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.
Everything is Boston has to be better, taller, world class etc (to be fair there are plenty of Toronto posters who probably does the same). Maybe you guys should really compare it to the world class NYC not some lowly Canadian city? Or maybe it's more fun to compare who has the fifteenth best museum in the world?
The ego on display on this thread is astonishing. Seems like it's really not possible to have a friendly debate without bashing the heck out of another city/person. Modesty is overrated?
Toronto may be a fine city to live, and may be fun to spend time in, but it simply does not have the attractions that draw folk from around the world.
History - Boston, Quebec City have history - Toronto's history isn't any more interesting than any other city in the US or Canada. Boston has lots of buildings significant to the founding of the world's most powerful nation. What does Toronto have to match Old North Church or Fanueil Hall? These are just two buildings, but Boston's core is pretty unique in the entire US. Okay, it may not impress European visitors for age, but this is the history of the United States.
Architecture: Nothing unique in Toronto except maybe the CN tower.
Culture - Canadian culture...big woop. To most people it's the same as American culture. Why would anyone care about all those museums and art galleries when they've got NYC, DC, Boston so close to it?
Sure it has entertainment and nightlife...but you can go to any big city for that.
Food: Sure Toronto is multicultural but there's no unique culinary scene there.
Uniqueness factor: Montreal and Quebec City have the French thing, Boston has history, NYC is well, NYC, LA for Hollywood, SF for scenery, beatniks, hippies, cable cars, Miami for the Latino/art-deco thing, Vancouver for nature, Denver for the mountains...Toronto has none of these things.
Torontoans seem to try so hard to prove their city is global, important, cultural...it will obviously never have the history/culture that Boston, let alone Europe or Asia have. It doesn't have anything special. I might stop by if I'm passing through, but I'm not going to make an effort to visit it.
Toronto may be a fine city to live, and may be fun to spend time in, but it simply does not have the attractions that draw folk from around the world.
History - Boston, Quebec City have history - Toronto's history isn't any more interesting than any other city in the US or Canada. Boston has lots of buildings significant to the founding of the world's most powerful nation. What does Toronto have to match Old North Church or Fanueil Hall? These are just two buildings, but Boston's core is pretty unique in the entire US. Okay, it may not impress European visitors for age, but this is the history of the United States.
Architecture: Nothing unique in Toronto except maybe the CN tower.
Culture - Canadian culture...big woop. To most people it's the same as American culture. Why would anyone care about all those museums and art galleries when they've got NYC, DC, Boston so close to it?
Sure it has entertainment and nightlife...but you can go to any big city for that.
Food: Sure Toronto is multicultural but there's no unique culinary scene there.
Uniqueness factor: Montreal and Quebec City have the French thing, Boston has history, NYC is well, NYC, LA for Hollywood, SF for scenery, beatniks, hippies, cable cars, Miami for the Latino/art-deco thing, Vancouver for nature, Denver for the mountains...Toronto has none of these things.
Torontoans seem to try so hard to prove their city is global, important, cultural...it will obviously never have the history/culture that Boston, let alone Europe or Asia have. It doesn't have anything special. I might stop by if I'm passing through, but I'm not going to make an effort to visit it.
If I could rep you more than once I would, best post of this thread by far
Toronto may be a fine city to live, and may be fun to spend time in, but it simply does not have the attractions that draw folk from around the world.
History - Boston, Quebec City have history - Toronto's history isn't any more interesting than any other city in the US or Canada. Boston has lots of buildings significant to the founding of the world's most powerful nation. What does Toronto have to match Old North Church or Fanueil Hall? These are just two buildings, but Boston's core is pretty unique in the entire US. Okay, it may not impress European visitors for age, but this is the history of the United States.
Architecture: Nothing unique in Toronto except maybe the CN tower.
Culture - Canadian culture...big woop. To most people it's the same as American culture. Why would anyone care about all those museums and art galleries when they've got NYC, DC, Boston so close to it?
Sure it has entertainment and nightlife...but you can go to any big city for that.
Food: Sure Toronto is multicultural but there's no unique culinary scene there.
Uniqueness factor: Montreal and Quebec City have the French thing, Boston has history, NYC is well, NYC, LA for Hollywood, SF for scenery, beatniks, hippies, cable cars, Miami for the Latino/art-deco thing, Vancouver for nature, Denver for the mountains...Toronto has none of these things.
Torontoans seem to try so hard to prove their city is global, important, cultural...it will obviously never have the history/culture that Boston, let alone Europe or Asia have. It doesn't have anything special. I might stop by if I'm passing through, but I'm not going to make an effort to visit it.
The Torontians on this thread made te fatal mistake of trying to defend claims that its not world class. It is a world class functional, livale city, and so is Boston. but neither is really world class touist destinations. have people here claiming boston as one actually been to London? Paris? Rome? Istanbul? Tokyo? Hong Kong? heck een NYC? its only a few hours by car...
