Pittsburgh = Best Sports City

2»

Comments

  • smg97791smg97791 Posts: 151
    smg97791 wrote:
    Are we talking fan loyalty and atmosphere or success of local teams? If its fan loyalty, fanaticism or whatever then yeah, it might be pittsburgh or boston. But if we're talking local team success then its LA.

    L.A. success begins and ends with the Lakers.

    L.A. Kings- 0 Stanley Cups

    L.A. Dodgers- last WS Championship 1988

    L.A. Football- they never stay

    L.A. SUCKS.

    HAHAHA! There are six major sports in America, the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, NCAA football and basketball. A very strong argument can be made for LA's representative in 3 of the 6 sports to be labeled "best in class," meaning most successful in their respective sport. The Lakers, USC football and UCLA basketball. Boston has one, the Celtics, New York has one, the Yankees, Pittsburgh has one, the Steelers, LA has THREE people! The Red Sox? They're a blip on the map, two world series in 80+ years does not make you "best in class," not even close. Same goes for the Patriots. Their history can't compare with the Steelers or Cowboys. Again, blip on the map. Boston sports fans really need to look at the big picture and realize a few recent championships does not make up for practically a millenia of futility. Here are my nominees for "best in class" for each sport.

    NFL - Steelers, Cowboys, 49ers. A small argument can be made for the Giants and Patriots.

    MLB - Yankees, thats it. In the running for 2nd place? The Cardinals, Dodgers, Giants and A's.

    NBA - Celtics and Lakers. Thats it. Its not even worth talking about who would be 3rd place.

    NHL - Canadians and Red Wings. An argument can be made for the maple leafs, but not a strong one.

    NCAA football - Notre Dame, USC, Alabama and Oklahoma.

    NCAA Basketball - UCLA. Up for 2nd place, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky.

    There you have it people, as you can clearly see, LA has a "best in class" nominee in 3 of the 6 sports. Bitch and moan all you'd like but nothing is gonna change. Yes, LA has the worst fans but we have the best teams. I know this is gonna be difficult for some of you, especially those from New York and Boston. There is one thing you can do, go out and cheer for your team. In a few decades maybe your city will have as many "best in class" nominees as LA. End of argument.
  • 8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
    g under p wrote:
    ajgolf23 wrote:
    BOSTON!
    According to Sports Illustrated a few years ago it was Chicago. :P

    We also have a big population edge, so maybe that's what helps and one of the biggest rivalries between two of our own teams... and Da Bears.

    Boston sports teams also have a regional edge not just the Boston city area. They have New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine and parts of Connecticut oh you could through in Rhode Island. It ALL adds up to a pretty vast area don't ya think.

    Peace

    from wiki

    Greater Boston includes the tenth-largest metropolitan area in the United States, home to over 4.4 million people, while the CSA is the nation's fifth largest and includes over 7.4 million people


    chicagoland is up over 9.8 million in the CSA.

    yeah, go ahead and count all of those rinky dink area's.
    81 is now off the air

    Off_Air.jpg
  • 8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
    smg97791 wrote:
    smg97791 wrote:
    Are we talking fan loyalty and atmosphere or success of local teams? If its fan loyalty, fanaticism or whatever then yeah, it might be pittsburgh or boston. But if we're talking local team success then its LA.

    L.A. success begins and ends with the Lakers.

    L.A. Kings- 0 Stanley Cups

    L.A. Dodgers- last WS Championship 1988

    L.A. Football- they never stay

    L.A. SUCKS.


    NFL - Steelers, Cowboys, 49ers. A small argument can be made for the Giants and Patriots.

    MLB - Yankees, thats it. In the running for 2nd place? The Cardinals, Dodgers, Giants and A's.

    NBA - Celtics and Lakers. Thats it. Its not even worth talking about who would be 3rd place.

    NHL - Canadians and Red Wings. An argument can be made for the maple leafs, but not a strong one.

    NCAA football - Notre Dame, USC, Alabama and Oklahoma.

    NCAA Basketball - UCLA. Up for 2nd place, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky.

    .

    you left out so many teams.

    NFL, umm Bears
    NBA Bulls are the class of 3rd in basketball. lol
    NCAA that is your list? you are kiding right? you missed soooo many teams here. OSU, MI, Penn State and thats just hte big ten.
    the rest are pretty decent, althought the Candians are clearly the longterm winner in the NHL. Detroit would be a distant 2nd.
    MLB heck, long term, you could toss in teh Pirates and their 5 titles in the last 100 years.
    81 is now off the air

    Off_Air.jpg
  • SongburstSongburst Posts: 1,195
    81 wrote:
    dcfaithful wrote:
    I think the NBA is more popular than the NHL... :?

    or maybe I think that because Utah doesn't have a professional hockey team...


    based on tv ratings it is

    i enjoy both sports and attend all the major sports except football since Bears tickets are over priced and difficult to come by
    Hockey doesn't really translate too well to TV. Being groomed on it, it's fine on TV for me but it is easily the best sport to watch live.

