U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-03-2009, 12:58 AM
 
Location: Ohio
904 posts, read 1,636,245 times
Reputation: 1164

Advertisements

I think Kentucky should get an NBA team. If I had to choose a city, it'd be Louisville since it's the most populated and the capital, and the fact their opening a new arena in downtown Louisville in 2010. Those people in Kentucky love their basketball, and the fact I may move there after college is another reason I'd like to see them get a team(haha). But really, basketball is so important there and I think they could carry a team. If memory serves me correctly, they were one of the final cities to get the Grizzlies before they decided on Memphis.

And about LA getting an NFL team: Well, I think other cities deserve a team before LA. The city has failed to support their team multiple times. The only reason the NFL wants an LA team is because it's the 2nd largest market and it could potentially bring in lots of money. But, I can't seem to understand why everyone, including people working in the NFL, can't seem to remember that they tried it there a few times, and it failed! If anything, move the Jokeland Raiders to LA, I'd be fine with that. But I don't want to see an expansion team start in LA, and I also don't want to see a current team move to LA besides the Raiders since their up the state a little bit. I think other cities deserve a team before LA does. Los Angeles has enough things going on, and the state of California has a few NFL teams. Let another city with no current professional sport teams get something for a change.

Just my opinion...

 
Old 12-03-2009, 01:33 AM
 
Location: Quincy, Mass. (near Boston)
2,179 posts, read 3,690,048 times
Reputation: 1738
As a hockey fan, I'm surprised Houton doesn't have a team. They have a good minor league hockey heritage, and the Aeros in the minor-league AHL for several years. Sure, most people would not care, but it's still the largest US market without the NHL. Dallas has done very well since their move from Minnesota 15 or so yrs ago (although not selling out regularly in recent yrs due to tepid teams).

I also echo Portland and/or Seattle for the NHL; they've both had major junior hockey for years...and actually, a closer (or similar) drive to a Canadian border than Boston, a hockey town.

KC has their beautiful arena, but not sure if hockey at NHL prices would work long-term.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 08:04 AM
 
Location: Houston
2,026 posts, read 3,677,885 times
Reputation: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayp1188 View Post
I think it would be hard for Texas to really support another NFL team. Houston was able to do it because they had previously had the Houston Oilers from 1960-1996, so when the Texans came in 2002, there were already many people in Houston who weren't fans of the Cowboys who needed a new team to follow. The Cowboys have one of the biggest fan bases in the NFL and are so dominant in Texas outside of Houston that it would be hard for a new team to spring up in San Antonio (or Austin) and build a fan base out of people who are already die hard Cowboys fans. It would be like Wisconsin getting another NFL team, or Pittsburgh getting another NFL team. I just can't see it working out.

I had previously stated that I think Austin should get an MLB team, but I think San Antonio could sucessfully support one too. An MLB team in either city could build a pretty big fan base.
Did you read the past two are three pages? We already went over this. San Antonio would probably be able support an NFL team because it would also draw in a large fan base in from Austin and the areas surrounding the two metros. An SA NFL team's biggest competitor for fans would be UT football not the Cowboys. Many die hard Cowboys fans in SA would start rooting for a local team if they had one. The same thing happened in Houston when the Texans came.

Austin doesn't want a pro team in the least bit. It would probably run out the MLB if they tried to put a team there.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Morgantown, WV
989 posts, read 1,932,446 times
Reputation: 975
Yeah Austin doesn't need a pro sports team at all, there's simply just no point in that with all the UT culture. But as far as baseball goes...Charlotte and Portland NEED teams. Portland would develop a natural rivalry with Seattle and the city needs a legit pro team(NBA/NHL=secondary sport). And Charlotte...well they have the entire Charlotte/Raleigh-Durham-CHapel Hill/Greensboro/Winston-Salem/Asheville TV market to work with. I believe that this is currently the largest television network without a MLB team, and I guarentee that they will land a team fairly soon. The location, size of the city, and natural rivalry with Atlanta is too perfect.

Personally, I would like to see New Orleans and either Omaha or Des Moines get MLB teams. I think there is a need for some sort of midwestern city to get a team..way too much of a geographical gap, and Indy is unfortunately locked by a brand new AAA-ball complex.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 08:53 AM
 
1,012 posts, read 2,247,389 times
Reputation: 454
Los Angeles needs an NFL franchise. Seattle needs another NBA team. Vegas needs at least one team.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 08:54 AM
 
1,012 posts, read 2,247,389 times
Reputation: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobucks86 View Post
I think Kentucky should get an NBA team. If I had to choose a city, it'd be Louisville since it's the most populated and the capital, and the fact their opening a new arena in downtown Louisville in 2010. Those people in Kentucky love their basketball, and the fact I may move there after college is another reason I'd like to see them get a team(haha). But really, basketball is so important there and I think they could carry a team. If memory serves me correctly, they were one of the final cities to get the Grizzlies before they decided on Memphis.

