Talk:List of American and Canadian cities by number of major professional sports franchises/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gotta wonder what rule of thumb might be in operation for the inclusion of state names in
Denver, Jacksonville, St. Louis, Charlotte, Raleigh, Columbus, Portland ...

Denver and St. Louis at least ought to be recognizable by themselves.

I think it would work fine with no state names, and if any disambiguations were needed, all but one of the links (Tampa Bay) go somewhere at present.

In order of the most-to-least ambiguous in the short list above:
Portland (Oregon or Maine at least),
Columbus (Georgia, New Mexico, Ohio),
Jacksonville (Illinois, Florida)

;Bear 17:34, 2004 Mar 29 (UTC)

On this issue, I go by the Associated Press Stylebook, which requires a state for all U.S. cities except: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Honolulu, Houston, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, New York, Oklahoma City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington.

That means it's Tampa, Fla.; Oakland, Calif.; Charlotte, N.C.; Raleigh, N.C.; Columbus, Ohio; Jacksonville, Fla.; etc.

Suggest this page be moved

If this page is only about North American cities, it should be "List of North American cities by number of pro-sports franchises". Otherwise, it should be expanded to include cities all over the world. Shane King 04:57, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

Agree with move --and what's up with listing two lacrosse leagues but only one men's ice hockey league, only two football leagues, etc. Some kind of pro-lacrosse bias here. Rmhermen 17:23, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

I had removed the MLL but someone put it back.

Maybe include it in the table but not the list at the top. And don't make it bold since its not the 'top level', the NLL is. J3wishVulcan

The MLL pays more. 22:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Another league should be added

The Arena Football League should have its teams added to this page. It is a bigger sport than either of the lacrosse leagues for sure. Also, a note by cities that host NASCAR races, PGA events, or Tennis tournaments would be a good addition. zellin 00:37, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

I agree, the AFL is definitely big enough to warrant mention, especially if the lacrosse leagues and MLS are listed --SodiumBenzoate 22:24, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Metro area changes

With the recent metro area changes by the US Census bureau, perhaps it would be best to use the World Gazateer info. That would also help the problem with the fact that a metro area in the US covers a far larger area than a Canadian metro area does based on different definitions. Also, the censi were taken on different dates... -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

New York has 3 NHL teams? DJ Clayworth 19:29, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Uh yeah- the Isles, Rangers and Devils. -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:21, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

USHL and SPHL

The United States Hockey League is an amatuer junior league and any of its teams should be removed from this list of *Professional* franchises. I see Chicago Steel, Indiana Ice, and Green Bay Gamblers. On a related note, The Florida Seals (Orlando metro) and Jacksonville Barracudas (article needs updating) of the Southern Professional Hockey League are not listed. ccwaters 12:38, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

By all means, make any corrections that are necessary Acsenray 17:54, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

ABA, CBA, & USBL

Are those three basketball leagues professional? If so, perhaps their teams could be included in the "Names of Pro Sports Teams" section of the article ...Amchow78 00:06, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Too many sports

How about taking out soccer and lacrosse? Just because they call themselves major, it doesn't mean they are. Golfcam 15:22, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

The table is definitely on the verge of getting out of hand and will only get worse. An argument can be made that listing every sport at every level is too much. Uvaduck 21:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
The MLS and NLL are important enough to warrant inclusion on this list. For example, the Toronto Rock regular attracts 15,000 to its games and has regularly televised games. If it's beginning to look messy, emphasizes the details in the table instead. --Madchester 18:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
The Toronto Rock may attract 15,000, but what about Major League Baseball teams like the Florida Marlins who attract only fans from the visiting team. And NHL attendance is way down ever since the lockout. Attendance should not be used to determine a major sport. Perhaps a better way of determining it would be has anyone not on the East Coast ever heard of Lacrosse being anything other than an unpopular high school sport. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.21.195.101 (talk) 05:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
Attendance from individual teams can be misleading. This list needs to be maintained by considering average and total attendances from across the league. Both the MLS and NLL have high enough attendances to warrant inclusion on this list, however the MLL and possibly WNBA don't attract enough attention to be really classified as "major". --Torlek 02:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

San Francisco

San Francisco really includes the entire San Francisco Bay Area, and if it did it would be 5th on the metropolatin area size table. If no one objects I will change it. --Yarnalgo 03:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

No one responded so I did it. --Yarnalgo 03:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

The MLL

The MLL shouldn't be included as the top level of lacrosse. Only 36 games are played, between all of the teams and attendance is only around 3,000 for those games. Keep it on the table but there's no way in hell it should be in bold or on the list at the top of the page. --J3wishVulcan 16:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

You have a point but "no way in hell" why the hate? also then no way in the world should the NLL or MLS should be included Smith03 20:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

This list is so muddled, it's absolutely ridiculous

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Is there anyone out there who really wants to know how many teams a city has in every conceivable pro sports league, including Major League Lacrosse, the Canadian Football League, and the Women's National Basketball Association? This page has no practical use. People are using this for "metro boosterism", inflating their city's figure by including marginal leagues the general public by and large does not care about.

The table below is even worse. Listing minor league franchises? I see people are taking to listing every franchise in a given metro area. Under New York, someone's added the Cyclones and the SI Yanks, but that woefully falls short. Does anyone know how many minor league baseball teams there are in and around New York? Twelve! See list of New York metropolitan area sports teams. Are you suggesting we include them all in the table? They're all in the Metro area, as defined by the census. I'm not going to add them myself because fighting clutter with clutter is a losing battle.

