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.
I don't really want to be condescending or anything, but it's kind of bizarre to me that people would judge a city by how many professional sports championships it's won, and this is coming from someone who used to be a sports journalist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjimmy24
Exactly. I've never understood the correlation between sports teams and reputation of a city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox
If you're a suburban high school student masquerading as and adult who has lived in cities all around the world, professional sports championships are probably a disproportionately large piece of the "what's important for a great city to have" pie.
This is coming from a total homer when it comes to sports, by the way.
Uh, obviously you guys don't know that more sports championships = larger penis for every male in that metro area.
Uh, obviously you guys don't know that more sports championships = larger penis for every male in that metro area.
Jeez, read a medical journal for once.
Or because Championships are easy to Quantify, while QOL is not.
That's why many discussions become one of Density, GDP or transit ridership, lbs. of Kale per capita or anything that is easily quantifiable, so there is an easy "winner" supported by data, rather than an "I think LA/Boston is better..."
Overall Los Angeles has Boston beat,2 Olympics & possible 3 in the near Future....Way better looking Women & Quality if Life.
The luster of the Olympics has dropped off each games. Personally, the event is the most overrated and not worth the sheer cost. As a resident of Boston I am glad we canceled our bid - the money can be better spent elsewhere.
LA as a city doesn't need to Olympics to elevate its profile - a city like Atlanta did.
I won't argue with women - you have thousands of wannabe models and actresses flocking to SoCal every year to take their shot.
Not sure. Boston all around has a better economy, more educated and more interesting architecture with a lot more history. But LA also has good weather and wonderful scenery.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,172,934 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulevardofdef
I don't really want to be condescending or anything, but it's kind of bizarre to me that people would judge a city by how many professional sports championships it's won, and this is coming from someone who used to be a sports journalist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjimmy24
Exactly. I've never understood the correlation between sports teams and reputation of a city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox
If you're a suburban high school student masquerading as an adult who has lived in cities all around the world, professional sports championships are probably a disproportionately large piece of the "what's important for a great city to have" pie.
This is coming from a total homer when it comes to sports, by the way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr
Uh, obviously you guys don't know that more sports championships = larger penis for every male in that metro area.
Jeez, read a medical journal for once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
Or because Championships are easy to Quantify, while QOL is not.
That's why many discussions become one of Density, GDP or transit ridership, lbs. of Kale per capita or anything that is easily quantifiable, so there is an easy "winner" supported by data, rather than an "I think LA/Boston is better..."
I actually think championships are a significant thing to bring into city vs city discussions. Regardless of your personal opinion of or inclination to follow sports, you can't deny that professional sports are a multi-billion dollar industry (perhaps trillion dollar) not just nationally, but globally, and that they bring significant amounts of money and exposure to metropolitan areas. Like it or not, pro sports teams amass huge followings, and their successes--and failures--are often woven into the fabric of a city's identity. More championships = more money and positive exposure for cities, which in turn leads to more investment and development in that city.
Pro sports are a bedrock for modern metropolitan areas and help spur a lot of civic growth--no different than any other successful, large business, really. If we can argue about the presence of Fortune 500 companies in a metropolitan area, I don't see why we would ignore pro sports representation and civic boosting championships. Successful corporations are judged by their stock prices and valuation, while sports teams are judged on championships and attendance--among other factors, for both. Quite similar, if you ask me.
I actually think championships are a significant thing to bring into city vs city discussions. Regardless of your personal opinion of or inclination to follow sports, you can't deny that professional sports are a multi-billion dollar industry (perhaps trillion dollar) not just nationally, but globally, and that they bring significant amounts of money and exposure to metropolitan areas. Like it or not, pro sports teams amass huge followings, and their successes--and failures--are often woven into the fabric of a city's identity. More championships = more money and positive exposure for cities, which in turn leads to more investment and development in that city.
Pro sports are a bedrock for modern metropolitan areas and help spur a lot of civic growth--no different than any other successful, large business, really. If we can argue about the presence of Fortune 500 companies in a metropolitan area, I don't see why we would ignore pro sports representation and civic boosting championships. Successful corporations are judged by their stock prices and valuation, while sports teams are judged on championships and attendance--among other factors, for both. Quite similar, if you ask me.
Good points. I also don't think anyone's denying what you're saying. It's just that most of the time professional sports aren't discussed in that context on these forums. It usually goes something like this:
1) "Our city has 5 championships and you only have 4!"
2) "Yeah but we won in 2014 and you haven't since 2005!"
3) "Oh yeah?! Well we sell out more games because we have better fans!"
... and so on.
Everything you said is valid. I agree that economically, sports are important. They're important culturally as well. Nobody here in Boston will forget David Ortiz saying, "This is our f*cking City!" in 2013. That extended well beyond sports. The exposure certainly helps. That's why cities fight for the Olympics (relevant to this thread). Not because sports are so important to the city; but because it's the modern era's World Expo- where a city invest billions to create an international showcase and bask in the spotlight. Success is important. So is longevity (just ask the Cubs or pre-2004 Red Sox- both top franchises without recent success). But when City vs. City threads delve into sports, the conversation usually doesn't go that deep.
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.
