lol Buffalo is closer to Toronto, Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh than it is to New England. It's a midwestern city.
You’re right. It IS a midwestern city (happens to be one that is VERY accessible to both Connecticut and Vermont). Doesn’t matter a bit to to the kids who are from way down in Arkansas. It’s still in NY. Still looks like a slight.
Storrsroars DISliked both of the above posts.
It's "Rust Belt"/Mid-Atlantic with a nod to Appalachia, which starts just a couple counties south of Buffalo.
If you were standing next to me and called Pittsburgh "midwest", you'd get throat punched.
Here's where things get interesting-er...
Buffalo isn't mid-Atlantic. I wouldn't call it Appalachian either.
It's Great Lakes. Maybe a little Rust Belt-y.
Picking up some speed...
Historically Pittsburgh’s development has centered on its position as the head of the Ohio River, a categorically “Midwest” river.
Coal and iron sourced in Western PA were turned to Pittsburgh steel and shipped, first on barges and then rails, to midwestern industries.
Sorry but Pittsburgh has more in common with Detroit Buffalo and Cleveland than it does with eastern cities, even Philly
** braces throat **
And some fine-tuning...
Historically, Pittsburgh modeled its governance more on NYC and Boston than Chicago or Detroit. Which is why it's so damn messy with a ridiculous number of boroughs and townships with redundant municipal services and why Pittsburgh is routinely powerless in trying to annex its neighbors, unlike many midwestern cities.
Btw, a whole lot of Manhattan was built with Pittsburgh steel, as well as in other East Coast cities. But that's neither here nor there.
There's no argument here that Pittsburgh is "East Coast". But it's definitely not Midwestern in almost any regard. It's more a mix of Eastern & South than anything Midwest. Kids go to college either locally, to Eastern or SEC schools. Few go to midwest universities comparatively.
There's geology, natural resources, American history, commerce, and transportation all in play. Maybe more.
Buffalo is a Great Lakes city, and thereby part of both the NYC-Hudson River-Erie Canal-Great Lakes AND St Lawrence-Great Lakes channels.
Pittsburgh was an outpost in westward expansion prior to the Erie Canal, and is the origination point of the Ohio River, which flows down through Cincinnati and Louisville, and meets up with the Mississippi in Cairo, IL.
Much that is bounded by those two rivers encompasses and defines the Great Lakes, Rust Belt, and Midwest regions. Navigable waterways, rail beds, roadways, and airline hubs for passengers & freight delivery of raw materials and finished goods are all in the mix.
Lewis & Clark set off from the western bank of the Ohio River where natural falls at Louisville brought that city to prominence and westward expansion ran through St. Louis (along the Mississippi) and into the great northwest and throughout the Louisiana Purchase.
There's a lot of opportunity for 'difference-splitting' within this thread, especially where it shines a light on parochialism and lack of greater awareness.
As an interesting side note, some time in the past couple decades, there was an inquiry into whether Lake Champlain shared a certain geological DNA enough to be considered a 'lost' 6th Great Lake, and it came up negative, but there lies the best case to link UVM and its Round 1 game location in Buffalo.
Finally, my musings come from the heart of Kentuckiana, where I can confidently proclaim that no American city draws in a more balanced fashion from the East, the North, the South, and the Midwest than Louisville, Kentucky. In the same way that Omaha got some props as an underrated city in the McDermott/Creighton thread, the Falls/River/Derby city gets misinterpreted when simply seen though the quick-take of a Northeasterner's mindset.
And with that, GO HUSKIES!
