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.
Where exactly in Montgomery County would you put this 2nd team?
Close to 276+476+202. Either King of Prussia or Plymouth Meeting.
Perfect spot would be the Village of Valley Forge location across the street from KOP Mall.
You would have 800K Mont, 600K Bucks,600K Delco, 550 K Chester. With another 2 M nearby in Lancaster ,Reading and Lehigh Valley. 9 out of 10 Phillies ticket holders come from this demographic.
But the fans would care, and that's what matters because without them you have the Tampa Bay or Miami situation. Nobody would jump ship from the Phillies unless it was for the A's.
If you put a team in say King of Prussia you would have about 3 or 4 M suburbanites instantly take to their new team whether it was the A's or Rays. Most would stay Phillies fans as well. Eventually over the decades you would see a rivalry brew with NW suburbs pulling away from the Phillies. Which is the precise reason the Phillies would never allow a second team in this region. Which kind of makes this thread a moot point.
Quote:
It's because baseball only works in the city.
NYC works differently than the Philadelphia area. The money in NY is in Manhattan which is where a ball park would have went in the ideal situation. But there is no room in Manhattan to build a ball park hence they tucked it in the Bronx where the NYY tradition has always been.
Quote:
The money is only in the suburbs in cities that declined, like Philadelphia did. Please don't try to tell me that the money in the New York or Chicago or even Boston areas is in the suburbs.
Yes the vast majority of wealth in Boston and Chicago is in their suburbs. Manhattan skews the NY regions statistical data but yeah on average West Chester County, Union County, Long Island citizens are better off than people living in the boroughs.
If you put a team in say King of Prussia you would have about 3 or 4 M suburbanites instantly take to their new team whether it was the A's or Rays. Most would stay Phillies fans as well. Eventually over the decades you would see a rivalry brew with NW suburbs pulling away from the Phillies. Which is the precise reason the Phillies would never allow a second team in this region. Which kind of makes this thread a moot point.
NYC works differently than the Philadelphia area. The money in NY is in Manhattan which is where a ball park would have went in the ideal situation. But there is no room in Manhattan to build a ball park hence they tucked it in the Bronx where the NYY tradition has always been.
Yes the vast majority of wealth in Boston and Chicago is in their suburbs. Manhattan skews the NY regions statistical data but yeah on average West Chester County, Union County, Long Island citizens are better off than people living in the boroughs.
But you would have a non-urban area that can't even remotely support a baseball franchise. It doesn't matter what the location is but what type of area it is. I've seen people using the Union putting their stadium in Chester as an example but for one thing, Chester is a legitimate city that, like Camden, was decimated by urban renewal and other awful ideas, such as the highways that tore through it (not just talking about I-95 either. They widened roads that were formerly in Chester's downtown and effectively leveled the majority of the downtown by widening the streets into highways and tearing down the buildings in their way), and soccer is a sport, like football, that doesn't need to be played in an urban area. Baseball on the other hand does and always has. Even a legitimately urban market like Oakland has never really given the A's a stable home because it's not as big as many other cities when it comes to the things that matter for sports franchises such as corporations and other aspects of bigger markets. Look at what happened with the Nets in New Jersey before they moved to Newark, or the Devils. It has been proven time and time again that urban sports do not survive in suburban areas. You seriously think the NW suburbs are that important? They aren't. The only real rivalries you could ever develop in this area in terms of baseball are North vs South Philly, people who prefer urban, walkable areas around a stadium to ones who prefer one where you can tailgate, AL vs NL, and loyal Phillies fans versus people who have no problem hopping on a different team's bandwagon.
New York works differently than the Philadelphia area now, and really not as much as you might think. The only difference between the two areas in that regard is that in the Philadelphia area the people with money fled the city and it declined, which didn't happen in New York. As for Yankee Stadium, they put it in the Bronx at a time when the Giants played in Manhattan at the Polo Grounds, and because the Giants wouldn't allow them to play there and famously said "They can go play in the Bronx". At that time, the football Giants still played in New York and not NJ. Currently there is no space in New York compared to the places outside of New York, but that wasn't the case when Yankee Stadium was built. They built it in the Bronx for the same reason the Phillies and A's both played in North Philly.
