Colin Cowherd on the state of Rust Belt Pro Sports Teams

[spain]

I was listening to Colin Cowherd on ESPN radio on Thursday. He was reporting on the latest census data which clearly indicate a HUGH population shift from the rest belt to the south and west. This demographic shift away from the old industrial north to the better climate and nicer cities in the southeast and southwest has been going on for a long time and isnt news really. Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburg, Milwaukee, would actually be declining in population if it werent for illegals. And the folks leaving are the college educated young people moving out of areas with no jobs to areas where jobs are plentiful and you dont have to freeze to death 6 months per year. A massive "brain drain" is happening to a region that has already been hard hit being a rapidly declining industrial sector. Again nothing everybody doesnt already know.

 

But Cowherds take applied these demographic trends to the potential effects that they will have on the sports landscape. He claims that 25 years from now there wont be 2 sports teams in Buffalo; 3 pro teams in Pittsburgh; 4 teams in Detroit; 3 teams in Cleveland; etc. Those old rust belt cities are losing population at dramatic rates. The high paying jobs moved south for the winter and aint coming back. What is left is the inner city welfare recipients and old retired people. These arent the folks forking out the big bucks for season tickets to pro sporting events. As ticket prices continue to increase, and the high wage earners leave those areas in droves, the population base simply wont be able to sustain multiple pro franchises in all of those rustbelt cities. I have never considered this arguement but found it fairly compelling. Any thoughts on this subject?

[Swampnuts]

His argument makes sense to me. It's pure speculation of course, but it does make sense in theory. Many people dislike Cowherd because he makes these kind of points, but I think he's great to listen to just for that reason.

 

I live in Charlotte, and almost all the people I meet who are new to the city are moving in from upper Ohio, Pennslyvania, and New Jersey. They all cite the same reasons for leaving as better pay, better cost of living, better climate and quality of life.

 

The one industrial midwest city I would disagree with Cowherd on is Milwaukee. I only visited the city once, but I really enjoyed it. I thought it was a great city, with good atmosphere, location, and a cool sense of history.

[Chavez]

 

The one industrial midwest city I would disagree with Cowherd on is Milwaukee. I only visited the city once, but I really enjoyed it. I thought it was a great city, with good atmosphere, location, and a cool sense of history.

 

Well, living in Milwaukee, I certainly appreciate the kind words.

 

But the "Rust Belt" IS having issues, starting back in the 70s and continuing - most of the cities up here were built on manufacturing, which isn't moving to the souther US but OUT of the country. The best of these cities have transitioned from manufacturing to a newer economic model - Chicago and Minneapolis, to name a couple, are thriving, vibrant cities; Detroit, on the other hand, stayed married to the Big Three...er, Two, now, I suppose...and is clearly on the verge of going teats up.

 

One thing about the Milwaukee situation in particular is that some of the people departing aren't going South but are moving to the suburbs - lower crime, better schools, higher property values, etc - and aren't considered part of the city, and may even be outside the "metro area" but still contribute to the state and follow the teams. Also the Brewers are somewhat of a statewide draw, which doesn't hurt - the 400,000 Fox cities population base and 200,000 Madison population aren't in the Milwaukee demographic but follow the Brewers (and Packers) as fervently as anyone, and are only 1 - 1 1/2 hrs away.

 

While Milwaukee isn't thriving in the 21st century economy like Chicago or Minneapolis, it hasn't reached a tipping point the other way like Detroit either; the city leaders are trying to plug into the population base of Chicago and the research facilities in Madison (at the University of Wisconsin) to create a "tech triangle" and move forward. So far, it's been a pretty fitful effort, and there's no guarantee it will succeed.

[dmarc117]

milwaukee is kinda different like chavez said....its more a state draw than city. the pack used to play in milwaukee too, remember. maybe the brewers and bucks would move to the fox cities area so fans from gb, milwaukee, madison, and the fox cities could all attend much easier......

 

plus they say in 20 years....the chicago-milwaukee corridor will be a megalopolis, so a fan base will be there. even now, i have buddies here in chicago that have season tix to the bucks.

Edited April 8, 2007 by dmarc117

[Ursa Majoris]

Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburg, Milwaukee, would actually be declining in population if it werent for illegals immigrants.

 

Most of the immigrants are legal.

 

Whatever, the argument does have a lot of merit. Worth noting that Minneapolis and St Paul are actually tiny cities on a nationwide scale, only 330,000 and 250,000 respectively, but the metro area is made up of over 50 cities all squashed together and the total population is 3,000,000. Overall, Minneapolis has a net growth but an article in the paper last week showed us slipping in terms of growth rate and if it wasn't for the immigrants we could have a net population loss. Ours is due to aging and the brutal winter rather than the economy - the first boomers are heading south to warmer climes.

