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.
MLS isn't as relevant as the big 3. Not even close.
Big 4- although NHL has drifted pretty far from the rest of the pack (NFL, NBA, and MLB). But I would still say it is part of the country's premier professional sports leagues.
I think sports definitely helps the perception of a city...if one is, at all, interested in sports. Milwaukee, for example, the Bucks are huge in the city, and the Brewers are, as well. It adds a dimension to a city, and that's a positive.
To get back to the original OP question. Yes, but only for those who like sports. For everyone who loves sports, there are probably two who don't give a crap. So, if my stats are correct, about 33% care. For that 33% the perception of a good sports team does indeed increase the perception of a city. Of course, there are some other variables, such as if the team wins a lot or losses a lot. Beyond that, a winning team does indeed create more positive exposure of said city overall, as in more media coverage, more skyviews over stadiums, more general mentions overall. Finally, pride in a winning team is contagious and has been proven to create positive business activity within their cities.
To get back to the original OP question. Yes, but only for those who like sports. For everyone who loves sports, there are probably two who couldn't give a crap. So, if my stats are correct, about 33% care. For that 33% the perception of a good sports team does indeed increase the perception of a city. Of course, there are some other variables, such as if the team wins a lot or losses a lot. Beyond that, a winning team does indeed create more positive exposure of said city overall, as in more media coverage, more skyviews over stadiums, more general mentions overall.
I still say winning has little to do with it.
Take the Cubs for example.
Look at how much attention their legacy of losing has brought to Chicago and Wrigley Field.
The Kansas City Royals won the AL title twice in a row just a few years ago-anyone even remember that?
Go to any rust belt city that's experienced massive population loss-Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc. When you see those stadiums and people wearing team jerseys on game day, I guarantee you're going to get a more dramatic sense of being somewhere than in a place without pro teams like Austin.
To the people who don't care about sports (which is probably the majority in all cities), they'll still see the visitors and tourists that sports bring. I witnessed this firsthand living in Columbus when the Blue Jackets started. Never went to a game, but seeing Ontario plates parked downtown to see NHL hockey created a far more dramatic sense of being somewhere than any sellout of a Buckeye football game could (which would be 5X as many spectators).
Look at how much attention their legacy of losing has brought to Chicago and Wrigley Field.
The Kansas City Royals won the AL title twice in a row just a few years ago-anyone even remember that?
Go to any rust belt city that's experienced massive population loss-Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc. When you see those stadiums and people wearing team jerseys on game day, I guarantee you're going to get a more dramatic sense of being somewhere than in a place without pro teams like Austin.
To the people who don't care about sports (which is probably the majority in all cities), they'll still see the visitors and tourists that sports bring. I witnessed this firsthand living in Columbus when the Blue Jackets started. Never went to a game, but seeing Ontario plates parked downtown to see NHL hockey created a far more dramatic sense of being somewhere than any sellout of a Buckeye football game could (which would be 5X as many spectators).
So yes, pro sports matter.
I tend to agree, but the Cubs are not a good example as they have a lot of built-in loyalty for being the "lovable losers" up until recently. Winning usually creates a better environment and better revenue. Though I would say there are some fan bases that will always support...Green Bay, Seattle, Denver in the NFL, and obviously in the MLB, said Chicago Cubs, perhaps also LA Dodgers, Boston Red Sox, Seattle Mariners, perhaps even the SF Giants. With many of these teams the "experience" is more important than winning.
I tend to agree, but the Cubs are not a good example as they have a lot of built-in loyalty for being the "lovable losers" up until recently. Winning usually creates a better environment and better revenue. Though I would say there are some fan bases that will always support...Green Bay, Seattle, Denver in the NFL, and obviously in the MLB, said Chicago Cubs, perhaps also LA Dodgers, Boston Red Sox, Seattle Mariners, perhaps even the SF Giants. With many of these teams the "experience" is more important than winning.
The Oakland A's are consistently one of the top teams in baseball. Watch one of their home games and see how depressingly empty the park is. People fly from all over to see a game at Wrigley or Fenway but I"ve never heard anyone making plans to go see the A's in Oakland despite their incredible legacy of winning.
If we apply the San Diego logic, well people aren't going to see MLB because there is so much else to do in the amazing Bay Area! Kind of hard to accept that logic when Giants games are as loud as a Manchester soccer game just a few miles away.
There's either something about the A's being in Oakland or maybe its the stadium, looks like they're having a hard time making MLB work there despite having an iconic franchise.
To get back to the original OP question. Yes, but only for those who like sports. For everyone who loves sports, there are probably two who don't give a crap. So, if my stats are correct, about 33% care. For that 33% the perception of a good sports team does indeed increase the perception of a city. Of course, there are some other variables, such as if the team wins a lot or losses a lot. Beyond that, a winning team does indeed create more positive exposure of said city overall, as in more media coverage, more skyviews over stadiums, more general mentions overall. Finally, pride in a winning team is contagious and has been proven to create positive business activity within their cities.
The Oakland A's are consistently one of the top teams in baseball. Watch one of their home games and see how depressingly empty the park is. People fly from all over to see a game at Wrigley or Fenway but I"ve never heard anyone making plans to go see the A's in Oakland despite their incredible legacy of winning.
If we apply the San Diego logic, well people aren't going to see MLB because there is so much else to do in the amazing Bay Area! Kind of hard to accept that logic when Giants games are as loud as a Manchester soccer game just a few miles away.
There's either something about the A's being in Oakland or maybe its the stadium, looks like they're having a hard time making MLB work there despite having an iconic franchise.
I don't mean to be too harsh, but fans don't care for the Oakland Coliseum, or the current naming rights, "RingCentral Coliseum", whatever the heck that is...it is consistently voted the worst stadium for both the NFL and MLB. (Likely one reason the Raiders are heading to Vegas). I don't know how accurate this is, but everything I have heard about this stadium district is it is crime-ridden. So the Warriors have left, and the Raiders are right behind.
The SF Giants is more of an "experience" like I described before. Winning and Losing don't matter in places like that, but again, generally, winning will produce more revenue than losing.
Big 4- although NHL has drifted pretty far from the rest of the pack (NFL, NBA, and MLB). But I would still say it is part of the country's premier professional sports leagues.
MLS is in a lower tier than the other 4.
I agree. When I rank major league sports in my recreational assets category for my metro rankings, I do list MLS in with NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL, because it has enough interest nationally and its rate of growth over the last 5 years or so justifies being included. But I award a point system to each league based on tv ratings and merchandise sales. The order is NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and MLS.
Location: Pittsburgh (via Chicago, via Pittsburgh)
3,887 posts, read 5,521,355 times
Reputation: 3107
Anyone with simplified statements like "Rust belt is rust belt" seem to be a bit uninformed.
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.
