Warrior General Games

Originally posted by RobertRJS
Originally posted by rjssob

When you are counting WNBA and Soccer, all credibility goes out the window....I am almost embarrassed that I share the name RJS with you!

well, i self-admitted wnba is a bit lol. but soccer is legit.

Still. Boston has nothing on LA. 2 MLB titles and 3 NFL superbowls + 1 more superbowl doesn't match up with 3 straight NBA titles, back-to-back NCAA titles, 3 final fours in a row, and a world series and stanley cup title.

American soccer is anything but legit, and the other stuff is mostly just because there are more teams packed in (not necessarily a wins per team thing, but a power in numbers thing). I mean you've got the LA Angels and the LA Dodgers, the LA Lakers and the LA Clippers, Anaheim Ducks and the LA Kings. Since you're looking at it from a gross titles standpoint, this doesn't really matter, but I personally wouldn't root for the Bruins and the Trojans just because they're both in LA.

Originally posted by soapbox
Originally posted by RobertRJS

Originally posted by rjssob


When you are counting WNBA and Soccer, all credibility goes out the window....I am almost embarrassed that I share the name RJS with you!

well, i self-admitted wnba is a bit lol. but soccer is legit.

Still. Boston has nothing on LA. 2 MLB titles and 3 NFL superbowls + 1 more superbowl doesn't match up with 3 straight NBA titles, back-to-back NCAA titles, 3 final fours in a row, and a world series and stanley cup title.

American soccer is anything but legit, and the other stuff is mostly just because there are more teams packed in (not necessarily a wins per team thing, but a power in numbers thing). I mean you've got the LA Angels and the LA Dodgers, the LA Lakers and the LA Clippers, Anaheim Ducks and the LA Kings. Since you're looking at it from a gross titles standpoint, this doesn't really matter, but I personally wouldn't root for the Bruins and the Trojans just because they're both in LA.

Well, if thats a criteria for eliminating a city... then I can make the claim that the San Antonio-Austin Metro is the #1 sports city then thanks to the Spurs 3 championships this decade and UT's national championship. All we have is NBA and WNBA.

And American Soccer is legit in my book. Talent wise it may be a step below the national teams that the rest of the world enjoys, however MLB is still a representation of America's best for the most part and opperates in a similar manner to the other major sports. A championship is a championship for a city. Can I say that the Redsocks and Angels world series dont count because they have the #2 and #4 largest payrolls in baseball? We all know how huge the gap is between the top 10 in baseball and the bottom 10. You can literally buy a championship in baseball, so does that invalidate the Redsocks two world series?

Just playing devils advocate here

Soccer does not exist in the USA, 99.9% of Americans dont care, and would rather go to a preseason baseball or football game than a MLS game.

And the WNBA talk, PLEASE.

So if one of my kids wins a title in teeball does that count? I mean we need all the help we can get in Kansas City, but cmon.

The MLS and WNBA are still the pinacle of their respective sports and genders in America. Both are run on a draft based system to infuse talent so both leagues are on a relitively level playing field. Aside from the fact that many Americans just dont care, the championships are still quite an accomplishment.

But I wouldnt use them to decide a good sports town, hell we gonna start counting horses that win? They just dont count as major sports.

Horses dont so much have a defined team... and if your going to use the NBA/MLB/NFL/etc... to decide what counts as a goods sports how can you not include all the other legit professional sports that are atleast somewhat prominent.

Heck, the heart of the issue would then be to completely throw teams out of the equation and just count which cities have the most champions hailing from them. I dont think there are any native Bostonians playing on the Red Soxs. Any Los Angelasians playing on the ducks. Although there may infact be one or two, you get my point.

My point, WNBA and Soccer dont count. Period.

Originally posted by soapbox
Originally posted by RobertRJS

Originally posted by rjssob


When you are counting WNBA and Soccer, all credibility goes out the window....I am almost embarrassed that I share the name RJS with you!

well, i self-admitted wnba is a bit lol. but soccer is legit.

Still. Boston has nothing on LA. 2 MLB titles and 3 NFL superbowls + 1 more superbowl doesn't match up with 3 straight NBA titles, back-to-back NCAA titles, 3 final fours in a row, and a world series and stanley cup title.

American soccer is anything but legit, and the other stuff is mostly just because there are more teams packed in (not necessarily a wins per team thing, but a power in numbers thing). I mean you've got the LA Angels and the LA Dodgers, the LA Lakers and the LA Clippers, Anaheim Ducks and the LA Kings. Since you're looking at it from a gross titles standpoint, this doesn't really matter, but I personally wouldn't root for the Bruins and the Trojans just because they're both in LA.

Did you just cite the clippers as a positive? lol

Originally posted by mikelj
Soccer does not exist in the USA, 99.9% of Americans dont care, and would rather go to a preseason baseball or football game than a MLS game.

i believe soccer is more profitable than the nhl right now, though I could be wrong.

