Rank your city's sports teams by popularity

[pj3000]

My cousin and his wife spent nearly a million dollars over the years for their son to play hockey, from the time he was 5 until he was 19. Traveled all over the place, nationally and internationally. Their life together revolved ENTIRELY around hockey.

He was considered an elite national player, and was drafted into the Tier I junior league, with college scholarships waiting and a potential career in the NHL building. He moved away from home to play for the junior pro team, his parents divorced soon after, and then he quit hockey altogether.

[dchan]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

This is my personal experience as well, especially as a teenager. I took Wrestling/Judo/Jiu Jitsu VERY seriously, but didn't really have any interest in playing other sports. Of course i'd dick around at practice and warm up playing basketball or whatever.

It's the same as a 38 year old, I don't play many sports, but the sports I play, I take seriously and want to be the best version of myself that I can be.

Same here, as a 36 year old with creeping leg & flexibility issues.

I was playing softball, baseball, and soccer a few years ago, but abandoned them all to stick with basketball. Part of it was a time commitment issue - I only had so much time on the weekends. But part of it was due to my commitment to youth bball coaching, and the fact that I myself didn't learn how to play formally, so I needed to learn on the fly (imposter syndrome).

And part of it was playing with bad players in a casual setting. If the players were my level or higher. But to watch a guy who insists on being the first basemen, despite the fact that he was horrible at catching throws from the other infielders was more than a bit annoying.

For whatever reason, the one rec-league sport that seems to bring out all the former HS athletes is soccer. Our co-ed "beginners" soccer Meetup turned into competitive pickup games with several former HS soccer players speeding around guys with no feet like me, or girls who are there because it was supposed to be a co-ed beginners meetup.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by rusted root

The Giants were never moving to Tampa. It was a PR stunt to get public funding for a new ballpark and it worked. So much so that the A's repeated that exact strategy with Las Vegas as the boogeyman city and it worked again!

And Pantone 294 are all douchebags. Even Dodger fans don't like them.

Apparently Brandon Crawford didn’t think so.

And how exactly are Pantone 294 douchebags? I’ve not read of any incidents of members getting physical with other fans, and they almost always get a shoutout on nationally televised games because they show up in large numbers. I recall watching a game during the 2019 season in which the Dodgers visited Fenway in the summer; A-Rod said that he was “flabbergasted” by how many Dodgers fans there were.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Uh, the Rams started in Cleveland in 1936, won the 1945 NFL Championship and then left for LA. That's when the Browns became Cleveland's team.

My mistake; Rams moved to LA in 1946.

Regardless, tough shit. It was much more common for teams to relocate to other cities in the day. And as you quoted me saying, the Browns won a championship before the LA Rams did (beating them in 1950 and again in 1955).

[38 Geary]

Why Dodger Fans Leave Early

This is not about traffic and parking problems at Dodger Stadium. More than enough has been written on that, most recently a wrongheaded, hysterical column by Bill Plaschke in the Los Angeles Times the morning after a sold-out Fernando Valenzuela Bobblehead Night kept some fans in their cars for 90 minutes before they got to their seats. In the same vein that he once suggested improving the World Series by staging it at a neutral site, Plaschke suggested fixing an occasional mass gridlock problem by removing thousands of seats from the stadium and filling the space with "amenities." Rather than make Dodger Stadium more "exclusive," I would opt for more fan-friendly solutions like a direct Metro rail line or cheaper parking fees for carpools of three or more.

But there I go, blabbing about parking and traffic again. I'm really here to try and explain the bugaboo I've always had with the Dodger Stadium experience: why huge numbers of fans routinely show up in the 3rd and 4th innings and leave after the 6th and 7th.

