U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What cities/metros can handle two of each of the pro leagues?
Atlanta 2 3.77%
Boston 3 5.66%
Detroit 0 0%
DFW 6 11.32%
Houston 11 20.75%
Miami/Ft. Lauderdale 0 0%
Minneapolis/ St. Paul 2 3.77%
Philadelphia 4 7.55%
San Fracisco/Oakland/San Jose 20 37.74%
Washington DC 5 9.43%
Voters: 53. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-06-2011, 08:18 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
624 posts, read 1,168,138 times
Reputation: 337

Advertisements

Besides NYC, LA, and Chicago what other cities/metros can handle two franchise teams of the big 4 (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL)?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-06-2011, 08:46 AM
 
2,565 posts, read 5,035,835 times
Reputation: 855
I wish there was an option for none. I don't think any city can handle 8 pro sports teams. Just look at the issues that always come up with players making too much for the amount of money they bring in. Dividing up your fan base and attendance isn't going to help that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 08:54 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
624 posts, read 1,168,138 times
Reputation: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by EndersDrift View Post
I wish there was an option for none. I don't think any city can handle 8 pro sports teams. Just look at the issues that always come up with players making too much for the amount of money they bring in. Dividing up your fan base and attendance isn't going to help that.
Yeah I don't think too many cities can do this but it is possible just look at NYC once it opens the new sports center in Brooklyn it will have 8 teams. LA is in the running of 3 basketball teams, so maybe it isn't as inconcievable as you might think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
624 posts, read 1,168,138 times
Reputation: 337
^^^ BTW to add to my post, SF already has 6 teams but I guess a better question would be is which of these cities can handle the most teams in its metro area with SF obviously ahead of the other cities on this list. I believe some of these other cities could handle multiple teams of the same league but it would be hard to get a fanbase in certain cities such as I can't ever see another football team in the DFW area for the simple fact that the Cowboys are so beloved here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 09:02 AM
 
Location: America
5,098 posts, read 7,381,067 times
Reputation: 1919
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtownboogie View Post
Besides NYC, LA, and Chicago what other cities/metros can handle two franchise teams of the big 4 (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL)?
Two franchises of one or of all 4?

I voted Houston, but I think DFW is the only place that could really pull it off. I can see them having two NBA teams.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
624 posts, read 1,168,138 times
Reputation: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlGreen View Post
Two franchises of one or of all 4?

I voted Houston, but I think DFW is the only place that could really pull it off. I can see them having two NBA teams.
Acutally Houston could also pull it off for the simple reason that it does not have a hardcore fanbase to any of it's teams and I don't mean this as an insult but rather a key component to acquire a second team in any of the pro leagues for it would make it easier to become a fan if your team that is already in place is not doing so good, don't know if this made any sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 10:20 AM
 
1,538 posts, read 5,154,889 times
Reputation: 1649
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtownboogie View Post
just look at NYC once it opens the new sports center in Brooklyn it will have 8 teams.

the nyc metro already has nine major league sports teams (ten if you count the red bulls of major league soccer).

when the nets move from northern nj (suburbs of nyc) to brooklyn (nyc proper), the number of teams in the nyc metro area will stay exactly the same, as the team will simply be shuffling from one section of the region to another. it's analogous to the dallas cowboys moving from texas stadium in irving to cowboys stadium arlington, or the los angeles lakers from the great western forum in suburban inglewood to the staples center in downtown LA, or the washington redskins moving from rfk stadium in d.c. to fedex field in suburban landover, md.

and for the record, when the nets complete their move to brooklyn, there will only be five pro sports teams playing within nyc's city limits: the mets (queens), yankees (bronx), knicks (manhattan), rangers (manhattan), and nets (brooklyn). there will still be four teams just across the river to the west in northeastern nj (giants, jets, devils, red bulls) and one team in the suburbs of long island to the east (islanders).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,598 posts, read 53,395,125 times
Reputation: 14521
The Bay Area has the 49ers, Raiders, Giants, As, Golden State Warriors and the SJ Sharks.

There is rumor going around that Larry Ellison wants to buy an NBA team and bring it to San Jose-I hear its the team from Charlotte?

That would give us 1 NHL team, 2 MLB teams, 2 football teams and 2 NBA teams.

7 teams in all(if we get that 2nd NBA team)

Also, the Sacramento Kings are trying to move to Orange County so LA might soon have 2 NBA teams.

Ironically, with all these teams, the Bay Area generally has very old football stadiums and the As are in sore need of a new ballpark.

Otherwise ATT is a showplace and so is HP Pavillion in San Jose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 10:40 AM
 
1,538 posts, read 5,154,889 times
Reputation: 1649
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtownboogie View Post
Besides NYC, LA, and Chicago what other cities/metros can handle two franchise teams of the big 4 (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL)?
i strongly believe that there is no metro area in the u.s. besides nyc and los angeles that can support two teams in each of the four major sports. not even chicago can pull that off IMO, although it's probably the most likely candidate due to market size and its status as one of the most passionate pro sports markets in the nation.

i feel that a CSA needs a minimum of 15 million residents to support two teams in each of the four major sports leagues; otherwise, there simply isn't enough disposable income to go around for all of these different teams and sports.

but i do think there are a handful of metros that could successfully host multiple teams in one or two sports.

the sf bay area is a good example of this - sure, the athletics and raiders haven't had great support of late, but they had good attendance during their highly successful seasons. for example, many people forget that the a's drew very well during the "bash brother" years of the late '80s/early '90s. if either team ever built a brand new, state-of-the-art facility in oakland, san jose, or elsewhere in the bay area, i have no doubt that every seat in the house would be packed (at least for the first few seasons) without hurting the attendance of the sf giants and 49ers. that's because the bay area is very wealthy and is a spread-out, polycentric region, so there are economic and geographic reasons why two teams are feasible in the nfl and mlb.