I say we restrict our discussion--both in the list and the table--to the major profressional sports leagues: MLB, the NBA, the NFL, and the NHL. Everything else is clutter and debilitates any efficacy this page could hope to have. Let's hear some opinions on this. StarryEyes 23:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

As big of a lacrosse fan as I am, I agree -- this page should list just the top 4, especially considering the second paragraph at the top of the page; players in the NLL and MLL definitely do have jobs outside the sport, and I suspect the same thing about MLS and WNBA. However, I don't think that's true about the CFL, and I have no idea about AFL. Gperrow 15:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Some of the CFL players have other jobs, but the vas majority don't. Even the ones who do are only part-time.--J3wishVulcan 19:48, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Am I missing something?

I put area next to Dallas because the Rangers play in Arlington and Cowboys in Irving. I put area next to Miami because Dolphins and Marlins are in Miami Gardens and Panthers are in Sunrise yet that get removed but Phoenix area stays probably because Coyotes and Cardinals play in Glendale . What is the difference between Phx and Dallas/Miami Smith03 20:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

North America?

Isn't Mexico City in North America? They have 3 teams in Primera División de México which is a bigger professional league than several covered in this article, not to mention a professional baseball team as well. There's nothing logical about including Winnipeg and Ottawa, but excluding Mexico City and Guadalajara. --dm (talk) 05:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a difference. Ottawa and Winnipeg are developped cities in a developped country with major sports teams. The pro sports in Mexico are a mess. The players are payed minimal salaries and play in stadiums that are outdated and falling apart.--J3wishVulcan 19:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Are you saying that Frank Clair Stadium at Lansdowne Park (capactiy ~30,000), built in 1908, is state of the art while Estadio Azteca (capacity >110,000), built in 1966 and renovated in 1986, which hosted a World Cup final is "outdated and falling apart"? Are you saying that the payroll of the Winnipeg Blue Bombers is greater than that of Chivas de Guadalajara? If so, then you don't know what you're talking about. If the WNBA, CFL, & NLL are major leagues then so is the Primera División de México. The title of the article isn't List of developed North American cities by number of pro-sports franchises so the economy shouldn't be a factor. --dm (talk) 03:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I see your point. But unfortunately, for reasons unknown, when there is talk about 'North American' sports, it is usually the US and Canada. I think this might have something to do with many US leagues also having teams in Canada and not Mexico. It might also have to do with many considering Mexico a part of Central America, not North. If Mexico were to be added then arguments could be made for Central America and the whole Carribbean to be added as well. Tough one.--J3wishVulcan 17:18, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it's that tough. You have two options: (1) Rename the article "List of American cities by number of pro-sports franchises" and eliminate the Canadian cities or (2) Include cities in Mexico, Central America, & the Caribbean that have professional sports teams. I don't have a preference but option #1 would probably be unpopular. For option #2 to work, someone has to define "pro-sports franchise" in an objective way, something that this article needs to do anyway. The current definition should exclude both lacrosse leagues (most of those players have day jobs) and possibly MLS and Arena Football as well. Mexican soccer (and possibly baseball) on the other hand generally pays better than all of those. dm (talk) 06:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
If you want to rename it to "List of American cities by number of pro-sports franchises" then you definitly have to add Mexico, along with all of Central America and South America. Thats right, all of those countries are in the Americas. What you want is "List of United States cities by number of pro-sports franchises". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.21.195.101 (talk) 05:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
If you want to add Central America, be my guest. I don't think you need to remove leagues, just don't include them in the list of "top notch" leagues at the top, and don't bold them in the table. I don't think MLS needs to be unbolded, but definately Arena Football and the MLL for sure.--J3wishVulcan 22:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
dm is correct that ignoring FMF first division clubs is an oversight and I have corrected it. However would any other leagues in Mexico really qualify as "major"? --Torlek 06:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The inclusion of Mexican soccer makes the article confusing at best and useless at worst as a collection of coherent data because, as mentioned above, U.S. and Canada are generally interlocked from a top-level professional sports perspective while Mexico is not, the occasional indoor soccer team notwithstanding. If Monterrey or Mexico City get an MLB team, or the FMF grants a first-division team to LA, San Diego, Houston or Dallas, then we need to reconsider. Until then, change the article's name to U.S. and Canadian cities if necessary ("North American" is commonly used in Canada to refer to US/CA only, but can be confusing elsewhere), but move/junk the Mexican information. This article is in desperate need of a complete rewrite anyway, and I'm halfway tempted to start on it in my userspace. VT hawkeyetalk to me 21:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hamilton

Why are the Hamilton teams listed under Toronto? According to the Greater Toronto Area article, Hamilton is not part of the GTA. --FrankCostanza 13:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I would think Hamilton has an identity of its own, just like Rochester and Buffalo. ccwaters 14:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

For the purpose of this article and for the sake of consistency, the US definition of metropolitan area is used, which covers a considerably larger area. Its a little like Oakland and San Francisco.--J3wishVulcan 19:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly. Hamilton & Toronto are about 50 miles apart. Oakland & San Francisco are only separated by a ½ mile of water. A better comparison is Washington, DC & Baltimore (same metro area in this article) which are about 40 miles apart, still closer than Hamilton & Toronto. --dm (talk) 03:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Not significantly. And there is no demographic speration between the 2 cities, if you know what I mean. The area between Toronto and Hamilton is very densely populated, and hence there is no real seperation. That is what the US definition is founded upon: 'population', not physical area.--J3wishVulcan 17:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I think we should seperate Washington D.C. to Baltimore

Officially they are one consolidated metropolitan area according to the Census Bureau, However they have different Designated Market Area. The DMA ultimately determines which sports teams are being followed or watched by the people in a particulat place. Any comments?