New York and Boston blow their suburbs out of the water, especially New York, and Chicago's wealth is in its fortress of huge residential towers and toney neighborhoods, not in some wealthy suburbs. In New York's case, you're comparing a city of 8 million people to some pretty damn small suburban areas and a handful of small cities. Manhattan alone probably has more wealthy people than most of the counties you mentioned. I think maybe you should learn a bit more about that area. There's lower-income communities in Long Island, Westchester (never heard of Yonkers?), definitely Union County (Union City?), and there are plenty more that are becoming that way due to gentrification all throughout New York.
Outside of blue-blood places like the Main Line, suburban wealth is unsustainable and not nearly as rich and secure as the wealth in places like Manhattan. You also do realize that plenty of megamillion dollar earning celebrities live in parts of Brooklyn and Queens, right? Or that there are still huge, multimillion dollar companies and corporations in even normal sections of places like Brooklyn and Queens? Or that quite a bit of the corporations outside of New York are in Jersey City, Hoboken, Newark, etc? Probably more than the suburbs.
But you would have a non-urban area that can't even remotely support a baseball franchise. It doesn't matter what the location is but what type of area it is. I've seen people using the Union putting their stadium in Chester as an example but for one thing, Chester is a legitimate city
The Union going to Chester had zero to do with urban settings or how fans flock to cities. The stadium going to Chester(which was ill-advised imo) was purely political in nature. This stadium undoubtedly should have been built in King of Prussia or Cherry Hill . It was horrible planning which is the norm for this region.
It's 2013 my man its a mobile auto-centric society. Driving is a big part of people lives and the people that can afford tickets to professional sporting events would prefer to drive their families to modern,safe, enviorns like King of Prussia over Chester or Broad + Lehigh.
Quote:
The only real rivalries you could ever develop in this area in terms of baseball are North vs South Philly, people who prefer urban, walkable areas around a stadium to ones who prefer one where you can tailgate, AL vs NL, and loyal Phillies fans versus people who have no problem hopping on a different team's bandwagon.
North Philly is completely irrelevant in this discussion. Its an area of maybe 100,000 people, unfortunately most who wouldn't have the money to even buy a hot dog let alone a ticket for a game. A better argument for your Philadelphia rivalry would be NE Philly but even that area pales in comparison to the money and population of the NW suburbs. The sad reality is that the city of Philadlephia is nowhere near healthy enough to sustain 1 team let alone 2.
The people/fans with the money are out in Bucks,Montgomery,Chester,Delaware counties. Why are you refusing to accept this fact? These people aren't going near Broad + Lehigh.
Quote:
Outside of blue-blood places like the Main Line, suburban wealth is unsustainable
What? Its sustained itself for the past 70 years why would that change?
The Main Line is a micro fraction of the regions overall suburban wealth.
The 4 wealthiest counties in PA are Chester,Montgomery,Bucks,Delaware.
The Union going to Chester had zero to do with urban settings or how fans flock to cities. The stadium going to Chester(which was ill-advised imo) was purely political in nature. This stadium undoubtedly should have been built in King of Prussia or Cherry Hill . It was horrible planning which is the norm for this region.
It's 2013 my man its a mobile auto-centric society. Driving is a big part of people lives and the people that can afford tickets to professional sporting events would prefer to drive their families to modern,safe, enviorns like King of Prussia over Chester or Broad + Lehigh.
North Philly is completely irrelevant in this discussion. Its an area of maybe 100,000 people, unfortunately most who wouldn't have the money to even buy a hot dog let alone a ticket for a game. A better argument for your Philadelphia rivalry would be NE Philly but even that area pales in comparison to the money and population of the NW suburbs. The sad reality is that the city of Philadlephia is nowhere near healthy enough to sustain 1 team let alone 2.
The people/fans with the money are out in Bucks,Montgomery,Chester,Delaware counties. Why are you refusing to accept this fact? These people aren't going near Broad + Lehigh.
What? Its sustained itself for the past 70 years why would that change?
The Main Line is a micro fraction of the regions overall suburban wealth.
The 4 wealthiest counties in PA are Chester,Montgomery,Bucks,Delaware.
I never said it did. I was pointing out how that situation can't be compared to putting an urban sports franchise in the suburbs. Sorry, but you're wrong about it being a mistake. Chester is actually situated perfectly, whether you turn your nose up at that city or not. Those other places aren't. Period.
