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.
The rules of this are simple, but let's keep this civil.
Just so it is clear again within the post, "Big League" is being defined as a city that has a professional sports team (Big 4), so no, your city is not being "knocked" if it isn't included.
One thing I will note: There is an exception in this group, and it's name is Vegas. Yes, it isn't a big league city in the sense of having a sports team, but it made symmetrical sense to include it in the poll, and also, it is quite likely that they will have a sports team within the next decade.
Also, San Jose/Oakland/San Francisco is all being judged as one area, however in fairness to the other cities, the point of determination will be from DT SF, which still covers those areas also.
The "range" on which cities are being judged is within 60 miles of the CBD, however, I at least give some preference if many of the natural features are right within the downtown area or at least within 20 miles. Obviously all of this is subjective, so diversity is of a high priority.
Pictures are encouraged!
Personally, I voted for Portland out of this group, but one that really gets knocked a lot and is REALLY underrated in this regard, though not a Big League city, would be Fresno.
The rules of this are simple, but let's keep this civil.
Just so it is clear again within the post, "Big League" is being defined as a city that has a professional sports team (Big 4), so no, your city is not being "knocked" if it isn't included.
One thing I will note: There is an exception in this group, and it's name is Vegas. Yes, it isn't a big league city in the sense of having a sports team, but it made symmetrical sense to include it in the poll, and also, it is quite likely that they will have a sports team within the next decade.
Also, San Jose/Oakland/San Francisco is all being judged as one area, however in fairness to the other cities, the point of determination will be from DT SF, which still covers those areas also.
The "range" on which cities are being judged is within 60 miles of the CBD, however, I at least give some preference if many of the natural features are right within the downtown area or at least within 20 miles. Obviously all of this is subjective, so diversity is of a high priority.
Pictures are encouraged!
Personally, I voted for Portland out of this group, but one that really gets knocked a lot and is REALLY underrated in this regard, though not a Big League city, would be Fresno.
San Jose is like another country from SF. It's totally different, period.
True, but that's one of the things that makes the "region" so great. Still, San Francisco is 40 miles from San Jose, which is 37 miles from Oakland which is 8 miles from San Francisco, so all of those different landscapes are captured under the same 60 mile umbrella.
Seattle running away early so far. I don't deny that Seattle's surroundings are impressive, they are no doubt. However, for some reason, when I went, I wasn't quite as overwhelmed as I thought I'd be. Perhaps doing something on the water would be nice, but I didn't have enough time when I was there. Also, the bigger concern I had when I was in the area was that it was almost more of a concrete jungle, to where, if living in the city, one would have to drive for 30 minutes or so to even find a quiet forest, and for an hour or even two to get to any mountains. On the other hand, other West Coast cities (SLC, Portland, Vancouver, LA, etc.) felt much closer to mountains/secluded nature. I could be wrong on that though.
Yeah.. I mean Seattle is really, really nice, don't get me wrong. But I mentioned specific chinks in the armor that I at least perceived (espec. when considering the criteria is within 60 miles, with preference given to closeness), but yet Seattle is just running away. I'm not saying it shouldn't win, but, just surprising. Also, no votes for LA? 5 miles from Griffifth Park, 10 miles from the Pacific Ocean, 35 miles from Mount Baldy (10K Peak), etc.
Yeah.. I mean Seattle is really, really nice, don't get me wrong. But I mentioned specific chinks in the armor that I at least perceived (espec. when considering the criteria is within 60 miles, with preference given to closeness), but yet Seattle is just running away. I'm not saying it shouldn't win, but, just surprising. Also, no votes for LA? 5 miles from Griffifth Park, 10 miles from the Pacific Ocean, 35 miles from Mount Baldy (10K Peak), etc.
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.
