It's August 26, 2025, 11:11:51 PM
Quote from: I Am The Anton on January 21, 2007, 12:28:28 AMQuote from: Rik: That Kufi Smackin' Ass Beaner on January 20, 2007, 09:40:19 PMWe need a team out here.To say you need another professional sports team in California is just being greedy. LA NEEDS A TEAM - Just because there are teams in California doesnt mean shit, LA as an area is bigger than most teams with a NFL team combined.
Quote from: Rik: That Kufi Smackin' Ass Beaner on January 20, 2007, 09:40:19 PMWe need a team out here.To say you need another professional sports team in California is just being greedy.
We need a team out here.
Quote from: Low Key on January 20, 2007, 08:09:14 PMQuote from: Ted Buckland on January 20, 2007, 08:01:57 PMQuote from: Low Key on January 20, 2007, 07:26:08 PMIn a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.That's very misleading to say primarily because Minnie/St. Paul is more dense then L.A. St. Paul and Minneapolis have about 700,000+ people combined compared to L.A.'s 3.6 million+ people. The entire metro area doesn't even have a higher population then the city of Los Angeles.The Twin Cities area includes the surrounding suburbs, and has a population of more than 3 million. The area here is unique and if you factor in the "metro area", we are right up there with LA.The entire Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington Metropolitan Statistical Area has 3 million+ people. Not even the total population of the city of L.A.
Quote from: Ted Buckland on January 20, 2007, 08:01:57 PMQuote from: Low Key on January 20, 2007, 07:26:08 PMIn a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.That's very misleading to say primarily because Minnie/St. Paul is more dense then L.A. St. Paul and Minneapolis have about 700,000+ people combined compared to L.A.'s 3.6 million+ people. The entire metro area doesn't even have a higher population then the city of Los Angeles.The Twin Cities area includes the surrounding suburbs, and has a population of more than 3 million. The area here is unique and if you factor in the "metro area", we are right up there with LA.
Quote from: Low Key on January 20, 2007, 07:26:08 PMIn a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.That's very misleading to say primarily because Minnie/St. Paul is more dense then L.A. St. Paul and Minneapolis have about 700,000+ people combined compared to L.A.'s 3.6 million+ people. The entire metro area doesn't even have a higher population then the city of Los Angeles.
In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.
Quote from: E-Crazy on January 21, 2007, 12:29:38 AMQuote from: I Am The Anton on January 21, 2007, 12:28:28 AMQuote from: Rik: That Kufi Smackin' Ass Beaner on January 20, 2007, 09:40:19 PMWe need a team out here.To say you need another professional sports team in California is just being greedy. LA NEEDS A TEAM - Just because there are teams in California doesnt mean shit, LA as an area is bigger than most teams with a NFL team combined. LA has 2 NBA teams in the same building and 2 MLB teams. Is it really going to hurt you to not have a NFL team? LA had a NFL team and it failed, why do you think LA even deserves to take a franchise from another city.
In a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.
Quote from: Bay Area Jat on January 21, 2007, 08:35:26 AMIn a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.I live in Burnsville homie, I grew up in LA. There is no way that 100 square mile is right. Maybe average, but there are parts of LA that in a 100 square miles, it's as dense as New York. I've lived in both.As for the Lakers, LA made them. They moved to LA because they won 5 titles in Minneapolis, and they never had people come to the games. They were losing money, and they were making basketball history. They were the first NBA team to play the Harlem Globetroders, as back then no NBA team would play a black team, much less the World Champions. The MN Lakers were making history, and no one knew it in their own city. So to survive as a franchise, they had to move. And they can keep the name, as the Lakers in Los Angeles are basketball history. Oh, here's a list of Lakes in Los Angeles.Lake Machado, Harbor City (made popular by the elusive "Reggie the Alligator")Lincoln Park Lake (formerly East Lake), Lincoln HeightsLake Balboa, Sepulveda Basin (Encino/Van Nuys)MacArthur Park Lake (formerly West Lake), MacArthur ParkEcho Park Lake, Echo ParkLake Hollywood (Hollywood Reservoir), HollywoodLos Angeles Japanese Garden lakes, Sepulveda Basin, Van NuysHollenbeck Lake, Boyle HeightsReseda Park Lake, ResedaErnest Debs Park Reservoir (pond), Montecito HeightsToluca Lake (there are actually 2 of them: one in the L.A. community of Toluca Lake and a smaller one in Burbank)Del Rey LagoonPond (in the shape of a "Mexican guitar") from a natural spring at Los Encinos State Park, EncinoHansen Dam Lake, Lake View Terrace
Quote from: M Dogg on January 21, 2007, 01:38:59 PMQuote from: Bay Area Jat on January 21, 2007, 08:35:26 AMIn a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.Yall already took our basketball team, yall don't need our football team too. How many lakes does LA have anyways? One? Give our damn name back at least.I live in Burnsville homie, I grew up in LA. There is no way that 100 square mile is right. Maybe average, but there are parts of LA that in a 100 square miles, it's as dense as New York. I've lived in both.As for the Lakers, LA made them. They moved to LA because they won 5 titles in Minneapolis, and they never had people come to the games. They were losing money, and they were making basketball history. They were the first NBA team to play the Harlem Globetroders, as back then no NBA team would play a black team, much less the World Champions. The MN Lakers were making history, and no one knew it in their own city. So to survive as a franchise, they had to move. And they can keep the name, as the Lakers in Los Angeles are basketball history. Oh, here's a list of Lakes in Los Angeles.Lake Machado, Harbor City (made popular by the elusive "Reggie the Alligator")Lincoln Park Lake (formerly East Lake), Lincoln HeightsLake Balboa, Sepulveda Basin (Encino/Van Nuys)MacArthur Park Lake (formerly West Lake), MacArthur ParkEcho Park Lake, Echo ParkLake Hollywood (Hollywood Reservoir), HollywoodLos Angeles Japanese Garden lakes, Sepulveda Basin, Van NuysHollenbeck Lake, Boyle HeightsReseda Park Lake, ResedaErnest Debs Park Reservoir (pond), Montecito HeightsToluca Lake (there are actually 2 of them: one in the L.A. community of Toluca Lake and a smaller one in Burbank)Del Rey LagoonPond (in the shape of a "Mexican guitar") from a natural spring at Los Encinos State Park, EncinoHansen Dam Lake, Lake View TerraceThere are more lakes in walking distance from my house. We have 11,000+ lakes in Minnesota. It just seems logical to call a Minnesota team the Lakers, wouldn't you agree?Anyways, fan turn out was terrible as a whole back then, not just in Minneapolis. It wasn't until the addition of the shot clock in the mid 50s that got people more interested and involved. It literally saved the sport. When the final score is Pistons 19, Lakers 18 (lowest score ever in the NBA), you know damn well you aren't gonna sit and watch more games.
Quote from: Ted Buckland on January 20, 2007, 08:01:57 PMQuote from: Low Key on January 20, 2007, 07:26:08 PMIn a 100 square mile area, the Twin Cities pretty much has as many people as LA. There is plenty of stuff to do here.That's very misleading to say primarily because Minnie/St. Paul is more dense then L.A. St. Paul and Minneapolis have about 700,000+ people combined compared to L.A.'s 3.6 million+ people. The entire metro area doesn't even have a higher population then the city of Los Angeles.The Twin Cities area includes the surrounding suburbs, and has a population of more than 3 million. The land division here is unique and if you factor in the "metro area", we are right up there with LA.