I was inspired by this post:
Quote from: davewiecking on September 13, 2017, 11:34:41 PM
When I was a young lad (before the Washington Capitals existed), I became somewhat of a fan of the Boston Bruins because WBZ frequently came in quite clearly in suburban DC at night. WLW 700 in Cincinnati, KDKA Pittsburgh and KMOX St. Louis were other ones that I remember right now. But these are the opposite of OP's question.
So my best answer to the actual question is "about 500 miles" based on the fact that I was visiting family in Bluffton, Indiana many years ago, and when I got tired of the cassette I was listening to, popped it out and discovered I was listening to DC's WTOP (at the time a 50kw clear channel station broadcasting on 1500).
1. Football is a TV sport. I'm a New Englander and my dad was an NFL Giants fan. The Pats didn't exist until he was 22 and a lot of folks couldn't even see the Pats on TV due to blackout rules. In the Hartford area, we usually got them and the Giants, but we weren't considered their main market. Boston and Providence were subject to blackout.
Down to the southwest, New Yorkers were subject to Giants blackouts. SO fans would often drive within TV range of other cities stations and hold watch parties in motels. Often, they'd go up CT-15 to get in range of WNBH-30 or WTIC-3. I also saw a 60s sitcom that had a plot involving a Rams fan driving to San Diego to get his fix.
2. Baseball is a radio sport. KMOX and the Cardinals radio network created a large geographical fanbase for the Cardinals BITD. As far as the Red Sox go, it wouldn't surprise me if as many fans listened to them on WTIC-1080 out of Hartford as listened to them on whatever Boston flagship station carried them at the time. 1080 was and is a 50,000 watch blowtorch.
The Tigers use to be on WJR and that was as good as you could get in the Detroit market. 50,000 watts and a clear channel signal that station is a flat out blowtorch.
The Braves were very popular in Virginia when I was growing up in the 90s. Richmond was home to their AAA team at the time, and that added to the national broadcast availability of the team at the time on TBS and the success they had at the time grew the fanbase quite well. It dipped in the mid 2000s when the Nationals came into existence, the AAA team left Richmond, and the TBS broadcasts dwindled.
The Tigers. Dylan may've written a song about Catfish Hunter, but I believe that he listened to Detroit games when he was a kid in Hibbing, Minn.
I would say that in football across the board that the Cowboys and Steelers have a good fan base across America. I would say in baseball that that spot is filled by the Yankees. I don't think there is an America's team in basketball or hockey, but I could be convinced that the closest thing in hockey would be the Red Wings.
Cubs on AM WGN 720/50k Watt Station grew the fanbase across the Midwest, even before the WGN Superstation TV deal.
They are now on AM WSCR 670, which is also 50k Watt
KMOX and WGN is part of why the Cubs/Cardinals Rivalry is a thing, because especially in Central IL, but also parts of MO, IA, and IN, both stations are clear as day. Pick your team!
The Redskins used to be fairly popular in a good part of the South since there were no teams in the Southeast until the mid-1960s when the NFL added the Falcons and Saints and the AFL added the Dolphins. Most of North Carolina remained part of the Redskins' broadcast territory until 1995, when the Carolina Panthers joined the league.
The Toronto Blue Jays are a special case as the only remaining Canadian MLB team. Even prior to the Expos' move, though, the Blue Jays got a lot more national support than the Expos did. No doubt Québécois politics (and opposition thereto) factored into that.
Certain player acquisitions can get whole countries to rally around one specific team. Ichiro brought Japanese attention to the Mariners. Park Chu-young going to Manchester United and Son Heung-min to Tottenham bought those teams a lot of air time in Korea. Fulham bought a bunch of Americans in the 2000s and still has a lingering fanbase stateside.
Obliged to mention that there is a Sports Board here on the forum.
Before the Seattle Seahawks came along, the entire PNW was wide open territory for pro football. Broadcasts focused on the Raiders and 49ers so they got most of the love but plenty of others could be counted on joining the ranks of "America's Team" (Dallas) and the NY Jets, who had the "cool guy" in the form of Joe Namath.
Rick
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2018, 08:30:49 PM
Obliged to mention that there is a Sports Board here on the forum.
I don't think that I've ever posted there so I plum forgot. If a mod wants to move it, that's fine with me. Do I shoot a PM to Alps or one of the others?
