A city deserving one particular sport

[FiddySicks]

Sacramento deserves a MLS team. 

 

If you disagree, fight me.

[Quillz]

Anchorage should have a NHL team. City is growing to the south, plenty of space to put in an open-air rink. Borrow the SeaWolves identity, always loved that logo.

[Kramerica Industries]

52 minutes ago, Quillz said:

Anchorage should have a NHL team. City is growing to the south, plenty of space to put in an open-air rink. Borrow the SeaWolves identity, always loved that logo.

 

That's a transportation nightmare waiting to happen. Anchorage is a 3-3 1/2 hour flight away from Vancouver and Seattle, let alone places further south and east. And, aside from Scott Gomez (retired) and Nate Thompson (wherever he is these days), you're not gonna have too many people willing to live in Anchorage.

 

EDIT: Brandon Dubinsky, Matt Carle, and the Caps' backup goaltender are from Alaska as well. Full list.

[Quillz]

Well of course it won't ever happen. But if we were talking about places that "should" have a hockey team, there's a city that would probably enjoy one. Especially more so than Phoenix.

[BurdBranding]

On 7/13/2019 at 3:32 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

This is nonsense. FC Cincinnati is amongst the league leaders in attendance. And the Reds have publicly stated that they now for the first time have major-league competition for fans' attention and money.

 

 

Anyway, on the general question of the thread: there are at least a half a dozen cities in Canada and the northern part of the U.S. that deserve NHL teams more than f-ing Las Vegas or Phoenix where there's no such thing as ice, or anyplace in Florida or Texas.

I 100% agree with the thoughts on the handful of cities in Canada that deserve a team, and personally I agree that my state, Arizona, does not deserve to have a NHL team at all. I am curious about the cities that are non traditional hockey markets that you left out like Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose and even Nashville you could argue with the minimal amount of snow they see. Is the feeling for these teams you listed because the cities have had their cup of tea and obviously fell flat on their face, or is it because these are examples of teams that fit the argument that have had mild to no success in the league? And if these are the reasons, Las Vegas shouldn’t break that list, yet, as much as I hate them due to my teal blood. Not disagreeing, I’m just genuinely curious.

[GDAWG]

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

The TV deal is because next year MLS is going to have a league wide deal. No more local deals. So for one year that's the best you get. 

 

The stadium is not that far from uc. Locals weren't driven out by construction. If anything gentrification is that with a new stadium property values go up and people cash out. Make some money and leave. Business will come in as well. Bars and clubs in the general area will increase over time. 

 

Interesting you say mostly college kids attend. Yet there's no real drop in attendance when schools are not in session. 

 

A ponzi scheme would be what happened under C David Baker to the AFL. Using new expansion money to fund current teams. It's fine as long as new owners kept buying in. And then the great recession hit and no new owners and the thing fell apart fast. 

 

That ponzi scheme got C. David Baker the gig as President of the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

[Sykotyk]

43 minutes ago, GDAWG said:

 

That ponzi scheme got C. David Baker the gig as President of the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

And he's basically screwing over Canton now. 

[GDAWG]

I wonder if the NBA ever announces expansion to 32 if they are going to go to 2 new cities, two old cities or a combination of the two, like Seattle and Louisville.

[Brian in Boston]

7 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

Locals weren't driven out by construction. If anything gentrification is that with a new stadium property values go up and people cash out. Make some money and leave.

Who are the people positioned to "cash out" and "make some money" with the gentrification of Cincinnati's West End?

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, of the West End's 4,094 total housing units, 3,327 were occupied. Of those 3,327 units, just 407 were owner-occupied. So, 2,920 of the housing units in the West End - 88% of the occupied housing supply - were rentals.

Bottom line? There's every reason to believe that the majority of people who will economically benefit from gentrification of the West End are developers/land-owners/landlords from outside the neighborhood. As the West End is gentrified, many of the long-term residents of the neighborhood - most of whom are renters - are likely to be priced-out of being able to continue to live there. 

[Crabcake]

6 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

If you disagree, fight me.

The internet’s tagline. 

[Bowski]

4 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

Who are the people positioned to "cash out" and "make some money" with the gentrification of Cincinnati's West End?

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, of the West End's 4,094 total housing units, 3,327 were occupied. Of those 3,327 units, just 407 were owner-occupied. So, 2,920 of the housing units in the West End - 88% of the occupied housing supply - were rentals.

