i have the magazine, and the ranking criteria is made up of things that heavily favor small markets. things like value for your dollar (sorry, knicks) or fan relations (the lakers don't have to try hard to make customers happy because they know they'll fill staples anyway).
after "bang for the buck" and "fan relations," the most highly weighted criteria in their study are the likability of players, affordability. (feels redundant), and stadium experience. again, having been to games in larger markets, i can tell you that most of the big fish don't care too much about things like that, because they'll get people in the stadium either way.
that's why this study is a little bogus. title hopes only make up 3.2% of the ranking, so this isn't about which franchises are GOOD... they're just about which franchises produce the most warm-and-fuzzy relationships with average joe fan. that's why the top of just about any league is a list of small-market teams. in the NBA's case, it's OKC, SAS, IND, MEM at the top. for the NFL it's packers, saints, ravens, steelers. you see where i'm headed...
