There is a very intriguing argument that college football and college athletics formed as a way for the academic institution to relate to the general populace. The modern university forced academics into a position in which scientific and intellectual rigor was demanded to sustain societal standing among other universities. This position meant that research and ideas created by universities were not always publicly accessible. Effectively, the academy was based in a community, but it did not encompass that community. This argument provides that scholars created the knowledge base of the university, but administrators used sport as a vehicle to make the institution accessible to most Americans.

Something that complicates this idea is the existence of an American culture that valued physical culture and strenuous activity. Institutions of higher education used athletics as an out let for students who were otherwise overwhelmed by intellectual and academic rigor.

In an effort to connect with communities and provide physical outlets for students, universities in the late 1890s and early 1900s began to adopt football programs and market them to the general public. This is where we see the advent of large stadium structures and the true spectacle of college football.

Baseball was, of course, popular in this era as well. One argument about why baseball wasn’t as popular as football on college campuses is accessibility. Football engaged more players, did not require special equipment (these were the days of no helmets and padding), and did not require a specialized field. Baseball required balls, bats, bags, and a special field structure. Football was seen as a game which could be played on an equal playing field, no matter how much skill the contestants possessed. In a way, it was a way for young men to relax and exert physical strength to save their minds from rigorous study. At this point (pre-1880s), football was generally a game without rules or structure. It was something that college men played in order to preserve their strength and sense of “manliness”.

This is probably a simplification of the prevailing arguments about college football and it isn’t my main area of expertise. I’m sure someone will be able to add or correct what I have written here.

Sources and Additional Reading:

The Rise of Gridiron University: Higher Education’s Uneasy Alliance with Big-Time Football by Brian M. Ingrassia

College Football: History, Spectacle, Controversy by John Sayle Watterson

Bowled Over: Big-Time College Football from the Sixties to the BCS Era by Michael Oriard

Reading Football: How the Popular Press Created an American Spectacle by Michael Oriard

Football Facts and Figures: A Symposium of Expert Opinions on the Game’s Place in American Athletics by Walter Camp

Sports and Freedom: The Rise of Big-Time College Athletics by Ronald A. Smith