Avoiding traffic? I don't buy it. Nearly every one of the 17 ballparks I've been to have their share of entering and exiting gridlock. Length of the drive? Sorry. People trek to St. Louis Cardinals games from as far away as Arkansas, and I never see those stands emptying out before the stretch inning. As I see it -- and I've been seeing the evidence around me for over 25 years -- many Dodger fans come late and leave early because willfully or not, they are disengaged from the game. Unless it's a final weekend or postseason contest with something at stake, these fans do not treat the game as a dramatic event but as a social one, like going to a big family picnic or a real cool party where you arrive fashionably late or leave early before the beer runs out. The game is merely the thing going on the background you look up to cheer and boo once in a while. I would never think of showing up late to a play or leaving a movie early, but if I was just in the mood to catch a few scenes, maybe I would.

...

Both evenings, the reserved section around me was filled with people getting up constantly for food and beer, visiting with each other, talking about work, taking cell phone photos, smacking beach balls and balloons that went by, doing the wave, basically doing anything but watching and following the game in front of them.

This isn't to say these folks weren't having a great old time; they were certainly texting their friends enough to tell them so. At the same time, in every direction for at least 80 miles, scores of long-time, diehard Dodger fans were listening to the radio or comfortably at home watching the Vin Scully telecast. (Ironically, Hall of Famer Scully is the most focused, informative broadcaster in the business.) But immersed in that constant commotion, I was convinced you can't find a more distracted big league ballpark crowd than the ones at Dodger Stadium.

By contrast, check out baseball's polar opposite just 340 miles to the north. Giants games at AT&T Park are an invigorating experience, and it isn't just because of the place's amenities, scenic beauty, and great public transportation that gets them there. Giants fans are engaged with the game from first pitch to last, never leave early and produce a fun, loud, positive energy that frequently seems to electrify the home team. Right now, there is no place like it in the game.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dodger-fans_b_1832231

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by pj3000

My cousin and his wife spent nearly a million dollars over the years for their son to play hockey, from the time he was 5 until he was 19. Traveled all over the place, nationally and internationally. Their life together revolved ENTIRELY around hockey.

He was considered an elite national player, and was drafted into the Tier I junior league, with college scholarships waiting and a potential career in the NHL building. He moved away from home to play for the junior pro team, his parents divorced soon after, and then he quit hockey altogether.

It must depend on where you live, and the program you are involved in. Because $1M from 5 - 19 years old is over $70,000 per year, which is nuts.

In Minnesota, equipment is usually on the parents/player, but almost always purchased pre-owned, especially during younger years. Travel here isn't nearly as bad, because domestically, Minnesota is THE hockey state, so you don't need to go far to find good competition.
I know a few people who've traveled/played in Europe, and most travel is covered from sponsors/fund raising, with very little covered by families.
$70K per year and that is probably heavily weighted towards older age, where it would be >$100K annually is hard to believe, I don't actually buy it.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by homebucket

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dodger-fans_b_1832231

This guy's an idiot. The reason why people leave early is because getting 56000 people out of 3 exits when 90% have to show up by car is the reason. It's a hell to leave. I've never left early because that's who I am but when you're waiting 45 min to move 100 feet you can see why.

That being said, this was more of a problem years ago. They have fixed some of the issues, added dedicated busses to and from union Station (about 5000 use per game) and the come late leave early thing is not nearly as bad as it used to be unless it's a 5 pm game which is just not fair with LA traffic

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by eburress

I don't think anybody did one of these for Dallas so here goes:

1. Cowboys
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
2. Mavericks
3. Stars
4. Rangers
...
...
...
...
5. All the local universities, MLS soccer, minor league teams, etc...


Rangers probably beat out the Stars on attendance but it seems like there's more love for the Stars. Just my POV.

What about college football? You have a Division I program in the TCU Longhorns (Fort Worth), and I’d image the Longhorns are to Texas what the Buckeyes are to Ohio — probably not to the same extent, but in the sense that the whole state can identify with the name-brand program in the state capital.

[Crawford]

I could see it. Soccer here is over 10k/year, exclusive of uniforms, equipment and travel, BUT the vast majority of elite older kids supplement with private training which can be absurdly expensive. If you're using top personal trainers I could see 100k+ annual expenses in the middle/high school years.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

It must depend on where you live, and the program you are involved in. Because $1M from 5 - 19 years old is over $70,000 per year, which is nuts.

