Norman Oklahoma, Happy Valley, PA, Syracuse, NY, Tuscaloosa, AL, College Station, TX, Tallahassee, FL, any place in Kentucky, any place in Arkansas, Lincoln, Nebraska, Manhattan, KS, any place else in the midwest not in the city of Chicago.
I could go on and on. If there had been a different outcome in this state's history, and the UW had been sited in Olympia and the capital up on homo hill, there would be no difference in Washington's football history. If that same program had gone on runs like Oklahoma has, it would matter not that it was located in Olympia.
Olympia is Eugene. I've been to both on several occasions. They are the same place save for the UofO and a Federal Courthouse located in one and not the other. Besides that, they are the same place.
Norman is basically a suburb of Oklahoma City. Tuscaloosa is a short drive from the largest metro area in Alabama. Lincoln and Tallahassee are state capitals. Lexington, KY and the Fayetteville area of Arkansas are the nicest parts of each state.
Manhattan = a larger, easier to get to Pullman. College Station sucks.
Homo hill is in Seattle, not Olympia. \ Olympia is within the Seattle metro area. Olympia is 30 miles from Tacoma and 60 miles from Seattle. The eastern parts are already turning into bedroom communities for people commuting to DuPont and other places north.
Olympia is also a lot different than Eugene. Being a state capital, huge military area, and bedroom community hugely overshadow the colleges. If Aberdeen or Centralia were a major college town, they could be Eugene like.
Weakest response yet. Rest your back - you're gonna hurt yourself reaching that far.
A suburb of Oklahoma city? Are you kidding with this? A suburb of a shit hole is a shit hole. Nobody goes there to be there. Tuscaloosa is a short drive ... from where? Have you been to Alabama? Nicest part of Arkansas? Good God are you whooshing me? The entire state is one big shit hole of the worst kind. Jesus, if you're going to do that, then you're going to have to give Eugene some credit for being a 2 hour drive from Portland. Any place in Oregon is more attractive than any place in Arkansas. Jesus Fucking Christ. We should also assume the black kids will be attracted to the Willamette valley's burgeoning wine scene while we're at it. What other random things can we think of?
Why do people like you struggle with this? So you can assure yourself that Seattle is a big recruiting advantage to black kids who live in 2,000+ miles away from here? Good luck with that.
Do you really think I need you to tell me where Capitol Hill is? I've been in Seattle for almost 30 years. I think you missed entirely the point of my post, and I think you need a basic lesson in Washington State history as it pertains to the political process for determining the site of the state capitol and the state's flagship university. You might find it interesting and informative.
Finally, yes, of course they are not precisely the same place. But they are not very different places ... at all. Maybe someday encroaching metro Tacoma will leap frog the Nisqually Basin and change that, but it is still a one horse town: state employment. It's sleepy just like Eugene is. Similar size. Similar pace. Similar neighborhoods. Similar "down towns", similar everything. Eugene has a federal courthouse and a large university and some other things and Olympia has a sleep little port and state agencies. Neither one is anything close to be exciting or metropolitan.
I'm from down there my friend. I know of what I write.
Washington wasn't, and isn't, a destination job either. the fact that it's in Seattle is of no relevance because the PNW is one of the weaker recruiting regions in the country. there are a lot of bigger cities in the mid atlantic and northeast ... please list for me all the power house programs sited in Boston, Philly, New York and New Jersey.
Yet Washington just landed Chris motherfucking Petersen. Destination job, destination city.
The Northeast is not football country. Youth, high school, and college football is not as big of deal out there as it is in the rest of the country. Lacrosse and hockey are bigger out there than it is out here.
Weakest response yet. Rest your back - you're gonna hurt yourself reaching that far.
A suburb of Oklahoma city? Are you kidding with this? A suburb of a shit hole is a shit hole. Nobody goes there to be there. Tuscaloosa is a short drive ... from where? Have you been to Alabama? Nicest part of Arkansas? Good God are you whooshing me? The entire state is one big shit hole of the worst kind. Jesus, if you're going to do that, then you're going to have to give Eugene some credit for being a 2 hour drive from Portland. Any place in Oregon is more attractive than any place in Arkansas.