Quote from: ce929wax on July 12, 2018, 06:04:00 PM
I would say that in football across the board that the Cowboys and Steelers have a good fan base across America.
and the Packers too
The Broncos used to have a huge following in Phoenix before the Cardinals got decent and went to a Super Bowl.
Quote from: ilpt4u on July 12, 2018, 06:12:24 PM
Cubs on AM WGN 720/50k Watt Station grew the fanbase across the Midwest, even before the WGN Superstation TV deal.
They are now on AM WSCR 670, which is also 50k Watt
KMOX and WGN is part of why the Cubs/Cardinals Rivalry is a thing, because especially in Central IL, but also parts of MO, IA, and IN, both stations are clear as day. Pick your team!
White Sox ;-)
Quote from: texaskdog on July 13, 2018, 08:13:39 AM
Quote from: ce929wax on July 12, 2018, 06:04:00 PM
I would say that in football across the board that the Cowboys and Steelers have a good fan base across America.
and the Packers too
My grandfather was a Packers fan here in CT. I'm not sure why, but I think he admired Vince Lombardi and also, I think my grandfather started watching sports on TV right around that era, so it was easy to follow Green Bay from New England.
Quote from: jon daly on July 13, 2018, 06:27:59 AM
Quote from: webny99 on July 12, 2018, 08:30:49 PM
Obliged to mention that there is a Sports Board here on the forum.
I don't think that I've ever posted there so I plum forgot. If a mod wants to move it, that's fine with me. Do I shoot a PM to Alps or one of the others?
You can, if you want to. Sometimes a mod will move it on sight, it just all depends. No stress, just me being technical as usual. :-P
Quote from: texaskdog on July 13, 2018, 08:13:39 AMand the Packers too
Shh, we don't say Packers around here :biggrin:
You are right though, the Packers do have a decent following across America.
Due to the kind of Canadian nationalist advertising the Blue Jays have, and the ease to watch every game, the Blue Jays basically have a strong following all the way across Canada. Well English Canada at least.
Games against the Mariners in SAFECO are practically like rivalry matches despite the Blue Jays stadium being over 3000 miles away. Personally to the Vancouverites who root for the Blue Jays, I say to them, GET YOUR OWN TEAM! You badmouth our city all the time and yet want to cheer for our baseball team, go away.
The best I can tell, or remember, baseball was very much a geographical sport in my youth. You rooted for the team in your area. My part of the world was Reds Country.
Then, cable TV and WTBS, channel 17 out of Atlanta, came along in the late 1970s and early 1980s. A generation of kids in my area who should have grown up to be Reds fans turned into Braves fans instead.
I'm told that before the creation of the Cincinnati Bengals, many in this area rooted for the Cleveland Browns. The Dallas Cowgirls have long marketed themselves as "America's Team," but I have no idea why. (My derisive nickname for them probably shows how I feel about them.)
Basketball-wise, I'm not sure. The old Cincinnati Royals of the NBA were probably this area's favorite team until the ABA and the Kentucky Colonels came along.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 13, 2018, 01:49:26 PM
The best I can tell, or remember, baseball was very much a geographical sport in my youth. You rooted for the team in your area. My part of the world was Reds Country.
Then, cable TV and WTBS, channel 17 out of Atlanta, came along in the late 1970s and early 1980s. A generation of kids in my area who should have grown up to be Reds fans turned into Braves fans instead.
I'm told that before the creation of the Cincinnati Bengals, many in this area rooted for the Cleveland Browns. The Dallas Cowgirls have long marketed themselves as "America's Team," but I have no idea why. (My derisive nickname for them probably shows how I feel about them.)
Basketball-wise, I'm not sure. The old Cincinnati Royals of the NBA were probably this area's favorite team until the ABA and the Kentucky Colonels came along.
"America's Team" was an NFL Films release in the Seventies that featured the Dallas Cowboys. It was not a marketing ploy on Tex Schramm's part. That film is why the Cowboys got the moniker. As it is, they are a popular team as well as a hated team, which is a higher status than the Tampa Bay Bucs have ever had...LOL!
Rick
Quote from: ce929wax on July 13, 2018, 11:36:29 AM
You are right though, the Packers do have a decent following across America.
