What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Seattle as the Next Great Sportstown? (1 Viewer)

Paulymaggs

Footballguy
Lived here for 20+ years and I was a young buck when James split the national title and the 2001 Mariners were very exciting to watch. The Gary Payton years were fantastic and who can forget the Super Bowl run?

But what a tremendous fall/winter so far. :tebow:

1. Russel Wilson/Seahawks. He will own this town for the next decade irregardless.

2. Sounders. While it's been a very disappointing season, the supporters don't really care and should continue to fill 40k+ every home game next season. One of the most well run organizations around.

3. Mariners. Cano.

It's easy to slam them for the moves and record over the past few years, but there is a sense that it has been building up to this. 100+ million payroll team for the forseeable future and will really make or break based on the kids (Miller, Paxton, Zunino, Walker, et al), not the FA signings.

4. Chris Petersen to UW. Believe it or not, Sarkisian was on the hot seat; excellent recruiter but severely lacking during gamedays. Continuing to start Keith Price all this time..... :bye:

We'll see what Petersen can do with the UW's resources.

5. We still need a basketball team though.... maybe one that can sign Durant when his current deal runs out. :coffee:

 
Lived here for 20+ years and I was a young buck when James split the national title and the 2001 Mariners were very exciting to watch. The Gary Payton years were fantastic and who can forget the Super Bowl run?

But what a tremendous fall/winter so far. :tebow:

1. Russel Wilson/Seahawks. He will own this town for the next decade irregardless.

2. Sounders. While it's been a very disappointing season, the supporters don't really care and should continue to fill 40k+ every home game next season. One of the most well run organizations around.

3. Mariners. Cano.

It's easy to slam them for the moves and record over the past few years, but there is a sense that it has been building up to this. 100+ million payroll team for the forseeable future and will really make or break based on the kids (Miller, Paxton, Zunino, Walker, et al), not the FA signings.

4. Chris Petersen to UW. Believe it or not, Sarkisian was on the hot seat; excellent recruiter but severely lacking during gamedays. Continuing to start Keith Price all this time..... :bye:

We'll see what Petersen can do with the UW's resources.

5. We still need a basketball team though.... maybe one that can sign Durant when his current deal runs out. :coffee:
When your #2 is an MLS team.....the answer is no.

 
Lived here for 20+ years and I was a young buck when James split the national title and the 2001 Mariners were very exciting to watch. The Gary Payton years were fantastic and who can forget the Super Bowl run?

But what a tremendous fall/winter so far. :tebow:

1. Russel Wilson/Seahawks. He will own this town for the next decade irregardless.

2. Sounders. While it's been a very disappointing season, the supporters don't really care and should continue to fill 40k+ every home game next season. One of the most well run organizations around.

3. Mariners. Cano.

It's easy to slam them for the moves and record over the past few years, but there is a sense that it has been building up to this. 100+ million payroll team for the forseeable future and will really make or break based on the kids (Miller, Paxton, Zunino, Walker, et al), not the FA signings.

4. Chris Petersen to UW. Believe it or not, Sarkisian was on the hot seat; excellent recruiter but severely lacking during gamedays. Continuing to start Keith Price all this time..... :bye:

We'll see what Petersen can do with the UW's resources.

5. We still need a basketball team though.... maybe one that can sign Durant when his current deal runs out. :coffee:
When your #2 is an MLS team.....the answer is no.
And when your #1 uses the phrase "irregardless", you are automatically disqualified.

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.

ETA: One question I have is whether St. Louis is in the top tier or not....being an STL guy, I am curious for an outsiders perspective. Sure, we love the Cards, the Blues have been around for a long time and the Rams are....well....there. But is that enough to be great? No real college sports scene and the only heavy hitter is the Cards.

ETA2: What about Indy? Add in auto racing, the Colts, Pacers and the ridiculous college basketball scene around the state....maybe they are a top tier city. I'd put them ahead of Seattle probably.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.
I'm a :homer: but Indy deserves a spot on the list.Especially when you consider amateur sports.

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.
I'm a :homer: but Indy deserves a spot on the list.Especially when you consider amateur sports.
See edit #2...I think I agree with you.

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.
I'm a :homer: but Indy deserves a spot on the list.Especially when you consider amateur sports.
See edit #2...I think I agree with you.
Just caught that. I'm not buying LA. That can't support an NFL team, the most popular sport in the country.