I agree. The cities are in seperate states and most of the professional leagues consider them to be seperate markets, as there are 2 teams in most leagues. E.g. Redskins and Ravens, Nationals and Orioles.--J3wishVulcan 16:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't have a strong opinion as to whether the two cities should be separated but I will note that both MLB and the NFL consider them a single market, at least in some respects. Orioles owner Peter Angelos won major concessions for allowing the Nationals into his "territory". And Baltimore is within the Washington Redskins' NFL broadcast blackout territory (and vice versa). Both football teams regularly sell out their home games so this is largely a formality. --dm (talk) 05:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreement between upper list and lower table

In the upper half it says that Boston has 6 professional sports teams (1 each of NHL, MLB, NFL, NBA, MLS, and MLL). Yet in the lower list it says Boston has 5 major league clubs, but then lists 6 bolded (aka major league) teams in the various columns. In the upper half Detroit is listed with 5 pro teams. But in the lower half there are 6 bolded teams, though the number in this table is still 5. One of those Detroit teams, the Detroit Ignition, is in the MISL. Other MISL teams such as the Chicago Storm and Baltimore Blast are not bolded. On top, Philly is listed as having 7 pro teams, and on bottom it is listed as 6, even though all 7 teams appear in bold.

These are only a few examples that I saw right away, I'm sure there are others. I don't know what teams should or should not qualify for these lists, but whatever the definition it needs to be consistent at least within the same page. There also needs to be more consistent usage of "major league team" and "professional team". These terms seem to be used interchangeably in this article. AAA baseball teams are professional teams, but are not in a major league.

I have performed a cleanup on this. I hope I got everything but it is somewhat late here. --Torlek 06:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Minor League teams on bottom list

The additon of Minor League Baseball Teams to the bottom list needs some serious cleaning. Chicago has only the Kane County Cougars (who play just outside of the suburbs) listed, it doesn't include the Shaumburg Flyers who actually play in the suburbs. Its also missing 5 other teams in the Chicagoland area. I would argue rather than going crazy and adding every Minor League team (and a few 100 more cities), there should be no more Minor League teams on the lists.

I have removed minor teams from the list due to the obvious fact that there are too many to combine into this list. If anyone wants a list thereof, I'd suggest a seperate page for the minors. --Torlek 06:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Limited Scope?

How can the article be accuse of limited scope when it's not supposed to deal with any where besides Canada and the US? Take a look at Major North American professional sports leagues as see that the concept of major league sports is what is being measured, and that only applies to the US and Canada (not Mexico). Kevlar67 01:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

By almost any objective measure, the Primera División de México is a major league. The second section of the article explicitly excludes Mexican cities for no apparent reason. That's why the article is of limited scope. If the article was limited to the big 4 leagues, I'd agree with you. But to include MLS, NLL, AFL, & CFL, but not Mexican soccer makes no sense. --dm (talk) 12:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite in my userspace: request for comment.

I've done a complete rewrite of this article, including only the Big 4 and providing justification both for the inclusion of NHL and exclusion of CFL, MLS and lacrosse leagues, at User:VT hawkeye/List of North American cities by number of pro-sports franchises.

I'd appreciate comment here from other interested editors on whether this would be an acceptable replacement -- trying to avoid a WP:BRD cycle here. In conjunction with the replacement, I'd want to move this article to a more accurate title, substituting "U.S. and Canadian" for "North American"; as I mentioned above, the terms are equivalent in a Canadian context, but not internationally, and the inclusion of Mexico makes the article a collection of incoherent data since none of the Big 4/5 have teams in Mexico, nor does the FMF have any clubs in the USA or Canada. VT hawkeyetalk to me 18:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, for lack of any comment, I've gone ahead with the replace-and-move. Edit away, folks. VT hawkeyetalk to me 03:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I saw it too late, but I agree totally. If someone wants to add an article for Canadian cities by number of sports teams and include the CFL, fine, I'd help. If someone want to create a list of Mexican cities by the number of futbol team, fine that's great too. Kevlar67 04:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

What about this?

Let me know. --necronudist 08:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I like the concept. I'd leave off the lacrosse leagues, though; players in the NLL and MLL aren't full-time athletes, as most if not all have other jobs in the off-season. I'd make a couple of minor style changes, too: provide some distinction between NFL and CFL teams (either italicize CFL teams or move them to a separate column), and use common broadcast scorebox abbreviations even if they're only unique within leagues rather than trying to create abbreviations that hint at the nicknames. (i.e. retain the CHC/CWS differentiation in baseball, but it's OK for the rest of Chicago's teams to be listed as CHI). Working on my variant at User:VT hawkeye/NN's team table with italicized CFL teams; thoughts? VT hawkeyetalk to me 21:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Good! For me it's ok! --necronudist 08:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Alright, new table is subbed in. VT hawkeyetalk to me 21:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

MLS should be in the Big Five not the Big Four

The average attendance of the NHL is 16,961 while the MLS is 15,504. Thus, the attendance hardly varies by only about 2,000. Also there is a double franchise in the MLS at Los Angeles which shows great popularity in the Second City. This shows that it should be concidered to be involved in the ranking.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mr.wang (talk • contribs) 20:02, 25 June 2007.