When the Packers sold stock to fund stadium improvements, they got the approval of officials in all 50 states and D.C. to allow the sale in their jurisdictions. My own state for some reason was one of the last to get on board, but did so in time for me to buy a share of stock as a Christmas present for a local Cheesehead.
Packers stock certificates are suitable for framing (which is what she did with hers), but the stock pays no dividends and is non-transferable. The stock prospectus went to great pains to explain that the stock was essentially worthless.
Quote from: Flint1979 on July 12, 2018, 12:00:40 PM
The Tigers use to be on WJR and that was as good as you could get in the Detroit market. 50,000 watts and a clear channel signal that station is a flat out blowtorch.
And they had one of the best broadcasting teams of all time, Ernie Harwell and George Kell. There was a kid in my HS that could do a dead-on impression of both of them.
Quote from: GaryV on July 13, 2018, 04:39:30 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on July 12, 2018, 12:00:40 PM
The Tigers use to be on WJR and that was as good as you could get in the Detroit market. 50,000 watts and a clear channel signal that station is a flat out blowtorch.
And they had one of the best broadcasting teams of all time, Ernie Harwell and George Kell. There was a kid in my HS that could do a dead-on impression of both of them.
By the time I was around George Kell was on TV with Al Kaline. Paul Carey was teamed with Ernie on radio that was an outstanding team. Ray Lane was good too.
You gotta remember, between 1903 and 1953 there was zero movement of MLB teams. The westernmost teams (Cardinals, Browns) were in St. Louis and the southernmost team (Senators) was in Washington. In 1953 the Braves moved to Milwaukee and in 1954, the Browns moved to Baltimore (becoming the Orioles). Movement from there has been a six-decade-plus process and there hasn't been a whole lot.
Quote from: Road Hog on July 15, 2018, 05:17:12 PM
You gotta remember, between 1903 and 1953 there was zero movement of MLB teams. The westernmost teams (Cardinals, Browns) were in St. Louis and the southernmost team (Senators) was in Washington. In 1953 the Braves moved to Milwaukee and in 1954, the Browns moved to Baltimore (becoming the Orioles). Movement from there has been a six-decade-plus process and there hasn't been a whole lot.
Kind of striking how there was a flurry of movement from the 1950s through 1971, and then since then only one team has relocated. Also somewhat interesting that five of the original eight teams in each league have not moved since 1903.
National League
Philadelphia Phillies
Pittsburgh Pirates
Cincinnati Reds
Chicago Cubs
St. Louis Cardinals
Boston Braves (moved to Milwaukee in 1953, then to Atlanta in 1966)
New York Giants (moved to San Francisco for the 1958 season)
Brooklyn Dodgers (folded after the 1957 season and some asshole started a team in Los Angeles with the same name and the same players....at least, that's what my relatives from Brooklyn say!)
New York Mets (expansion team, 1962)
Houston Colt .45s (expansion team, 1962; changed name to Astros for 1965; moved to American League for 2013)
San Diego Padres (expansion team, 1969)
Montreal Expos (expansion team, 1969; moved to Washington for 2005 and became the Nationals)
Florida Marlins (expansion team, 1993; changed geographic designation to Miami for 2012)
Colorado Rockies (expansion team, 1993)
Arizona Diamondbacks (expansion team, 1998)
American League
Boston Red Sox
New York Yankees
Cleveland Indians
Detroit Tigers
Chicago White Sox
Philadelphia Athletics (moved to Kansas City for 1955, then to Oakland for 1968)
Original Washington Senators (moved to Minnesota for 1961 and became the Twins)
St. Louis Browns (moved to Baltimore for 1954 and became the Orioles)
Replacement Washington Senators (expansion team, 1961; moved to Texas for 1972 and became the Rangers)
Los Angeles Angels (expansion team, 1961; changed geographic designator to California in 1965 in advance of 1966 move to Anaheim; changed it again to Anaheim in 1996 as part of a deal for stadium renovations; changed name again to "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" in 2005 and defeated a lawsuit from the city trying to prevent the change)
Kansas City Royals (expansion team, 1969)
Seattle Pilots (expansion team, 1969; moved to Milwaukee the next year and became the Brewers; switched to the National League for 1994)
Seattle Mariners (expansion team, 1976)
Toronto Blue Jays (expansion team, 1976)
Tampa Bay Devil Rays (expansion team, 1998; dropped "Devil" from the name for 2008)
^^ One small correction: The brewers moved to the NL in 1998.