    Basketball is boring. NBA basketball is worse. Saw the Jordan Bulls play live a few times and I wish I had those hours back.

    Football kicks serious ass on TV. Aside from the atmosphere in the stadium, the actual game is horrible to watch live. The Sunday football atmosphere of tailgating, partying, drinking is all great in my books though. Last game I went to, AP ran for 296 yards, Antonio Cromartie ran a missed field goal back 109 yards for a TD and the game was boring to watch. Paying more than 50 cents for a glass of American beer isn't #1 in my books either though I love the free-pours on liquor.

    Oh ya -- Minneapolis is the best sports town. Somehow.
    1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
  • Heatherj43Heatherj43 Posts: 1,254
    edited October 2009
    lukin2006 wrote:
    81 wrote:
    i'm guessing only because they have the defending NHL and NFL champs. yeah, Pitt is nice for college.


    I would put Philly, Boston, NY, & Chicago above pittsburgh. heck, I'd might even put Detroit above them.

    I would put Detroit ahead of them, all 4 of their teams draw well and the Michigan Wolverines football sells out.

    I would think you have to have all 4 major sports to be considered.
    I am so glad that Detroit is being mentioned. I would say it is the greatest sport city. I have friends who don't have major sport teams so close to their homes. I have it all, pro and college. I know other major cities do also, but Michigan fans are not "fair weathered" fans. We are die-hards, that's why the Lions get away with their BS! Its hard to live in the metro Detroit area and not be connected somehow to sports.
    I havr had a relative and a neighbor play pro sports.
    Post edited by Heatherj43 on
    Save room for dessert!
  • 8181 Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
    "Songburs wrote:
    Hockey doesn't really translate too well to TV. Being groomed on it, it's fine on TV for me but it is easily the best sport to watch live.

    Basketball is boring. NBA basketball is worse. Saw the Jordan Bulls play live a few times and I wish I had those hours back.

    Football kicks serious ass on TV. Aside from the atmosphere in the stadium, the actual game is horrible to watch live. The Sunday football atmosphere of tailgating, partying, drinking is all great in my books though. Last game I went to, AP ran for 296 yards, Antonio Cromartie ran a missed field goal back 109 yards for a TD and the game was boring to watch. Paying more than 50 cents for a glass of American beer isn't #1 in my books either though I love the free-pours on liquor.

    Oh ya -- Minneapolis is the best sports town. Somehow.


    not sure where to even start. i will agree hockey is better in person.


    if you didn't enjoy the Jordan bulls then you are a lost cause there.

    football is so much better in person. there is so much action missed on tv. on tv you never see the routes by wr unless there is a replay. you see the wr line up and then dissappear until the ball is thrown. i'm still trying to figure out why they show the camera angle from the endzone from the back of the Offense more often. that would allow you to see soo much more of the action. you could see how the line is lining up, the WR routes and so much more.
    81 is now off the air

    Off_Air.jpg
  • HorosHoros Posts: 4,518
    You can all say what you like but the FACT is according to SN Pitt is the best!
    #FHP
  • satansbedbugssatansbedbugs On Tour Posts: 2,412
    PHILLY IS THE BEST SPORTS TOWN IN THE WORLD !!
    *Marker in the Sand Fanclub * HNIC

    Philly- 2005, 2013, 2016, 2024
    Camden 2000, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2022, 2023
    Philly Spectrum 2009 x4 - We closed that MFER Down Proper
    Baltimore- 2024
    DC- 2006, 2008
    New York- 2008, 2010
    Boston - Fenway 2016 (night 2) , 2024 (night1)
    East Rutherford, New Jersey- 2006
    Chicago - Lollapalooza 2007
    Seattle- Gorge 2005
    EV Solo- DC x2, Baltimore x2 , Newark NJ x2,  Tower Theater x2 

    - Given To Fly
  • SongburstSongburst Posts: 1,195
    81 wrote:

    not sure where to even start. i will agree hockey is better in person.


    if you didn't enjoy the Jordan bulls then you are a lost cause there.

    football is so much better in person. there is so much action missed on tv. on tv you never see the routes by wr unless there is a replay. you see the wr line up and then dissappear until the ball is thrown. i'm still trying to figure out why they show the camera angle from the endzone from the back of the Offense more often. that would allow you to see soo much more of the action. you could see how the line is lining up, the WR routes and so much more.
    Watching WR routes live? Really? What if it's a run? You see it all on replay on TV. Football is much better to watch on TV if you want to pay attention to the game. Not much beats the atmosphere of a live NFL game though -- it's pretty amazing.

