Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How many baseball town are there...really?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How many baseball town are there...really?

    I don't mean cities which can support baseball. I mean places where interest in the local baseball team is #1 and everything else does not come close. Off the top of my head, I can only think of four....Boston, New York, and St. Louis. At one time, Cincinnati may have been a baseball town, but I don't know if that is the case. Baltimore USED to be a baseball town, but thanks to Peter Angelos fans care more about the Ravens now. I probably should list L.A., but I suspect the Lakers may have a bigger hold on people's hearts. Is this list too short or am I too cynical?

    Eddie Cunningham
    20 20

    Finally---something Nats and Birds fans can agree on!

  • #2
    I think Cincy probably would be a baseball town, if only because the Bengals have been bad for so long (until this year). I'm dead certain that people care more about the Lakers than baseball in LA.

    Maybe Houston? Their new football team is pretty lousy and I dunno if the Rockets are as big as they have been. Or Chicago, with the Sox and Cubs rivalling the Bears or Bulls.

    I'd say football is probably #1 everywhere else, except Toronto (hockey) and Phoenix/Arizona (basketball).
    sigpic
    5.

    Comment


    • #3
      real baseball towns

      St. Louis, New York, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, in no particular order. Oh yeah and Seattle.
      “I see great things in baseball.”
      Walt Whitman

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by baseball junkie
        St. Louis, New York, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, in no particular order. Oh yeah and Seattle.
        Maybe somebody from Atlanta can contradict me, but I hear fans are more interested in the Falcons. Incidentally, before any Braves fans pummel me, let me frankly admit something. Nats fans turned out in phenomenal numbers to RFK last year, and 2.7 million is amazing considering RFK does not have many of the same conveniences that modern ballparks have, many fans couldn't pick up radio broadcasts, and our games weren't telecast on cable TV. Still, we are light-years behind the Redskins, and I think we may be behind the Wizards, Terps, and Hoyas as well...

        Eddie Cunningham
        20 20

        Finally---something Nats and Birds fans can agree on!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by eddiejc1
          I don't mean cities which can support baseball. I mean places where interest in the local baseball team is #1 and everything else does not come close. Off the top of my head, I can only think of four....Boston, New York, and St. Louis. At one time, Cincinnati may have been a baseball town, but I don't know if that is the case. Baltimore USED to be a baseball town, but thanks to Peter Angelos fans care more about the Ravens now. I probably should list L.A., but I suspect the Lakers may have a bigger hold on people's hearts. Is this list too short or am I too cynical?

          Eddie Cunningham
          Boston (and Massachusetts in general) is more of a Red Sox state than a baseball state. The Red Sox are huge, even bigger than the Patriots despite their recent success. As far as just pure love for the sport of baseball, it's not anything that special.

          Comment


          • #6
            If the Patriots are considered in Boston, I would think that Boston is a football town. Off the top of my head I can only think of one place where baseball is big and #1, New York City
            Last edited by [email protected]; 12-11-2005, 06:40 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Los Angeles is THE Baseball town.

              Saying LA is not a baseball town is absurd. The Dodgers have consistantly the learder in attendance since their move to LA in 1958 and the Angels have lead the AL in attendace as early as 1966, and from 1978-87 among the top three in AL attendance. Since 2002, the Angels attendace has only been behind the Yankees and Dodgers. The Dodgers drew 3.6 million last season while the Angels drew 3.4 million, that is 8 million peole attending MLB in one market.

              Before MLB came to town, the city supported two PCL clubs, the Angels and the Stars and USC was the dominate program in colligiate baseball until the mid 1970s. The local news normally starts with the baseball teams first. LA is and always was a baseball town. How many major leagues come from So Cal?
              http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/ex...eline_1961.jpg

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by [email protected]
                If the Patriots are considered in Boston, I would think that Boston is a football town. Off the top of my head I can only think of one place where baseball is big and #1, New York City
                Boston itself is not a Red Sox town nor even a Patriots town- it's long been the Bruins and Celtics at top teams.

