This is for the people out there who would like a visual comparison of relationships among cities and the amount of championships won and by whom. http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...tory_of_mlb_the_nba_the_nhl_and_the_nfl_.html nothing compares to New England....
Do they count the cities championships even when a team leaves? For instance does Minnesota have the 5 championships from the Lakers?
It looks like the championships stay where they are won. So minny does have the NBA titles (unless I Rip Van Winkled and the T-wolves dominated while I was asleep)
Missed out on the Oilers first 2 AFL championships in '60 and '61....so Houston is missing 2...and are the Dynamo championships on there? DD
If New England didn't have the Celtics- they would have a lot less. Same with NY and the Yankees. Remember, the premier big market Knicks have won the same amount of rings we have. The Mets have always sucked, the Rangers were pretty good for awhile, but the Islanders are ****ty now and the Rangers haven't won the Stanley Cup in awhile. Giants won 4 super bowls, and the Jets have only won 1.
Not really the same as Boston.. Not did the Yankees win a lot, but they beat the NY Giants or Brooklyn Dodgers a combined 8 times for the World Series.
Well, NY also has 2 teams from each sport - Yankees/Mets, Jets/Giants, Islands/Rangers, Knicks (and now the Brooklyn Nets)
Doesn't surprise me. The best sports cities today are pretty much the best winning cities of all-time.
AFL/ABA championships never really count because those leagues don't exist anymore. And I suppose MLS isn't taken seriously
