Thank you. I always see people talk about nightlife nightlife nightlife, and I'm thinking to myself, who cares? I mean, really. How can it be a real factor in where people want to live (and even visit)?
It's all about community for me. Anywhere can be a great place to live if you're close to friends/family and can run into people you know on the street and in your neighbourhood.
My take as well. I look at a place with a high concentration of nightclubs as a place I'd avoid. Although I could see the appeal maybe in a persons 20's and maybe for some hockey players but if I was worth gobs of money I wouldn't be hanging around scouting puck bunnies in a greasy nightclub.
Its sad sometimes where this generation is at as far as what appeals to them. Glen Sather et al saw this province and territory as a great outdoors to explore and get around in. Some of the best wildlife and experiences found anywhere on the planet.
Bored of the city? Hit the mountains and get out in the backcountry and change your life and a lot of bad habits.
I honestly find it hard to believe that NHL players really care about the cold. Here are young athletes in amazing shape, I doubt they really care about cold winters. However, I do agree with the other two points, the long travel and crappy team. Also will add the size of the city, most players want to live in a bigger city, night life and all of that.
I think a place like Tampa Bay often has just as little going for it as Edmonton. I think places like NYC, Toronto, LA, Chicago, will always have the most going for them in terms of drawing UFAs.
Think about it. A lot of players especially the younger players unless they are big into snowboarding and skiing(something they probably don't get to do a lot of since their hockey season is dead smack in the middle of prime skiing season) would likely prefer to be sitting on a beach in the sun or whooping it up at some fancy bar when they aren't playing hockey. While Edmonton has a lot of bars and cold, I can understand why players would ultimately choose to be in Anaheim, LA, New York, Philly, New Jersey, Boston etc. over Edmonton. That pretty much applies to the young players and the old players would not choose Edmonton due to the travel.
Think about it. A lot of players especially the younger players unless they are big into snowboarding and skiing(something they probably don't get to do a lot of since their hockey season is dead smack in the middle of prime skiing season) would likely prefer to be sitting on a beach in the sun or whooping it up at some fancy bar when they aren't playing hockey. While Edmonton has a lot of bars and cold, I can understand why players would ultimately choose to be in Anaheim, LA, New York, Philly, New Jersey, Boston etc. over Edmonton. That pretty much applies to the young players and the old players would not choose Edmonton due to the travel.
I agree, and Tampa does have a lot going for it. I'm sure Taylor Hall would be in heaven if he was in Florida during the summer. Tons of college people (girls) go to the beach, and the nightlife in PCB, Destin, Daytona, etc. is really good. Florida is basically where rich, white people go to die and where young kids go to party.
This is all based on the assumption that Hall wants this type of lifestyle. Some hockey players, including Malkin, like a quiet city with nothing to do.
Yes, and I agree. Its a joke. The best places to live in Canada are the biggest cities. Know how I know? Becasue most people live there. So they should be high up on the list.
This list fails to weigh “stuff to do” as a high priority. That’s where the bigger cities should have the advantage. Bigger cities have more things that make life interesting and fun. How many points does Calgary get for being close to the mountains and having the Stampede? How many points does Edmonton get for being a few hours from the best mountain town ever (Jasper) and having such a great Fringe festival? How about having NHL, CFL and other pro teams to go watch? These things don’t get enough weight, as they are a huge factor as to why most people live where they are.
Cost of living, ease of finding work and amount of things to entertain yourself and your family should be three of the biggest reasons. Not number of new cars on the road.
Yes, and I agree. Its a joke. The best places to live in Canada are the biggest cities. Know how I know? Becasue most people live there. So they should be high up on the list.
This list fails to weigh “stuff to do” as a high priority. That’s where the bigger cities should have the advantage. Bigger cities have more things that make life interesting and fun. How many points does Calgary get for being close to the mountains and having the Stampede? How many points does Edmonton get for being a few hours from the best mountain town ever (Jasper) and having such a great Fringe festival? How about having NHL, CFL and other pro teams to go watch? These things don’t get enough weight, as they are a huge factor as to why most people live where they are.
Cost of living, ease of finding work and amount of things to entertain yourself and your family should be three of the biggest reasons. Not number of new cars on the road.
I would agree that the new cars piece should probably not be used and should be replaced by "amenities & activities". I also think the weather criteria should be tweaked slightly.
But, for the most part, it is much more realistic than the dumb ones that rate touristy criteria and have no element of real livability in them. Although not perfect, this is the most accurate one I have seen.
