I know some teams have won in two different cities. But, the Braves won in Boston in 1914, Milwaukee in 1957, and Atlanta in 1995, and again this year. Does this make them unique among all franchises and professional sports?
I should qualify that I’m mostly thinking MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL.
In the NFL, the Rams have won championships while based in Cleveland (1945), Los Angeles (1951), and St. Louis (1999).
They, the Raiders (Oakland, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas), and the Cardinals (Chicago, St. Louis, and Arizona/Phoenix) are the only current NFL teams to have been based in three different cities. The Raiders have only been in Las Vegas for two seasons now, and the Cardinals’ only championship came while they were in Chicago (1947).
For the MLB 3 cities teams are The Braves as mentioned.
The A’s (Philly, KC & Oakland)
Orioles who were the St. Louis Browns and started as the Milwaukee Brewers in 1901. No championships except as Baltimore.
One more Baseball team had 3+ cities, the Elite Giants played in Baltimore, Washington, Columbus & Nashville. But they only took the pennant in Baltimore.
The NBA has had a lot of movement, but only teams with Champions in 2 cities.
None in the NHL
To clarify, though, it would be a significant understatement to say that the Kansas City A’s never won a pennant.
If you go back to the nineteenth century, the NY/SF Giants actually started out in Troy, NY, so that’s three cities for them, too.
Not to be confused with the other Baltimore Orioles, who became the Yankees, or the other Milwaukee Brewers, who used to be the Seattle Pilots.
Also, the Browns never won a World Series, but they did win at least one league championship in 1944, and maybe others I don’t remember offhand.
I don’t understand, The NY Giants started as the NY Gothams, not Troy. You would have to cite that. The Giants tooks a slot vacated by Troy maybe, but no team connection.
According to Baseball & The Yanks, the Yanks are not the Baltimore Os of 1901 & 1902. Also those Baltimore Os are not the AA Os who were quite successful.
@Yodalicious, for Baseball, once the World Series began, were you looking for league champions or just World Series winners? I assumed the latter.
The Browns did win the AL and lost the World Series in 1944 to the St Louis Cards.
Hm, it appears you are right. Contrary to Giants fans urban legend, the Gothams took the Trojans’s spot in the league, but the franchises were otherwise unrelated. This article confirms that , but also confirms the existence of the legend by stating without evidence “The city of Troy is credited for becoming the birth place of the San Francisco Giants”.
Also, I learned the Troy-Worcester clash on the next-to-last day of the 1882 season holds a probably-never-to-be-broken major league record, with a paid attendance of 6.
This is from the first paragraph of the Yankees Wikipedia article, though:
The Yankees began play in the 1901 season as the Baltimore Orioles (no relation to the modern Baltimore Orioles). In 1903, Frank Farrell and Bill Devery purchased the franchise after it ceased operations and moved it to New York City, renaming the club the New York Highlanders .[3] The Highlanders were officially renamed the New York Yankees in 1913.[4]
The Wiki page is wrong. But an easy mistake as I believed that also until around 1999. According to MLB, the Baltimore franchise folded after the NY Giants raided the Orioles. Then an American League team in NYC was added in 1903 that went on to be known as the Yankees.
Confusing things were many on the remaining roster were transferred to the new team. The new owners purchased the dead team for its contracts basically.
I will dig up cites for this if you don’t believe me.
Quickest cite:
Note Baltimore not included, check the Brewers and the Pilots are included.
Well, if the Baltimore owners moved both the team and the players on the roster to New York, how is that not a franchise move? I mean, on paper maybe the Yankees were “officially” considered an expansion team and the Baltimore franchise just disappeared entirely, but given that the same people owned both teams, it seems like a distinction without a difference.
The only place it really matters is total team/franchise records. MLB itself, Baseball Reference and Total Baseball, along with the Yankees all make the distinction. The Yankees Franchise goes back to 1903 and not 1901.
The 1901 & 1902 Baltimore Orioles are also not in any way connected to the 1882 to 1899 Orioles. This team was first an NL team and then an American Association team.
It is all a little strange. And even losing 2 years of wins, the Yanks were still the first and currently the only AL team with 10,000+ Wins.
Phillies should finally make it in 2022. Despite 21 extra seasons of playing. The only original NL team still not at 10,000+
Red Sox will get there in 3-4 years as the second AL team.
There are a few examples of that from the NFL’s history, as well – a team would fold, and its assets (including equipment and player contracts) would be transferred to a new team, but from the NFL’s historical POV, it wouldn’t be a continuation of the same franchise.
For example, in 1951, the New York Yanks NFL team folded; a pair of wealthy brothers from Dallas bought an NFL franchise for 1952, and also bought the Yanks’ roster. However, the new team, the Dallas Texans, was considered to be brand-new, rather than a continuation of the Yanks franchise.
The Texans folded after one season, and the NFL granted a new franchise to Baltimore (which would be the Colts); though the Colts obtained the roster and other assets of the Texans, they, too, were considered a brand-new franchise, rather than being a continuation of the Texans franchise.
This kind of thing is kind of nebulous, especially prior to about 1930 or so. Are they the same club? Are they not? There’s no real definitive answer, and it’s pointless to pretend there is.
I mean, right now we are living with the fiction that the Baltimore Ravens weren’t actually the Cleveland Browns and that the current Cleveland Browns are not a new franchise. That’s clearly a lie, but we are pretending it’s true. We might as well pretend that the 1901 Baltimore Orioles are the current New York Yankees and that the 19th century Troy club is the same as the current San Francisco Giants, if that’s what the organizations and the fans want to believe.
Correct.
If you want to get technical, the Braves can sort of claim FOUR cities. While they are still called Atlanta, their current stadium isn’t really in Atlanta. It holds an Atlanta mailing address but sits in Cumberland, in Cobb County.
If I am not mistaken, they and the LA Angels (in Anaheim, of course) are the only MLB teams presently named after a city they don’t actually have a stadium in.
Yes, I remember waking up to the news that our tax dollars were being shifted from roads, schools, and green spaces to a stadium, without our approval. But that’s a story for another day.
Well, I support the Yankees’ right to self-identify however they please. 
It was just an observation, big guy. They are in fact the only major North American pro sports franchise to win a championship while headquartered in four different municipalities.
The New York Giants have always been called “New York” too, but it’s just a fact that they have played in three different cities, is it not?
So the Giants DIDN’T play in New York City from 1925 to 1973 and in New Haven in 1973 and 1974, back to New York in 1975, and then in East Rutherford, New Jersey from 1976 to now?
Well… they did. Those are facts.
So they’ve played in two cities and a borough you won’t call a city? Sigh.
Hey, you know who’s won a major championship while headquartered in four different municipalities? The Braves.
The Dodgers have played in three cities - Los Angeles, New York, and Brooklyn (which was an independent city prior to 1898).