And about LA getting an NFL team: Well, I think other cities deserve a team before LA. The city has failed to support their team multiple times. The only reason the NFL wants an LA team is because it's the 2nd largest market and it could potentially bring in lots of money. But, I can't seem to understand why everyone, including people working in the NFL, can't seem to remember that they tried it there a few times, and it failed! If anything, move the Jokeland Raiders to LA, I'd be fine with that. But I don't want to see an expansion team start in LA, and I also don't want to see a current team move to LA besides the Raiders since their up the state a little bit. I think other cities deserve a team before LA does. Los Angeles has enough things going on, and the state of California has a few NFL teams. Let another city with no current professional sport teams get something for a change.

Just my opinion...
I think you need to take a Geography class. Frankfort, not Louisville, is Kentucky's state capital. And no, Louisville is not nearlly large enough to have a pro sports team.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Columbus,Ohio
1,014 posts, read 3,121,659 times
Reputation: 483
NFL: Los Angeles ( I think they should get the Raiders back from Oakland ( IMHO Oakland is a satellite city of San Franscisco - 49ers- like Fort Worth to Dallas - Cowboys- , Newark to NYC- Giants and Jets -and St.Paul to Minn.- Vikings- etc.) Columbus Ohio ( everyone say that C-bus has the Ohio State Buckeyes and I think they are great but comparing college football to the NFL is like comparing apples to oranges.) Portland Ore. and possibly Memphis ( the Titans should be based there instead of Nashville which has the lesser population), Louisville ( rapidly growing) and San Antonio . I also feel that the Buccaneers should move out of Tampa Bay( that area has alot of sprawl with very little urban feel) to it to one of the above mentioned possibilities. MLB : Columbus Ohio, Indianapolis , Portland Ore., Memphis and Buffalo NY.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 10:44 AM
 
9,967 posts, read 14,630,717 times
Reputation: 9193
Quote:
Originally Posted by TelecasterBlues View Post
Portland would develop a natural rivalry with Seattle and the city needs a legit pro team(NBA/NHL=secondary sport).
I don't know if most people out here would agrees with you the Blazers aren't a legit pro-team. Really, the NBA is considered a secondary sport? Maybe back east MLB is much bigger than the NBA with teams like the Red Sox and Yankees. But, I know very few people of my age(29) who follow baseball--it's bigger in parts of California more so than in the Northwest, but even most of the people I know in Seattle aren't that interested in the Mariners. Football and basketball have been the number one and number two sports for as long as I can remember--a common reaction around World Series time from people I know is--who cares?

Anyhow, if Portland by some incredible longshot ever got an MLB team, all the transplants from California, Ohio, Michigan, Chicago, Boston, and New York would probably just end up rooting for their hometown teams against Portland.

Last edited by Deezus; 12-03-2009 at 11:15 AM..
 
Old 12-03-2009, 11:39 AM
 
33 posts, read 25,077 times
Reputation: 23
Portland needs a baseball team.
 
Old 12-03-2009, 12:15 PM
 
11,897 posts, read 32,942,782 times
Reputation: 8666
Quote:
Originally Posted by TelecasterBlues View Post
Yeah Austin doesn't need a pro sports team at all, there's simply just no point in that with all the UT culture. But as far as baseball goes...Charlotte and Portland NEED teams. Portland would develop a natural rivalry with Seattle and the city needs a legit pro team(NBA/NHL=secondary sport). And Charlotte...well they have the entire Charlotte/Raleigh-Durham-CHapel Hill/Greensboro/Winston-Salem/Asheville TV market to work with. I believe that this is currently the largest television network without a MLB team, and I guarentee that they will land a team fairly soon. The location, size of the city, and natural rivalry with Atlanta is too perfect.

Personally, I would like to see New Orleans and either Omaha or Des Moines get MLB teams. I think there is a need for some sort of midwestern city to get a team..way too much of a geographical gap, and Indy is unfortunately locked by a brand new AAA-ball complex.
I agree that NC would be a logical place for a MLB team. There are close to 5 million people in the fast-growing Charlotte-Triad-Triangle megalopolis (and well over 6 million if Columbia and upstate SC are thrown in). Minor league baseball is huge in NC, so I'm sure it wouldn't take much effort for a MLB team to gain a lot of support in the area. But it would really need to be a NL team in order to have a more natural rivalry with the closest other MLB teams which are all in the NL (Atlanta, Washington, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh).
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.


Closed Thread

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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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