Finally, yes, of course they are not precisely the same place. But they are not very different places ... at all. Maybe someday encroaching metro Tacoma will leap frog the Nisqually Basin and change that, but it is still a one horse town: state employment. It's sleepy just like Eugene is. Similar size. Similar pace. Similar neighborhoods. Similar "down towns", similar everything. Eugene has a federal courthouse and a large university and some other things and Olympia has a sleep little port and state agencies. Neither one is anything close to be exciting or metropolitan.
I'm from down there my friend. I know of what I write.
Take a trip to Burns, OR. NW Arkansas is a scenic, growing area. Nicer than many parts of Oregon.
Olympia, Lacey, Yelm = Seattle/Tacoma sprawl over the last decade. It was one of the fastest growing counties in the state over the last 15 years. Nothing close to a one horse town with the HUGE military presence due to JBLM. This isn't the 1970's anymore, bro. The small, sleepy days of the Olympia area are long gone. The Growth Management Act sealed Olympia's fate 20 years ago by restricting growth in King County and displacing that growth into more affordable areas within urban growth boundaries, such as Yelm and Lacey. Other than Fort Lewis, the Nisqually Delta, and the mouth of the Snohomish R. it is non-stop dense development between Arlington and Tumwater these days.
Olympia is 45 minutes from the only airport that has direct flights to every Pac-12 city plus direct flights to all the major population centers on the west coast. The University of Washington in Seattle will soon be directly connected to this airport by a fucking subway.
Weakest response yet. Rest your back - you're gonna hurt yourself reaching that far.
A suburb of Oklahoma city? Are you kidding with this? A suburb of a shit hole is a shit hole. Nobody goes there to be there. Tuscaloosa is a short drive ... from where? Have you been to Alabama? Nicest part of Arkansas? Good God are you whooshing me? The entire state is one big shit hole of the worst kind. Jesus, if you're going to do that, then you're going to have to give Eugene some credit for being a 2 hour drive from Portland. Any place in Oregon is more attractive than any place in Arkansas.
Finally, yes, of course they are not precisely the same place. But they are not very different places ... at all. Maybe someday encroaching metro Tacoma will leap frog the Nisqually Basin and change that, but it is still a one horse town: state employment. It's sleepy just like Eugene is. Similar size. Similar pace. Similar neighborhoods. Similar "down towns", similar everything. Eugene has a federal courthouse and a large university and some other things and Olympia has a sleep little port and state agencies. Neither one is anything close to be exciting or metropolitan.
I'm from down there my friend. I know of what I write.
Take a trip to Burns, OR. NW Arkansas is a scenic, growing area. Nicer than many parts of Oregon.
Olympia, Lacey, Yelm = Seattle/Tacoma sprawl over the last decade. It was one of the fastest growing counties in the state over the last 15 years. Nothing close to a one horse town with the HUGE military presence due to JBLM. This isn't the 1970's anymore, bro. The small, sleepy days of the Olympia area are long gone. The Growth Management Act sealed Olympia's fate 20 years ago by restricting growth in King County and displacing that growth into more affordable areas within urban growth boundaries, such as Yelm and Lacey. Other than Fort Lewis, the Nisqually Delta, and the mouth of the Snohomish R. it is non-stop dense development between Arlington and Tumwater these days.
Olympia is 45 minutes from the only airport that has direct flights to every Pac-12 city plus direct flights to all the major population centers on the west coast. The University of Washington in Seattle will soon be directly connected to this airport by a fucking subway.
What in the fuck are you doing here my friend? Have you lost track of the discussion? It would appear so.
Review the thread as objectively as your mind will allow, and tell me which one of us started out with a conclusion they wanted to reach and has worked their way backwards, as hard as they can, from there.