16,961 in indoor arenas averaging less than 20K capacity, multiplied by 41 home games, is rather more of a statement than 15,504 * 15 home games, with much lower ticket prices, in stadiums that hold anywhere from 25K to well over 50K. MLS might be bigger than the NHL in LA. That leaves the rest of North America to discuss. VT hawkeyetalk to me 00:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, in Toronto they almost sell out in every home game. Mentioned before, the pay for players is high especially for David Beckham which is well over $50 million each year for five years for a some of over $250 million.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mr.wang (talk • contribs) 04:06, 26 June 2007.
Do you really want to argue that soccer is more popular than hockey in Toronto? Come on. Also, please sign your comments by typing ~~~~ at the end of each one, which will get autoexpanded into your name and date/time. This is common courtesy on Talk pages. VT hawkeyetalk to me 13:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, Toronto FC may sell out all their games, but the Leafs do as well- and have done so for decades. -- Earl Andrew - talk 18:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
If I may add, outdoor sports, such as soccer always have larger attendance, since the stadiums are bigger. --Howard the Duck 09:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Metropolitan areas

Teams are listed by base cities, not by city names, so Miami should be named as South Florida metropolitan area like in the original version 'cause actually Florida Panthers are based on Ft.Lauderdale. And there are plenty of similar cases (I've just corrected San Francisco who comprised Oakland and San Jose that are different cities of the same Area, the Bay Area), so I think the list should be revisited. --necronudist 14:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Should We Seperate Baltimore to Washington?

It has been brought up before. Both have different Markets, why are they being combined here? Are they the only places with different markets that is merged here? Any suggestions?71.107.252.14 (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

SUGGESTION: REPLACE THE METRO RANKING TO MEDIA MARKET RANKING

It would be LOT less confusing because Media Market uses ONE definition while the METROPOLITAN RANKING uses different definitions (MSA, CSA, etc) and they are all mixed in one list. Plus, Media Market is what the Sports Franchises really follows in terms of Marketing etc.71.104.94.68 (talk) 06:16, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Population rankings are incorrect

For instance the rank for Baltimore/Washington, DC only takes into account the Washington metro, the entire area is actually fourth not eighth. Similarly the SF Bay ranking excludes San Jose's metro which would push it to sixth in rank. You need to use Table_of_United_States_Combined_Statistical_Areas when applicable and United_States_metropolitan_areas when the ranking represents a single metro area.Timpcrk87 (talk) 20:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I would propose using either the media market rankings or the primary census statistical areas (which includes CSAs, as well as MSAs not a part of CSAs). -- χγʒ͡ʒγʋᾳ (talk) 22:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Pop'n ranking

I've combined statistics from the top US metropolitan centres and the top Canadian metropolitan centres for the ranking, so there's not one specific Wiki page to reference those numbers (unless I've missed it). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.236.93.210 (talk) 19:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC) - that was me on a different comp. Themodelcitizen (talk)

It would be interesting to see the full population list (I noticed it was Las Vegas between Columbus and Milwakee) even though they have 0 teams in the Big 6. It might be easier to see expansion possibilities. Being a soccer fan I'd like to see the USL-1 markets only because some of them will move to the MLS (ie Seattle and talks about Vancouver and Montreal) Coppercanuck (talk) 01:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

WNBA

What about the Professional Woman's Basketball team cities? 68.110.255.121 (talk) 21:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Done and done. Montville looks really weird at the bottom; when I have time I'll figure out it's pop'n rank relative to the other North American cities. Whether or not the WNBA could factor in as part of a "Big Seven" instead of a "Big Six" is up for debate.Themodelcitizen (talk)
    • Sorry, but I've gotta revert this. The NBA owns the WNBA and props it up financially; only Connecticut and Chicago operate independently of local NBA franchises. The attendances and revenues aren't anywhere close to those of the other six leagues under discussion. Frankly, there's a better case for pulling MLS than adding the WNBA. VT hawkeyetalk to me 02:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Surely the fact that the NBA props it up means that it should be included as a sort of add-on/italicized sidenote to the NBA stats? Themodelcitizen (talk) 07:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


NBA

The Seattle NBA team has been removed from the list (decided by the city and owners July 3, 2008) but Oklahoma City hasn't been added.

I've added it. Brady4mvp (Talk to me) 19:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

MLS

Major League Soccer teams are not included in the list for multiple reasons as described in the article, chiefly that it is simply not commonly accepted as on the same level as the leagues for baseball, football, basketball and hockey in the USA or Canada: hence the term Big Four and not Big Five.