 
I defended the Mariners in the Baseball Forum as potentially better than the Yankees in a couple of years, but... :lmao:

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.
I'm a :homer: but Indy deserves a spot on the list.Especially when you consider amateur sports.
See edit #2...I think I agree with you.
Just caught that. I'm not buying LA. That can't support an NFL team, the most popular sport in the country.
Depends on what you're talking about. If it's funding, then the reality is they won't support a football team by using public funds to pay for a stadium.

If it's fan support, then they sure can. They supported two NFL teams in addition to two top 25 college football programs.

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.

ETA: One question I have is whether St. Louis is in the top tier or not....being an STL guy, I am curious for an outsiders perspective. Sure, we love the Cards, the Blues have been around for a long time and the Rams are....well....there. But is that enough to be great? No real college sports scene and the only heavy hitter is the Cards.

ETA2: What about Indy? Add in auto racing, the Colts, Pacers and the ridiculous college basketball scene around the state....maybe they are a top tier city. I'd put them ahead of Seattle probably.
I don't know how you come up with a list of better sports towns and NOT put Green Bay at the top of that list. That's ALL they do up in Green Bay - focus on the Packers.

And Seattle a Great sports town? Please. :lol:

Win some Lombardi trophies and maybe you'll be in the conversation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.

ETA: One question I have is whether St. Louis is in the top tier or not....being an STL guy, I am curious for an outsiders perspective. Sure, we love the Cards, the Blues have been around for a long time and the Rams are....well....there. But is that enough to be great? No real college sports scene and the only heavy hitter is the Cards.

ETA2: What about Indy? Add in auto racing, the Colts, Pacers and the ridiculous college basketball scene around the state....maybe they are a top tier city. I'd put them ahead of Seattle probably.
I don't know how you come up with a list of better sports towns and NOT put Green Bay at the top of that list. That's ALL they do up in Green Bay - focus on the Packers.

And Seattle a Great sports town? Please. :lol:

Win some Lombardi trophies and maybe you'll be in the conversation.
Great football town /= great sports town.

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.

ETA: One question I have is whether St. Louis is in the top tier or not....being an STL guy, I am curious for an outsiders perspective. Sure, we love the Cards, the Blues have been around for a long time and the Rams are....well....there. But is that enough to be great? No real college sports scene and the only heavy hitter is the Cards.

ETA2: What about Indy? Add in auto racing, the Colts, Pacers and the ridiculous college basketball scene around the state....maybe they are a top tier city. I'd put them ahead of Seattle probably.
I don't know how you come up with a list of better sports towns and NOT put Green Bay at the top of that list. That's ALL they do up in Green Bay - focus on the Packers.

And Seattle a Great sports town? Please. :lol:

Win some Lombardi trophies and maybe you'll be in the conversation.
Great football town /= great sports town.
What other sport is there besides football? :)

But I see your point. Well, played, PT. :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
On behalf of a city that one year ago had a 10-6 division winning NFL team led by a 22 year old phenom, a 98 win division winning MLB team led by 24 year old and 19 year old phenoms, and a 28-14-6 division winning NHL team led by a 27 year old who led the league in goals, a bit of advice: don't get ahead of yourself.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Talk to me when you have a professional basketball franchise.

Or at least two amateur ones like New York.

:coffee:

 
Niners are moving to Santa Clara so that leaves SF with just the Giants. You would have to pool the Bay Area as a whole for them to be anywhere on a top sports city list

LA can't support an NFL team, but they are probably still above Seattle. I would even put Miami above them .

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not a bad little city, but Oregon owns Washington, Timbers own Sounders and I think Portland's NBA team is a cut above as well. And even though Portland doesn't have an MLB team, if we did, I'm sure it would be better than whatever Seattle has.

 
Not a bad little city, but Oregon owns Washington, Timbers own Sounders and I think Portland's NBA team is a cut above as well. And even though Portland doesn't have an MLB team, if we did, I'm sure it would be better than whatever Seattle has.
Cities without an NFL franchise are not eligible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
2. Sounders. While it's been a very disappointing season, the supporters don't really care and should continue to fill 40k+ every home game next season. One of the most well run organizations around.

5. We still need a basketball team though.... maybe one that can sign Durant when his current deal runs out. :coffee:
2. :lmao:

5. What about the Seattle Storm of the WNBA?

 
Not a bad little city, but Oregon owns Washington, Timbers own Sounders and I think Portland's NBA team is a cut above as well. And even though Portland doesn't have an MLB team, if we did, I'm sure it would be better than whatever Seattle has.
Cities without an NFL franchise are not eligible.
So Buffalo is out then?
Of course. Cities with 2 major sports teams are also not eligible.