The reason that kids go to places like Arkansas, Oklahoma, Penn State, and a bunch of other programs located in no-fucking-place USA is because (1) they are from that general REGION of the country and are thus comfortable there and want to be relatively close to home so their families can come watch them, or (2) the tradition of the PROGRAM, regardless of location, draws them there. Kids go to Oklahoma to play football at OKLAHOMA! The name says it all. Norman is, at best, a non-factor in the decision, and at worst, something to overcome. I have spent a lot more time than I wanted to in the southeast. Of course, like anyplace, there are pockets of relative charm. Overall, it is one giant, humid, bug infested shit hole. The West is Best. Oregon has white trash towns, as does Washington. You aren't making any points here. The state of Oregon is beautiful and Portland is a great city with a lot of advantages. I don't live there, I'm not a fan of the program and have no skin in the game. But those are the facts. Oregon blows any southeastern state away on almost any measure. Anyone arguing that point who isn't a full blown southern homer is working an agenda, which is exactly what you are doing.
Petersen came to Washington not because of Seattle. Please. He came to Washington because of family history and because he likes this part of the country and because he was ready to try it with the big boys. He'd go to Eugene too - Eugene is not the reason he would turn down Oregon. Circumstances. Until now, he's turned down everyone to stay at Boise. He was at a point, finally, where he would listen to offers. He was leaving Boise eventually ... Washington or not. Look at the three prior coaches at UW following Neu and tell me it's a destination job. Destination jobs have names like Oklahoma, Alabama, Nebraska, Penn State, USC, Texas, LSU and Michigan. Miami isn't even a destination job. They can luck out once in a while like Washington can, but neither is a destination job.
Your effort to distinguish Eugene and Olympia started my new year off with a chuckle. Olympia is still Olympia. My mom lives there and I'm there all the time. I don't need the geography lesson. For a kid who is being recruited, none - NONE - of the things you mentioned would matter at all ... not at all. The name of the hypothetical program in Olympia would be all that mattered in our hypothetical. Period. Yelm? Fuck, you are not very learned on the art of making a cogent argument. To avoid an I5 nightmare, I just drove through all those podunk little communities on my way to see mama. Sure, maybe in 20 years it will all connect and be a sophisticated metropolis of the sort you suppose recruits care about, but until then, it's at best Vancouver Washington. There is no there there.
Setting aside all that "olympia really is a big town" non-sense, tell me how it is that Oregon recruits anybody given their isolation and small size. Exactly.
Again, the Northeast has several cities that dwarf Seattle on almost any measure (other than beauty and a tech scene), and yet that region is a cfb wasteland for precisely the reason you, and I, mentioned: NOBODY CARES. And because nobody cares, there aren't any programs. And because there aren't any programs, nobody cares.
Pullman, Washington is buttfuck nowhere. NW Arkansas, Norman, State College, etc. are either a suburb in million + people metro area, in the center of a scenic/growing area, or right in the dead middle of a state with almost 13,000,000 people.
Fayetteville > Eugene. The Ozark area is the most scenic area in that entire part of the country. With multiple Fortune 100 companies nearby, the NW Arkansas Regional Airport is well connected.
Pullman, Washington is buttfuck nowhere. NW Arkansas, Norman, State College, etc. are either a suburb in million + people metro area, in the center of a scenic/growing area, or right in the dead middle of a state with almost 13,000,000 people.
Fayetteville > Eugene. The Ozark area is the most scenic area in that entire part of the country. With multiple Fortune 100 companies nearby, the NW Arkansas Regional Airport is well connected.
Your geography knowledge fucking sucks.
Your debating skills fucking suck even more. Because while you're trying to make a silly comparison on subjective preference, comparing what many consider to be the most beautiful region of the US (the PNW) to what many consider to be the asshole region of the US (the SE) in a clear effort to make a point about Oregon, you have managed to NOT respond to one substantive point. Instead, you dogmatically focus on the subjective so that we can go round and round and you can avoid the obvious conclusion: that you are dead wrong in your original premise. fuck, here is where I should say that Eugene's proximity to the most beautiful coastline in the lower 48 is a recruiting advantage - about as random your point. when exactly do you run out of stupid?
