|
|
BenedictGomez 05-08-2008, 01:47 PM According to FoxSports. I was a little disappointed they picked the Bruins for this list instead of the Rangers, since the Bruins have more cups.....oh well. Where are the Buffalo Sabres for that matter? Like many "American sports experts" my guess is the author knows more about nuclear physics than the NHL, and the Bruin inclusion is thus "token" in nature. I also think the Grizzlies and Rays are poor choices, because they've only been around 10 years or so = not enough time to fairly judge them. And oh yeah..... Golden State Warriors anyone?
10) Los Angeles Clippers
9) Vancouver/Memphis Grizzlies
8) Atlanta Hawks
7) Minnesota Twins
6) Boston Bruins
5) Detroit Lions
4) Tampa Bay Rays
3) Arizona Cardinals
2) Kansas City Royals
1) Pittsburgh Pirates
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8098378/Top-10:-Worst-franchises-in-pro-sports?MSNHPHCP>1=39002
Clarkson Falls Down 05-08-2008, 01:51 PM The 21st century 49ers organization is making a push for the top 10. :shakehead
Mr.Krinkle 05-08-2008, 01:58 PM How are the Knicks not on that list?
Also no love for the 10,000 loss Phillies?
EDIT; looking at that list it's not based solely on merit and results, but how the franchise is run as well.
Given that too, I have no idea how the Knicks didn't make the list!
DevsOwnYou 05-08-2008, 03:27 PM The Hawks? They get good ratings in the New York market, proven last Sunday afternoon. :laugh:
The Knicks and Jets also belong on the list.
jrunclenyc 05-08-2008, 03:37 PM According to FoxSports. I was a little disappointed they picked the Bruins for this list instead of the Rangers, since the Bruins have more cups.....oh well. Where are the Buffalo Sabres for that matter? Like many "American sports experts" my guess is the author knows more about nuclear physics than the NHL, and the Bruin inclusion is thus "token" in nature. I also think the Grizzlies and Rays are poor choices, because they've only been around 10 years or so = not enough time to fairly judge them. And oh yeah..... Golden State Warriors anyone?
10) Los Angeles Clippers
9) Vancouver/Memphis Grizzlies
8) Atlanta Hawks
7) Minnesota Twins
6) Boston Bruins
5) Detroit Lions
4) Tampa Bay Rays
3) Arizona Cardinals
2) Kansas City Royals
1) Pittsburgh Pirates
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8098378/Top-10:-Worst-franchises-in-pro-sports?MSNHPHCP>1=39002
I am surprised that the Chicago Blackhwks did not make the list. This may change, as Wirtz has passed away and the new management is not mired in 1950s thinking.
The Bruins? Oh hell yes. Anyone gets good, and Jacobs will sell in an instant. It's a wonder why the Bruins fans still support that team, given that the loyalty is utterly unreciprocated. Winters in Boston must be pretty boring...and, let's face it - when was the last time the Bruins won the Cup? last time they made the finals, the Oilers blew them away - even if there was a blackout in that old rathole of an arena they had.
theMessiah1194 05-08-2008, 04:01 PM I mostly agree with the list. I'd switch out Bruins with Blackhawks and definantly, definantly switch out Twins with Brewers.
njdevscup30 05-08-2008, 04:50 PM This list is ok, but the Bruins and Twins don't belong on this list. Also, I'm sure there are a number of teams that would be on this list before the Hawks.
Knicks, Blackhawks, Mapleleafs, Orioles, they all deserve a shot.
ILikeItVeryMuch 05-08-2008, 04:54 PM Knicks need to be on that list.
Anssi is epic 05-08-2008, 06:48 PM Kansas City Scouts?
KohoDonuts88 05-08-2008, 06:53 PM Particularly sad to see the Bruins, Royals and Pirates on this list. These were once proud franchises.
Lou's Koolaid 05-08-2008, 07:38 PM Why the Twins they compete year in year out with a low payroll?:help: The Knicks could be the entire top ten.:laugh:
Dialamo 05-08-2008, 08:46 PM It's official. This list sucks.
Game Breaker 05-08-2008, 09:29 PM This list is ok, but the Bruins and Twins don't belong on this list. Also, I'm sure there are a number of teams that would be on this list before the Hawks.
Knicks, Blackhawks, Mapleleafs, Orioles, they all deserve a shot.
agreed
Muttley 05-09-2008, 07:05 PM Also no love for the 10,000 loss Phillies?
1 World Series title in 125 years. (1883 was their first season)
That has to be the worst ratio in North American pro sports.
MountainHawk 05-09-2008, 07:11 PM 1 World Series title in 125 years. (1883 was their first season)
That has to be the worst ratio in North American pro sports.
I think the list is now, otherwise yeah, it's clearly the Phils if you go all time.
If the Phils go 95-67 every year, it'll take them something like 45 years to get back to .500.
The Korean* 05-09-2008, 07:13 PM 1 World Series title in 125 years. (1883 was their first season)
That has to be the worst ratio in North American pro sports.
Phillies won 2, I think. And I don't see how winning only 2 WS championship within 125 years makes them a poorly run franchise NOW! PRESENT!
Blackhawks also does not deserve any consideration after Rocky took over. It is running well, so far.
Muttley 05-09-2008, 07:15 PM Phillies won 2, I think. And I don't see how winning only 2 WS championship within 125 years makes them a poorly run franchise NOW! PRESENT!
Blackhawks also does not deserve any consideration after Rocky took over. It is running well, so far.
Nope. Just one sicne 1883.
That's pathetic.
BenedictGomez 05-10-2008, 11:57 PM Nope. Just one sicne 1883.
That's pathetic.
Not an A+ for consistency?
But yeah, the list must clearly be NOW and not all-time history, which would explain why you see the Twins and Bruins yet no Rangers, Phils, Cubs etc....
dkball7 05-11-2008, 12:22 AM Twins? What a joke.
|
|