Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What Cities Could Be Considered Sports Capitals of the US?
Boston 105 59.32%
New York City 77 43.50%
Philadelphia 80 45.20%
Los Angeles 53 29.94%
San Francisco 25 14.12%
Seattle 11 6.21%
Miami 15 8.47%
Denver 16 9.04%
Chicago 71 40.11%
Dallas 40 22.60%
Atlanta 24 13.56%
Las Vegas 11 6.21%
Phoenix 5 2.82%
Houston 14 7.91%
Nashville 8 4.52%
Charlotte 5 2.82%
Indianapolis 14 7.91%
Minneapolis 6 3.39%
Detroit 21 11.86%
Kansas City 10 5.65%
Other City 20 11.30%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 177. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-22-2023, 09:02 AM
 
14,019 posts, read 15,001,786 times
Reputation: 10466

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartonro View Post
I get what you're saying and i personally don't love the idea, but why is that loser behavior? If a city believes it's in its best interest, I may disagree, but I wouldn't call it loser behavior, especially when it's becoming common practice. Since 2000, 19 NFL stadiums have been built. Only 3 were built entirely with private money. Meaning at least half the NFL is receiving taxpayer support. And you know that number will surely go up.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ls/7217852001/
The team should need the city not vice versa. Jacobs and Kraft built their own venues and the Sox were stuck in Fenway cause they need Boston more than Boston needs them. Because the market is so strong,

Pittsburgh needs to pay the Penguins to stay or Minneapolis needs to pay the Vikings because the fans can’t do it themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-22-2023, 09:08 AM
 
255 posts, read 159,575 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19 View Post
Have they? I didn't know that.
I thought the Rockets shared the Toyota Center with Houston's Hockey Team until ten years ago when they moved away.

Not sure what the poster means by Houston has 30 years to build a stadium and didn't. Houston built the Stadium for Basketball and Hockey just 20 years ago. Around the same time they built the NFL stadium and a few years before they built the MLS stadium.

I don't think stadiums are an issue. Houston has 3 stadiums downtown and the NFL and 2 College stadiums are nearby on the rail making for 6 stadiums near downtown on the rail.

There is an enthusiasm issue though. Even the Astros had difficulty building back it's fanbase despite 2 world series wins.
The Rockets too are popular when they are winning but not so much when they are not
The Texans have a great tailgate culture, but enthusiasm in the stadium is so so. Even with one of the more entertaining QBs this season.
The Dynamos came out with a bang, and won the MLS cup in 06 and 07 and was 2nd in 2011 and 2012. But enthusiasm there follow win cycles.

Despite the enthusiasm gaps, I think having the stadiums downtown has helped with downtown activity. The Astros is planning their Astros Village around their stadium and the Toyota Center is definitely due for upgrades.

UH athletics has grown quite a bit so the foundation is there for Houston to be huge in both professional and College sports if they can get that enthusiasm train going.
I was throwing an arbitrary number. It was more of an estimated time to coincide with the NHL's aggressive expansion into sunbelt markets (1990s). If the NHL was truly trying to get into the Houston market, it would have happened years ago, evident by you mentioning all the stadium deals that have been done Houston in the NHL expansion timeline.

I would assume if/when the Coyotes move, Houston will be the city. But my original comment was meant to address that having all big 4 pro teams is due to more than market size, and that's why I mentioned Houston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 09:15 AM
 
255 posts, read 159,575 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
The team should need the city not vice versa. Jacobs and Kraft built their own venues and the Sox were stuck in Fenway cause they need Boston more than Boston needs them. Because the market is so strong,

Pittsburgh needs to pay the Penguins to stay or Minneapolis needs to pay the Vikings because the fans can’t do it themselves.
In theory you're right. But fans are short for fanatic, so it's not purely logical. Often times a city does need its team.
You tend to see less public subsidies the larger the market. So, the examples you provide would reflect that. I think you're looking at this through the lenses of a large market, but the big 4 leagues aren't made up of a majority of large markets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 10:17 AM
 
Location: The High Desert
16,070 posts, read 10,732,474 times
Reputation: 31441
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjbradleynyc View Post
St Louis is probably in top 20. But I think reasons why they wouldn't be higher in my book, is because the city does not have NFL or NBA. Two major teams with zero representation on a major league level.

