Nashville is 7th best North American sports city
by Aditya T (smashville) on May 23, 2009 4:31 PM CDT
Email
Print 
To measure the relative sporting success of major North American cities, the Toronto Star ranked 37 cities with at least two professional sports teams based on their winning percentages since 2000. Teams — which were drawn from baseball, hockey, football and basketball — were awarded bonus points for making the playoffs or winning a championship. The results above rank the winningest — and losingest — across the continent.
Nashville ranked seventh in the list, with our two teams, the Preds and the Titans. This is what thestar.com said about Nashville:
Nashville: Another pro-sports parvenu of the New South, city has had more luck cheering NFL squad than puck chasers.
What I find amazing about this is that about 11 years ago, there were no professional sports teams in Nashville. In about a decade, the fact that the city has grown into such a successful sports town is a remarkable feat. How about another team? Surely Nashville can fill up a Grizzlies game better than this:
It's been mentioned before. Even an MLB team for Nashville has been mentioned.
Indianapolis was ranked #1 on this list, followed by Boston, Vancouver, Philly, and Dallas. Not judging by stats, who do you think the top sports town is?
(hat tip to On the Forecheck and Stampede Blue for pointing this out)
12 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
chicago is one of the best
ever since living here, i’ve noticed there’s definitely a really strong sports culture. 5 pro teams, all of them with great history, tons of bars, knowledgeable fans. weak college sports though. i definitely miss the college football/basketball scene.
the worst are atlanta and la.
I believe
The evaluation is based on wins and loses for local franchises, not sports culture. Since 1999, the Bulls, Bears, Cubs, Blackhawks, and White Sox have been pretty terrible. Compare that with places like Nashville and Indy, and it is pretty clear their sports towns have more successful franchises than Chicago (home to some of the worst sports franchise owners on the friggin planet).
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
I don't really get how Indy is higher than Boston
Bruins, Celtics, and Patriots have to be in the top 3 of their respective leagues. Red Sox aren’t doing too bad either.
The Colts are good. The Pacers suck.
It doesn’t make sense!!
Welcome to Smashville, Tennessee.
Official Graphic Designer/Researcher of MCM.
Proud iPhone user. Take that, Jim Balls.
by Aditya T (smashville) on May 23, 2009 9:17 PM CDT up reply actions
You do realize that the Patriots isn’t a Boston team right? New England represents Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, not just Massachusetts. Besides, the Patriots stadium is in Foxboro, not Boston.
The Bruins and the Celtics (up until last season) have basically been irrelevant the past two decades. The Pacers were one of the most dominant teams in the league during the Reggie Miller years. And since 1998, the Colts have been one of the best teams in the NFL year in and out. Combine that with the fact that Indianapolis is the racing capital of the world, yeah, Indy is the shit.
by KingRichard on May 25, 2009 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions
Forgot to mention the Shit Box Red Sox. But still, Boston doesn’t top Indy mang.
by KingRichard on May 25, 2009 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions
How on earth does vancouver even make the list?
First of all, we only have 1 major sports franchise, unless you count the first three years of the grizzlies existence. Second of all, the grizzles were the laughing stock of the league before leaving here and the canucks are mediore at best over the past thirty years or so. The Vancouver Millionaires won the stanely cup sometime in the twenties or thirties. Thats it. My only explanation is that they are including CFL teams in this. But if that is the case, then Edmonton should be well ahead of Vancouver, seeing how the eskimos won 6 straight grey cups with Warren Moon and had one of the most dominant hockey teams in the modern era. The fact that Vancouver is third discredits this list completely.
by vancouverTITAN on May 24, 2009 12:09 AM CDT reply actions
Calgary too
Last time I checked, they only have the Flames.
Welcome to Smashville, Tennessee.
Official Graphic Designer/Researcher of MCM.
Proud iPhone user. Take that, Jim Balls.
by Aditya T (smashville) on May 24, 2009 12:37 AM CDT up reply actions
while i would love to take rips at memphis
i can’t blame them for not being interested in a completely uncompetitive franchise. the ownership and management are the ones to blame there. how bad do you have to be to not sell bball tickets in freaking memphis??? it’s almost inconceivable.
The Dual Threat, Official Enforcer/Stat Geek of MCM.
If the Grizzlies take Rubio in next year's draft...
… and Gasol continue to develop with Mayo. Plus if they get some solid vets. This team could be a playoff team in 3 years.
Go Titans!
by Pinoy Titan on May 24, 2009 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
yeah
but in the near 15 years of that franchise’s existence (including Vancouver) other than being first round sweep fodder 3 times, “maybe in 3 years” is about all they have to show for their efforts. that’s horrible. that’s basically a team that just shouldn’t exist.
The Dual Threat, Official Enforcer/Stat Geek of MCM.
I would love for the Rays to re-locate here!
It might cost us the Predators, but oh well. I believe Nashville would be a great MLB city, especially when the Red and Yankees came to town.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
