Sigging it.

The Lakers are a terrific example of a team that has nothing to do with their city. They were originally from Minneapolis in Minnesota, a state whose nickname is Land of 10,000 Lakes. Then they moved to L.A., which has very few lakes, and pointlessly kept the name.

That show ain’t hurting their pussies son. Wrong attitude.

Not as egregious as the Utah Jazz (from New Orleans)

No denying that.

It is true.

I read a site for city development. One of the biggest complaints the users on there have at the moment is that all of our teams are doing quite badly and have been for a while. We've had some of the best development outside London over the past five years or so, but the one thing that remains a constant complaint is the lack of a team at the highest level of football because of the revenue and exposure playing in the Champions League gives you, and the size of the audience, which everyone is aware of. It really can be important in getting the city's name out there and boosting things like tourism and development. The Commonwealth Games should be a good boost but we'd like teams to be competing. If we had made the CL in 2009 VP would be a 50,000+ stadium right now.

A good example of a city where it is predominantly known for its sports team would be Dortmund, imo.

That is silly but like I said, not really a thing here.

Yes. Do you not?

And?

And it doesn't change what I was saying about successful teams raising a city's profile especially when they use the name of the city. That team is an exception to the rule because it's not really a thing over here or in Europe.