 

This place is ideal for couples with young children because of the great education and the very old, because of the services. A lot of those snowbird retirees come back here to take advantage of the services but they won't be spending their $$$ on the Vikings or Twins either.

[spain]

I dont recall if he specifically mentioned the Twin Cities. I know he never said Chicago. But Buffalo, Detroit, and Cleveland, were prominently mentioned...

[Ursa Majoris]

I dont recall if he specifically mentioned the Twin Cities. I know he never said Chicago. But Buffalo, Detroit, and Cleveland, were prominently mentioned...

 

Pittsburgh also in deep trouble. Twin Cities wasn't mentioned but it is nevertheless a real challenge to get people to stay here post-grad until they have young families - then it's easier.

[Chavez]

I dont recall if he specifically mentioned the Twin Cities. I know he never said Chicago. But Buffalo, Detroit, and Cleveland, were prominently mentioned...

 

Detroit has been circling the drain since the late 70s. I was under the impression Cleveland had undergone somewhat of a revitalization in the past decade or so. Buffalo I don't know anything about, except I wouldn't want to live there.

[godtomsatan]

The biggest problem with the new markets are that unless the team is winning, the general population does not care. This is evident by looking at attendance figures in newer NBA and NHL cities.

 

As far as the population drain of rust belt cities as it pertains to pro sports, you're essentially talking about the Sabers and the Penguins, and maybe the Bucks(?), potentially the Bills I suppose, but that's really about it.

 

The Pistons, Lions, Tigers, and Wings aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The NFL won't uproot the Browns again in our lifetime, and the Steelers and Packers will move only when the United States Armed Forces lock down Western Pennsylvania and the state of Wisconsin to allow the moving trucks through.

[Chavez]

Twin Cities wasn't mentioned but it is nevertheless a real challenge to get people to stay here post-grad until they have young families - then it's easier.

 

...but the Twin Cities have a sizable population base and a thriving 21st century economy. They aren't in any danger of anything. Same reason I mentioned Chicago as not having to worry.

[spain]

The biggest problem with the new markets are that unless the team is winning, the general population does not care. This is evident by looking at attendance figures in newer NBA and NHL cities.

 

As far as the population drain of rust belt cities as it pertains to pro sports, you're essentially talking about the Sabers and the Penguins, and maybe the Bucks(?), potentially the Bills I suppose, but that's really about it.

 

The Pistons, Lions, Tigers, and Wings aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The NFL won't uproot the Browns again in our lifetime, and the Steelers and Packers will move only when the United States Armed Forces lock down Western Pennsylvania and the state of Wisconsin to allow the moving trucks through.

 

What you have to understand is that we are talking about "long term". Not in the next 5 or 10 years. But looking at 25 years out if the demographics continue down this path, no way will those cities be able to support multiple franchises. It just wont happen. They will move to markets like Nashville, Charlotte, San Antonio, Las Vegas, San Diego, and Orlando. That is where the jobs are and where people are going. They continue to abandon the old rust belt in droves. And not because those cities are polluted cesspools of crime, drugs, corruption, and welfare. But there simply are no jobs there and the weather sucks.

[Chavez]

They will move to markets like Nashville, Charlotte, San Antonio, Las Vegas, San Diego, and Orlando.

 

 

...but Charlotte ALREADY lost an NBA franchise, and the Padres are one of the "small-market" and consistently struggling MLB teams.

 

Where, o where will these poor teams go?

[spain]

 

...but Charlotte ALREADY lost an NBA franchise, and the Padres are one of the "small-market" and consistently struggling MLB teams.

 

Where, o where will these poor teams go?

 

Again, we are projecting current trends 25 years into the future, not a snapshot in time TODAY. A future where the Detroits and Buffalos have continued to shrivel up for another 2 and 1/2 decades, while the Charlottes and San Diego's have seen exponential growth. The sports landscaped my be drastically altered by that time due to demographic shifts. The rust belt will be the big losers in this scenario and the south and west the winners. And if a franchise moves and cant make it then you may see some contraction.

[Skippy]

This article is dead on, IMO. I'm not happy to say that but really it is pretty clear to me that this is the truth. I am only 41 and I already look forward to moving to a climate that will support year round golf and I swear I am one of the last to admit to it. I can very easily see myself in the Carolinas in 15-20 years.

[godtomsatan]

They will move to markets like Nashville, Charlotte, San Antonio, Las Vegas, San Diego, and Orlando. That is where the jobs are and where people are going. They continue to abandon the old rust belt in droves. And not because those cities are polluted cesspools of crime, drugs, corruption, and welfare. But there simply are no jobs there and the weather sucks.

 

 

Then why are the two most dire franchise situations in the NFL in Jacksonville and New Orleans? In MLB, it's Miami and Tampa (newer franchises). The NBA is continually having problems in Charlotte, Atlanta, New Orleans, and of course Memphis.