Bottom line? There's every reason to believe that the majority of people who will economically benefit from gentrification of the West End are developers/land-owners/landlords from outside the neighborhood. As the West End is gentrified, many of the long-term residents of the neighborhood - most of whom are renters - are likely to be priced-out of being able to continue to live there. 

 

The same exact thing is happening slowly in my city where they built a new stadium a few years back, first off they built brand new condos all around it that have I believe total about 200 - 250 units, and according to the city's data, only 75 have had residence for more than 2 years. The older neighborhoods next to the area have also all started to experience the same thing as in Cincinnati, most of them were long-time minority renters living in fairly cheap houses only to have the landlords start cranking up rent to a point that many houses sit vacant and get eventually sold to be redeveloped into new apartments that are too expensive for previous renters. I would say objectively speaking it boosts the area's income/property tax income to a point & does lure business development downtown to a point; but it comes at the expense of many people who get essentially priced out to live in run-down areas of the suburbs aka the multitude of trailer parks that have sprung up on the outskirts of my city in the past 5 years.

 

It's caused two major things here in my region of Indiana;

1. There's basically a "reverse white-flight" happening in my city where many young white families are moving into the heart of the city and raising housing costs because you know, landlords are a**holes. This actually has resulted in the decay of some of the suburban areas of the city, as well as a present a further case for why, in general, bus systems are inefficient/cause more problems then they solve and, in particular, why our public transit system was poorly designed in the first place.
2. As a result of the "reverse white-flight", the small towns around the city have all began to gain many black and Hispanic residents which has been a burden on the towns, because there's not enough jobs and city services to go around, because many of these new residents don't exactly bring copious amounts of tax revenue

It's honestly disgusting that cities put in to place these borderline racist/class-ist zoning laws that supplement landlords being greedy.......that then prevents mixed development in cities that would benefit everyone. Then the cities engage in dirty politics to build these stadiums by stealing funds from other sources, i.e. why Detroit announced a new Red Wings Arena days after declaring bankruptcy.

[McCall]

1 hour ago, GDAWG said:

I wonder if the NBA ever announces expansion to 32 if they are going to go to 2 new cities, two old cities or a combination of the two, like Seattle and Louisville.

My best guess is they follow the NHL and go Seattle (obvious) and Las Vegas. Brand new arenas (or mostly new in Seattle's case). Louisville seems more like the type of market where it would have to wait for a relocation, which there doesn't really seem to be a candidate for at the moment.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, TheHealthiestScratch said:

I 100% agree with the thoughts on the handful of cities in Canada that deserve a team, and personally I agree that my state, Arizona, does not deserve to have a NHL team at all. I am curious about the cities that are non traditional hockey markets that you left out like Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose and even Nashville you could argue with the minimal amount of snow they see.

 

This is a good point. 

I intentionally left out Los Angeles (the entire area, including Anaheim) because that is one of the world's top cities and a major cultural centre.  So in my view that city should have every sport, regardless of its climate.

 

I admit that I did not perceive either San Jose or Nashville as warm-weather locations, though a check of the weather data shows that neither has an average winter low below freezing.  I think of San Jose as close to San Francisco, which is a city that I associate with cold.  (There is the great comment attributed to Mark Twain, perhaps apocryphally, "The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer in San Francisco." )  And I probably should have included Nashville in my list; though it doesn't seem as extreme as Las Vegas or Phoenix or cities in Florida or Texas.

 

 

1 hour ago, Sykotyk said:

2 hours ago, GDAWG said:

That ponzi scheme got C. David Baker the gig as President of the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

And he's basically screwing over Canton now.

 

Oh?  What's he doing to screw Canton?

 

[BurdBranding]

42 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

This is a good point. 

I intentionally left out Los Angeles (the entire area, including Anaheim) because that is one of the world's top cities and a major cultural centre.  So in my view that city should have every sport, regardless of its climate.

 

I admit that I did not perceive either San Jose or Nashville as warm-weather locations, though a check of the weather data shows that neither has an average winter low below freezing.  I think of San Jose as close to San Francisco, which is a city that I associate with cold.  (There is the great comment attributed to Mark Twain, perhaps apocryphally, "The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer in San Francisco." )  And I probably should have included Nashville in my list; though it doesn't seem as extreme as Las Vegas or Phoenix or cities in Florida or Texas.