Skip the other (obvious to anyone with a brain) examples in the southeast and go to Penn State and Happy Valley. Tell me about all the Fortune 100 companies there. Tell me how much more beautiful it is there as compared to Oregon. Tell me how close it is to metropolitan Pittsburgh or Philly. Tell me how great the weather is. I await with bated breath.
You are one of those people who purposefully stick to the premise(s) that cannot be deductively proven or dis-proven so you can make it appear that you're holding your own, when all the while anyone with a brain can see you lost on the basic point of your opinion.
I don't hide like you do - I put it out there plainly: The geographical location of a program is relatively unimportant to its name, to its coach, to its overall history and to its relatively recent accomplishments on the field. Otherwise, San Francisco, New York, Philly, Dallas, Atlanta, Boston, Chicago and a bunch of other metropolitan places with a helluva lot more people than Seattle would have, at least on occasion, dominant cfb programs. You have yet to explain that point away - because you can't.
Geography is important. Geography is why Washington State University NEVER will be an elite athletic program. Geography is why Penn State is a winner. Smack dab in a football state of almost 13,000,000 people and is the most northeasterly state flagship university who gives a shit about football. That's a mega advantage.
Penn State has a geographical advantage. Washington has a geographical advantage. Anything in or near CA, TX, or the entire SE USA has a geographical advantage. Washington State University is the most geographically challenged program in a big 5 conference. No coach will change this.
Geography is important. Geography is why Washington State University NEVER will be an elite athletic program. Geography is why Penn State is a winner. Smack dab in a football state of almost 13,000,000 people and is the most northeasterly state flagship university who gives a shit about football. That's a mega advantage.
Penn State has a geographical advantage. Washington has a geographical advantage. Anything in or near CA, TX, or the entire SE USA has a geographical advantage. Washington State University is the most geographically challenged program in a big 5 conference. No coach will change this.
super duper nice try.
apparently you can't read. apparently words like "relative" elude you. apparently being "near" things is good enough when you want one conclusion, but not being within a "short drive" is not when you want another. Penn State is in the middle of the state, and far away from both major metropolitan locales.
and then there are the other examples. of course, geography matters when you have loads of recruits nearby. a very few schools have that advantage, and Washington is not one of them.
I'm not talking about Washington State. I'm talking about a school that has had as good of a run as Washington arguably ever had sans a national title, which we all know requires a little luck along with the "Iron Laws".
go back to your original premise, then we can continue this. Seattle has little or nothing to do with Washington's place in cfb history - whatever that place is - good, bad or otherwise. this town was a nowhere locale when Washington was at its zenith, both from a metropolitan sophistication standpoint and from a recruiting standpoint. it's much more of a city now than it was then, and recruiting resources have improved, but are relatively poor compared to the real talent regions.
again, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Dallas, Atlanta, Philly ... where are the juggernauts? your last answer to this question makes my point and you don't even understand why.
apparently you can't read. apparently words like "relative" elude you. apparently being "near" things is good enough when you want one conclusion, but not being within a "short drive" is not when you want another. Penn State is in the middle of the state, and far away from both major metropolitan locales.
The Pennsylvania State Fucking University is near the geographic center of a football state with almost 13,000,000 people.
That's one hell of an advantage. On top of that, many of the adjacent states have decent talent too.
Population of Pennsylvania - 12,773,801 Population of WA, OR, & ID - 12,513,607
PA has 2 big five conference programs competing for that local talent, the PNW has 4. PA shits out football talent like Montana, Marino, and Namath.
Penn State has a comparative advantage geographically vs. many programs.
and then there are the other examples. of course, geography matters when you have loads of recruits nearby. a very few schools have that advantage, and Washington is not one of them.
