Kansas City Ranks as Second Worst North American Sports City
by Joel Thorman on May 25, 2009 6:21 PM CDT
in 2009 Offseason
44 comments
The Toronto Star recently compiled a list of 37 North American cities with at least two of the four major professional sports teams - football, basketball, baseball and hockey. Indianapolis topped the list and Cincinnati ranked last.
Where did Kansas City land? 36th, or second to last.
The ranking is based off winning percentages since 2000. Extra points were given for making the playoffs and winning a championship. The Chiefs have made the playoffs twice in that span ('03 and '06) while the Royals have gone 0 for 9 in playoff bids.
From 2000-2008 the Royals winning percentage has been .416.
From 2000-2008 the Chiefs winning percentage has been .507.
Since 1985, there have been THREE playoff victories by Kansas City professional sports teams. I'm tempted to bring up the Blades as a semi-pro team to inflate these stats (that sweet, sweet 1992 Turner Cup Championship).
Geez...we can talk about the history of our teams because that's about all we've got. Since 1972, there has been ONE world championship by Kansas City professional teams.
Let's not forget this post where Kansas City was ranked as the 5th least popular city.
H/T to Stampede Blue for the link. (And now I will take back my hat tip because the Colts beating the Chiefs in the '03 and '06 playoffs are part of the reason we're so low on the list.)
Update: Looks like Stampede Blue is having a lot of fun with this. I don't like this list.
0 recs |
44 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
thats surprising, I thought it would be 99% for the Royals
by SayHeyWerd on May 25, 2009 6:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure the answers would be different on Royals Review
Aren’t you a Braves fan?
by Joel Thorman on May 25, 2009 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Basing the statistics on Championships is Flawed to say the least
Maybe best sport Cities should be inverted. The longer you haven’t competed and still have a base of support would indicate Best Sports Fans to me :)
And could we add College sports and Ahem Hockey and other Minor league teams.
I listened to that Blades Championship and had my Chest pumped up for Days.
Wow, we came back so many times in those series!
The Wizards won a Championship in that time also, with that Bald Scandanavian fellow!
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on May 25, 2009 6:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It was based on winning %
Extra points were given for playoffs and championships.
Ahh..the Wizards, I forgot about them. Too bad soccer isn’t one of the “big 4” professional sports :)
by Joel Thorman on May 25, 2009 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Royals my vote
If they maintain their pitching and add a bat or two they are in contention.
by FrankPitts on May 25, 2009 6:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Their pitching is faltering and their bats are on IR
I love the Royals but when Ponson was a starter and Hochevar is faltering.
Competing for 2nd is going to be an all year batlle.
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on May 25, 2009 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should have read the Story
Kansas City, Ill sucks and any ‘best of’ that has 3 Canadian Cities ‘no disrespect to Canada’ in top 10 is Biased. IMO that the Chiefs would have won the CFL for a decade running with Vermeil :)
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on May 25, 2009 7:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thats comparing apples to oranges tho.
The CFL teams play other CFL teams of close to equal levels same as NFL teams do. If anything the CFL has even more parity then the NFL does when it comes to that. Ive been to some sporting events in Canadian cities and trust me they are just as passionate about their sports there as we are here.
by GenericBrand on May 25, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That shocks me...
I would have thought Boston would have taken the top spot. 6 major championships since 2000 compared to Indy’s1…I know it was based on winning percentages, but IMHO, the final product should garner the most consideration.
by thejesuslizard on May 25, 2009 7:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Indy Colts
consistantly had a good record. The Sox and Patriots didn’t always have a good record in the ’00’s…
by TDubb on May 26, 2009 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But they have consistantly had
championship parades. 6 to Indy’s 1. That’s the ONLY record that matters.
by thejesuslizard on May 26, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But you were just talking about
winning percentages. Records directly affect winning percentages. Unless I’m totally wrong and missed that class…
by TDubb on May 28, 2009 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I said it was BASED on winning percentage
I said the FINAL PRODUCT, i.e. CHAMPIONSHIPS should garner the most consideration…maybe you missed reading class…
by thejesuslizard on May 28, 2009 5:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also you said
Should. not are. I was trying to come up with an explanation, not a criticism. Then you stated it as fact. It’s like Jason Whitlock talking about Jeff George. He says he thinks he’s the best and then uses it as a factual statement.
Also, if you look at the records of their divisional opponents (my records go back to 2002) you notice that the afc south had an overall better winning percentage(215 wins) than the afc east(202 wins). Maybe that’s what they used as part of the factors?
by TDubb on Jun 7, 2009 1:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The inconsistent Pats and Sox vs. the consistent Colts and Pacers
Using just the Pats and Sox, they still have a better winning percentage than the Colts and Pacers since 2000.
Since 2000:
Pats .797 Colts .789
Sox .566 Pacers .521
-———————- -—————————-
.682 .660
But, in this model only the Red Sox and Pats (the two teams you claim that haven’t been consistently good since 2000) are used.
This was a FLAWED study only used to boost the egos of Candain readers with Indianapolis fans getting an ego stroke.
Like I’ve said before 6-1 is all that matters…and I’m not even counting the 2 NCAA Championships Boston College won for hockey. Hands down, since 2000, Boston is the top sports town in North America.
by thejesuslizard on May 28, 2009 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's see
Does this correspond with markets? Overall, yes.
by dorsey on May 25, 2009 7:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Indy, Nashville?
I have no idea what kinda market Vancouver (#3) or Montreal (#6) are.
by Joel Thorman on May 25, 2009 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Both had teams...
in the major 4 that split town (Grizzlies and Expos).