I do know soccer stadiums are being built and they're turning profits. It's really popular among immigrants here, which make up a LARGE part of the population.

Originally posted by KellerFox
Originally posted by soapbox

Originally posted by RobertRJS


Originally posted by rjssob



When you are counting WNBA and Soccer, all credibility goes out the window....I am almost embarrassed that I share the name RJS with you!

well, i self-admitted wnba is a bit lol. but soccer is legit.

Still. Boston has nothing on LA. 2 MLB titles and 3 NFL superbowls + 1 more superbowl doesn't match up with 3 straight NBA titles, back-to-back NCAA titles, 3 final fours in a row, and a world series and stanley cup title.

American soccer is anything but legit, and the other stuff is mostly just because there are more teams packed in (not necessarily a wins per team thing, but a power in numbers thing). I mean you've got the LA Angels and the LA Dodgers, the LA Lakers and the LA Clippers, Anaheim Ducks and the LA Kings. Since you're looking at it from a gross titles standpoint, this doesn't really matter, but I personally wouldn't root for the Bruins and the Trojans just because they're both in LA.

Well, if thats a criteria for eliminating a city... then I can make the claim that the San Antonio-Austin Metro is the #1 sports city then thanks to the Spurs 3 championships this decade and UT's national championship. All we have is NBA and WNBA.

And American Soccer is legit in my book. Talent wise it may be a step below the national teams that the rest of the world enjoys, however MLB is still a representation of America's best for the most part and opperates in a similar manner to the other major sports. A championship is a championship for a city. Can I say that the Redsocks and Angels world series dont count because they have the #2 and #4 largest payrolls in baseball? We all know how huge the gap is between the top 10 in baseball and the bottom 10. You can literally buy a championship in baseball, so does that invalidate the Redsocks two world series?

exactly. If we're going to term the best sports town, then you better make some criteria.

and no matter what, it's prolly going to be silly. pick & choose.

no such thing as a 'best' sports town, though i think you could claim there are some poor sports towns (atlanta, for example).

I don't know shit about soccer or really care, but right now soccer on Univision is a cash cow - most watched sport outside of the Superbowl. Best sports town is Chicago, btw. At least according to my criteria that I'm about to come up with.

Originally posted by KellerFox
Originally posted by soapbox

Originally posted by RobertRJS


Originally posted by rjssob



When you are counting WNBA and Soccer, all credibility goes out the window....I am almost embarrassed that I share the name RJS with you!

well, i self-admitted wnba is a bit lol. but soccer is legit.

Still. Boston has nothing on LA. 2 MLB titles and 3 NFL superbowls + 1 more superbowl doesn't match up with 3 straight NBA titles, back-to-back NCAA titles, 3 final fours in a row, and a world series and stanley cup title.

American soccer is anything but legit, and the other stuff is mostly just because there are more teams packed in (not necessarily a wins per team thing, but a power in numbers thing). I mean you've got the LA Angels and the LA Dodgers, the LA Lakers and the LA Clippers, Anaheim Ducks and the LA Kings. Since you're looking at it from a gross titles standpoint, this doesn't really matter, but I personally wouldn't root for the Bruins and the Trojans just because they're both in LA.

Well, if thats a criteria for eliminating a city... then I can make the claim that the San Antonio-Austin Metro is the #1 sports city then thanks to the Spurs 3 championships this decade and UT's national championship. All we have is NBA and WNBA.

And American Soccer is legit in my book. Talent wise it may be a step below the national teams that the rest of the world enjoys, however MLB is still a representation of America's best for the most part and opperates in a similar manner to the other major sports. A championship is a championship for a city. Can I say that the Redsocks and Angels world series dont count because they have the #2 and #4 largest payrolls in baseball? We all know how huge the gap is between the top 10 in baseball and the bottom 10. You can literally buy a championship in baseball, so does that invalidate the Redsocks two world series?

Actually a good point. I guess the mental cutoff for me is like one team per city and I never really considered less.

Personally, I don't really care. I'm a serious Pittsburgh fan (born just outside Pittsburgh). I think I've gone to 7 or 8 of their games in the past two years and I live about 6 hours away. I love Pittsburgh for the fanbase mostly. I'm surprised Pittsburgh doesn't have an NBA team (Seattle Sonics moved to... OKC? Hellooooooo), but eh.

Because Pittsburgh doesn't have a bball team, I reached a "treaty" with my paternal family (all from Boston) to root for the Celts and the BoSox, but that doesn't influence my feelings on Boston. Besides, I'd never homer-defend Boston when their greatest achievement this decade is in football, and I think the Patriots are one of the least classy teams in the NFL (their conferences are PC, but it just looks like they don't really respect the game).

Here's something I think we can all agree on

What a joke: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/titletown/index