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.
I saw that ranking thing last week and didn't understand how the Warriors jersey got like a 7 or something and some other Bay Area teams got 10s when the Warriors jersey is widely considered to be the best in the league currently and the The City jersey is considered one of the best uniforms ever across all sports. For the record, I think declaring something like a uniform to be the best is pretty ridiculous similar to labeling a restaurant the best in the world.. but still.
On my phone so don't feel like citing a million webpages but here is 1 I read during the finals:
1. Best. Jersey. Ever. Beginning with the 1966-67 season, the Warriors wore what's now widely regarded as history's greatest basketball uniform -- the fabled "The City" design. What made it so great? The gorgeous depiction of the Golden Gate Bridge on the front, the spectacular cable car motif for the uniform numbers on the back, and of course the odd use of "The City" on the upper chest. It was nonsensical but somehow felt just right. Like, which city? You know -- the city. Still the best basketball uniform ever (and of course it's also the basis for the Warriors' current jersey design, which features a stylized depiction of the Bay Bridge).
The Minneapolis - St. Paul area continually supports its mediocre (at best) professional and college sports teams. The area has the NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA, WNBA, D-1 sports, and soon will have MLS. Since moving to Minneapolis, the teams have a been a major disappointment BUT the organizations and college teams have been able to get new stadiums built. I don't understand the support for such sh*tty organizations. That being said, Minneapolis has to be ranked pretty high for supporting all it's crappy professional and D-1 teams.
It's definitely not Minny - sorry. Compare Green Bay (population 100,000, 30 year waiting list, no blackouts for a lifetime) with the Vikings. And yes, there was a time (1970s) when the Vikings were great and the Packers were terrible. During that time, people still filled Lambeau.
While neither did well (Bucks have the worst arena in the NBA but has a new one on the horizon), the Bucks outdrew the Timberwolves, even though the Bucks had the worst record in the NBA the previous year ('wolves had the 2nd worst attendance in the NBA): 2014-2015 NBA Attendance - National Basketball Association - ESPN
This is not illustrating that the WI teams are the answer on this thread, though the Packers should be up there and the Brewers draw top 10 in baseball's smallest market, but to show how poorly the Twin Cities support their sports.
When the Bruins and Celtics need championships to sell out, excuse me if I consider their ranking a little dubious.
Boston gets unprecedented media and social media coverage because of their 9 titles in 15 years so they get a ton of exposure. Just because your team wins a lot doesn't mean they have the best fans or are the best sports city.
What about cities like Philadelphia or Buffalo that never win and sell out?
Sorry Boston. You're diehard for the Red Sox but bandwagon for the Patriots, Bruins and Celtics. Everyone knows its true but nobody ever talks about it.
I mean it's not like Philadelphia greatly sell out all their teams. The Sixers attendance is woeful and the Phillies went back to below average due to their struggles. No city honestly is perfect in this across the board.
It's definitely not Minny - sorry. Compare Green Bay (population 100,000, 30 year waiting list, no blackouts for a lifetime) with the Vikings. And yes, there was a time (1970s) when the Vikings were great and the Packers were terrible. During that time, people still filled Lambeau.
The ONLY reason why Green Bay has a team is because the city owns the Packers. Had the city not owned the team, the Packers would have been gone long ago.
The Twins organization was handed a brand new baseball park, which opened in 2010 and the team went 94-68. Since then they have had four straight years of 90+ losses. Obviously attendance is going to be down, BUT they still manage to draw 2 - 3 million each year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheese plate
While neither did well (Bucks have the worst arena in the NBA but has a new one on the horizon), the Bucks outdrew the Timberwolves, even though the Bucks had the worst record in the NBA the previous year ('wolves had the 2nd worst attendance in the NBA): 2014-2015 NBA Attendance - National Basketball Association - ESPN
T-wolves are awful. I'm surprised they are still around.
Well, Minnesota, specifically the Minneapolis metropolitan area produces the most NHL talent and supports an NHL team, two D-1 hockey teams within its CSA, and the best high school hockey in the country so, yeah the Minneapolis area is pretty much the center of hockey in the US. As far as the Wild's attendance is concerned, the Xcel was at 106% capacity last year and looking at the previous 9 years: 103.1%, 104.7%, 98.4%, 99.7%, 101.9%, 102.8%, 102.8%, 102.7% and over 100%. In other words, you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to hockey.
BTW, I can't stand the Wild - their logo, their colors, their style of hockey, etc... BUT people support them even when they are bad, which has been often.
I mean it's not like Philadelphia greatly sell out all their teams. The Sixers attendance is woeful and the Phillies went back to below average due to their struggles. No city honestly is perfect in this across the board.
Sixers attendance being bad is understandable. The Celtics and Bruins is not.
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.