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.
Not really, not that either way is saying much, unless including college hockey, which NU doesn't have. You could basically include Illinois and Notre Dame for Chicago.
Not really, not that either way is saying much, unless including college hockey, which NU doesn't have. You could basically include Illinois and Notre Dame for Chicago.
Northwestern's women's lacrosse team is really good.
Which city has better sports teams?
Which city has better stadia/arenas/ballparks?
Which city has better fans?
Overall - Which city has better sports?
What other good sports cities are there and how do they compare to Chicago/Boston?
Better sports teams- Boston
Better stadiums,arenas, and ballparks-Chicago
Better fans-Boston
Overall-Boston
Other cities that are good sports cities are Cleveland, New York City, Detroit, Buffalo, St. Louis, Denver, and Kansas City. Imo those cities have very good sports fans, though Im from Cleveland and they are fairweather baseball and basketball fans, but when it comes to the Browns, we will root for them and sell out the Stadium even when they don't do good. Which has been mostly all of the time since the Browns were formed again in 1999.
(* - This tally includes all NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL championships won since January 1, 1960, and all AFL championships won between January 1, 1960 and January 31, 1966.)
(* - This tally includes all NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL championships won since January 1, 1960, and all AFL championships won between January 1, 1960 and January 31, 1966.)
No, it has to be since the beginning or within the past year or so, no arbitrary starting date.
Well, having 2 MLB teams is better than have 1 MLB team (unless you are talking about league pennants in the last 50 years that is).
So true. I'm by no means a Braves fan, but it would be cool if they still played in Boston. Not many cities have ever had two teams, fewer still have been able to hold onto them. Of the four remaining two team markets, really only the SF bay area is hard to justify. There are places nearly as big without any team.
On the question: Boston, and it's a no-brainer. Both cities are great on tradition, but there is a lot to be said for meaningful recent success. And Fenway is a national treasure.
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.