Of the criteria listed in Major North American professional sports leagues, MLS cannot meet dominance of its respective sport, ownership restrictions, or high salaries, and has a problematic stand on franchise stability as well (in 12 seasons, two folded franchises in Florida and three name changes not even counting KC Wiz(ards)). If you can build a factual case for MLS's equal standing to the NHL to counter these problems, without restricting your comparison to just popularity in MLS cities in the U.S. Sun Belt, then make it here and get consensus before you go unilaterally adding. Tolerating that sort of thing is what made this article's predecessor such a bloody mess, and it's time that stop. VT hawkeyetalk to me 21:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Plus they could be dead in 5 years.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.237.54.62 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 15 May 2007.

MLS is included in the article Major North American professional sports teams. Wjmummert (KA-BOOOOM!!!!) 03:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge

I am proposing to merge U.S. cities with teams from four major sports into this article since they cover essentially the same topic. Comments? - Mitico (talk) 19:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


Oppose This article is just a list, while the other contains a good deal of analysis and discussion, making it far more substansial than just a list. oknazevad (talk) 20:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Wheres the AFL???

Come now, the AFL is much bigger than the NHL or the LX League. Look at the TV contracts, look at the ratings, look at the video games for Pity's sake!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.103 (talk • contribs) 10:59, 2 July 2007

Look at the attendance, look at the salaries, look at the revenues, look at the franchise stability, look at the standing at the top level of the sport. Because ESPN bought a share of the Arena Football League and has suddenly started promoting it as a major league sporting event does not make it so. VT hawkeyetalk to me 01:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Wow, imagine if we'd followed this IP user's advice back in 2007. Still think the defunct AFL is bigger than the NHL? Powers T 18:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Region columne in table

Options Canada, Western United States, Midwestern United States, Northeastern United States and Southern United States, as census definition.--Feroang (talk) 05:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

List countries by number of American and Canadian major professional sports franchises

table started by --Feroang (talk) 02:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Country Country2 Pop.
rank 		Population B4 B6 NFL MLB NBA NHL MLS CFL
United States United States2 1 312,032,000 113
32+29+29+23 		129
113+16 		Arizona Cardinals

Baltimore Ravens
Buffalo Bills
Carolina Panthers
Chicago Bears
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Cleveland Rams
Dallas Cowboys
Denver Broncos
Detroit Lions
Green Bay Packers
Houston Texans
Indianapolis Colts
Jacksonville Jaguars
Kansas City Chiefs
Miami Dolphins
Minnesota Vikings
New England Patriots
New Orleans Saints
New York Giants
New York Jets
Oakland Raiders
Philadelphia Eagles
Pittsburgh Steelers
San Diego Chargers
San Francisco 49ers
Seattle Seahawks
St. Louis Rams
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Tennessee Titans
Washington Redskins

Yankees
Mets 		Knicks
Nets 		Rangers
Islanders
Devils 		Red Bulls —
Canada Canada 2 34,557,000 9
1+1+7 		19
9+2+8 		— ? ? ? ?
? 		?
Totals — — — 122 148 32 30 30 30 18 8

CFL only cities

I believe that CFL only cities should at least get a mention in the introduction, as many in Canada regard the CFL as a pro league and the only pure Canadian pro league left. I have left the derogatory sentence about CFL players being a notch below the NFL debite my belief that that is false (many former NFL players still in their prime try out of the CFL and don't make it or they play poorly, such as Ricky Williams), but pairing the CFL up with the NFLE development league is just flat out wrong, and so I removed it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.237.54.62 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 8 June 2007.

Sorry, being "the only pure Canadian pro league left" doesn't put them on equal footing with the NFL. I'd say they're probably marginally better than NFLE in terms of quality of play, but that's pure POV assertion on my part, and to state that they're on an equal footing in terms of being one step away from the NFL is just fact, not derogatory: for 90% of the skill players, it's a stepping-stone league. (To use a smoked-out Ricky Williams to claim that an NFL player in his prime couldn't make a CFL team is just foolish.) Now, does NFLE have the status in its home territory that the CFL does (attendance, history, player continuity, media coverage, merchandise, general public recognition)? No way, and that's where the CFL does have a better claim. You can make a good career as a CFLer, but that just doesn't happen in NFLE. VT hawkeyetalk to me 01:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Mentioning the CFL team in Ottawa now will save an editors trouble when they have to write it in later IMO Kanga-Kucha

I believe that the CFL should be included in ranking because the CFL is popular in Canada as in the NFL, not NFLE, is only popular in the U.S.

Stated in the article before, it says that the CFL is strictly Canadian, so why is the NFL in there because it is strictly American.Gordomono 21:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Because the NFL is not definitionally American, and because it is the dominant league for gridiron football not just in North America, but the world. The CFL has some characteristics of a major league within Canada only, but fails in others. The NFL has all those characteristics, period. The only thing U.S.-limited about the NFL is the geographic distribution of teams. VT hawkeyetalk to me 21:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Just as the NFL is the dominant league for American Football, the CFL is the dominant league for Canadian football, not just in Noth America, but the world. They are different sports, played by different rules. 69.181.237.64 (talk) 02:29, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

population of Canadian cities

metro cities in the US have a lot more area than they do in Canada. the greater horseshoe area around Toronto has around the same area as metro Chicago and has 8-9 million people. metro Denver is about 22 thousand squared km's in area metro Chicago is about 30 thousand squared km's in area metro Seattle is about 21 thousand squared km's in area metro Houston is about 26 thousand squared km's in area

cities in Canada metro Toronto is about 7 thousand squared km's in area metro Montreal is about 4 thousand squared km's in area metro Vancouver is about 3 thousand squared km's in area

in these metro areas Chicago has 9.5-9.8 million people Toronto has about 6 million people Vancouver has about 3 million people Montreal has 3.6-4 million people Seattle has over 4 million people

but Toronto has about 12 million people living within a couple hundred miles of the city. So it could cover a bigger area like Chicago and have the same number of people almost all of British Columbia's 4-5 million people living around Vancouver so Vancouver could make its area the size as Seattle and have the same population. Montreal could have the same population as Sydney, Australia if it had the same area size. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.89.250.83 (talk) 07:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