Granted, St Louis has the storied Cardinals, with a ton of support and fan base, as well as the Stanley Cup winning NHL St Louis Blues. And then also, the brand spankin' new MLS team.

But not having NFL or NBA is a major gap, preventing St Louis from making a top 10 showing.
I don't think St. Louis needs NFL or NBA to be in the top 10. The Cardinals have been a team since 1882 and continue to hold a huge fan base. St. Louis is arguably the #1 baseball town. (I am one of a few survivors who saw the St. Louis Browns play as a kid.) The Blues have a huge fan base in the city and are in full competition for the cup most years. The new "City" MLS team is breaking records among all of the MLS teams -- and it's a team owned by women. The city's plan to install the MLS stadium downtown (along with Busch Stadium and the Blues' Enterprise Center) was a stroke of genius. I don't think NFL can compete very well with what is already happening in the city. There have been two attempts (Cardinals and Rams). It is probably the same with NBA. There are local and state college teams that draw attention and I'm sure there is a level of surreptitious fandom for the KC Chiefs. I left St. Louis decades ago but still follow the teams.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 10:24 AM
 
4,344 posts, read 2,803,077 times
Reputation: 5273
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartonro View Post
I was throwing an arbitrary number. It was more of an estimated time to coincide with the NHL's aggressive expansion into sunbelt markets (1990s). If the NHL was truly trying to get into the Houston market, it would have happened years ago, evident by you mentioning all the stadium deals that have been done Houston in the NHL expansion timeline.

I would assume if/when the Coyotes move, Houston will be the city. But my original comment was meant to address that having all big 4 pro teams is due to more than market size, and that's why I mentioned Houston.
Well, this article says that the Toyota Center is set for 30M in renovations that would include a Hockey Ice making machine: https://www.sportskeeda.com/ice-hock...expansion-mind.
Quote:
With NHL expansion in mind, Houston's Toyota Center, currently home to the NBA's Houston Rockets, is poised for a substantial $30 million renovation. This transformative project will focus on the installation of ice-making equipment essential for creating NHL-quality ice, potentially paving the way for the venue to host NHL games.
The owner of the Rockets have also signaled that he wants to own an NHL team.

Not sure why they would make Hockey upgrades without a commitment from a team. But all of that supports your assertion that if the NHL was looking to expand the infrastructure and the welcome wagon won't be problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 01:16 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,514 posts, read 33,519,512 times
Reputation: 12147
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLake View Post
Philadelphia
Boston
Detroit


Chicago
NYC
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Cleveland
Atlanta
DC

Dallas
Houston
Miami
KC
SF
LA
I’m absolutely putting Dallas in that 2nd tier. Probably among the top of that second tier alongside Chicago, St Louis, and NYC. Dallas is being heavily underrated in this thread. A very loyal NFL base, decent support for hockey and probably the most support of any southern city got NHL, still selling out the AAC when the Mavs were bad pre Luka and not great but not bad attendance for MLB. Also a good college sports market, host plenty of events domestically and internationally (and could host the world cup final in 2026).

I will go as far as to say DFW is the best sports metro in the South.

Last edited by Spade; 11-22-2023 at 01:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
471 posts, read 272,646 times
Reputation: 630
Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 02:20 PM
 
8,856 posts, read 6,851,017 times
Reputation: 8651
It would be a national embarrassment to put the WC final in a stadium without decent transit, or that's surrounded by tons of surface parking.

American-Football stadiums with WC-required stats are generally not integrated well with their cities, including the best stadiums and the biggest cities.

Seattle won't get the final, and the stadium is in a gritty area, but at least it's walkable and has good transit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 02:26 PM
 
14,019 posts, read 15,001,786 times
Reputation: 10466
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays25 View Post
It would be a national embarrassment to put the WC final in a stadium without decent transit, or that's surrounded by tons of surface parking.

American-Football stadiums with WC-required stats are generally not integrated well with their cities, including the best stadiums and the biggest cities.

Seattle won't get the final, and the stadium is in a gritty area, but at least it's walkable and has good transit.
It’s gonna be New York or Philly I think. But honestly Atlanta has the best location for a NFL stadium of the host cities, at least in America
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2023, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Austell, Georgia
2,217 posts, read 3,900,194 times
Reputation: 2258
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesJay64 View Post
Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago
This.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top