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.
As lifeshadower mentioned, there are many cities with teams outside of its borders like Dallas, for example. I am really referring to the city's entire area of immediate influence whether it be MSA or CSA.
If we were to make a list based on sports teams (NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB) it'd be something like this
NYC area - 9
San Francisco & San Jose - 6
LA area - 6
Chicagoland - 5
Cities with 4 teams
Boston, Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
Dallas
Denver, Colorado
Detroit, Michigan
Miami, Florida
Minneapolis–St. Paul, Minnesota
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Phoenix, Arizona
Washington, DC
On the topic, the numbers mostly align to metro size, nothing more, nothing less with some exceptions
If you use CSA DC has 6
I am not sure WMBA, Arena or MLS should be in the discussion at this point and honestly not sure why it matters if they (stadiums) are in or not in the main city
N.Y.C. From Giants Stadium Parking Lot | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_kay_1/6023804989/ - broken link)
Also, another correction: If you're talking about "Chicagoland" then the number goes up to 6 (I forgot about the WNBA playing in Rosemont).
WNBA?
Should we then count UFL, AHL, IHL, AAA baseball, lacrosse, etc?
I mean if you want to count MLS, I can kinda see that (though it's still very secondary compared to the big 4 sports). But WNBA should not be in the conversation.
On the topic, the numbers mostly align to metro size, nothing more, nothing less with some exceptions
If you use CSA DC has 6
I am not sure WMBA, Arena or MLS should be in the discussion at this point and honestly not sure why it matters if they (stadiums) are in or not in the main city
N.Y.C. From Giants Stadium Parking Lot | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_kay_1/6023804989/ - broken link)
I would stick with the the Big 4 leagues (NHL, NBA, NFL, MLB) as they quite frankly the only elite leagues.
Size does play a big part but there are a couple of variants like the Bay Area (having more than several other areas it's size) or Sacramento and Seattle (having less than others its size)
Should we then count UFL, AHL, IHL, AAA baseball, lacrosse, etc?
I mean if you want to count MLS, I can kinda see that (though it's still very secondary compared to the big 4 sports). But WNBA should not be in the conversation.
Fair enough. If we aren't including WNBA teams, that drops New York down to only 4 teams that can claim one of the 5 Boroughs as home.
Mets
Yankees
Knicks
Rangers
The Liberty play at MSG, but aren't being counted.
Fair enough. If we aren't including WNBA teams, that drops New York down to only 4 teams that can claim one of the 5 Boroughs as home.
Mets
Yankees
Knicks
Rangers
The Liberty play at MSG, but aren't being counted.
Not sure why city limits matter so much
The nets are moving to BK, but the Devils in Newark or the Giants and Jets in the Meadowlands or Ilanders in Nassua are very much integrated in the NYC fabric
The skins moved from the district to Landover, still very much a DC team
Or the Pistons in the burbs etc.
Or the Cowboys in Irving or Arlington or wherever they reside are absolutely affiliated with Dallas/DFW
Fair enough. If we aren't including WNBA teams, that drops New York down to only 4 teams that can claim one of the 5 Boroughs as home.
Mets
Yankees
Knicks
Rangers
The Liberty play at MSG, but aren't being counted.
Agree with kidphilly. I mean if you want to exclude NJ teams, I can see the logic in that. But why would you exclude teams that represent NYC just because their stadium is 6 miles on the wrong side of the river? (though I would grant you, it is sort of illogical that NY teams play in NJ )
Anyway, to answer the original question, I do think the number of pro teams historically has correlated pretty well (though not perfectly of course) with the size/stature of a city.
NY - 7 to 9 (depending on whether you wanna count NJ teams)
LA - 4 to 6 (with Anaheim) (soon to be 5 to 7, once they finally get an NFL team)
Bay area - 5 to 6 (but one quite far away)
Chicago - 5
Philly, Boston, DC, Detroit, Miami-Ft Lauderdale, Dallas (all 4m plus metro areas) Minneapolis, Phoenix, Denver - 4
Overachievers: Minneapolis, Phoenix, Denver and Oakland (more teams than SF!)
Underachievers: San Antonio, Portland, Columbus, Sacramento, Austin, LV, Charlotte, Orlando, SD, Seattle (since the Sonics left), Baltimore and perhaps Houston (5-6m metro area, only 3 teams).
I am sure I left some out..
Performance, on the other hand, is another story.
Edit: drop Charlotte from the underachievers list. Forgot they have two teams now, which I guess is appropriate for their size.
I believe that the government at every single level (federal, state, local, etc.) cares about those limits and boundary lines. After all, who is paying how much to whom is something everybody is very interested in, correct? Taxes and such. I think who "picks up the tab" is a very much an issue now a days.
I believe that the government at every single level (federal, state, local, etc.) cares about those limits and boundary lines. After all, who is paying how much to whom is something everybody is very interested in, correct? Taxes and such. I think who "picks up the tab" is a very much an issue now a days.
Well if the topic were related to Tax collection I might agree however the OP appears to be more attributing the number of teams to a city/region of which the boundaries are arbitrary IMHO for this purpose
Also many players may not live in the city, this presents other tax implications, also when players play in certain cities they also get taxed etc. That seems to be taking things to an extreme based on what my understanding was the intent of the question at hand
Last edited by kidphilly; 12-01-2011 at 02:12 PM..
Add to that the fact that laws and ordinances can very greatly not only between towns, cities and counties, but entire states. No matter how "close" they are.
Well if the topic were related to Tax collection I might agree however the OP appears to be more attributing the number of teams to a city/region of which the boundaries are arbitrary IMHO for this purpose
Also many players may not live in the city, this presents other tax implications, also when players play in certain cities they also get taxed etc. They seems to be taking things to an extreme based on wht my understanding was the intent of the question at hand
You don't think the amount of money made, taxed, and then distributed out back into the economy has an effect on the quality of a city? Can a population of a city or metro stand all the tax subsidization generally associated with having professional sports teams? Stadium building? A population RICH ENOUGH to afford to take the family to one? Those aren't measures of a city? The infrastructure to support all that comes along with a team, or teams?
Food for thought:
I know they are not sports teams. I KNOW THEY AREN'T.
But consider Midway and O'Hare. Midway is completely inside Chicago city limits. O'Hare by an sane person's mind is in Rosemont, Il. But O'Hare IS a part of Chicago through "Politics". Chicago, not Rosemont, gets tax money from O'Hare.
Is there any way the Meadowlands could be the "O'Hare" of NYC? Or do boundary lines *really* matter?
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.
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.
)