 

I could understand the relation for both cities being related to cold. San Jose is actually a different animal than SF. Inland and pretty hot most of the year. I never seen a glimpse of snow the 19 years I was there. I’d say I’m generally on your side but it seems the NHL has at least deserved the right to experiment due to these outliers. When it gets obvious that these non traditional markets have failed I agree it is time to pack up shop.

[Quillz]

54 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

I intentionally left out Los Angeles (the entire area, including Anaheim) because that is one of the world's top cities and a major cultural centre.  So in my view that city should have every sport, regardless of its climate.

It probably also helps that by this point the city has won three Stanley Cups and combined for five Cup Finals.

[GDAWG]

1 hour ago, McCall said:

My best guess is they follow the NHL and go Seattle (obvious) and Las Vegas. Brand new arenas (or mostly new in Seattle's case). Louisville seems more like the type of market where it would have to wait for a relocation, which there doesn't really seem to be a candidate for at the moment.

 

Does Las Vegas need an NBA team when they already have an NHL team and an NFL team very soon? I tend to think that the next time the NBA expands one of the cities they go to will be the first major league team that city has. NBA teams tend to do well when they are the only major league team in town.  Not sure how Memphis does attendance wise.  I would think the NBA would go that route for one of their expansion teams. 

[Sykotyk]

4 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

This is a good point. 

I intentionally left out Los Angeles (the entire area, including Anaheim) because that is one of the world's top cities and a major cultural centre.  So in my view that city should have every sport, regardless of its climate.

 

I admit that I did not perceive either San Jose or Nashville as warm-weather locations, though a check of the weather data shows that neither has an average winter low below freezing.  I think of San Jose as close to San Francisco, which is a city that I associate with cold.  (There is the great comment attributed to Mark Twain, perhaps apocryphally, "The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer in San Francisco." )  And I probably should have included Nashville in my list; though it doesn't seem as extreme as Las Vegas or Phoenix or cities in Florida or Texas.

 

 

 

Oh?  What's he doing to screw Canton?

 

The Hall of Fame Village. Convincing the school district to lease their stadium for nothing and then got a special taxing district and wanted to replace the stadium. First it wasn't that bad. Then it became $80 million and eventually finishing over $100 million. For a high school stadium that hosts a D2 college football team and one preseason NFL game a year. It's still not finished. They were supposed to build 4 locker rooms. Instead built two and now the school had no locker room of their own. They still say they plan on building it. Also, the HOF had the audacity to then charge the school rent for practicing on their fields. The stadium ground was leased to the HOF to keep it tax exempt because it's the school's. 

[BBTV]

If we're now defining Ponzi schemes as  MLS stadiums built in stupid locations, then the Phila Union are running the biggest Ponzi scheme of them all.  Inaccessible from the city, in a location that's in a scary AF city where you need to park and take a shuttle to the game.  Absolutely disgraceful how the whole deal got done... and a shame that "Philadelphia's team" plays where it does.

[GDAWG]

3 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

If we're now defining Ponzi schemes as  MLS stadiums built in stupid locations, then the Phila Union are running the biggest Ponzi scheme of them all.  Inaccessible from the city, in a location that's in a scary AF city where you need to park and take a shuttle to the game.  Absolutely disgraceful how the whole deal got done... and a shame that "Philadelphia's team" plays where it does.

 

The complete opposite of FC Dallas playing in Frisco.  Frisco has been rapidly growing for the last 20 years or so.  All of our major sports teams have connections to Frisco.  Cowboys and Stars train there, the Maverick's G League team is there and the Frisco Roughriders too, the Double A affiliate of the Texas Rangers. It's a fairly safe city but the only way to get there is via car and sometimes you have to go through a toll way.

[Bowski]

4 hours ago, GDAWG said:

 

The complete opposite of FC Dallas playing in Frisco.  Frisco has been rapidly growing for the last 20 years or so.  All of our major sports teams have connections to Frisco.  Cowboys and Stars train there, the Maverick's G League team is there and the Frisco Roughriders too, the Double A affiliate of the Texas Rangers. It's a fairly safe city but the only way to get there is via car and sometimes you have to go through a toll way.

 

^Really Frisco is booming that much? I haven't been down to Toyota Stadium since 2007, and I remember it being not too developed then, but if it is now, I guess I should go check out the stadium again.

 

As for the overall "Ponzi" nature of the MLS, I'd definitely say its a team-by-team basis and really depends on the market.