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.
Thought this might make a good topic. Maybe too sports related for this thread, but not here to talk sports as much as cities that should have teams that don't vs. cities that do and shouldn't.
Here is an example.
Two MLB teams in Chicago. I understand NYC having multiple major league teams, it just goes with their history. But Chicago having both an NL and AL team seems too much when there are so many (albeit smaller market) cities that don't have ML baseball: Charlotte, New Orleans, Buffalo, Portland, Salt Lake City, Nashville, Indianapolis... to name a few. Most of these have at least two major league sports teams in town.
Notable large metro areas with none of the 4 major leagues
Las Vegas
Virginia Beach/Norfolk
Hartford
Louisville
Birmingham
(There are others that could make the list, but limited to cities with no other city in their state with a major league team).
LA being the second largest market in the US, having two teams in the NHL, NBA and MLB each and not having a single team in the NFL is one of the oddest of all the sports city conundrums.
Thought this might make a good topic. Maybe too sports related for this thread, but not here to talk sports as much as cities that should have teams that don't vs. cities that do and shouldn't.
Here is an example.
Two MLB teams in Chicago. I understand NYC having multiple major league teams, it just goes with their history. But Chicago having both an NL and AL team seems too much when there are so many (albeit smaller market) cities that don't have ML baseball: Charlotte, New Orleans, Buffalo, Portland, Salt Lake City, Nashville, Indianapolis... to name a few. Most of these have at least two major league sports teams in town.
Notable large metro areas with none of the 4 major leagues
Las Vegas
Virginia Beach/Norfolk
Hartford
Louisville
Birmingham
(There are others that could make the list, but limited to cities with no other city in their state with a major league team).
LA being the second largest market in the US, having two teams in the NHL, NBA and MLB each and not having a single team in the NFL is one of the oddest of all the sports city conundrums.
Other oddities along these lines?
Cry me a river! You're just mad that your city doesn't have an intracity, inter-league, crosstown rivalry. Red Line Series FTW!
Because the tax payers here do not want to fund a stadium for gazillionaires.
(which cracks me up. So many regions have no problem funding stadiums, but fight tooth and nail against funding education and health services)
I don't agree with funding stadiums with taxes, but I understand why it happens. They are often sold with promises of new development and jobs, which sometimes appear but not always. In either case, it's easy to see what you are getting for the money in a physical stadium w/ sports team. Not so in the case of raising property taxes for increased education and health spending. Often the benefits of this are either invisible or non-existent due to waste and fraud.
So, do you spend your time on city data researching threads that have a similar topic and blasting posters for starting a new one, albeit with a different twist? The four you list are all about cities without major league teams. I started a discussion on comparing cities that do and perhaps shouldn't vs. cities that don't. None of the above threads bring up the cities that have teams that perhaps shouldn't.
I guess some folks find happiness when they can one up another, even if it is over a light-hearted conversation on a chat board. Why not move on down the road if the topic doesn't suit your taste?
Thought this might make a good topic. Maybe too sports related for this thread, but not here to talk sports as much as cities that should have teams that don't vs. cities that do and shouldn't.
Here is an example.
Two MLB teams in Chicago. I understand NYC having multiple major league teams, it just goes with their history. But Chicago having both an NL and AL team seems too much when there are so many (albeit smaller market) cities that don't have ML baseball: Charlotte, New Orleans, Buffalo, Portland, Salt Lake City, Nashville, Indianapolis... to name a few. Most of these have at least two major league sports teams in town.
Notable large metro areas with none of the 4 major leagues
Las Vegas
Virginia Beach/Norfolk
Hartford
Louisville
Birmingham
(There are others that could make the list, but limited to cities with no other city in their state with a major league team).
LA being the second largest market in the US, having two teams in the NHL, NBA and MLB each and not having a single team in the NFL is one of the oddest of all the sports city conundrums.
Other oddities along these lines?
Why not, South side and North Side Chicago are basically 2 different worlds. Also, other markets have multiple baseball teams.
SF, LA, DC also have NL/AL teams in their CSA.
NY had 3 MLB teams at one point.
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.