Washington has decent talent nearby to draw from. It is not a comparative advantage, nor is it a handicap. Luckily Washington is in a popular, thriving city with an intl. airport with a great range of direct flight options minimizing transportation frictions allowing Washington to supplement that talent from other areas. With the future subway, travel frictions will be even less. Getting a PSA, their parents, etc. to campus is pretty darn easy for just about anyone on the west coast and places further away near a major airport.
Seattle has little or nothing to do with Washington's place in cfb history - whatever that place is - good, bad or otherwise.
Wrong. Since the west coast was once an outpost due to travel frictions, major professional sports did not exist. Husky Football grew into the giant it is because it was located in a large, growing city without Major League Baseball, etc. Husky Football was pro sports in Seattle. Just ask Hugh McElhenny.
Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Dallas, Atlanta, Philly ... where are the juggernauts? your last answer to this question makes my point and you don't even understand why.
None of those places have the state's flagship university. If UT was in Dallas, it still would be a super power. Ditto Penn State in Philly or UGA in Atlanta. Georgia Tech has done fine for itself too despite its academics keeping out the coug fucking stupid, which many talented kids out of high school are.
Norman Oklahoma, Happy Valley, PA, Syracuse, NY, Tuscaloosa, AL, College Station, TX, Tallahassee, FL, any place in Kentucky, any place in Arkansas, Lincoln, Nebraska, Manhattan, KS, any place else in the midwest not in the city of Chicago.
I could go on and on. If there had been a different outcome in this state's history, and the UW had been sited in Olympia and the capital up on homo hill, there would be no difference in Washington's football history. If that same program had gone on runs like Oklahoma has, it would matter not that it was located in Olympia.
Olympia is Eugene. I've been to both on several occasions. They are the same place save for the UofO and a Federal Courthouse located in one and not the other. Besides that, they are the same place.
Olympia is also a lot different than Eugene. Being a state capital, huge military area, and bedroom community hugely overshadow the colleges. If Aberdeen or Centralia were a major college town, they could be Eugene like.
The only similarity I see between Aberdeen and Eugene is that Kurt Cobain was raised in Aberdeen and Courtney Love was raised in Eugene. Aberdeen looks more like Coos Bay, a coastal Oregon town that has very few jobs and small mossy homes.
Jesus christ this thread has become AuburnDoogFS. The "Iron Laws" are shit, and it remains to be seen if Penn State remains a football school post-Paterno
Comments
A suburb of Oklahoma city? Are you kidding with this? A suburb of a shit hole is a shit hole. Nobody goes there to be there. Tuscaloosa is a short drive ... from where? Have you been to Alabama? Nicest part of Arkansas? Good God are you whooshing me? The entire state is one big shit hole of the worst kind. Jesus, if you're going to do that, then you're going to have to give Eugene some credit for being a 2 hour drive from Portland. Any place in Oregon is more attractive than any place in Arkansas. Jesus Fucking Christ. We should also assume the black kids will be attracted to the Willamette valley's burgeoning wine scene while we're at it. What other random things can we think of?
Why do people like you struggle with this? So you can assure yourself that Seattle is a big recruiting advantage to black kids who live in 2,000+ miles away from here? Good luck with that.
Do you really think I need you to tell me where Capitol Hill is? I've been in Seattle for almost 30 years. I think you missed entirely the point of my post, and I think you need a basic lesson in Washington State history as it pertains to the political process for determining the site of the state capitol and the state's flagship university. You might find it interesting and informative.
Finally, yes, of course they are not precisely the same place. But they are not very different places ... at all. Maybe someday encroaching metro Tacoma will leap frog the Nisqually Basin and change that, but it is still a one horse town: state employment. It's sleepy just like Eugene is. Similar size. Similar pace. Similar neighborhoods. Similar "down towns", similar everything. Eugene has a federal courthouse and a large university and some other things and Olympia has a sleep little port and state agencies. Neither one is anything close to be exciting or metropolitan.
I'm from down there my friend. I know of what I write.
