Started thinking earlier about how my hometown of St. Louis doesn't have any DI football in the entire metro while Chicago only has Northwestern (debatably NIU too), yet a smaller area like the NC Research Triangle happens to have Duke, UNC, NC State, NC Central, and Campbell. Got to thinking, and what are the largest cities in the US without any local FBS, FCS, or even DI teams? I think St. Louis is the largest without football (Baltimore is right behind them, though they have FCS with Towson); does Rochester have anyone in DI?
Milwaukee doesn't have any, UW Milwaukee and Marquette both have D1 basketball but neither have football.
The entire state of Wisconsin actually only has 1 NCAA scholarship football program in UW Madison. All the other NCAA schools in the state are D3
Rochester does not have a D1 college.
Like Baltimore, Indianapolis doesn't have an FBS team, though they have FCS Butler.
Denver doesn't...
Or at least they used not to.
Boulder is 45 miles out of town and used to be a completely different world. Fort Collins was 60 miles out to the North and used to be seperated by miles and miles of grass. And Colorado Springs was 60 miles to the South and is still a seperate media market and divided from Denver by the Palmer Divide.
Rochester I think wins...(or loses)
Rochester has two options Buffalo Bills/Sabres or Syracuse Orange
(12-29-2017 09:15 PM)TexanMark Wrote: [ -> ]Rochester I think wins...(or loses)
Rochester has two options Buffalo Bills/Sabres or Syracuse Orange
Milwaukee the city and the metro are both larger than Rochester city and metro. Madison is roughly the same distance from Milwaukee as Syracuse is from Rochester.
Of course that is football only... Rochester doesn't even have D1 basketball which is kind of crazy.
Growing up in Rochester, the only college sports team that people cared about is Syracuse. It is odd that Buffalo/Niagara Falls has 3 (Niagara, Canisius and UB), there is also St. Bonnaventure in Olean, Cornell, Colgate, SUNY Binghampton, and SUNY Albany all in the Upstate, but not in Rochester. St. John Fisher, Nazareth, UofR, RIT (Hockey is DI), and SUNY Brockport are all good DIII schools. Roberts Weslyan recently moved from NAIA to DII.
I remember a study a while ago that had Rochester as the largest metro area without a DI school of any kind.
Sacramento and Portland dont have an FBS team.
Greenville, SC (#61 MSA) has Furman (FCS) but no FBS team. Clemson is roughly a 45 minute drive, but the sprawl hasn't quite gotten as far west as Tigertown. Also, it is one of the largest MSA's in the country without a 4-year public university.
Sdsu. San Diego county has 3.5 million people, no pro football and 1 fbs football team.
New York doesn't have an FBS team. Neither does San Francisco (although Cal, Stanford, and San Jose State aren't very far.)
(12-29-2017 08:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote: [ -> ]Started thinking earlier about how my hometown of St. Louis doesn't have any DI football in the entire metro while Chicago only has Northwestern (debatably NIU too), yet a smaller area like the NC Research Triangle happens to have Duke, UNC, NC State, NC Central, and Campbell. Got to thinking, and what are the smallest cities in the US without any local FBS, FCS, or even DI teams? I think St. Louis is the smallest without football (Baltimore is right behind them, though they have FCS with Towson); does Rochester have anyone in DI?
UMdTerps' FBS stadium is 30 road miles from InnerHarbor / Ravens' stadium. Navy is even closer at 27 miles from M&T.
FCS includes Morgan State in addition to Towson.
(12-29-2017 10:33 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote: [ -> ]New York doesn't have an FBS team. Neither does San Francisco (although Cal, Stanford, and San Jose State aren't very far.)
Rutgers is in the NYC metro, same with Cal and Stanford with the San Francisco Bay Area (San Jose is technically separate according to the census bureau).
Given how St. Louis no longer has an NFL team, it's a missed opportunity that Saint Louis U doesn't have a team and UMSL has a piss-poor athletic department. SLU in theory could've wound up in the AAC or UMSL in the MAC with decent followings for each, but neither decided to pursue football (or serious sports in general for UMSL). Missouri has always bled black and gold for Mizzou, interesting how Kansas City doesn't have a significant urban university sports program either.
IF you’re discounting FCS, technically Washington DC doesn’t have one, although Maryland and navy aren’t far away, and of course Towson and Morgan st in Baltimore. But none within the city limits that I can think of.
(12-29-2017 11:09 PM)Love and Honor Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2017 10:33 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote: [ -> ]New York doesn't have an FBS team. Neither does San Francisco (although Cal, Stanford, and San Jose State aren't very far.)
