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 dont care if Philly wins this poll or not. These polls are not accurate as evident by the multiple brand new accounts. All I have to say is that these regions are some the largest in America for a reason.
LOL I don't believe you. You obviously want to win here, otherwise you wouldn't be making the statements that you're making. If any of you didn't care about winning here or weren't salty about not winning, then it wouldn't be an issue at all for you guys to look at the entire Bay Area in this comparison.
And I know for a fact that if Philly was killing the Bay in the poll here you guys would be quick to focus on the 7.2 million person Bay Area in stead of the 4.3 million person section that you're acknowledging right now. There would be all kinds of mention of how impressive Philly would be considering SF's metro is larger. Lol I can't fathom how y'all can try and claim to be "real" when you can't even admit that you play like this. Pathetic.
True, and I appreciate that you aren't one of these homers. A few others have too, or at least have reasons other than regional pride for choosing Philly. This just goes to show that many of you don't suck. I respect people who can think for themselves and don't just give opinions based on nothing more than regional bias. People can vote for Philly all day and that's fine (I have nothing at all against Philly), but just being a homer is retarded.
I love SF and feel that it is the sure winner here, but I have no problem voting against it when I don't see it as the winner. I live here b/c I love it and I choose to.
I’m still baffled that this is even up for debate. San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland form one large metropolitan area called the San Francisco Bay Area. I honestly thought this was common knowledge, but that shows how much I know. In order to understand the culture of all this, I’ll once again bring up the 49ers as an example. Their practice facilities are in San Jose. Their new stadium is probably going to be in San Jose. Yet no one is talking about the 49ers “relocating”. As far as I know, they are still going to be called the San Francisco 49ers. Why not rename them the San Jose 49ers, if San Jose is such a separate entity from San Francisco? That’s because it’s not.
Now take the case of the San Diego Chargers. They’ve threaten to move to Los Angeles if not granted a new stadium, and such a move would be considered a relocation. The team would accordingly be renamed the Los Angeles Chargers, since it would be inappropriate to continue using the San Diego name. That’s because Los Angeles and San Diego are considered two separate metro areas. San Francisco and San Jose are not.
Excellent post! This is a perfect illustration of what we're talking about. And even though the 9ers situation is a bit of a sore spot for me, this is an absolute fact. SF and SJ are part of the same metro. LA and SD are not.
True, and I appreciate that you aren't one of these homers. A few others have too, or at least have reasons other than regional pride for choosing Philly. This just goes to show that many of you don't suck. I respect people who can think for themselves and don't just give opinions based on nothing more than regional bias. People can vote for Philly all day and that's fine (I have nothing at all against Philly), but just being a homer is retarded.
I love SF and feel that it is the sure winner here, but I have no problem voting against it when I don't see it as the winner. I live here b/c I love it and I choose to.
I prefer NoCal to SoCal as well. I have many friends in Philly and visit them frequently and even they joke about how corrupt and raggidy it is.
One was trying to convince me to go into business with him buy up these $2000 row houses and renting them out. Being a slumlord is not part of my MO.
It's obvious that there can never/ever be a poll that can be fair to the SF Bay Area in this forum. If BosWash decides to gang up, there's a 8:1 ratio against SF as of today's count (40:5).
Not only that, there are some that want to split the SF Bay into two.
So, the fact that SF is winning (by that margin) boggles the mind.
It's funny, no matter how many times and how many different ways, images, figures etc. we use to try and explain to people like DailyJournalist, PITTS, Rainrock, etc. that you CANNOT divide the Bay Area into two separate metros, they refuse to accept it.
To PITTS, the OP, I think the poll is a good question, but your premise is bad in that you began by describing the SF metro as having 4.2 million. As we have illustrated and described in numerous ways, if you want to compare SF metro you have to use the Bay Area. It is without a doubt one metro area, despite some bizarre classification schemes by the Census.
We are not trying to combine disparate metro areas to inflate our numbers, we're just describing what is blatant and obvious to anyone familiar with the Bay Area. Namely, the Bay Area--SF/Oakland/San Jose--is one metro.
Trying to include separated areas would be like saying Sacramento or Stockton (both ~ 80 miles from SF) are part of the Bay Area. These are clearly in different metro areas, and no one claims they are part of the same metro.
But SJ, SF, and Oakland are so intertwined and interconnected and have very dense unfettered development between all of them, so you just cannot try and break them up. They form a triangle around the bay and, like I said, even as 1 metro area it is still far denser and has far less area than most other large MSA's.
Actually San Francisco is quite popular outside this board and usually ranks near the top of most surveys and rankings of favorite cities and destinations.
This is true, my comment was in reference to the board since this is a city-data poll. But your point is very valid.
Haven't we been through this already? The Census decision to cut the Bay Area in half is a controversial one, and based on bizarre employment patterns. The truth is, the physical, cultural, and social geography (along with a continuous urban expanse) of an area defines what its metro, for all intensive purposes, is. When comparing Philly and San Francisco, its ridiculous to only look at half of the Bay Area, which is what youre doing.
Im going to post this again, because you have yet to respond to how you can justify cutting the Bay Area into two. Please explain how the half ring around the bay is not one urban area. If you can't, then accept what everyone who lives in the Bay Area understands:
Quote:
Originally Posted by PITTSTON2SARASOTA
The U.S. Census dictates metropolitan areas...not you nor myself!
I’ll say it again too. The San Francisco Bay Area is one metro area.
A few posters want to make up their own parameters for a metropolitan area...that is up to the Census Bureau...HERE ARE THEIR DEFINITIONS AND PARAMETERS..... United States metropolitan area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and the populations(NO ESTIMATES). They have the definitive say!
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.