Quote from: Big John on July 15, 2018, 07:33:47 PM
^^ One small correction: The brewers moved to the NL in 1998.
That's what I thought I had typed, but I see I didn't. Thanks.
I think the Brewers actually switched to the NL in 1998 when Arizona and Tampa Bay entered MLB.
My dad grew up in Logansport, IN. He remembers being able to get White Sox, Cubs, Reds and Cardinals games on the radio. He ended up becoming a fan of the White Sox, because they were the only AL team of the group and thus the only ones who played the Yankees, back when they had Mantle, Maris, Berra, etc.
I don't know Indiana geography well, but I'm surprised he could pick up Cincy and not pickup Cleveland or Detroit. That said, the Go Go White Sox made it to the World Series in 1959. Cleveland was strong, too, but that was earlier in the 1950s.
Quote from: cabiness42 on July 16, 2018, 08:56:16 AM
My dad grew up in Logansport, IN. He remembers being able to get White Sox, Cubs, Reds and Cardinals games on the radio. He ended up becoming a fan of the White Sox, because they were the only AL team of the group and thus the only ones who played the Yankees, back when they had Mantle, Maris, Berra, etc.
He couldn't get WJR in Logansport?
Quote from: ce929wax on July 15, 2018, 10:52:01 PM
I think the Brewers actually switched to the NL in 1998 when Arizona and Tampa Bay entered MLB.
They did. It was to keep an even number of teams in each league, to minimize the number of interleague games (which had just started the year prior). Kind of amusing to look at it in that light now since the Astros moving to the AL caused that to happen.
I cannot exaggerate how much I dislike interleague play.
Quote from: jon daly on July 16, 2018, 12:50:46 PM
I cannot exaggerate how much I dislike interleague play.
A lot of people don't.
Yet, not a single thing is said about the NFL, NBA and NHL interleague play.
Wrt the NFL, I wasn't following it before the merger. So interconference play doesn't bug me. But something doesn't feel right when (e.g.) the Red Sox finish their season series against the Twins in May just so they can play more games against the NL.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2018, 01:07:35 PM
Quote from: jon daly on July 16, 2018, 12:50:46 PM
I cannot exaggerate how much I dislike interleague play.
A lot of people don't.
Yet, not a single thing is said about the NFL, NBA and NHL interleague play.
I assume it’s because in MLB’s case it’s because the two leagues differ on DH usage. In the other leagues the rules are the same between the conferences.
I can't stand Interleague play either. MLB went 97 years with both leagues playing only the teams in that league and not no Interleague. Now with 15 teams in each league you have to have it or one team will always have a day off every day. The All-Star Game use to be a lot more fun when the teams in each league only played each other rather than Interleague, as an American League fan in an American League city (Detroit) it was fun seeing the players from the National League in the All-Star Game. Now it's not as much fun since they play each other during the regular season. The World Series was kind of fun that way too but not anymore. I loved how the pennant was won during the regular season before 1969 but those days are gone forever it really put the two best teams from each league in the World Series rather than having like a Wild Card winner making it to the World Series. I didn't mind the East and West divisions prior to 1994 and it seems as if the AL Central is a rather weak division with this season anyway two of the worst teams in baseball the White Sox and Royals in it but I guess the AL East has the Orioles who believe it or not are right on pace with the 2003 Tigers who lost 119 games. I looked the other day and through 95 games the Orioles had the same exact record the 2003 Tigers did. I can't believe that Buck Showalter still has a job.
97 years is a long time. The only major sports I can think of with a that long a history of prominence are horse racing, boxing, and college football.
I wonder what boxing purists thought when the alphabet soup of title belts started. I know that I'm thrown off by NCAA conference realignment.
Good point about the All-Star Game being diluted by interleague play, but I think some dilution might be due to the availability of out of market games via cable and, now, streaming.
Part of what I dislike about the current interleague format is that it results in there not being a balanced schedule even within the same division. For example, the Nationals play Baltimore every year, while the Mets play the Yankees. Most years, that's a potential advantage for the Nats. Strength of schedule was historically not an issue in baseball.
