I love these arguments oriented around demographics � I think that there is a lot of interesting conjecture being posted. Okay � let�s talk about population demographics. If we take a look at counties where there are major population centers, the �big three� are of course Greenville, Columbia, and Charleston. Here�s a first cut at some demographic data for these and also take the highest populations and densities in counties that are close to these metropolitan areas that might represent populations from which to draw:

Greenville:
Greenville County: 380K people, 479.3 people/square mile (SC, rank#1)
Spartanburg County: 254K people, 312.9 people/square mile (SC, rank #4)

Columbia:
Richland County: 321K people, 423.9 people/square mile (SC, rank #2)
Lexington County: 216K people, 308.2 people/square mile (SC, rank #5)

Charleston:
Charleston County: 310K people, 337.9 people/square mile (SC, rank #3)
Dorchester County: 96K people, 167.7 people/square mile (SC, rank #11)

Okay � someone brought up brought up education and financials. These tend to be rather strongly linked. Here�s some financial information for these counties in terms of median family income and SC county ranking:

Greenville County: $50K/family (SC, rank #4)
Spartanburg County: $45K/family (SC, rank #9)

Richland County: $50K/family (SC, rank #6)
Lexington County: $53K/family (SC, rank #2)

Charleston County: $47K/family (SC, rank #7)
Dorchester County: $50K/family (SC, rank #5)

Note: I didn�t include Beaufort County in with Charleston to try to keep this simpler � but it�s probably worth noting that Beaufort County is ranked #1 with a median family income of $52K/family.

But what about the target population, people younger than 18? Here�s how these areas stack up with each other:

Greenville County: 93K, 118 people/square mile
Spartanburg County, 63K, 78 people/square mile

Richland County: 78K, 103 people/square mile
Lexington County: 56K, 80 people/square mile

Charleston County: 74K, 80 people/square mile
Dorchester County: 28K, 48 people/square mile

So, what are my opinions based on this data? First, the financial argument doesn�t really hold � despite most people�s perception, the Charleston area has a higher median family income than most of the state and the Columbia area has a higher median family income than the Greenville area (of course, you can go to a higher level of granularity and look at all sorts of trends here). Second, in terms of population and density, a case can be made that the Charleston area has fewer players under 18 from which to draw than the midstate on both an absolute and a square mile basis � even when you abandon looking at regions and you just look at dominant counties contributing to a metropolitan area (note: my simplified numbers using only two contributing counties still shows a roughly 1.5X overall population difference and a roughly 1.5X density difference and thus agree with LPAF's broader population analysis). The Columbia and Greenville areas are very close.

Does this then mean that it comes strictly down to population draw? I honestly don�t think so. If it did, then the Columbia area would have many more state championships. I think the Charleston area, for example, could be a regional and national force if a single club made the investment in coaches. But that�s just my opinion. What these demographics don�t show is that the 16-18 players who constitute a top team in any club are difficult to define in any median or average way � these 16-18 players are by their nature unusual if they are among the best. So I think that what is paramount once you get to some critical threshold (which I�m guessing that Charleston, Columbia, and Greenville has) is the club and the coaches of that club. But then again, that�s just my opinion.