Rutgers is in the NYC metro, same with Cal and Stanford with the San Francisco Bay Area (San Jose is technically separate according to the census bureau).
Given how St. Louis no longer has an NFL team, it's a missed opportunity that Saint Louis U doesn't have a team and UMSL has a piss-poor athletic department. SLU in theory could've wound up in the AAC or UMSL in the MAC with decent followings for each, but neither decided to pursue football (or serious sports in general for UMSL). Missouri has always bled black and gold for Mizzou, interesting how Kansas City doesn't have a significant urban university sports program either.
Remember that the KC metro actually contains the University of Kansas.
Generally speaking, being the flagship university means significantly more to delivering the metro areas within its state (regardless of where that flagship might be physically located). To your point about the St. Louis metro, Mizzou and even Illinois (as a large portion of the metro is on the Illinois side) are simply going to be always more important for FBS purposes there even if a school like SLU added football.
(12-29-2017 10:09 PM)SDSUguy Wrote: [ -> ]SDSU. San Diego county has 3.5 million people, no pro football and 1 fbs football team.
San Diego
Pro = 0 (Chargers --> LA 2017)
FBS = 1 (SDSU) (1A)
FCS = 1 (USD) (1AA)
DI = 1 (UCSD) (1AAA (non-FB) 2020)
(12-29-2017 08:58 PM)RandomFan Wrote: [ -> ]Rochester does not have a D1 college.
Like Baltimore, Indianapolis doesn't have an FBS team, though they have FCS Butler.
I'd say they do have a team in Syracuse. Buffalo is also not terribly far, though Syracuse is a bigger brand and arguably the school for all of Upstate. Soon, Grand Rapids will overtake them as the largest although Western Michigan is an hour away.
Rutgers is closer to NYC than Syracuse is to Rochester but with that said, it's fair to argue that NYC doesn't have an FBS team, though it has a rich assortment of college teams in general, probably 20+ are a short subway ride from Manhattan. You could argue Oklahoma City doesn't have one though Norman isn't terribly far away.
Minnesota has only one D-I sports program, let alone one full scholarship football program.
(12-29-2017 10:37 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2017 08:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote: [ -> ]Started thinking earlier about how my hometown of St. Louis doesn't have any DI football in the entire metro while Chicago only has Northwestern (debatably NIU too), yet a smaller area like the NC Research Triangle happens to have Duke, UNC, NC State, NC Central, and Campbell. Got to thinking, and what are the smallest cities in the US without any local FBS, FCS, or even DI teams? I think St. Louis is the smallest without football (Baltimore is right behind them, though they have FCS with Towson); does Rochester have anyone in DI?
UMdTerps' FBS stadium is 30 road miles from InnerHarbor / Ravens' stadium. Navy is even closer at 27 miles from M&T.
FCS includes Morgan State in addition to Towson.
Maryland is closer to Washington than Baltimore, though I see your point.
(12-30-2017 12:14 AM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2017 08:58 PM)RandomFan Wrote: [ -> ]Rochester does not have a D1 college.
Like Baltimore, Indianapolis doesn't have an FBS team, though they have FCS Butler.
I'd say they do have a team in Syracuse. Buffalo is also not terribly far, though Syracuse is a bigger brand and arguably the school for all of Upstate. Soon, Grand Rapids will overtake them as the largest although Western Michigan is an hour away.
Rutgers is closer to NYC than Syracuse is to Rochester but with that said, it's fair to argue that NYC doesn't have an FBS team, though it has a rich assortment of college teams in general, probably 20+ are a short subway ride from Manhattan. You could argue Oklahoma City doesn't have one though Norman isn't terribly far away.
Minnesota has only one D-I sports program, let alone one full scholarship football program.
What does Grand Rapids have to do with Upstate New York?
(12-29-2017 11:09 PM)Love and Honor Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2017 10:33 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote: [ -> ]New York doesn't have an FBS team. Neither does San Francisco (although Cal, Stanford, and San Jose State aren't very far.)
Rutgers is in the NYC metro, same with Cal and Stanford with the San Francisco Bay Area (San Jose is technically separate according to the census bureau).
Given how St. Louis no longer has an NFL team, it's a missed opportunity that Saint Louis U doesn't have a team and UMSL has a piss-poor athletic department. SLU in theory could've wound up in the AAC or UMSL in the MAC with decent followings for each, but neither decided to pursue football (or serious sports in general for UMSL). Missouri has always bled black and gold for Mizzou, interesting how Kansas City doesn't have a significant urban university sports program either.
SLU is a Jesuit school along the lines of almost the entire Big East and much of the A-10. It makes total sense that they have no football team.
UMKC has too much potential to be what they are. They could at least be a Valley level program.