[BoomRShine]

Originally Posted by beachmouse

Just the core city population is a bad metric to use because of the different ways different places have incorporated/annexed over time. Remember that Jacksonville, FL is significantly larger than Miami, and you get the picture. Going by Metropolitan Statistical Area/Combined Statistical Area is a lot more accurate of a picture.

Grand Rapids-Wyoming MSA 774,000/Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland CSA 1,321,000
Des Moines MSA 569,000/Des Moines-Pella-Newton CSA 631,000
Omaha MSA 865,000/Omaha-Council Bluffs CSA 865,000
Asheville MSA 412,000/Asheville-Brevard CSA 442,000
Madison MSA 570,000/Madison CSA 628,000

Indianapolis MSA 1,700,000/Indianapolis CSA 2,064,000

So going by CSAs, twice as large as Des Moines, Asheville, or Madison, and about 50% larger than greater Omaha.

Actually, when U.S. Office of Management and Budget redefines MSAs in the next couple of years (based on Census 2010 figures), the Grand Rapids MSA figures to be much different and much larger.

Something I posted on a different forum a few months back:

I think Ottawa County will be included in the Grand Rapids MSA after the OMB does its next analysis (2013?) of MSAs. According to this document produced by the Library of Michigan, "Adjacent counties are considered outlying counties of a CBSA if either...at least 25 percent of the employed residents of the county work in the central county or counties of the CBSA; or...at least 25 percent of the employment of the county is accounted for by workers who reside in the central county or counties of the CBSA." It goes on to note that "Grand Rapids comes close to being a nine-county metropolitan area".

As we know, Barry, Ionia, and Newaygo Counties (in addition to Kent County) make up the Grand Rapids MSA. These "counties qualify as outlying counties of the Grand Rapids metropolitan area because they barely meet the 25 percent commuting standard: Newaygo (26.7 percent), Ionia (26.6 percent), and Barry (25.8 percent)."

Montcalm County just barely doesn't qualify because "only an estimated 24.6 percent of its workers commute to Kent county."

Ottawa County just barely doesn't qualify as well because the "estimated percentage of its workers who commute to Kent county (24.7 percent) does not quite meet the 25 percent threshold for merging with the Grand Rapids metropolitan area."

So, Ottawa County just barely did not get included in the Grand Rapids MSA, all because of .3 percentage points. However, based on 2010 Census results, I would expect this to be now be greater than 25 percent. Most of Ottawa County's growth was on the east side of the county, near Kent County. Allendale Township grew by 7,666, Georgetown Township/Hudsonville grew by 5,283, Jamestown Township grew by 1,972, and Tallmadge Township grew by 694. This area, which probably has a high percentage of workers commuting to Kent County, accounts for an increase of 15,615. The whole rest of the county grew by 9,872.

Montcalm County is a similar situation. It didn't get included in the Grand Rapids MSA because of .4 pecentage points. Most of Montcalm County's growth was in the two townships that lie on US 131. Reynolds Township grew by 1,031 and Pierson Township grew by 350. These areas account for an increase of 1,381. The whole rest of the county grew by just 691. Again, I would expect the commuting percentage to now be above 25 percent.

It would appear, then, that Ottawa County and Montcalm County would now be included in the Grand Rapids MSA. Allegan County would then also be included in the Grand Rapids MSA - in 2000, 19.6 percent of its workers commuted to Ottawa County and 16.4 percent commuted to Kent County. With them combined, this would be 36 percent, well above the 25 percent threshold (and this figure will probably only go up, as most Allegan County's growth has been in townships bordering Kent and Ottawa Counties).

Barry County will almost positively remain in the Grand Rapids MSA. The bulk of its growth - 1,767 - was in the two townships that border Kent County - Thornapple Township and Irving Township. The rest of the county grew by just 630.

Newaygo County will also probably remain in the Grand Rapids MSA. The two townships that border Kent County - Ensley Township and Grant Township - grew by 325. The rest of the county grew by just 277.

The one question mark is Ionia County. There was pretty good growth in the townships bordering Kent County. But, there was also pretty good growth in the southeastern part of the county, around Portland. I am going to guess that Ionia County would qualify as part of the Grand Rapids MSA.

This would all make the Grand Rapids MSA a seven county MSA - Kent, Ottawa, Allegan, Ionia, Montcalm, Barry and Newaygo Counties - with a population of 1,212,311. Under the current definitions, Grand Rapids MSA's population is 774,160.

I'm not sure how Muskegon falls in this. I believe it would be its own separate MSA, but obviously be part of the CSA.

So, it appears to be a pretty good possibility that the Grand Rapids MSA will be a seven county MSA with a 2010 population of 1,212,311. Muskegon would probably be its own MSA, but could go from a one county MSA to a two county MSA (back in 2000, Oceana County had 24.0 percent of its residents commuting to Muskegon County - if this goes up to 25.0 percent, Oceana County will be included in the Muskegon MSA). The Muskegon MSA would have a 2010 population of 198,758. The Grand Rapids-Muskegon CSA would have a population of 1,411,069.

