I don't know, or maybe it doesn't, but it certainly could, and it certainly looks good as a headline!
Anyway, you're looking at a map of NFL teams overlaying US population density. It's an interesting map to show you where a ship load of people live, and who gets an NFL franchise because of it. It also shows you which cities are awful and horrible and don't deserve a franchise. Don't worry, Minnesota isn't one of those teams. But I can think of one such example, and I'm looking directly east, WISCONSIN.
Some other observations from the map:
- Jesus, look at that East Coast Bias. SETTLE DOWN, ESPN, NO ONE LIVES OU ... Oh, wait, yes they do. I guess that's why they only talk about the Giants, Patriots, and Tim Tebow.
- Remember when Red McCombs was going to move the team to San Antonio or some shit? Well ... It probably would have been a fine move for him, actually. If you wrap Austin into San Antonio, there's almost as many people in those metro areas as there is in Minneapolis and St. Paul. Maybe it would have been a wash?
- However, this map obviously fails to take into account the reach certain teams have. Like the Vikings hold that spike around the Twin Cities, obviously, but then also the two little testicles near Fargo, Sioux Falls, through Iowa, etc. There's a lot of weirdoes who love the Vikings that live there and count as fans, so this isn't exactly representative of a fandom map.
- But population density does give you a good idea of who could, randomly, on a Sunday morning, wake up and say, "Shit yeah, I'm going to go buy some Vikings tickets and walk down to the stadium." Iowans couldn't do that with the Vikings (not without making a day of it), but nor would we want them too, because they smell and drive slow. Point being, population density still has an impact.
- Detroit! Look at how many homeless people love the Lions!
- You never get the sense that there are more Chicago fans than, say, Packers fans, do you? Despite that, Chicago obviously has tons of people living in and around the city that should be repping their team. Yet it never appears like it's the case. Bears fans, you people are terrible.
- So, Los Angeles probably needs and NFL franchise. I'm looking at you, Buffalo and Jacksonville.
- QUESTION: Is Salt Lake City, Utah, more deserving of an NFL franchise than New Orleans? YOU DECIDE.
Anyway, kind of fun. Waste some time during the start of your work week and see if you can read me that chicken scratch next to Charlotte. I can't make it out.
What else do you see?
|Like PJD on Facebook||Follow PJD on Twitter|
I like to stay on top of things and respond immediately. You know... to remain topical. That said, the chicken scratch next to Charlotte is Raleigh-Durham. Dookies. Fuck 'em. Probably Packer fans. They're like that.
As much as I'd like to say something amazingly witty, I can't think of anything because we gave away Percy... and it is demoralizing.
@CollegeWolf Yeah, the content for the rest of the week on this site has pretty much just written itself.
Salt Lake City IS more deserving of an NFL franchise than New Orleans.I never, ever, EVER want a terrorist attack to occur at an NFL game (or anywhere, really), but if it HAD to happen and I HAD to pick what teams were playing, I would not hesitate: Packers at New Orleans.
I agree, Salt Lake should have an NFL team...And anyone that thinks otherwise because Salt Lake doesnt "fit in", well then we can name the team Salt Lake Rebels. Better yet, move the Saints from New Orleans to SLC and rename them the Devils.
@peterandkelsey It seems like you've maybe given this some thought, and I can respect you for that.