Does luring professional sports enchance a city's profile?

[Pistola916]

That depends. I believe having a sports franchise raises the vitality of a city in some aspects, more so in small market cities where one or two pro teams exist such as Sacramento, San Antonio, Portland, Oklahoma City, Columbus, Salt Lake City, Orlando and a few others.

But sports teams are really nothing more than an amenity. It's pure entertainment and enjoyment the same way an art museum is. Public financing or city subsidies toward stadiums/ arenas are foolish, however, small market cities that are not known for tourism or lack corporate headquarters, I think a public-private collaboration toward a sports facility can be a good investment in attracting businesses, young professionals, economic development, and enhance a city's image that otherwise wouldn't exist.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by mhays

Do rinks even exist? Even in "northern" Seattle, the only one within city limits is Key Arena. Apparently you can play a form of hockey in the street, but I've never seen it.

There are three public rinks in my hometown of little Foxboro (17,000), MA alone. Basically every high school in Mass has a rink, every YMCA has one, and every other town seems to have a private rink for all the league play, both kids and adult leagues, guys' leagues and girls' leagues. It's a little less intense in CT and RI, but even crazier in NH, VT, and ME. I've heard from natives that high school hockey is just as massive in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the Dakotas.

My cuz is playing Junior A for the Casper Cyotes, he tells me WY is just like MA for hockey and rink availability.

You can also play baseball with a tennis ball and raquet

[mhays]

High schools? Apparently New England is a foreign country too.

This relates to my skepticism of pro hockey in Seattle, though a lot of people (mostly transplants from Wisconsin and so on) say otherwise. Maybe Vancouverites and Victorians would help a bit too.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by mhays

High schools? Apparently New England is a foreign country too.

This relates to my skepticism of pro hockey in Seattle, though a lot of people (mostly transplants from Wisconsin and so on) say otherwise. Maybe Vancouverites and Victorians would help a bit too.

HS hockey is as big as amateur sports get in New England (outside of NCAA hockey, of course). But I wouldn't say it's as big as HS football is in Texas. We don't have 30,000 people showing up to $20 million arenas.

The term "hockey family" means a whole lot up there.

[Shawn]

Off hockey and back to the OP:

I feel that pro sports teams do raise a region's profile nationally / in Canada. Particularly for the smaller, one-team markets like OK City, Salt Lake, and San Antonio. It helps quite a bit if the team wins like the Spurs do; it helps a lot less when the team has been irrelevant for a decade or more, like the Sacramento Kings. It helps even less when the team gets a state moniker instead of a city; the only reason I know the Hurricanes play in Raleigh is because they stole the B's best rival not named the Habs.

I forgot that the Golden State Warriors are San Francisco's NBA team until they suddenly started winning late last year. Horrible franchise name, that one.

But at the end of the day, it's impossible to put an actual ROI on the tax-payer funded portions of pro sports financial packages. Which is probably a good thing for owners everywhere; I'd bet every publicly-financed pro sports arena in the US is ROI negative through the package period. Some of them, particularly football stadiums, should be horribly red.

[Chef]

Originally Posted by mhays

High schools? Apparently New England is a foreign country too.

This relates to my skepticism of pro hockey in Seattle, though a lot of people (mostly transplants from Wisconsin and so on) say otherwise. Maybe Vancouverites and Victorians would help a bit too.

Minnesota has high school rinks too, there is also pond hockey literally everywhere in the state because of all the lakes. There are people here who play hockey who don't really follow the NHL. That said, I don't think that type of hockey culture is necessary to support a pro team. San Jose and Nashville are examples of warm weather cities that have given good support to their hockey teams. I would imagine that proximity to Vancouver, and the inherent nature of Canucks fans would kick start a rivalry pretty quickly, which in turn would draw in the casual sports fan.

[NorthernDancer]

Originally Posted by mhays

Do rinks even exist? Even in "northern" Seattle, the only one within city limits is Key Arena. Apparently you can play a form of hockey in the street, but I've never seen it.

No, rinks don't exist. There are no rinks anywhere in the world. Not a single one. They're a complete fabrication.

Seriously, what kind of question is "do rinks even exist"? There is a world beyond Seattle.

[Shawn]

Sorry, back to hockey, couldn't resist.

Here's where all of the NHL players born in the US and Canada come from, through 2009, by state / province.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=58948

Hands down, Ontario wins. No surprise there. Followed in order by Quebec, Alberta, BC, Saskatchewan, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, New York, and Wisconsin. These 10 provinces and states make up 95% of all North American born NHL players.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by Shawn

The New England homer in me needs to point out that football in general and the Pats specifically enjoyed plenty of popularity before 2002. The Pats have sold out every home game since 1994. From their move to Shafer/Sullivan/Foxboro Stadium through 1988, they only missed 3 sell outs. Yeah, NE isn't Texas about football, but back in 1997 I played in my high school's 100th Anniversary Thanskgiving Football Classic vs. our biggest rival. Plenty of football played and enjoyed in Mass over the past century plus.