  • For Toronto at least, it would probably make more sense to use Statistics Canada Greater Golden Horseshoe definition rather than the CMA. Canadian CMAs generally aren't as extensive as American ones - such as the one that combines Washington and Baltimore. This would combine Hamilton and Toronto (and Oshawa, etc.) and had a 2006 population of 6.1 million. Nfitz (talk) 19:28, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Mistakes in populations

The number of mistakes in the populations here are unexplainable. It makes no sense. For one, it states that they go by their MSA, but many of the cities in the table are using their CSA...like da fuq? As if 40,000km of land in a CSA is comparable to 7000km in a Canadian CMA...TheCanadianGuy123 (talk) 12:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

B4 (& B6) column(s)

I think the count of teams is not that important. For example: Philadelphia has 4 teams, one in each league; while Los Angeles has 6 teams, but only in 3 leagues. I'd rank the cities by the league count, i.e. in how many leagues they have a team. Though only top 5 cities have that "problem". 85.217.32.182 (talk) 09:58, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I had a very similar thought. Perhaps both could be included, though? At the risk of an ever-wider table... 84.203.36.99 (talk) 04:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Populations in list

An anon IP (who just so happens to be editing from the government of Canada) keeps reverting so I'll start a discussion here. If we want to try to compare population figures across international boundaries, we need to do so in a consistent way, or else it's entirely meaningless. We might as well compare US State populations versus Canadian city populations.

There are two viable options to do this as far as I can see:

  1. Use metropolitan areas as measured by the national statistics organization (ie Core Based Statistical Areas (US) and Census Metropolitan Areas (CA))
  2. Use urban areas as measured by a third party (ie [1])

Option 1 is a reasonable approach, but it relies on the definitions of a metro area being the same in the two countries. For urban areas, on the other hand, we have a third party source which does the comparison for us, which is much preferable IMHO.

The main objection from the Government of Canada IP seems to be that Hamiltonians don't like being considered part of Toronto ("absolutely no one in Hamilton considers their team a "Toronto" or "GTA" team""), but of course what Hamiltonians or their elected representatives think really isn't relevant: what matters is what sources say. I'm sure people from San Jose and their elected officials prefer not to think of themselves as part of San Francisco, but this isn't a list of sports teams by self-identified region, so we shouldn't let civic pride get in the way of a sensible and verifiable comparison. Also, the revision that the IP reverted linked to Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area and not Greater Toronto Area. Other complains have been "Hamilton is not considered part of Toronto's "urban area"", however from Census metropolitan areas: "Statistics Canada has described the Greater Golden Horseshoe as the country's largest urban area."[1] The argument that "Hamilton is not part of the GTA or Toronto CMA. Hamilton is its own CMA." misses the point since the article is sorted by urban areas not CMAs. Urban areas can span more than one CMA. "Canada and US define demographics differently" - this is the entire point, which is why it's better to rely on third party data to do a legitimate comparison for us, rather than comparing demographics computed differently in an entirely meaningless way as the Government of Canada IP keeps attempting to do.

