. You aren't watching minor league games on TV. It is "easier" to be a fan of the teams that get more media coverage. It's why the Mets, Cubs, Bulls and Braves had a lot of fans in the early days of cable TV (WWOR, WGN and TBS, respectively).