    I just never really liked basketball -- it's really boring actually. Was dragged to a Bulls game a couple of times on sporting weekends (once in Minny and once in Chicago) when there were no double-header hockey games -- it was hopeless. Got to see a few 7 foot men dunk though -- pretty amazing stuff. Might go see a Lakers game while I'm working in LA for a week next month because there are no Kings or Ducks games to speak of that week -- maybe it will be better this time - lol.
    1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
  • smg97791 wrote:
    smg97791 wrote:
    Are we talking fan loyalty and atmosphere or success of local teams? If its fan loyalty, fanaticism or whatever then yeah, it might be pittsburgh or boston. But if we're talking local team success then its LA.

    L.A. success begins and ends with the Lakers.

    L.A. Kings- 0 Stanley Cups

    L.A. Dodgers- last WS Championship 1988

    L.A. Football- they never stay

    L.A. SUCKS.

    HAHAHA! There are six major sports in America, the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, NCAA football and basketball. A very strong argument can be made for LA's representative in 3 of the 6 sports to be labeled "best in class," meaning most successful in their respective sport. The Lakers, USC football and UCLA basketball. Boston has one, the Celtics, New York has one, the Yankees, Pittsburgh has one, the Steelers, LA has THREE people! The Red Sox? They're a blip on the map, two world series in 80+ years does not make you "best in class," not even close. Same goes for the Patriots. Their history can't compare with the Steelers or Cowboys. Again, blip on the map. Boston sports fans really need to look at the big picture and realize a few recent championships does not make up for practically a millenia of futility. Here are my nominees for "best in class" for each sport.

    NFL - Steelers, Cowboys, 49ers. A small argument can be made for the Giants and Patriots.

    MLB - Yankees, thats it. In the running for 2nd place? The Cardinals, Dodgers, Giants and A's.

    NBA - Celtics and Lakers. Thats it. Its not even worth talking about who would be 3rd place.

    NHL - Canadians and Red Wings. An argument can be made for the maple leafs, but not a strong one.

    NCAA football - Notre Dame, USC, Alabama and Oklahoma.

    NCAA Basketball - UCLA. Up for 2nd place, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky.

    There you have it people, as you can clearly see, LA has a "best in class" nominee in 3 of the 6 sports. Bitch and moan all you'd like but nothing is gonna change. Yes, LA has the worst fans but we have the best teams. I know this is gonna be difficult for some of you, especially those from New York and Boston. There is one thing you can do, go out and cheer for your team. In a few decades maybe your city will have as many "best in class" nominees as LA. End of argument.


    You do realize that the point of this was to name the best current sports city, right? Your "best in class" argument seems to heavily rely upon championships from DECADES ago. To label what the Red Sox and Patriots have done consistently in the last 5+ years as a "blip" makes no sense when we're discussing this year or even this decade.

    As a Pens fan I'm not arguing with the "title", but it's impossible to rank these things. However I would say that Boston has a much better case than most every city you mentioned given the premise to begin with.
  • I think most here are in agreement with the following cities topping Pittsburgh

    1. Chicago
    2. Boston
    3. Philadelphia

    But not L.A.
  • smg97791smg97791 Posts: 151
    edited October 2009
    You do realize that the point of this was to name the best current sports city, right? Your "best in class" argument seems to heavily rely upon championships from DECADES ago. To label what the Red Sox and Patriots have done consistently in the last 5+ years as a "blip" makes no sense when we're discussing this year or even this decade.

    As a Pens fan I'm not arguing with the "title", but it's impossible to rank these things. However I would say that Boston has a much better case than most every city you mentioned given the premise to begin with.

    Oh, ok. We'll just ignore The Lakers four championships, 6 finals appearances total, USCs two national championships plus national title runner up and UCLA's three consecutive final four appearances. LA is CLEARLY not in the running compared to Bostons six titles (6=6), Pittsburghs 3 titles (6>3) and Philly's one title? Seriously? Yes, all these cities are CLEARLY more successful than LA.