 

The population shifts in the US are to the south and the west, but they are also to urban areas. I understand that you're talking about two-to-three decades out and there are all kinds of changes that we can't even conceive of. Especially with the globalization of all the major sports in this country.

 

However, I still find it hard to fathom that the day will occur in my lifetime where the state of Michigan will have zero professional sports franchises.

[Swampnuts]

Charlotte was one of the top teams in attendance for the first 10 years with the Hornets. The people here loved that team. George Shinn, the owner of the team developed a ton of bad press locally for biaching about the arena. He wanted a new arena with luxury suites and more premium club seating. The voters said no, so George said see ya.

 

Charlotte promised a new uptown modern arena, and were granted a new team. The Hornets would have never left if the deal had taken place 3 years earlier.

 

The Panthers sell out every game, and the Bobcats are trying to court fans. The people here in Charlotte don't care much about the Hurricanes, there was some buzz with last years Stanley Cup but it's already dead.

[spain]

Then why are the two most dire franchise situations in the NFL in Jacksonville and New Orleans? In MLB, it's Miami and Tampa (newer franchises). The NBA is continually having problems in Charlotte, Atlanta, New Orleans, and of course Memphis.

 

The population shifts in the US are to the south and the west, but they are also to urban areas. I understand that you're talking about two-to-three decades out and there are all kinds of changes that we can't even conceive of. Especially with the globalization of all the major sports in this country.

 

However, I still find it hard to fathom that the day will occur in my lifetime where the state of Michigan will have zero professional sports franchises.

 

Again, its all about "demographics". New Orleans and Memphis dont have the type of populations needed to sustain pro franchises. They both are having brain drains themselves. You have repeatedly heard me refer to Memphis as the "Detroit of the South". College educated young people are fleeing those areas for one's where better jobs are located and where the quality of life is better. That said, those jobs are in other places in the south and west, not in Cleveland or Buffalo. And corporations who would potentially buy luxury boxes arent in New Orleans, Memphis, or Jacksonville, and they dam sure arent moving there.

 

I look at it from my viewpoint here in my hometomw. In 1975, there is no way that Nashville could support a pro sports franchise. We had a AA baseball team that couldnt even make money because of poor attendance. 25 years later we have not 1 but 2 pro teams. The Titans sell out every single game. The Predators have a tougher time because this is a non traditional hockey market. But the fact is that they have been here 10 years now. If you had asked me in 1975 if we would have ever an NFL franchise I would have laughed in your face. Not we have 2 pro teams. Its because people are fleeing the north in droves to move where the cost of living is lower, the quality of life better, and the jobs are more abundant. Population shift will affect the sports landscape in decades to come and it will be interesting to see how it plays out.

[dmarc117]

i think that a football franchise can last longer in a poor market because of the 1 game per week. the other pro sports with multi-game weeks have a much harder time getting the stadiums to fill up every night.

Edited April 9, 2007 by dmarc117

[TimC]

I will volunteer my time to help build that wall south of DC over to the Tennessee border to keep 'em out. Let's get this grassroots campaign going!

[Pope Flick]

So which northern team that ends up in the south calls themselves The Carpetbaggers?

[dmarc117]

So which northern team that ends up in the south calls themselves The Carpetbaggers?

 

 

cant wait til the yankees move to the south!!

[Yukon Cornelius]

 

...but Charlotte ALREADY lost an NBA franchise, and the Padres are one of the "small-market" and consistently struggling MLB teams.

 

Where, o where will these poor teams go?

 

hmm padres to the 51 state??

[godtomsatan]

Population shift will affect the sports landscape in decades to come and it will be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

 

Absolutely true. I think once it becomes feasible to travel more quickly across the water, the NBA, NHL, and MLB are going to expand across the ponds. Once the NFL stops sharing revenue is when the Buffalos of the league have to start worrying about moving. Until then, the fan support will keep them there.

[Ursa Majoris]

Once the NFL stops sharing revenue is when the Buffalos of the league have to start worrying about moving. Until then, the fan support will keep them there.

 

That's Spain's point - will there be enough fans left to do that?

[Bill Swerski]

I listen to Cowtard on the way to work and heard this as well.

 

Whoever said that the loss of manufacturing jobs in the North and the number of new jobs popping up in the cheaper-cost-of-living South is correct. As for the "lifestyle" argument in the South, I'm not so sure that applies to everyone. Yes, the winters are nice and you can play a round of golf in December in Florida. But the summers are awful (heat, humidity, mosquitos, wasps, hornets, fire ants, tornadoes, hurricanes). It's definitely a trade-off. The Southwest is nicer weather-wise, but you basically have to live in or right on the border of a suburban sprawl or your house won't have running water.