It is makes me laugh how Boston is actually the reference for comparison. Like I said before, neither have top notch attractions. 500 years of history? Maybe try 1000, 2000 years? (People are overestimating the american historial appeal to non americans?) Ever heard of the little church that is Nortre Dame? St. Peter's
Basicila, Hagia Sofia? Fenway park? Rogers dome? Most people in the world don't really care about baseball. Harvard? Yeah a regular tourist is going to spend 1000 usd and 10+ hours to visit that. Toronto doesn't have any must see attractions. Neither does Boston no matter how hard one tries to prove how crappy another city's lack of. How does that even make any sense? And how did that even generate 10 pages of replies? Lol.
Boston is a good city to eat in and I would agree that its Seafood is world class, but its food scene overall is not by any stretch. It is a very good second tier food city, which is something it should be proud of, but no one is hopping on a plane to come to Boston just to eat.
You really think a lot of International visitors to Boston would take in a Baseball game at Fenway over checking out one of the many entertainment options at Rogers - hey if you feel that way than we are both speculating here but -
We are not talking about the same thing. We are talking about a stadium (and its team) being an iconic attraction for the city. Sure, Rogers Centre will draw more people - it has way more seats and is multi-purpose. Fenway is not. But that does not mean that people around the world ''think'' of Rogers Centre or even know it that well.
The Red Sox are better known around the world than any of the Toronto sports teams.
And obviously ticket availability (Fenway is small) is a big factor in how many visitors go to see a game at Fenway.
And regardless of how many people are familiar with baseball, even if you know nothing about the sport if you are visiting Boston seeing a Sox game at Fenway is considered something ''special'' to do in that city.
I don't think seeing the Jays or Argos at Rogers Centre evokes the same thing. Nor do I think seeing Madonna or Coldplay there really ranks as a uniquely Torontonian ''special'' experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
heck sensation white has probably done more for Rogers on a global scale than a Boston Red Sox game has done for Fenway lol...
A one-time event in a fringe artistic and musical genre has a bigger impact than being the storied stadium of one of the most storied teams for a century in the national sport of the most hyper-publicized and mediatized country in the world?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
I would agree that Roger's may take a backseat to Olympic Stadium in the here and now - I think 2015 will change that due to the recent memory of the event.
Olympic Stadium has an advantage because the Olympics gives any such facility a big ''fame'' edge. Warts and all, its architecture is also quite unique and even striking. Of course its renown is fading with time and obviously the fact that it is little used does not help to keep it in the spotlight.
That said, I am not sure that 2015 (you are obviously referring to the Pan-Am games) will change much. I will probably watch the ceremonies because they are in Canada but even though I love international sporting events and always watch the Olympics this will be the first time in my life I watch the Pan-Am opening ceremonies. They are fairly low-profile games and will provide of course a decent amount of exposure to Toronto the city but overall for Rogers Centre it will only be a blip in the increase of its renown.
For the record, before you accuse me of being anti-Toronto I do think that the CN Tower is by far the most iconic landmark building in Canada. Bar none. It is far far ahead of Olympic Stadium, the Parliament Buildings in Ottawa and the Château Frontenac in Quebec City.
But I am just being frank here about Rogers Centre.
I hate to nitpick on one specific statement, but agree to disagree that Red Sox is more well known than te Maple Leafs in a large part of Europe. Scandinavia, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Finland, Russia. Far more people play and watch hockey in Europe than baseball, even though its not a top tier sports for some of these countries.
I know that places like Italy and the Netherlands field some baseball team for international tournament, but exactly how popular is mlb in those countries? Below their secondary football league? Do people in say France or countries from Africa or Asia particularly like baseball more than hockey? Or do they don't care either way?
I find this very common that people are grossly overestimating the popularity of North American pro sports outside of North America. Few people really care the way Americans and Canadians do. Baseball fans in Japan and Korea are far more invested in their own leagues than they are mlb, and same for say Sweden and NHL, despite the difference in skills. They are mostly major league bandwagon fans who happens to like teams with players from their own countries.
I hate to nitpick on one specific statement, but agree to disagree that Red Sox is more well known than te Maple Leafs in a large part of Europe. Scandinavia, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Finland, Russia. Far more people play and watch hockey in Europe than baseball, even though its not a top tier sports for some of these countries.
I know that places like Italy and the Netherlands field some baseball team for international tournament, but exactly how popular is mlb in those countries? Below their secondary or territory football league?
That's why I talked about the world. (I generally agree for most of these regions you mentioned.) But they are only a portion of Europe and we aren't talking about the rest of the world where interest in hockey in basically nil.
Anyway, I am not saying MLB is super popular in all countries. It is not - but because of American culture many people are at least a bit aware of baseball (even in non-baseball countries), that it has legendary teams like the Yankees and Red Sox, etc.
Rugby is not really popular at all where I live, and yet most people are at least aware of the New Zealand All-Blacks and know they do the haka, even if they might not be able to name it as the haka.
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.
