Is the Northeast a better recruiting territory than we realize?
part of a series posted on Deadspin Monday. It is a per capita display of where college football players come from. If you look at their other maps you will see that the Northeast (for this purpose Washington, D.C. north) produces a lot of college football players. I used the per capita map to show that even though this area is densely populated, it is not a wasteland that some make it out to be. New Jersey remains the focal point of the region.
Obviously parts of New England are barren, but the maps does show that Massachusetts and Connecticut produce relatively in line with other areas that people would assume are better (Western PA, pockets of the Midwest, large swaths of California).
Where players come from doesn't tell the whole story. The type of talent is a factor that the map doesn't cover. Aside from the mythical speed in other areas, I would say that many prospects in New England and the Northeast lack skills and would benefit from better year-round programs and better high school competition. But considering it is only our base and we continue to recruit the Midwest and Southeast, I would say BC is not as disadvantaged geographically as some assume.