The Northeast is not football country. Youth, high school, and college football is not as big of deal out there as it is in the rest of the country. Lacrosse and hockey are bigger out there than it is out here.
Olympia, Lacey, Yelm = Seattle/Tacoma sprawl over the last decade. It was one of the fastest growing counties in the state over the last 15 years. Nothing close to a one horse town with the HUGE military presence due to JBLM. This isn't the 1970's anymore, bro. The small, sleepy days of the Olympia area are long gone. The Growth Management Act sealed Olympia's fate 20 years ago by restricting growth in King County and displacing that growth into more affordable areas within urban growth boundaries, such as Yelm and Lacey. Other than Fort Lewis, the Nisqually Delta, and the mouth of the Snohomish R. it is non-stop dense development between Arlington and Tumwater these days.
Olympia is 45 minutes from the only airport that has direct flights to every Pac-12 city plus direct flights to all the major population centers on the west coast. The University of Washington in Seattle will soon be directly connected to this airport by a fucking subway.
What in the fuck are you doing here my friend? Have you lost track of the discussion? It would appear so.
Review the thread as objectively as your mind will allow, and tell me which one of us started out with a conclusion they wanted to reach and has worked their way backwards, as hard as they can, from there.
The reason that kids go to places like Arkansas, Oklahoma, Penn State, and a bunch of other programs located in no-fucking-place USA is because (1) they are from that general REGION of the country and are thus comfortable there and want to be relatively close to home so their families can come watch them, or (2) the tradition of the PROGRAM, regardless of location, draws them there. Kids go to Oklahoma to play football at OKLAHOMA! The name says it all. Norman is, at best, a non-factor in the decision, and at worst, something to overcome. I have spent a lot more time than I wanted to in the southeast. Of course, like anyplace, there are pockets of relative charm. Overall, it is one giant, humid, bug infested shit hole. The West is Best. Oregon has white trash towns, as does Washington. You aren't making any points here. The state of Oregon is beautiful and Portland is a great city with a lot of advantages. I don't live there, I'm not a fan of the program and have no skin in the game. But those are the facts. Oregon blows any southeastern state away on almost any measure. Anyone arguing that point who isn't a full blown southern homer is working an agenda, which is exactly what you are doing.
Petersen came to Washington not because of Seattle. Please. He came to Washington because of family history and because he likes this part of the country and because he was ready to try it with the big boys. He'd go to Eugene too - Eugene is not the reason he would turn down Oregon. Circumstances. Until now, he's turned down everyone to stay at Boise. He was at a point, finally, where he would listen to offers. He was leaving Boise eventually ... Washington or not. Look at the three prior coaches at UW following Neu and tell me it's a destination job. Destination jobs have names like Oklahoma, Alabama, Nebraska, Penn State, USC, Texas, LSU and Michigan. Miami isn't even a destination job. They can luck out once in a while like Washington can, but neither is a destination job.
Your effort to distinguish Eugene and Olympia started my new year off with a chuckle. Olympia is still Olympia. My mom lives there and I'm there all the time. I don't need the geography lesson. For a kid who is being recruited, none - NONE - of the things you mentioned would matter at all ... not at all. The name of the hypothetical program in Olympia would be all that mattered in our hypothetical. Period. Yelm? Fuck, you are not very learned on the art of making a cogent argument. To avoid an I5 nightmare, I just drove through all those podunk little communities on my way to see mama. Sure, maybe in 20 years it will all connect and be a sophisticated metropolis of the sort you suppose recruits care about, but until then, it's at best Vancouver Washington. There is no there there.
Setting aside all that "olympia really is a big town" non-sense, tell me how it is that Oregon recruits anybody given their isolation and small size. Exactly.
Again, the Northeast has several cities that dwarf Seattle on almost any measure (other than beauty and a tech scene), and yet that region is a cfb wasteland for precisely the reason you, and I, mentioned: NOBODY CARES. And because nobody cares, there aren't any programs. And because there aren't any programs, nobody cares.
It would appear that you now see my point.