Do others prefer option 1 or 2? TDL (talk) 08:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Please do not confuse the Golden Horseshoe (a region of the province) with an urban area or metropolitan area. They are very different. Statistics Canada does not say Toronto-Hamilton is a single urban area. When the link (from 12 years ago) says "this heavily urban area" it's speaking about about the region, of which Ontario has six. The greater golden horseshoe has three to five separate urban areas with the region depending on inclusion area. (Toronto, Hamilton, Niagara, Kitchener-Waterloo, Guelph) There is no such urban area or metropolitan area for Toronto-Hamilton. It is Toronto AND Hamilton. Two different urban areas, two different metropolitan areas. I hope this clears up any confusion. Saboteurest (talk) 02:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Blocked sock.
Thanks, but I'm not confusing anything. I'm merely quoting WP:reliable sources, such as Statistics Canada, on the matter. Not sure where you are seeing "this heavily urban area". The exact quote is "In 2006, nearly half of all Canadians, 13.9 million people, were living in the country's three largest urban areas: the Montréal census metropolitan area, the Vancouver census metropolitan area, and the Greater Golden Horseshoe in southern Ontario." Clearly it is explicitly referring to the GGH as an urban area, analogous to the Montreal and Vancouver metro areas.
There are plenty of other sources to support this. Take for example this report from the government of Ontario. They even helpfully include a map of the boundaries of the Greater Golden Horseshoe urban area, which includes Hamilton.
Here are some more secondary than support the point of the sources above:
"Governing Metropolitan Regions in the 21st Century". Routledge. The five CMAs of Toronto, Oshawa, Hamilton, Kitchener, and St. Catharines-Niagara are contiguous, forming a continuous built-up urban area
"Demographia World Urban Areas – 12th Annual Edition" (PDF). Demographia. April 2016. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-12-27. Retrieved 2016-04-25. Toronto, Hamilton and Oshawa metropolitan areas are also considered a single labor market and are combined into a single combined urban area
Do you have any RS to support your opinion, which contradicts all of these sources? TDL (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
You're clearly not understanding the references or the subject matter. You're comparing regional labour markets to urban areas. Just because multiple urban areas are combined into a single combined urban area for Statistic Canada purposes does not make it a single urban area. One of your "references" claims that "Toronto, Oshawa, Hamilton, Kitchener, and St. Catharines-Niagara are contiguous, forming a continuous built-up urban area" NOT a single urban area. If this ideology was used the entire northeast US corridor would be a single urban area.It's like saying the urban area of Southern California. That includes many different cities and urban areas. Also the Greater Golden Horseshoe is not even a region. It's a term made up by the province to describe a massive area which includes the golden Horseshoe, and parts of Central and Southwestern Ontario. It's not a single urban area but a series of urban areas. Do you actually think Niagara is in the Toronto urban area? There is an hour of farm fields between. I think you're getting hung up on the term "urban area". This terms was added this week. I've reverted the edit as it's clearly causing some editors confusion. Saboteurest (talk) 07:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Blocked sock.
The problem here isn't my understanding of the sources/subject matter. The problem is that you have conducted your own WP:original research, been unable to support it with WP:reliable sources, and then drawn conclusions that contradict what WP:reliable sources say on the matter. Now you're complaining that the list needs to be changed because it's not WP:TRUE.
You now seem to concede that they are "a single combined urban area for Statistic Canada purposes", but still claim that it is not a "single urban area", without explaining why. Statistic's Canada is a subject matter expert on defining statistical areas. If you think they are wrong, or you think that there is some other competing definition of what a "urban area" is, you need authoritative sources to support that. Saying you don't like the Statistics Canada results because your opinions are better is not sufficient. RS evidence is mandatory.
I'm not going to get into a debate with you in what cases metro areas should be merged into urban areas, that's why we have sources to do that for us. If you dislike the current sources, find better ones.
In terms of your comment: "This terms was added this week." - No. It's been there for four years, and you are the first person I recall being confused by it.
I'm going to go ahead and restore the WP:consensus version per WP:BRD, as this is the only version of the list that is WP:verifiable. If you can find a source which ranks the cities in terms of Metropolitan area populations, I'd be happy to discuss switching the list to using that, but we can't use unverified content. Please do discuss such changes on the talk page first though, rather than attempting to WP:edit war content into the article without consensus. TDL (talk) 03:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
The consensus is of your own making. They're not a single urban area for anyone other than statscan. An anon has split the region up again and unless you can provide a source associated with sports that considers it an urban area, we should leave it separated. For one, MLSE doesn't have any teams in the golden horseshoe, but they do in Metro Toronto. And for the record, list of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada has Toronto and Hamilton separated. You can see the references to the metropolitan areas in that article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Walter, you've been here long enough to understand how consensus works. See WP:EDITCONSENSUS for more details. The burden is on those who wish to change the articleu to demonstrate a consensus for the change. If you cannot, then the previous version is restored.
Can you provide any sources which refute statscan? Note that urban area's and metropolitan areas are different concepts. TDL (talk)

References

  1. ^ "2006 Census: Portrait of the Canadian Population in 2006: Subprovincial population dynamics". Statistics Canada. Retrieved 2014-07-11. {{cite web}}: line feed character in |title= at position 5 (help)
Note that your weak-ass "Subprovincial population" is not an actual division other than to break down a province at some level. Metropolitan areas is the correct measure, so statscan refutes stanscan. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm https://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/z01/cs0007-eng.htm http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/as-sa/fogs-spg/Facts-cma-eng.cfm?LANG=Eng&GK=CMA&GC=535. Here TO and steel town are distinct. Now, can you provide a single source associated with sports that considers them a coherent area? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

I see that @Saboteurest: restored "metropolitan areas" again, which is as it should be. Danlaycock, please seek consensus before changing to "urban area". Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:42, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

And I see that Saboteurest has been blocked indefinitely as a sock.
I will go ahead and restore the status quo, long term consensus version of this article based on "urban areas" as it has existed for four years per WP:BRD. If you and a sock would like to change the article, then please establish a consensus for such change on the talk page. See WP:DR for the various dispute resolution options that you can follow. Edit warring to force in dubious changes against consensus into the article is not one of them.
Note that I'm not fundamentally opposed to metropolitan areas, provided you can source them. But saying thinks like "Metropolitan areas is the correct measure" and urban areas are "weak-ass", without any sources, simple because you don't like "urban areas" is not a viable approach. TDL (talk) 02:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
And I have restored metroploitain areas as that's the term used elsewhere on Wikipedia. I'm not sure where the other consensus came from, but I'd be happy to see the discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Walter, you've been here for nearly 13 years. I shouldn't have to explain to you how WP:CONSENSUS is established. But if you are still unsure, I'd recommend you read WP:EDITCONSENSUS. In summary, if you want to change the article from its long term stable version, you need to demonstrate a consensus for change. If a change is disputed (which it has clearly been), you must establish a consensus for the change. You and a sockpuppet attempting to edit war a change in without consensus is not a consensus. Where is the discussion that supports your claim that there is a consensus for change? TDL (talk) 01:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
It's the weakest form of consensus, and it's also the wrong one as no one has even really edited here. Shall we actually achieve consensus through discussion? Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
By all means yes. Why do you think we should change the long term stable consensus version? What sources support your changes? TDL (talk) 01:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
First, stop calling it the "long term stable consensus version" when no one has bothered to even edit this, and correct grammar would be "long-term".
Second, unless I'm missing something, "this is a list of metropolitan areas in the United States and Canada", not "urban areas". You decided to ignore the subject and make an internal change four years ago, based on a flawed assumption that Canada did not have metropolitan areas, when in fact, as I have shown above, it does. In fact, geographic areas is anomalous and used in only one Stats Can survey. Also, you have failed to provide any sports-based source that supports your claim. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Can we forego the pettiness over a missing hyphen please? I am going to bite my tongue rather than school everyone about the proper abbreviation of Statistics Canada.