Not sure the same could be said about hockey in most of Texas. I still don't see how hockey could ever be truly popular in places where you cannot just pick-up puck on a pond after school. Having to schedule and rent rink time every time you want to play hockey? wtf is that?

Yeah that's what makes it hard. There's one not far from where I live and there's a giant ice rink in Houston's Galleria Mall but not much else. Sports are followed and practiced first on the ground level and it's virtually impossible to do winter sports without an artificial aid just like it's virtually impossible to do year round/summer sports up north, like tennis or even just jogging in some cases.

Originally Posted by Shawn

Off hockey and back to the OP:

I feel that pro sports teams do raise a region's profile nationally / in Canada. Particularly for the smaller, one-team markets like OK City, Salt Lake, and San Antonio. It helps quite a bit if the team wins like the Spurs do; it helps a lot less when the team has been irrelevant for a decade or more, like the Sacramento Kings. It helps even less when the team gets a state moniker instead of a city; the only reason I know the Hurricanes play in Raleigh is because they stole the B's best rival not named the Habs.

I forgot that the Golden State Warriors are San Francisco's NBA team until they suddenly started winning late last year. Horrible franchise name, that one.

But at the end of the day, it's impossible to put an actual ROI on the tax-payer funded portions of pro sports financial packages. Which is probably a good thing for owners everywhere; I'd bet every publicly-financed pro sports arena in the US is ROI negative through the package period. Some of them, particularly football stadiums, should be horribly red.

Actually, the Warriors were renamed after moving across the bay from San Francisco (Daly City actually) from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, presumably because they didn't want to limit their market with only one Bay Area team (Oakland is not San Francisco like Fort Worth is not Dallas) and because Golden State rhythms with "Golden Gate," which also could have made sense for an alternative name since the opening of SF Bay is known by that name.

[ThePhun1]

Moving this along further, do you guys think it's a good idea for suburbs that want a little publicity to fund them to any degree. I say no because I haven't seen any tangible benefit that Orchard Park (Bills), Glendale (AZ Cardinals and Coyotes), Sunshine (FLA Panthers), East Rutherford (various NY and NJ teams) have seen.

I'm not sure how many of those places publically funded their stadiums or if they were seeking publicity, with that said.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

Yeah that's what makes it hard. There's one in not far from where I live and there's a giant ice rink in Houston's Galleria Mall but not much else. Sports are followed and practiced first on the ground level and it's virtually impossible to do winter sports without an artificial aid just like it's virtually impossible to do year round/summer sports up north, like tennis or even just jogging in some cases.

Totally right about tennis. That's basically a 5-6 month sport up north.

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

Actually, the Warriors were renamed after moving across the bay from San Francisco (Daly City actually) from the San Francisco Warriors to the Golden State Warriors, presumably because they didn't want to limit their market with only one Bay Area team (Oakland is not SF like FW is not Dallas) and because Golden State rhythms with "Golden Gate," which also could have made sense for an alternative name since the opening of SF Bay is known by that name.

That's some cool info, I never thought about Golden State rhyming with Golden Gate.

But to your original point, it's much harder for a city's brand to benefit from a pro sports franchise if it doesn't have the city's name in it. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim

That got me thinking, are there any pro sport franchises with a city in their name whose home arenas are outside of the city itself?

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

Moving this along further, do you guys think it's a good idea for suburbs that want a little publicity to fund them to any degree. I say no because I haven't seen any tangible benefit that Orchard Park (Bills), Glendale (AZ Cardinals and Coyotes), Sunshine (FLA Panthers), East Rutherford (various NY and NJ teams) have seen.

I'm not sure how many of those places publically funded their stadiums or if they were seeking publicity, with that said.

I can speak to Foxboro, MA. The new Gillette Stadium was financed entirely by the ownership, but the state paid for infrastructure upgrades on and around Rt 1 to greatly improve accessibility by car, as well as upgrading the Foxboro Stadium MBTA station. The town didn't have to spend a dime. In fact, because of how Mass municipal law works, the new stadium went up to a town vote. Of course it passed by over 90%, but Kraft donates a lot of new equipment to all of the Foxboro HS sports teams every year, built a new park and Pop Warner field for the town, and the stadium contributes over a $1 million a year in taxes to the town from regular season games alone. Since the Pats go deep in the playoffs every year, there's added money from post season games. Plus MLS games, and a good 5-6 arena-level concerts a year, and the town makes out quite well. Now Kraft has built up the surrounding area into Patriot Place, complete with the region's largest Bass Pro Shop and a bunch of other meh restaurants, bars, chain retail at the mid-high end. There's an out-patient facility for the hospital my mother works for. Added bonus: high school playoff and state super bowl games get played there for free.

The town collects a portion of all the parking receipts too. And the liquor licenses. The only real downside is the police duty work costs and the traffic, which shuts down Rt 1 for 2 hours before and 2 hours after the games. And the concerts can be really loud until 11:30 on week nights. Goddamn New England Country Music Festival.