$70K/year makes sense. Depending on where one lives in the US travel AAA hockey is insane - tournaments all over the country, flying everywhere, equipment, ice time...expenses add up quickly. I know of teams from Los Angeles that have come to Toronto for tournaments.

Sports moving away from lower income to middle income peoples speaks largely to the corporate, capitalist setup of franchise sports at the top. They don't sell or prioritize to lower income, so why would those people take up the sport? Middle and high incomes are where the revenues are.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JHikka

$70K/year makes sense. Depending on where one lives in the US travel AAA hockey is insane - tournaments all over the country, flying everywhere, equipment, ice time...expenses add up quickly. I know of teams from Los Angeles that have come to Toronto for tournaments.

Yeah, local soccer and lacrosse teams here travel to the West Coast for tournaments. Even for younger kids now. Some even travel to Europe. No doubt hockey is the same. I think it's a money grab, mostly.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by JHikka

$70K/year makes sense. Depending on where one lives in the US travel AAA hockey is insane - tournaments all over the country, flying everywhere, equipment, ice time...expenses add up quickly. I know of teams from Los Angeles that have come to Toronto for tournaments.

Sports moving away from lower income to middle income peoples speaks largely to the corporate, capitalist setup of franchise sports at the top. They don't sell or prioritize to lower income, so why would those people take up the sport? Middle and high incomes are where the revenues are.

I was curious so I just texted my Brother in-law, whose Son plays at a high level in Minnesota (He's 14yrs old). This is obviously Minnesota, so could be different if you lived in say, Phoenix.

"Parents are told to expect ~$8-10K of out of pocket costs for kids prior to HS, this includes Ice time, equipment, travel, registration, uniforms, etc. At the HS level it depends, travel costs are higher, but subsidized with sponsors. I think $15K annually for HS is realistic. If you continue playing organized post HS, you are either playing in College (which doesn't have direct fees) or you're good enough to get paid to play".

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

It must depend on where you live, and the program you are involved in. Because $1M from 5 - 19 years old is over $70,000 per year, which is nuts.

In Minnesota, equipment is usually on the parents/player, but almost always purchased pre-owned, especially during younger years. Travel here isn't nearly as bad, because domestically, Minnesota is THE hockey state, so you don't need to go far to find good competition.
I know a few people who've traveled/played in Europe, and most travel is covered from sponsors/fund raising, with very little covered by families.
$70K per year and that is probably heavily weighted towards older age, where it would be >$100K annually is hard to believe, I don't actually buy it.

I'm going on what my cousin told me. I have no insight into his financial records. No one gives a fuck if you "don't actually buy it".

And based on what you say above, it doesn't seem like you are too aware of junior hockey at the elite national level. It wasn't youth hockey in Minnesota.

But rather, more along the lines of playing junior national teams throughout Europe, in addition to traveling domestically and in Canada year-round. Not to mention traveling every early Thursday and Monday mornings for long weekend 4-night stays to practice and play with a select team. Let's not even talk about airfare, hotels, transportation costs, etc. Instead, I'll just say "private tutor"... because he was barely in school from around 8th to 12th grades... to go along with a personal trainer and nutritionist when he was 17 and 18. You don't think all of that adds up pretty quickly?

[RowanGrad]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

This is the ranking for a white Philadelphia sports fan. If you were black Sixers would be #2 and Flyers wouldn’t even be on the list.

Temple and Villanova basketball would rank higher.

Exactly. That ranking even seems absurd to me, a white person. I tried to bridge the gap in my ranking.

Originally Posted by RowanGrad

1. Eagles (Pretty much equally beloved among all ages and races)

2. Sixers (Fanbase leans relatively young and non-white)
3. Phillies (Fanbase leans relatively old and white)

4. Flyers (Fanbase extremely white but closer to equal generationally than Sixers and Phillies. Becoming more niche as white people become less of a majority)


5. Union (Know no one personally who follows them but could see them growing more popular as soccer does with younger generations. Could even surpass Phillies and Flyers one day)

Open to the argument Phillies are more popular than Sixers but Sixers are much more beloved by both myself and my generation, so there's probably bias there from me. Sixers have also been much better recently.