                The general "Boston area" is Patriots country, has been since 1995 or so. The Red Sox are the second team and rising but it is still far away from being the top. Even with the Red Sox making it to the ALCS in 2003 and winning the World Series in 2004, they got overshaddowed by the Patriots.
                Best posts ever:
                Originally posted by nymdan
                Too... much... math... head... hurts...
                Originally posted by RuthMayBond
                I understand, I lost all my marbles years ago

                Comment


                • #9
                  L.A. supports winners no matter if it is the Kings , Lakers, Dodgers or whoever

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Jake83
                    L.A. supports winners no matter if it is the Kings , Lakers, Dodgers or whoever
                    I think that's true of pretty much all of the big cities with multiple teams.


                    If I am understanding this correctly a "baseball town" would pretty much have to be a city with another sport in it or close by. If that's true then there's really only a few cities that really qualify as a "baseball town"

                    Cleveland is the first one that comes to mind to me as a "baseball town". Since the old Browns left in 1996 the Indians have been top dog, eclipsing the new Browns and the Cavs...

                    Atanta is next, but with the recent rise of the Falcons and this past year's stumbling start and recent off season moves that may be changing...

                    Milwaukee is another, but only due to the Packers not exactly being a "Milwaukee" team...


                    Alot of the other cities mentioned are more of "sports towns" rather than "baseball towns". The fans love sports and support whatever team is winning like the Lakers or Dodgers in LA, the Giants or the 49ers in San Fransisco, the Yankees or the Jets or the Giants in New York...
                    Best posts ever:
                    Originally posted by nymdan
                    Too... much... math... head... hurts...
                    Originally posted by RuthMayBond
                    I understand, I lost all my marbles years ago

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by baseball junkie
                      St. Louis, New York, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, in no particular order. Oh yeah and Seattle.
                      Philly seems to me to be an Eagles town more than anything.
                      RIP - HGF [1937-2009]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Scoops
                        I think Cincy probably would be a baseball town, if only because the Bengals have been bad for so long (until this year).
                        Cincinnati is a big baseball town. Even after a big win over the Steelers, the talk of the town was Casey. It was a front page story before the trade.
                        Unlike most other team sports, in which teams usually have an equivalent number of players on the field at any given time, in baseball the hitting team is at a numerical disadvantage, with a maximum of 5 players and 2 base coaches on the field at any time, compared to the fielding team's 9 players. For this reason, leaving the dugout to join a fight is generally considered acceptable in that it results in numerical equivalence on the field, and a fairer fight.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Cincinnati is very much a baseball town. Detroit was for a long time, until the last decade or so.
                          Atlanta is in SEC country. It's probably more of a college football town than anything.
                          The one thing that told me Boston is a baseball town is when the Patriots won their first super bowl, the chants were about the Yankees and, ahem, a certain activity they were accused of doing.
                          How exactly are the LA Kings "winners"?
                          Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
                          Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
                          Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
                          Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
                          Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by efin98
                            Boston itself is not a Red Sox town nor even a Patriots town- it's long been the Bruins and Celtics at top teams.

                            The general "Boston area" is Patriots country, has been since 1995 or so. The Red Sox are the second team and rising but it is still far away from being the top. Even with the Red Sox making it to the ALCS in 2003 and winning the World Series in 2004, they got overshaddowed by the Patriots.
                            It has long been the Celtics and Bruins, but definately not recently.

                            As for the Patriots, they were the ones who were talking about being overshaddowed by the Red Sox in 2004. There were more people at the Red Sox championship parade then the any of the Patriots.

                            I think the answer is a town team changes with whos doing well at the time, of course when the Pats were losing they didn't have many fans, like the Celtics and Bruins now, while the Red Sox have ben going pretty strong for over 100 years...
                            "As I grew up, I knew that as a building (Fenway Park) was on the level of Mount Olympus, the Pyramid at Giza, the nation's capitol, the czar's Winter Palace, and the Louvre — except, of course, that is better than all those inconsequential places." - Bart Giamatti

                            You go through The Sporting News of the last 100 years and you will find two things are always true. You never have enough pitchers, and nobody ever made money.
                            -Don Fehr

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It seems that San Francisco may be underrated as a baseball town. I am speaking of right now when the 49ers team is absolutely horrendous and Barry Bonds is playing. I think the interest for a sport usually depends of the success of the city's team in that particular sport, so it changes through time. Of course city's like New York and St.Louis who have known the most successfull teams in the history of the sport are now more carved into the peoples minds and the effect is longer lasting.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X