^^ Agree. I suppose interleague play is great if you live in Boston and want to see Clayton Kershaw or Bryce Harper play live and in person. But that doesn't help us ordinary slobs who rarely get to an MLB game.
Detroit is my local city of course and whenever I go to Tigers games I want to see an American League team playing the Tigers not some random National League team. I'd much rather see them play the Yankees, Red Sox, Orioles and so on more than once a year at each ballpark. When I was watching baseball growing up the Tigers would make two trips to each American League city and each American League team would make two trips to Detroit, it was a lot more fun that way because you played the teams you are battling for the division. The Tigers historically are an average team IMO, they've had some dominate years but have also had a lot of down years too.
Quote from: Flint1979 on July 16, 2018, 02:22:20 PM
I can't stand Interleague play either. MLB went 97 years with both leagues playing only the teams in that league and not no Interleague. Now with 15 teams in each league you have to have it or one team will always have a day off every day. The All-Star Game use to be a lot more fun when the teams in each league only played each other rather than Interleague, as an American League fan in an American League city (Detroit) it was fun seeing the players from the National League in the All-Star Game. Now it's not as much fun since they play each other during the regular season. The World Series was kind of fun that way too but not anymore. I loved how the pennant was won during the regular season before 1969 but those days are gone forever it really put the two best teams from each league in the World Series rather than having like a Wild Card winner making it to the World Series. I didn't mind the East and West divisions prior to 1994 and it seems as if the AL Central is a rather weak division with this season anyway two of the worst teams in baseball the White Sox and Royals in it but I guess the AL East has the Orioles who believe it or not are right on pace with the 2003 Tigers who lost 119 games. I looked the other day and through 95 games the Orioles had the same exact record the 2003 Tigers did. I can't believe that Buck Showalter still has a job.
I'd just have them play divisional teams 14-15 times (57 games) conference 6 times (60 games), non conference/league 3 times (45 games)
Or just get rid of leagues and conferences altogether so everyone can play everyone
Quote from: texaskdog on July 16, 2018, 04:56:43 PM
Or just get rid of leagues and conferences altogether so everyone can play everyone
In general, teams in the same division are closer than other teams, which means traveling is less of an issue.
I've always been intrigued and puzzled by the factors that make someone a fan of a particular team. (Disclaimer: I grew up in a home totally devoid of professional sports, so really, everything about sports fandom is alien to me.)
Living in (or near) a city and being a fan of the home team would seem fairly understandable. Although to be honest, the concept of a "home team" seems like a bit of a stretch anyway. We're talking about a team of athletic mercenaries who come from all parts of the country: They may have grown up as die hard fans of their current team's arch nemesis and played college ball at a rival state university. And they likely spend the offseason at a mansion a thousand miles removed from their fans. I'd be more interested in following the Phillies, for example, if they all grew up in Roxborough and Ambler, spent their summers getting wooder ice and going downashore, and were Phillies fans themselves.
For people living out of a major metro area, picking "your" team becomes more complicated and convoluted. Obviously the availability of broadcasts is an important factor for people who aren't regularly attending games. My late grandmother, who grew up in Williamsport and spent most of her adult life either there or in greater Philadelphia, later became a Braves fan in her retirement in Florida because of the broadcasts on WTBS. And she kept that affiliation even after she moved back to Williamsport in the '90s.
Growing up in Williamsport, the majority of people were Philadelphia fans. A minority were either Pittsburgh fans or retained a favorite team from somewhere they had lived in the past. Or at least this was the case in my parents' generation (Baby Boomers). For many of their children (my generation), it seemed that the process of selecting a team became subject to odd and abstract criteria. Some became fans of a team because of a star player on the roster–like Michael Jordan or Joe Montana. And others seemed to pick a team based on some sense of "attitude" –like the Raiders being rowdy or the Yankees being the team for life's winners. Still others would follow a team based somewhere they dreamed of moving to, a team with colors or a logo they liked, etc. And some people I've questioned had no explanation whatsoever for their devotion to a team.
I'm sure it would make a good topic for a doctoral dissertation.
I'm not really bothered by interleague play. I never really followed baseball as much as I do now until I was in high school, so by that time interleague play had been established. When I was a younger kid, I was more into football, basketball, and hockey.