[ThePhun1]

That goes to my post asking about whether or not suburbs benefit. There are plenty. Just off the top of my head:

Glendale, AZ (Phoenix Coyotes)
Sunshine, FL (Florida Panthers)
Orchard Park, NY (Buffalo Bills)
Arlington, TX (Dallas Cowboys)
Landover, MD (Washington Redskins)
Auburn Hills, MI (Detroit Pistons)
Miami Gardens, FL (Miami Dolphins and Hurricanes)
East Rutherford, NJ (New York Giants and Jets)
Flushing, NY (NY Mets) *Flushing is actually a part of Queens but could be unknown to some.

The list is enormous actually and as seen in Miami, there are even a few universities, such as the University of Dallas, that are outside of their namesake's jurisdiction (Irving).

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I can speak to Foxboro, MA. The new Gillette Stadium was financed entirely by the ownership, but the state paid for infrastructure upgrades on and around Rt 1 to greatly improve accessibility by car, as well as upgrading the Foxboro Stadium MBTA station. The town didn't have to spend a dime. In fact, because of how Mass municipal law works, the new stadium went up to a town vote. Of course it passed by over 90%, but Kraft donates a lot of new equipment to all of the Foxboro HS sports teams every year, built a new park and Pop Warner field for the town, and the stadium contributes over a $1 million a year in taxes to the town from regular season games alone. Since the Pats go deep in the playoffs every year, there's added money from post season games. Plus MLS games, and a good 5-6 arena-level concerts a year, and the town makes out quite well. Now Kraft has built up the surrounding area into Patriot Place, complete with the region's largest Bass Pro Shop and a bunch of other meh restaurants, bars, chain retail at the mid-high end. There's an out-patient facility for the hospital my mother works for. Added bonus: high school playoff and state super bowl games get played there for free.

The town collects a portion of all the parking receipts too. And the liquor licenses. The only real downside is the police duty work costs and the traffic, which shuts down Rt 1 for 2 hours before and 2 hours after the games. And the concerts can be really loud until 11:30 on week nights. Goddamn New England Country Music Festival.

So it sounds like there's been a major benefit and that's good, though not really from a publicity standpoint. I actually went to Gillette Stadium when it was brand new but have to say back then the town left a ton to be desired or at least it appeared to be out in the middle of nowhere. It made me wonder how an NFL franchise could be put there.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by Shawn

It helps even less when the team gets a state moniker instead of a city; the only reason I know the Hurricanes play in Raleigh is because they stole the B's best rival not named the Habs.

For the longest time I assumed the Carolina Hurricanes played in Charlotte.

[dave8721]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

That goes to my post asking about whether or not suburbs benefit. There are plenty. Just off the top of my head:

Glendale, AZ (Phoenix Coyotes)
Sunshine, FL (Florida Panthers)
Orchard Park, NY (Buffalo Bills)
Arlington, TX (Dallas Cowboys)
Landover, MD (Every Washington DC team except the Nationals)
Auburn Hills, MI (Detroit Pistons)
Miami Gardens, FL (Miami Dolphins and Hurricanes)
East Rutherford, NJ (New York Giants and Jets)
Flushing, NY (NY Mets) *Flushing is actually a part of Queens but could be unknown to some.

The list is enormous actually and as seen in Miami, there are even a few universities, such as the University of Dallas, that are outside of their namesake's jurisdiction (Irving).

Just for clarification sake, the Panthers play in Sunrise not Sunshine.

[Gordo]

You can also add the San Francisco 49ers to that list, as they now play in Santa Clara, CA (50 miles south of SF).

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by Gordo

You can also add the San Francisco 49ers to that list, as they now play in Santa Clara, CA (50 miles south of SF).

The Raiders are now much closer to San Francisco than the 9ers.

When/if the Raiders and Chargers move to "Los Angeles", their home will be in suburban Carson, CA. Imagine the 405 on a Sunday gameday or MNF rush hour!

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

The Raiders are now much closer to San Francisco than the 9ers.

When/if the Raiders and Chargers move to "Los Angeles", their home will be in suburban Carson, CA. Imagine the 405 on a Sunday gameday or MNF rush hour!

Carson is a long shot at best. Inglewood is happening (starting construction this December) and the rams will be moving here. Most likely, the Raiders will follow in a year or two.

I don't think suburban stadiums/arenas do much and aren't worth the tax breaks, but an arena like staples center has been huge for downtown LA. It hosts 300 events a year and had reintroduced a large number of LA residents to downtown and now we have 30 highrises uc or imminent, tons of new retail, restaurants and hotels and a lot of it is due to Staples Center. Best of all, no public money was given.

[ThePhun1]

^

I used to live in Carson as a child, I can only imagine.

Originally Posted by dave8721

Just for clarification sake, the Panthers play in Sunrise not Sunshine.

Correct and I was wrong about the DC teams, only the Redskins play in Landover now, the Caps and Wizards moved back to DC proper years ago.