And yet sports is still not built around the automobile outside of football and soccer. Baseball stadiums are in urban areas, not suburbs. They can't and won't work in suburbs. And again, we're talking 30 years here. Get some perspective and drop the suburban bias you clearly have.
Maybe 100,000 people? Are you serious right now? In the 2010 Census, there were over 300,000 people living there. Again, you don't seem to understand that it's not about who lives in the neighborhood around the stadium or how much money they have but STRATEGIC LOCATION, something the suburbs are not. Have you ever actually looked at that area on a map? It's along an Amtrak station (which no suburban area has), is on a subway line, and is close to multiple other rail lines. It's directly above the Templetown area, which has been gentrifying rapidly over the past 10 but especially the past 5 years. It's to the west of Kensington/Port Richmond, and not that far from Fishtown. It's not all that far from Brewerytown to the southwest, which is being gentrified because of Fairmount/Art Museum/Francisville to one side and the Templetown area from another. It's not all that far from NW Philly or West Philly or even the Northeast. It's centrally located and easily accessible for people from all parts of the metro and from all walks of life, unlike KOP or whatever suburban area you want to stick a multi-million dollar baseball stadium in. It's close to Center City but far enough that it has its own identity and there will be a legitimate dividing line between North Philly A's and South Philly Phillies, with Center City being neutral ground. Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. Oh, and the King of Prussia area isn't all that wealthy. Also, the NE would be a terrible place to put a stadium, even in the more urban Lower Northeast, because like NW or West or Southwest or even far South Philly, it's not centrally located.
And their kids are moving to the city.
It's never sustained itself, only the Main Line has. Also, why are you talking about Philadelphia's suburbs when you were talking about New York, Boston, and Chicago before? By the way, making a lot of money doesn't equal sustainable wealth. Those are high incomes, for sure, but how many of them are going to last over a century the way the wealth in the Main Line has? Not too many. And don't forget to subtract the legitimately urban parts of those counties from of your population totals for them because they're not suburbs. Let's see... Delco minus its urban parts (which alone total roughly 220,000 people), Montco minus Norristown, Pottstown, and Conshy, Bucks minus Newtown and Bristol, among others..
I should note that the Piston's stadium is far out from Detroit and in the suburbs, so I think basketball could work an automobile sport. Why exactly do you think baseball couldn't work in the suburbs?
I just did a quick google search, and it appears both the Falcons and the Vikings are exploring the option of building new stadiums in the suburbs. Could this be the future for sports in general? Or perhaps the set-apart nature of the Philadelphia stadiums?
I should note that the Piston's stadium is far out from Detroit and in the suburbs, so I think basketball could work an automobile sport. Why exactly do you think baseball couldn't work in the suburbs?
And how do the Pistons do? When they aren't winning, how many people actually show up?
Urban sports need an urban environment and an urban location. That's exactly the Sixers' problem, too. If they were in Center City (like at 8th and Market, doing something with the Gallery that's similar to the Kings' plan with Sacramento's Downtown Plaza), they would be in much better position and would be much more entrenched in the city. Basketball needs to be played in an urban environment in an urban location, preferably in the downtown core. It's not a tailgate sport.
Baseball is the same way. Every team who has tried it in any sport has regretted it because it's the wrong way to go. Even the Dolphins are going to have to move back to Miami at some point. New York and New England really aren't the same because they haven't experienced much losing at all, and in New York's case, there's no room in the city, and the Meadowlands is right across the river.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cnote11
I just did a quick google search, and it appears both the Falcons and the Vikings are exploring the option of building new stadiums in the suburbs. Could this be the future for sports in general?
Minnesota is building its stadium in a neighborhood called Downtown East in Minneapolis, and last I heard the Falcons were looking to build one in Atlanta, just a bit from the Georgia Dome. Ah, I see that site has been deemed "not feasible". That's a shame. Anyway, they have a site for their new stadium apparently. New Falcons Stadium | New Atlanta Falcons Stadium Website
How can it be the future when it's a trend that was dominant in the past?
Well, I'm not for moving the stadiums to the suburbs, that is for sure. Thanks for the updates about the stadiums. I see the cities were successful in persuading them to pick new spots in city limits.