With a MSA population of over 1.2 million, the Grand Rapids MSA will be right up there with such big 4 MSAs as Jacksonville (1.3 million), Memphis (1.3 million), Oklahoma City (1.3 million), New Orleans (1.2 million), Buffalo (1.1 million), and Salt Lake City (1.1 million).

[MS313]

We have much larger cities and metro areas struggling to keep 1 sports team. How would GR make it? I don't like how some of you can try to bite the hand that feeds you. Saying Detroit is bringing MI down, remember that Detroit made MI in the first place. it's the reason why MI is in the top 10 most populous states, it's the reason why we even have half the freeways we have now, to be honest, MI wouldn't be half as relevant if not for Detroit. I don't care how much some of you hate Detroit or like GR better. Metro GR can't touch Metro Detroit. Metro Detroit has just about more EVERYTHING than metro GR. Detroit is 1,000 times more known. If GR pulled off even 1 successful pro sports team they would be EXTREMELY lucky. 4 successful pro sports teams? lmao. Especially to rival against Detroit.

[intelfan11315]

There would be absoultely no way the Van Andel could host an NHL team.

[intelfan11315]

Originally Posted by MarvinStrong313

We have much larger cities and metro areas struggling to keep 1 sports team. How would GR make it? I don't like how some of you can try to bite the hand that feeds you. Saying Detroit is bringing MI down, remember that Detroit made MI in the first place. it's the reason why MI is in the top 10 most populous states, it's the reason why we even have half the freeways we have now, to be honest, MI wouldn't be half as relevant if not for Detroit. I don't care how much some of you hate Detroit or like GR better. Metro GR can't touch Metro Detroit. Metro Detroit has just about more EVERYTHING than metro GR. Detroit is 1,000 times more known. If GR pulled off even 1 successful pro sports team they would be EXTREMELY lucky. 4 successful pro sports teams? lmao. Especially to rival against Detroit.

Yeah, Grand Rapids is a better city, but I don't think it really has the capacity to host a professional sports team yet.

[tablemtn]

As far as the Packers go - they are effectively the NFL team for metro Milwaukee, which is considerably larger than Grand Rapids.

[jmackay]

With the GR Griffins recent success... I'd say an NHL Franchise is most likely if anything. Van Andel Arena would have to expand... perhaps expand upwards vs outwards... to have any shot. The NHL has a strict 18,000 capacity minimum for any team... same for the NBA. The Pistons used to play preseason games at VAA, perhaps that was the NBA testing the waters sto to speak of potential basketball in GR??? Hopefully someday it will happen.

[Republic of Michigan]

Grand Rapids needs to consolidate with some of its inner ring suburbs to increase it population and size mass. It also needs a couple fortune 500 companies to locate there, and a few more high rises. It could also use a professional sports team.

[magellan]

Originally Posted by Republic of Michigan

Grand Rapids needs to consolidate with some of its inner ring suburbs to increase it population and size mass. It also needs a couple fortune 500 companies to locate there, and a few more high rises. It could also use a professional sports team.

This is pretty vague, but OK. I have to ask, why would consolidating its inner rings suburbs make a difference?

[Adrian71]

Originally Posted by tablemtn

As far as the Packers go - they are effectively the NFL team for metro Milwaukee, which is considerably larger than Grand Rapids.

Two other things to consider with the Packers:

1. The ownership structure.
2. NFL revenue sharing.

The Packers are the only team in any of the four big sports leagues to be a publicly owned non-profit. The NFL changed the rules years ago that prohibits that kind of ownership structure going forward -- now there needs to be a single majority owner who runs the team for a profit. (The Packers were grandfathered in.) If the NFL still allowed the fans and community to "own" teams, Grand Rapids might have a shot at getting a team. But no rich owner is going to make a huge investment in such a small market in this day and age. If the Packers were a privately owned for-profit franchise, their majority owner would have moved them out of Green Bay years ago, at the very least down to Milwaukee.

Then there's the revenue sharing, which is the only way Green Bay continues to survive. The NFL revenue pie (league-wide things like the TV contract, not individual team revenue) gets split 32 ways. Without that, the Packers just couldn't survive in such a tiny market. Green Bay isn't quite as big as Grand Rapids, but it is bigger than Kalamazoo, to give you some sense of scale. So the Packers are kind of a charity case in the NFL, kept afloat through the equal distribution of revenues. I doubt the big-city team owners would look kindly on having to take on another small-market charity case. And Grand Rapids is a small market, in the grand scheme of things. I used to enjoy going to Rampage games, but Grand Rapids couldn't even keep an arena team afloat. I don't see how they could ever support an NFL team, or a team in any of the other major sports leagues.

[VM1138]

I don't think Grand Rapids could survive with a pro sports team. Aren't there a lot of Detroit and Chicago fans there for every sport?