 
Not a bad little city, but Oregon owns Washington, Timbers own Sounders and I think Portland's NBA team is a cut above as well. And even though Portland doesn't have an MLB team, if we did, I'm sure it would be better than whatever Seattle has.
The Sounders bring up the question of what makes a great sports town. Is it just the success of the teams or the support of the fans, or a mix?

Obviously the Sounders have more a lot more support than success. I believe they are the highest supported soccer club in our entire hemisphere.

 
Not a bad little city, but Oregon owns Washington, Timbers own Sounders and I think Portland's NBA team is a cut above as well. And even though Portland doesn't have an MLB team, if we did, I'm sure it would be better than whatever Seattle has.
One day Portland may grow up to be like Seattle, keep trying mayberry.

 
Niners are moving to Santa Clara so that leaves SF with just the Giants. You would have to pool the Bay Area as a whole for them to be anywhere on a top sports city list

LA can't support an NFL team, but they are probably still above Seattle. I would even put Miami above them .
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.

 
As a Cubs fan the signing of Cano is no different than Soriano in 2007. Might contend a couple seasons but then they won't draw in fans. I believe there are better sport cities emerging.

 
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.
Put it this way...Santa Clara is something like four times the distance from SF that the Raiders are. It is far. Especially considering how many Niner fans live north of the GGB.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.
Put it this way...Santa Clara is something like four times the distance from SF that the Raiders are. It is far. Especially considering how many Niner fans live north of the GGB.
just as many live south. no one's calling them the santa clara 49ers. it's dumb to say they're not still san Francisco's team.

it's not like candlestick was near anything remotely interesting anyway.

 
List of towns I would consider better sports towns (in no particular order):

New York

Chicago

Pittsburgh

Boston

LA

San Francisco

Dallas

Detroit

Seattle is more along the lines of cities like KC, Atlanta and Phoenix.

ETA: One question I have is whether St. Louis is in the top tier or not....being an STL guy, I am curious for an outsiders perspective. Sure, we love the Cards, the Blues have been around for a long time and the Rams are....well....there. But is that enough to be great? No real college sports scene and the only heavy hitter is the Cards.
No. Great baseball town. Good hockey town. Bring nothing else to the table, really.

I'm shuked as to how STL isn't like Seattle when it comes to soccer. Perhaps my POV is skewed from having lived on the right side of the river, where soccer and basketball are bigger.

 
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.
Put it this way...Santa Clara is something like four times the distance from SF that the Raiders are. It is far. Especially considering how many Niner fans live north of the GGB.
Not a whole lot further than Boston to Foxboro. (But I'm okay if we're excluding the Patriots to shut up Boston fans.)
Santa Clara is right next to San Jose which is another medium-sized sports town. The Niners have always been more of a regional team anyway. San Francisco is relatively tiny. They draw from the entire Bay Area .

 
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.
Put it this way...Santa Clara is something like four times the distance from SF that the Raiders are. It is far. Especially considering how many Niner fans live north of the GGB.
Not a whole lot further than Boston to Foxboro. (But I'm okay if we're excluding the Patriots to shut up Boston fans.)
They're the New England Patriots, not the Boston Patriots.

 
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.
Put it this way...Santa Clara is something like four times the distance from SF that the Raiders are. It is far. Especially considering how many Niner fans live north of the GGB.
Not a whole lot further than Boston to Foxboro. (But I'm okay if we're excluding the Patriots to shut up Boston fans.)
They're the New England Patriots, not the Boston Patriots.
But the Pats are used to describe Boston as a sports town. That's the point.

 
They are still the San Francisco 49ers though. Santa Clara is not far.
Put it this way...Santa Clara is something like four times the distance from SF that the Raiders are. It is far. Especially considering how many Niner fans live north of the GGB.
Not a whole lot further than Boston to Foxboro. (But I'm okay if we're excluding the Patriots to shut up Boston fans.)
Santa Clara is right next to San Jose which is another medium-sized sports town. The Niners have always been more of a regional team anyway. San Francisco is relatively tiny. They draw from the entire Bay Area .
Santa Clara stadium advocates argued the season ticket holder base is more in the South Bay. My avatar should be the new logo for the 49ers.

 
How many 4 team cities have all their teams within the city limits of that town? I know Denver does, what other cities?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top