ANALYSIS: The NFL and college football remain divided by league, and party lines
Kyler Gilliam, Staff Writer
There is a political divide in the sport of football, and it is most prevalent between the professional and college levels. The NFL resides in left-leaning cities while college football powerhouses serve small towns harboured in traditional, conservative values.
President Donald Trump attended an NFL game between the Washington Commanders and Detroit Lions on Nov. 9. It was the third appearance of a United States President at an NFL regular-season game, and the first since former president Jimmy Carter in 1978.
Trump appeared on the jumbotron during halftime to swear in members of the military. He received a cascade of boos from the Commanders fans, a fitting response for an area where he lost handily to Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election. However, when Trump attended a game between the University of Alabama and Louisiana State University, he faced no backlash.
John Aughenbaugh, a VCU associate professor of political science who has taught a class about politics in sports, said the differences in response to Trump between the NFL and college football games should not come as a surprise due to the makeup of cities and rural areas.
“In large urban areas, you see a significant percentage of democratic voters,” Aughenbaugh said.
“It wasn’t a very huge shock that he was booed.”
College towns such as Tuscaloosa, Alabama and Athens, Georgia are surrounded by rural areas. The fans that live near the universities and fill the stands on Saturdays align more with the Republican party, according to Aughenbaugh.
Trump’s appearances at college football games are strategic for his brand. During the 2024 election cycle, Trump attended games between the University of South Carolina, Clemson University, Iowa University and Iowa State University. All are in early primary states.
Young males were a key demographic the Trump campaign targeted in the 2024 election. Along with attending games, Trump engaged with podcasts surrounding college football, a space where younger men frequent, according to Aughenbaugh.
Shows such as “Bussin’ with the Boys” and companies like Barstool Sports did much for Trump with young men. His ventures into these forms of media tapped him into a voter base that is sometimes overlooked.
“The shift in young male voters from voting for Democratic candidates to Republican candidates was anywhere between 6-8%,” Aughenbaugh said. “In a close election or a state where the outcome is closely divided, it could have an impact.”
Trump also connected with and energized rural voters who frequent college football games in small college towns. The Republican Party gained even more control in rural areas, leading Trump to win the popular vote, the first Republican to do so since 2004.
The Trump campaign made worthwhile efforts in engaging with their potential voter base up close and into unengaged demographics, especially in battleground states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Democrats have had trouble engaging with their rural voter base, often disregarding them in the grand scheme of their political strategy, according to Aughenbaugh.
“The Democratic party shouldn’t shamelessly try to embrace what these folks hold near and dear, but if you are dismissive of what they value, then don’t be surprised if they don’t look at your party,” Aughenbaugh said.
Political scientists do not know if Republicans’ plan to engage younger voters with sports such as college football will stick in the 2028 election. However, creating a loyal voter base with young, Gen-Z men could be crucial for their future.
If the separation of rural and urban voters continues, so will the separation of NFL fanbases and college football fanbases.
