We are actually the fourth fastest growing big city in the US in 2018. https://www.columbusunderground.com...he-4th-fastest-growing-big-city-in-the-us-we1 And the 4th hottest housing market... https://www.bizjournals.com/columbu...eaps-five-spots-to-become-fourth-hottest.html
I think ascetically it is not that bad. However, the symbolism and corporate speak they try to incorporate in it my be the most disingenuous thing I have ever seen. These marketing-jargon-laced crest explanations are always garbage, but this one is particularly cringeworthy given the context of the Austin saga. Someone actually thought "Tradition" needed to be emphasized here? Or is at all applicable? pic.twitter.com/Y1wFS68qMc— Jeff Kassouf (@JeffKassouf) August 23, 2018
I think its just terrible because it is so generic. It could literally be ANY city if you took the Austin off it. "Does your team have 11 players and exist on a map with the cardinal directions? Well then do we have the badge for you!"
it would not work for Phoenix or LA. They don't have oak trees. hahaha jk. But you are right. I reminds me of one of those soulless HR meetings that I've been to when I worked for big corporations. They get some prepy little HR glorified intern to talk about the flavor of the day. Mean while you are sitting in your seat contemplating the poor life choices that have lead you to this point and you feel a deep intense pain in your soul.
I've said before that it really isn't, by itself, a bad looking thing. It's just 110% generic. It would work great for a second-division Irish team (it's inspiration looks to be in the Celtic tree of life), where it would carry some meaning. But it says nothing about Austin or the team. That's what makes it bad.
Maybe its a good thing they are going with the Celtic theme. As both of the clubs supporters are scum of the earth.
had a dentist appointment go long and had to cancel my lunch plans (skyline) to catch up at work. What have I missed today? And yes, my credit card was charged for tickets.
Close, but not exactly. That CU article plays fast and loose with city and regional population stats. The stats in that article are for the City of Columbus, not the Columbus metro region. Not that having a booming City of Columbus is a bad thing - it's not - especially since it makes up half of the metro area population. But the Columbus metro area is not the 4th fastest growing in the country; just the city is. Last I heard - and it was at least a year ago - the Columbus MSA/metro region - with a population of about 2 million - was the 13th fastest growing large metro area in the country, and the only Midwestern metro area to crack the top 15 nationally. Not to be confused with the often-mentioned claim that we're the 14th biggest city in the US. True, for what it's worth, but again that only measures the City of Columbus and compares it to other singular cities. We're about the same size as the City of San Francisco, for example, but of course the San Francisco metro area (MSA population) is over 2.5 million larger than the Columbus metro region. Lies, damned lies and statistics, I suppose. But any way you slice it, "Columbus" is a fast growing area.
Oh lord does this hit the nail on the head, repped and quoted for truth. I go to the game to suffer with every kick of the ball. Complain when one of our guys does poorly, stew in my own misery while they play terribly. And erupt into joy when they do something right. It's the best and I have no idea why, because nearly every minute of it sucks.
I understand that I deserve to get a hard time about some of my grammar mistakes. But this one I feel I should be able to blame on the red squiggly line failing me.
I understand and yes you're correct about everything you said. My point though was the city is growing and rapidly so. Specifically faster than Austin, which is important in the current context. Especially since Columbus and Austin essentially had the same metro populations in 2017. Also, not specific to this post or Minnman's comments at all but I have a pet peeve about this hedging of Columbus growth stuff we hear/see a lot. If these stats were about any other major city in the US there would zero hedging. You don't see anyone saying "well we are only the second largest city in the south". You don't hear Charlotte saying "well really its just our urban area population that is skyrocketing." Or have people from Seattle saying "well really its just the city/area real estate market that is the hottest in the country." I think Columbus has been so used to being another college city and state capital in the Midwest that now that we are (rapidly) growing past that there is this sort of regressive mentality around that growth. We keep trying to put it in the larger context of Chicago or San Fransisco. It is problematic in general but in a conflict with Austin, who is growing slower with a very similar population but is considered to be "growing", its really problematic. We need to move past it, not just for the Crew but our own wellbeing.
I started OSU law school in 1974 and lived in one of the graduate dorms. The grad students from New York City in those days told their friends and relatives back home that Columbus was “a metropolitan area of a million people where the eleven o’clock news is sponsored by a herbicide.”