I thought that the Washington Monuments was a good name. I don’t understand why we need a mascot, other than for marketing purposes. Why don’t we just call all the teams by the city that they represent? That’s the way people talk about them in the media. Of course, Los Angeles gets five teams and San Antonio zero, so why quibble? San Antonio is the largest city in America (7th in size) without an NFL team.
I've always thought that the way major league sports teams (NFL, NBA, MLB) are placed has no rhyme or reason. Below are some random thoughts about that.
I think the NBA has the largest number of cities where it's the only major league game in town. Off the top of my head I can think of five cities (Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Sacramento and Portland) that all have an NBA team but no MLB or NFL.
The second-largest city in California and eighth largest in the country (San Diego) has only an MLB team, now that the Clippers and Chargers have moved to LA.
The third-largest city in California (San Jose) has none of the above. San Jose is the 10th largest city in the US. Number 11 is Austin, which also has no major league teams.
Atlanta is the 39th largest city, but has all three major league teams. I think Minneapolis is the smallest city (46th largest in the country) to have NFL, NBA and MLB.
Pittsburgh isn't even in the
top 50 largest cities and yet has both NFL and MLB, but no NBA.
New Orleans isn't in the top 50 either and has NFL and NBA, but no MLB.
If I remember correctly, there are only 14 states that have a major league baseball team, which means 36 states do not have one.
One of these days I'm going to sit down with a map and figure out which state is the farthest away from an NFL team.