I am late to this discussion but am going to walk through the above discussion and history of the article to better understand what is going on here, and provide my two cents. Hwy43 (talk) 03:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Just a note that Saboteurest has been blocked indefinitely as a sock of the community-banned UrbanNerd. Perhaps some of the long-term watchers of similar pages recall UrbanNerd. If IPs or newly registered users suddenly appear to make edits to the article or talk page similar to those of Saboteurest, please consider listing the IPs or users at User:UrbanNerd. Hwy43 (talk) 04:54, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I thought he thrived on that when you comment on how long I've been an editor, etc. Another voice would be appreciated. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • As much of a disruptive bully that the UrbanNerd sockmaster is, he and Walter are in the right. Absolutely too much weight has been given on the StatCan 2006 census analytical report's misuse of "urban area" to describe the GGH. It explicitly states the GGH is "... the most heavily urbanized region in Canada." and "... contains nine of the country's 33 census metropolitan areas and many census agglomerations." It then refers to it as a "major urban area" when it should be "major urban region". The Montreal and Vancouver CMAs are not analogous to a series of consolidated census divisions in Ontario with numerous CMAs and CAs within. The Toronto and Hamilton CMAs are analogous to the Montreal and Vancouver CMAs and 31 others (2016 census). Those familiar with StatCan's geographies know that there is no officially defined and reported on geographic area for the GGH, the Calgary–Edmonton Corridor (CEC), etc. The only exception is when they aggregate geographies together for the purpose of reporting trends observed among a cluster of geographies in its census highlight publications such as analytical reports. As can be seen in an equivalent report from StatCan for the earlier 2001 census, it more consistently refers to the GGH (then referred to as the extended Golden Horseshoe) and the CEC as urban regions with multiple urban centres within. Plainly, StatCan was sloppy in the terminology it used in the 2006 analytical report, and editors here have ran with that, albeit in good faith.

    Also, the Government of Ontario report's map has been taken out of context, misinterpreted, and described above incorrectly. The map is of the GGH showing its multiple built-up urban areas within. Go to GeoSearch 2006. Under the Search tab, select Place and type Hamilton as the search. Select Hamilton [UA] [Ont.] to see the geographic extent of the Hamilton urban area (UA), noting that it touches the Toronto UA to the northeast (confirmed by searching again for Toronto and selecting Toronto [UA] {Ont.]). Just because two urban areas touch does not give us creative license to merge them as if they were one urban area and then incorrectly characterize it as a non-existent Hamilton–Toronto urban area. That would be WP:OR.

    Regardless, WP:CANPOP states the principal definitive source for population counts is StatCan. I can only assume in the US the principal definitive source is Census Bureau. Demographia, whatever that is, is not the principal definitive source and therefore not a substitute. Not sure it is truly even a reliable source. It certainly looks suspect. Bottom line is most readers of this encyclopedia expect US Census Bureau, StatCan, and other national statistical agency figures for population, not repurposed census data from an alternate methodology provided by some unknown outfit. If that was the case, maybe I should start adding 2011 census population count approximations from my hobby website (see September 13, 2013 news) to Alberta community articles.

    Looking at the table on the article right now, it includes exactly what I expected should be there—populations of MSAs for the core cities in the US and CMAs for the core cities in Canada. My only quibble is with the title of the column. The "(Est.)" should be struck in favour of a note that indicates figures for the USA's MSAs are 2016 population estimates from the Census Bureau while figures for Canada's CMAs are 2016 population counts from the Canada 2016 Census. Hwy43 (talk) 08:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • And the Routledge publication mischaracterizes. It erroneously states that, because the five CMAs border each other, they form a continuous built-up urban area. No. That is contradicted by the map from the Govt of Ontario publication, which accurately shows the extent of the built-up urban areas within the GGH. I won't repeat my above comment about how there can be different urban areas that abut each other. I also note how Routledge publication refers to the GGH as a "major urban region" and that they are not permanently established or defined, relying on the firmly established CMA statistical unit instead. Hwy43 (talk) 08:53, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

North American Metro Cities By Major Sports Championships Link

https://metrocitysportschamp.wixsite.com/citymostsportschamp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.110.247.73 (talk) 01:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_American_and_Canadian_cities_by_number_of_major_professional_sports_franchises/Archive_1&oldid=1206195696"