You're right to point out that the Pistons have recently had very poor attendance, but so have other teams like the Bucks, Hawks, Cavaliers, etc. who are in an urban environment. The Pistons have had decent attendance even when they weren't particularly good: 96/97 had an average of 20,000, which would put them in third place in attendance last year. The follow year would have seen them 5th, and the next two in the middle of the pack, despite only winning 29 games. I don't think actually having the stadium in the city would do anything for the team. There have been many discussions on this in Michigan and many people feel it is easier for them to actually get to Auburn Hills. You have to remember that you won't have anything like subway lines or anything relevant to add to the ability to attend games like you figure in for places like Philadelphia. Detroit sports are, by default, automobile sports. Detroit's population is only 700,000 and declining, while the area surrounding Auburn Hills is 1.2 million and among one of the wealthiest areas in the nation, whereas most suburban people in Metro Detroit have never even been to Detroit and do not wish to go.
Well, I'm not for moving the stadiums to the suburbs, that is for sure.
You're right to point out that the Pistons have recently had very poor attendance, but so have other teams like the Bucks, Hawks, Cavaliers, etc. who are in an urban environment. The Pistons have had decent attendance even when they weren't particularly good: 96/97 had an average of 20,000, which would put them in third place in attendance last year. The follow year would have seen them 5th, and the next two in the middle of the pack, despite only winning 29 games. I don't think actually having the stadium in the city would do anything for the team. There have been many discussions on this in Michigan and many people feel it is easier for them to actually get to Auburn Hills. You have to remember that you won't have anything like subway lines or anything relevant to add to the ability to attend games like you figure in for places like Philadelphia. Detroit sports are, by default, automobile sports. Detroit's population is only 700,000 and declining, while the area surrounding Auburn Hills is 1.2 million and among one of the wealthiest areas in the nation.
Yeah but don't forget that those were the Grant Hill years. I mean who didn't want to see him play back then? It's a shame so many people who didn't see that era have no idea just how good he really was.
The thing about putting stadiums in the suburbs is that people have to drive out there specifically to go to a game, and when the team struggles that is really not something as many people want to do. When you put it in the urban core though, it's just one of many things to do, and people can decide to go to a game just because, and to use it as an excuse to go to the city. It can also be combined with shopping trips, guys/girls night out, really anything you can do in a city. It's a situation that benefits both the city and the franchise tremendously.
The thing about the Hawks, Bucks, and Cavs though is that it's a much different situation. Unlike the Pistons, those teams have not had much winning in their history, and they haven't been in their cities all that long. The Bucks are also the second NBA team in Milwaukee's history, and the Cavs used to play in the absolute middle of nowhere before Quicken Loans arena was built. The Sixers have the exact same problem, and so do the Bulls to an extent. If it weren't for MJ, and even after that if it weren't for Derrick Rose, the Bulls would be in the same position as those teams. GMs and owners these days flat out just don't understand their markets or their fanbases. The Cavs for example, start Varajeo over their big-time draft pick power forward, Tristan Thompson, even though they desperately need a guy like Thompson. Now they signed yet another big man, and drafted another one! Still, they've assembled their team better than any of those other teams, and they're doing everything right as an organization when it comes to the financial/market side. The Bucks, well they should've never traded for Monta, and they definitely shouldn't have traded away Bogut. Their star was Brandon Jennings but they made him play second-fiddle to Monta Ellis's overrated, selfish self. Hopefully they put together this team better now. Signing OJ Mayo was huge though, because he's never actually gotten a chance to be "the guy" in his entire pro career but he will get it in Milwaukee. Larry Sanders, OJ, and some of the young guys are their stars now, and they have to hope they've made the right choices this time. Still, they have yet to actually draft somebody from Marquette or another Wisconsin school or even sign somebody from one. Yet they wonder why the city doesn't feel as connected to them as they could be. The Hawks got an absolute gift in Josh Smith and didn't take advantage of it. They've had a solid, competitive team most years over the past almost decade thanks to Al Horford, and have gotten a few guys from Georgia Tech over the years, but there is still a lot more they could be doing to connect with their city. They've yet to do that, in their entire time in Atlanta. Franchises need to become a part of their city, not just exist in it, and the struggling franchises in cities that can support basketball haven't done that. New Orleans is another prime example. And the Sixers, well don't even get me started on their lack of even signing Big 5 or other local players, let alone drafting them!
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.