[38 Geary]

I think basketball is definitely overtaking baseball in popularity. There's probably only a handful of cities that have both NBA and MLB teams where the MLB team is more popular. NBA arenas also have more of an excited, party atmosphere whereas MLB is more laidback and chill, which isn't surprising given the different pace of the sports.

[RowanGrad]

Originally Posted by thoughtcriminal

and if the queen had balls, she'd be the king. what is your point?
why do you have to bring race into a fun, stupid discussion topic?
just because it is from the perspective of a white person, does that make it invalid?

No, not invalid. It just makes your list inaccurate cause you're not taking into account 1/5th of Phiily's metro population.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Originally Posted by homebucket

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dodger-fans_b_1832231

I dunno, I haven't been there in over 15 years, but in my experiences at Dodger Stadium, I never met a more passionate, engaged fanbase, and I absolutely hate the Dodgers.

There's, what, two entrances to that ballpark, and neither are off major thoroughfares? Building a ballpark in a ravine works at an aesthetic level, but is a logistical nightmare.

Also, the thing I can't stand about many of the ballparks I've been to are that they're mini amusement parks with so many attractions and amenities that draw attention away from the game. I get it: Lots of people think baseball is boring. Sometimes, I'm one of those people, but I grew up watching games at a multipurpose cookie cutter stadium where you needed binoculars to see the action if you were sitting in the upper concourse. At least I had Marty and Joe on the radio.

I'm not sure how/if Wrigley has changed after the most-recent renovations and I've never been to Fenway. You go to ballparks like Wrigley and Dodger Stadium to watch a baseball game. The simplicity is the beauty.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I think basketball is definitely overtaking baseball in popularity. There's probably only a handful of cities that have both NBA and MLB teams where the MLB team is more popular. NBA arenas also have more of an excited, party atmosphere whereas MLB is more laidback and chill, which isn't surprising given the different pace of the sports.

I'd say the without a doubt cities are:

Boston
New York
Philadelphia
Washington, DC
Chicago
Minneapolis
Atlanta
St Louis

I think LA and SF lean MLB, but it's close.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Buckeye Native 001

I dunno, I haven't been there in over 15 years, but in my experiences at Dodger Stadium, I never met a more passionate, engaged fanbase, and I absolutely hate the Dodgers.

There's, what, two entrances to that ballpark, and neither are off major thoroughfares? Building a ballpark in a ravine works at an aesthetic level, but is a logistical nightmare.

Also, the thing I can't stand about many of the ballparks I've been to are that they're mini amusement parks with so many attractions and amenities that draw attention away from the game. I get it: Lots of people think baseball is boring. Sometimes, I'm one of those people, but I grew up watching games at a multipurpose cookie cutter stadium where you needed binoculars to see the action if you were sitting in the upper concourse. At least I had Marty and Joe on the radio.

I'm not sure how/if Wrigley has changed after the most-recent renovations and I've never been to Fenway. You go to ballparks like Wrigley and Dodger Stadium to watch a baseball game. The simplicity is the beauty.

totally agree with not liking a lot of distractions at the old ballpark.

i mean a kiddie area is fine for restless young ones, and some homerun fireworks, but that's it!

that said, i am all in for modern 'ballpark villages' built around them that have all that stuff and more.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Buckeye Native 001

Also, the thing I can't stand about many of the ballparks I've been to are that they're mini amusement parks with so many attractions and amenities that draw attention away from the game. I get it: Lots of people think baseball is boring.

How about the constant barrage of promos, blasts of music, etc. throughout the game? Fucking sensory overload. I hate going to baseball games unless it's a afternoon game with barely anyone in the stands.

Every single break in the action is filled with an explosion of media. Even just in between batters... it's like the entire stadium is tweaking on meth.