Fayetteville > Eugene. The Ozark area is the most scenic area in that entire part of the country. With multiple Fortune 100 companies nearby, the NW Arkansas Regional Airport is well connected.
Your geography knowledge fucking sucks.
Skip the other (obvious to anyone with a brain) examples in the southeast and go to Penn State and Happy Valley. Tell me about all the Fortune 100 companies there. Tell me how much more beautiful it is there as compared to Oregon. Tell me how close it is to metropolitan Pittsburgh or Philly. Tell me how great the weather is. I await with bated breath.
You are one of those people who purposefully stick to the premise(s) that cannot be deductively proven or dis-proven so you can make it appear that you're holding your own, when all the while anyone with a brain can see you lost on the basic point of your opinion.
I don't hide like you do - I put it out there plainly: The geographical location of a program is relatively unimportant to its name, to its coach, to its overall history and to its relatively recent accomplishments on the field. Otherwise, San Francisco, New York, Philly, Dallas, Atlanta, Boston, Chicago and a bunch of other metropolitan places with a helluva lot more people than Seattle would have, at least on occasion, dominant cfb programs. You have yet to explain that point away - because you can't.
You suck.
....but you are too coug fucking stupid.
Geography is important. Geography is why Washington State University NEVER will be an elite athletic program. Geography is why Penn State is a winner. Smack dab in a football state of almost 13,000,000 people and is the most northeasterly state flagship university who gives a shit about football. That's a mega advantage.
Penn State has a geographical advantage. Washington has a geographical advantage. Anything in or near CA, TX, or the entire SE USA has a geographical advantage. Washington State University is the most geographically challenged program in a big 5 conference. No coach will change this.
super duper nice try.
apparently you can't read. apparently words like "relative" elude you. apparently being "near" things is good enough when you want one conclusion, but not being within a "short drive" is not when you want another. Penn State is in the middle of the state, and far away from both major metropolitan locales.
and then there are the other examples. of course, geography matters when you have loads of recruits nearby. a very few schools have that advantage, and Washington is not one of them.
I'm not talking about Washington State. I'm talking about a school that has had as good of a run as Washington arguably ever had sans a national title, which we all know requires a little luck along with the "Iron Laws".
go back to your original premise, then we can continue this. Seattle has little or nothing to do with Washington's place in cfb history - whatever that place is - good, bad or otherwise. this town was a nowhere locale when Washington was at its zenith, both from a metropolitan sophistication standpoint and from a recruiting standpoint. it's much more of a city now than it was then, and recruiting resources have improved, but are relatively poor compared to the real talent regions.
again, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Dallas, Atlanta, Philly ... where are the juggernauts? your last answer to this question makes my point and you don't even understand why.
That's one hell of an advantage. On top of that, many of the adjacent states have decent talent too.
Population of Pennsylvania - 12,773,801
Population of WA, OR, & ID - 12,513,607
PA has 2 big five conference programs competing for that local talent, the PNW has 4. PA shits out football talent like Montana, Marino, and Namath.
Penn State has a comparative advantage geographically vs. many programs.
Washington has decent talent nearby to draw from. It is not a comparative advantage, nor is it a handicap. Luckily Washington is in a popular, thriving city with an intl. airport with a great range of direct flight options minimizing transportation frictions allowing Washington to supplement that talent from other areas. With the future subway, travel frictions will be even less. Getting a PSA, their parents, etc. to campus is pretty darn easy for just about anyone on the west coast and places further away near a major airport.
Wrong. Since the west coast was once an outpost due to travel frictions, major professional sports did not exist. Husky Football grew into the giant it is because it was located in a large, growing city without Major League Baseball, etc. Husky Football was pro sports in Seattle. Just ask Hugh McElhenny. None of those places have the state's flagship university. If UT was in Dallas, it still would be a super power. Ditto Penn State in Philly or UGA in Atlanta. Georgia Tech has done fine for itself too despite its academics keeping out the coug fucking stupid, which many talented kids out of high school are.