that said, i don't know whether the bay area could support two nba and nhl teams on top of two nfl and mlb teams plus one mls squad. the seven teams they have now (including mls) is just about all they can handle unless their CSA population grows dramatically in the next couple of decades.

chicago is another city that can support multiple teams in multiple sports leagues - just not for all of the "big 4". IMO the best candidate for this is the nfl. frankly, i'm amazed that the league never added a second team in chicago after the chicago cardinals bolted for st. louis in 1960.

think about it: the bears have a 10 million person market with a huge and rabid football fanbase all to themselves - that's crazy. i know some people are going to say, "well, a second team would never work in chicago, since that's bears country", but i have to disagree. i feel there are enough transplants and casual football fans in chicago to make it work, even if the team would forever be the weak sibling.

in other words, having a second nfl team in chicago is not necessarily an ideal situation, but i do think it would be economically feasible.

i think the chicago area could arguably support a second nba team, too - but the odds of it working are not as good as a second nfl team IMO.

i do not think a second nhl team in chicago would work at all.

ultimately, i think one and possibly two more pro sports teams could do ok in chicago. it's a market of 10 million people, so you could easily make the case that it's underserved by "only" having five teams (six if you include the mls team).

another market that i think could support another team is new england - but only for baseball. it's amazing to me that the red sox have that entire market (arguably the best baseball market in the nation, along with nyc, st. louis, and chicago) all to themselves.

for any doubters out there, remember that boston was a two team mlb market for over fifty years. the braves moved from boston to milwaukee in the early '50s (and then to atlanta in the mid-'60s), but they had an 80 year history in boston before that.

finally, i think that with the way they've grown in recent decades, dallas and houston have the potential to support multiple teams in a single sports league - but ONLY for one of the sports leagues. in other words, you could have two mlb teams OR two nfl teams OR (less likely) two nba teams, but not all of them. i don't think either city could support two nhl teams, and to be honest it's debatable whether houston could support even one (if/when houston gets a little bit larger, i think my opinion will change from "debatable" to "likely").
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
624 posts, read 1,168,138 times
Reputation: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbergen View Post
i strongly believe that there is no metro area in the u.s. besides nyc and los angeles that can support two teams in each of the four major sports. not even chicago can pull that off IMO, although it's probably the most likely candidate due to market size and its status as one of the most passionate pro sports markets in the nation.

i feel that a CSA needs a minimum of 15 million residents to support two teams in each of the four major sports leagues; otherwise, there simply isn't enough disposable income to go around for all of these different teams and sports.

but i do think there are a handful of metros that could successfully host multiple teams in one or two sports.

the sf bay area is a good example of this - sure, the athletics and raiders haven't had great support of late, but they had good attendance during their highly successful seasons. for example, many people forget that the a's drew very well during the "bash brother" years of the late '80s/early '90s. if either team ever built a brand new, state-of-the-art facility in oakland, san jose, or elsewhere in the bay area, i have no doubt that every seat in the house would be packed (at least for the first few seasons) without hurting the attendance of the sf giants and 49ers. that's because the bay area is very wealthy and is a spread-out, polycentric region, so there are economic and geographic reasons why two teams are feasible in the nfl and mlb.

that said, i don't know whether the bay area could support two nba and nhl teams on top of two nfl and mlb teams plus one mls squad. the seven teams they have now (including mls) is just about all they can handle unless their CSA population grows dramatically in the next couple of decades.

chicago is another city that can support multiple teams in multiple sports leagues - just not for all of the "big 4". IMO the best candidate for this is the nfl. frankly, i'm amazed that the league never added a second team in chicago after the chicago cardinals bolted for st. louis in 1960.

think about it: the bears have a 10 million person market with a huge and rabid football fanbase all to themselves - that's crazy. i know some people are going to say, "well, a second team would never work in chicago, since that's bears country", but i have to disagree. i feel there are enough transplants and casual football fans in chicago to make it work, even if the team would forever be the weak sibling.

in other words, having a second nfl team in chicago is not necessarily an ideal situation, but i do think it would be economically feasible.

i think the chicago area could arguably support a second nba team, too - but the odds of it working are not as good as a second nfl team IMO.

i do not think a second nhl team in chicago would work at all.

ultimately, i think one and possibly two more pro sports teams could do ok in chicago. it's a market of 10 million people, so you could easily make the case that it's underserved by "only" having five teams (six if you include the mls team).

another market that i think could support another team is new england - but only for baseball. it's amazing to me that the red sox have that entire market (arguably the best baseball market in the nation, along with nyc, st. louis, and chicago) all to themselves.

for any doubters out there, remember that boston was a two team mlb market for over fifty years. the braves moved from boston to milwaukee in the early '50s (and then to atlanta in the mid-'60s), but they had an 80 year history in boston before that.

finally, i think that with the way they've grown in recent decades, dallas and houston have the potential to support multiple teams in a single sports league - but ONLY for one of the sports leagues. in other words, you could have two mlb teams OR two nfl teams OR (less likely) two nba teams, but not all of them. i don't think either city could support two nhl teams, and to be honest it's debatable whether houston could support even one (if/when houston gets a little bit larger, i think my opinion will change from "debatable" to "likely").
I strongly disagree about New England supporting another baseball team, I just don't see any other baseball team being able to get a fan base out there, I think the best bet for another franchise in New England would be either a NHL or NFL in that order.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top