    Oh, and the Angels won a World Series this decade, but we'll leave that one out since they were still the Anaheim Angels then.
    Post edited by smg97791 on
  • dcfaithfuldcfaithful Posts: 13,076
    smg97791 wrote:
    Are we talking fan loyalty and atmosphere or success of local teams? If its fan loyalty, fanaticism or whatever then yeah, it might be pittsburgh or boston. But if we're talking local team success then its LA.

    L.A. success begins and ends with the Lakers.

    L.A. Kings- 0 Stanley Cups

    L.A. Dodgers- last WS Championship 1988

    L.A. Football- they never stay

    L.A. SUCKS.

    You forgot the Clippers! :lol::lol::lol:
    7/2/06 - Denver, CO
    6/12/08 - Tampa, FL
    8/23/09 - Chicago, IL
    9/28/09 - Salt Lake City, UT (11 years too long!!!)
    9/03/11 - East Troy, WI - PJ20 - Night 1
    9/04/11 - East Troy, WI - PJ20 - Night 2
  • smg97791 wrote:
    You do realize that the point of this was to name the best current sports city, right? Your "best in class" argument seems to heavily rely upon championships from DECADES ago. To label what the Red Sox and Patriots have done consistently in the last 5+ years as a "blip" makes no sense when we're discussing this year or even this decade.

    As a Pens fan I'm not arguing with the "title", but it's impossible to rank these things. However I would say that Boston has a much better case than most every city you mentioned given the premise to begin with.

    Oh, ok. We'll just ignore The Lakers four championships, 6 finals appearances total, USCs two national championships plus national title runner up and UCLA's three consecutive final four appearances. LA is CLEARLY not in the running compared to Bostons six titles (6=6), Pittsburghs 3 titles (6>3) and Philly's one title? Seriously? Yes, all these cities are CLEARLY more successful than LA.

    Oh, and the Angels won a World Series this decade, but we'll leave that one out since they were still the Anaheim Angels then.


    Well unfortunately the NFL is king when it comes to things like this (which is rather retarded if you ask me), so while nobody can question the success LA has had in some areas, the lack of an NFL team will instantly eliminate them from anything Sports Illustrated does.
  • Thoughts_ArriveThoughts_Arrive Melbourne, Australia Posts: 15,165
    Melbourne!
    Adelaide 17/11/2009, Melbourne 20/11/2009, Sydney 22/11/2009, Melbourne (Big Day Out Festival) 24/01/2014
  • smg97791 wrote:
    You do realize that the point of this was to name the best current sports city, right? Your "best in class" argument seems to heavily rely upon championships from DECADES ago. To label what the Red Sox and Patriots have done consistently in the last 5+ years as a "blip" makes no sense when we're discussing this year or even this decade.

    As a Pens fan I'm not arguing with the "title", but it's impossible to rank these things. However I would say that Boston has a much better case than most every city you mentioned given the premise to begin with.

    Oh, ok. We'll just ignore The Lakers four championships, 6 finals appearances total, USCs two national championships plus national title runner up and UCLA's three consecutive final four appearances. LA is CLEARLY not in the running compared to Bostons six titles (6=6), Pittsburghs 3 titles (6>3) and Philly's one title? Seriously? Yes, all these cities are CLEARLY more successful than LA.

    Oh, and the Angels won a World Series this decade, but we'll leave that one out since they were still the Anaheim Angels then.

    We are looking at this differently.

    A great sports city isn't defined by titles, but rather great fans.

    Which Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago all have.

    I'm sorry your court side stars at Laker games and baseball fans showing up at the 3rd inning and leaving by the 7th don't cut it.
  • Jearlpam0925Jearlpam0925 Deep South Philly Posts: 17,182
    LA does suck. But this thread made me laugh. Pittsburgh....sha.....rrrrright.

    Armpit of America. :mrgreen:
  • booomm11booomm11 Posts: 865
    I really hate this argument! It gets old!!

    Philly, Boston, NY, Chicago, Detroit, Dallas, Seattle, Pitt, etc. are all great sports cities.

    But Philly is everything sports. Shit, our MLS team is gonna be huge. There is a ton of soccer neighborhoods here.
    being so KiND.. tO LEt me RiDe!!!
  • Heatherj43Heatherj43 Posts: 1,254
    Okay. I just got back from the Detroit Lions and Pittsburg Steelers game here in Detroit. There were more Pittsburg fans than Detroit. All of then drove here from PA. Our stupid fans sold them their tix! How humiliating! We loss too! From this day forward I will never sell my tix! (I hope I keep that promise).

    Oh, and then I had a doc appt. My blood pressure was 148/87. A bit high. Yep, it got to me.
    Save room for dessert!
Sign In or Register to comment.