Is Birmingham a "major city"? (Hoover, Greenville: employment, living in)

[ttownfeen]

Then Atlanta would no longer be a major city. Nor Seattle. Nor Los Angeles...

[po-boy]

I think a city needs at least two or three teams to be "major" but it doesn't have to have a team in all four. As ttownfeen mentioned even LA doesn't have all four (no NFL) and I think pretty much everyone would concede that Los Angeles is a major city. Atlanta and Houston each have three teams (no hockey), and Seattle only has two and all of those are probably considered major cities on a national level (of course Seattle may gain another team or two in the next few years as they are actively pursuing NBA and NHL).

But it is tough to consider a city that doesn't have any pro sports as a major national city.

[raj kapoor]

I think a lot of folks on here should study geography first and then decide where they want to classify the cities of there preference. Most explanations have been very superficial and irrelavent to what the cultural and economic dynamics are in the communities. (I was personally amused when one person dismissed UAB as irrelavent among schools in the country. Tell that to the doctors and research organizations that know that bio-research has lifted UAB SCHOOL OF MED to the top ten in the nation, as reported by two publications in the industry this year)
I really don't quite get the competitiion thing that goes on. Cities are so complex that it is truly apples to oranges. A good example; New Orleans, is living off its past reputation. It is well known but is a shell of itself when it comes to business , retail, industry, even tourism. It lost a third of its population and many of those big buildings downtown will be empty fifiteen years from now because the companies moved to Houston permanently.
I mention this as a reminder that a cities fortunes can change overnight. With N.O. it was weather. With downtown Atlanta real estate (40 percent vacancies) it was national trends slowing the convention machine. All cities have a time of surge and recede. Birmingham grew early and will reawaken because business can't ignore its advantages. I remember when Charlotte was a backwater town with blocks and blocks of land empty from tearing down old buildings. (not to build anything, just to tear them down. nice town, but odd?) They wanted to be Atlanta so bad, still do, that they had noticed Atlanta tore all its history down too. I think a lot of people think Birmingham isn't growing because we have all the great historic and beautiful buildings and just a few glass buildings. lol
Frankly towns are lucky to have steady growth rather than booms, as the boom towns face the down times with the most hurt.
It's a game, this is my rant and I will give you no list.

raj

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by raj kapoor

I think a lot of folks on here should study geography first and then decide where they want to classify the cities of there preference. Most explanations have been very superficial and irrelavent to what the cultural and economic dynamics are in the communities. (I was personally amused when one person dismissed UAB as irrelavent among schools in the country. Tell that to the doctors and research organizations that know that bio-research has lifted UAB SCHOOL OF MED to the top ten in the nation, as reported by two publications in the industry this year)
I really don't quite get the competitiion thing that goes on. Cities are so complex that it is truly apples to oranges. A good example; New Orleans, is living off its past reputation. It is well known but is a shell of itself when it comes to business , retail, industry, even tourism. It lost a third of its population and many of those big buildings downtown will be empty fifiteen years from now because the companies moved to Houston permanently.
I mention this as a reminder that a cities fortunes can change overnight. With N.O. it was weather. With downtown Atlanta real estate (40 percent vacancies) it was national trends slowing the convention machine. All cities have a time of surge and recede. Birmingham grew early and will reawaken because business can't ignore its advantages. I remember when Charlotte was a backwater town with blocks and blocks of land empty from tearing down old buildings. (not to build anything, just to tear them down. nice town, but odd?) They wanted to be Atlanta so bad, still do, that they had noticed Atlanta tore all its history down too. I think a lot of people think Birmingham isn't growing because we have all the great historic and beautiful buildings and just a few glass buildings. lol
Frankly towns are lucky to have steady growth rather than booms, as the boom towns face the down times with the most hurt.
It's a game, this is my rant and I will give you no list.

raj

You must be very unfamiliar with Atlanta to make such a comment. Atlanta has a very large stock of historic buildings and several historic districts. Look into it sometime if you like history and be ready for a treat.

Your comment about Charlotte is unfair too. Charlotte has boomed and develop on it's own - not because it "wanted to be Atlanta". That's just silly.

I know people have made negative comments about Birmingham in this thread, but that is no reason to disparage other cities in return.

[cpg35223]

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

You must be very unfamiliar with Atlanta to make such a comment. Atlanta has a very large stock of historic buildings and several historic districts. Look into it sometime if you like history and be ready for a treat.

Your comment about Charlotte is unfair too. Charlotte has boomed and develop on it's own - not because it "wanted to be Atlanta". That's just silly.

I know people have made negative comments about Birmingham in this thread, but that is no reason to disparage other cities in return.

Oh yeah? Well...well...Charlotte is named after a girl. And it's named The Queen City. Take that.

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by cpg35223

Oh yeah? Well...well...Charlotte is named after a girl. And it's named The Queen City. Take that.

LOL! I love sarcasm...

[kgartm1185]

I would say it is because Atlanta is considered to be the most major city in the Southeast and it's city population is only 432,000 but it's MSA population is 5.5 million and it's CSA is over 6 million. Greenville is considered to be a major city in South Carolina and it's city population is only 62,000 but it's MSA population is 842,000 and it's CSA population is about 1.4 million. Birmingham's city population is 212,000 but it's MSA population is about 1.1 million and it's CSA population is 1.3 million.

[birminghamster]

Originally Posted by kgartm1185

Greenville is considered to be a major city in South Carolina and it's city population is only 62,000 but it's MSA population is 842,000 and it's CSA population is about 1.4 million.

This is largely because of MSA's and CSA's being county-based. Those 1.4 million people don't all live in Greenville built-up area.

[jpillinois]

Originally Posted by po-boy

I think a city needs at least two or three teams to be "major" but it doesn't have to have a team in all four. As ttownfeen mentioned even LA doesn't have all four (no NFL) and I think pretty much everyone would concede that Los Angeles is a major city. Atlanta and Houston each have three teams (no hockey), and Seattle only has two and all of those are probably considered major cities on a national level (of course Seattle may gain another team or two in the next few years as they are actively pursuing NBA and NHL).

But it is tough to consider a city that doesn't have any pro sports as a major national city.

Geez I keep forgetting that LA doesn't have football..Absurd, but they do have 2 baseball and 2 BB and 2 MLS. Since NHL can be substituted with MLS Houston is a go. Atlanta gets a one time waiver for having the busiest airport.

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by birminghamster

This is largely because of MSA's and CSA's being county-based. Those 1.4 million people don't all live in Greenville built-up area.

True...but that is true everywhere. Lots of outlying areas included in CSA and MSA figures are far from built up.