Also, the Candian publication probably had to use winning percentage over championships seeing that Lord Stanley hasn’t crossed north since 1993.
by thejesuslizard on May 25, 2009 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Misleading. It's a reflection on the past and poor management. In the Chief's......
…..case, they still have some of the highest ticket sales and attendance even though they have had a loosing team. Football is King in the Midwest and does not have to compete as much with other sports and the Chief’s draw from so many different states.
by jcox31mc on May 25, 2009 8:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Map
Can we talk about the Canadians placing Kansas City in Central Illinois? I think that undercuts the whole effect of the article somewhat. I mean not even close.
by tbwhall on May 25, 2009 9:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
WOW we finished 2nd.... from last
could we count some of KU’s success
by Battle AXE on May 25, 2009 9:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
rofl at the canadian bias
Vancouver #3? I thought this was from cities that had at least 2 professional sports teams. I mean, are they really counting the BC Lions of the CFL? Maybe the class A ball Vancouver Canadians. What a joke.
Apparently the Edmonton Eskimos of the CFL (13 championships since ’49) are also being counted, bumping Edmonton to #9. Same with #6 Montreal. I mean, lol.
Frankly, #1 Indianapolis isn’t even close to deserving. Hell, they only have two professional teams. I mean come on, having a team is half the battle.
My rankings:
- Boston
- Dallas
- Detroit
- NY
- LA/Anaheim
- Philly
by rcpratt on May 25, 2009 9:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
love the Royals and Chiefs...
but if the Royals (whole team are free agents after the 2010 season) make the playoff before the Chiefs then we are the second worst sports town.
by chicks_love_chiefs on May 25, 2009 11:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
maybe that's the plan
clean house and start over?
by TDubb on May 26, 2009 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
seems like both teams have been starting over
for a while.
by chicks_love_chiefs on May 26, 2009 12:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
can I pick none of the above
because I seriously wonder if either team is going to do anything in the near and distant future
The only measure of true success in the NFL is the Vince Lombardi trophy. Anything less is a rationalization.
by sm7600 on May 26, 2009 12:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Specific sport bias.
As has been pointed out, the Canada bias due to the CFL and NHL is ridiculous.
What are the 2 sports leagues where it is hardest to MAKE the playoffs? The NFL and MLB, crazy how those 2 sports just happen to be the only two sports in KC (36), Cincy (37) and Cleveland (34). (The Caves probably help just a touch, because remember for half the decade Before Lebron they were the worst in the league.) The next bunch of lowest rankings are all places (with the exception of DC) where hockey teams have struggled.
Maybe if hockey only had a 10 team playoff instead of 16, their playoff appearance bonus might not be such a factor.
Though strictly ranking records in the 4 major sports, how high would KC really rise this decade? Not much farther.
by jbship628 on May 26, 2009 7:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It is a Canadian paper aimed at Canadians.
Of course there will be a bias in the formula to include Canadian cities. If this study was done by the KCStar, I’m betting only Toronto would be on the list.
by RedNose on May 26, 2009 7:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is why that article is hilarious.
by rcpratt on May 26, 2009 7:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then don't read the damn thing
It is a Canadian article! I know the CFL isn’t a big deal in the states, which is partly why we support the hell out of it!
Happiness is a long walk with a putter in your hand.
by craig in calgary on May 26, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh.
Which is why you support the Chiefs, those of an actual professional football league, of course.
by rcpratt on May 26, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The CFL has damn good football. And the games are a lot of fun to go to.
Also, the CFL starts in late June, so it’s a few extra months of football in the summer.
It’s not difficult to appreciate both CFL and NFL for us Canadians. It’s just more football.
No need to take a jab at the CFL.
by RedNose on May 26, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comparing them is a little funny
Vancouver ranks so high because the Lions have won 2 Grey Cups in that time frame, and the Canucks are a perennial playoff team in the NHL, but it’s a little goofy comparing the success of those 2 teams to the Chiefs and Royals.
It’s a fun article aimed at Canadians, so I don’t really buy into it either way.
by RedNose on May 26, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kansas City 2nd Worst Sports City
I don’t quite buy this, but then again, it seems the national media is always berating and belittling Kansas City—it’s in flyover country after all. It’s too bad college teams weren’t thrown into the mix because there are three good Big 12 schools in the Kansas City area, KU, MU, and K-State. If you add in their records, conference titles, national title, bowls, and win loss records, KC’s not so bad as a sports city. You can’t blame the city for bad professional teams. They’re only as good as their owners invest in them. A Chief told me at a party years ago that the owner only wanted that team to be good enough to fill the stands. A decade later, I tend to believe it. As a Royals fan, it’s been painful to watch this team the past quarter century. I hope Kansas City lands an NBA or NHL team in the new Sprint Center. Being originally from the west side of Kansas, I’m preferential to the Denver teams, especially the Broncos. I have enjoyed the Chiefs-Broncos rivalry over the years, and nothing can be taken for granted by either team. This year’s rough; the Broncos are 50:1 for the Super Bowl and the Chiefs are 60:1 last I looked. It’s too bad the Rockies went to the NL—a rivalry with the Royals would have been good. If KC does get another pro team, a good rivalry would help. Kansas City’s a good city and a good sports town in my opinion.
by Kansas Exile on May 27, 2009 1:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
In the Onion the other day...
They had a headline that stated something like, New Yorker flies from New York to L.A. – Discovers land in between. Names it “Mid-West.”
by TDubb on Jun 8, 2009 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
