Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Despite Relocation Drama, Coyotes Overcome Adversity

San Diego fifth most "miserable" sports city

Really what they're talking about in terms of misery isn't necessarily just having terrible teams. If you have a terrible team in your city, you don't know any better. Ignorance is bliss. It's when you have teams that are this close. That's when you start to know misery. That's when you can just about taste sweet victory before getting it slapped out of your mouth.

Forbes has the list up now. We rank behind Atlanta, Seattle, Buffalo and Phoenix. Phoenix is crazy to me considering they've won a championship within the last 10 years and it also makes me mad to be behind Seattle on any type of list.

Comment 14 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

If you've got to be miserable...

Atlanta is a land-locked hell-hole, Seattle is dreary and depressing, Buffalo is Buffalo for God's sake, and Phoenix is hot enough to kill you. If you've got to be miserable, San Diego seems like a pretty good place to do it.

by I_Can_Still_Pitch on Apr 14, 2008 8:20 AM PDT reply actions  

Comparing

the Chargers 1982 AFC championship loss to the Pads failure last yr to get to the NLDS is like comparing apples and unicorns. In '82, the entire city thought beating Cincy was just a formality to get to the Super Bowl and then the weather screwed everything up - entire city was crushed. Last yr, I'm not sure that anyone but those of us around here and at Ducksnorts cared all that much that we lost a one game playoff to get into the playoffs.

by Winfield's Ghost on Apr 14, 2008 8:41 AM PDT reply actions  

Agreed 100%

What an idiotic comparison.

by Drama on Apr 14, 2008 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Weak

Philadelphia has to be more miserable than us.

And last year was a minor disappointment, I'd say a bigger one was getting beat by the lowly Cards who fell backwards into a playoff spot.

The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

by Axion on Apr 14, 2008 9:32 AM PDT reply actions  

Cards and Rockies

what aggravates me is the woulda coulda shoulda that I go through when I see those types of teams continue on to the World Series.

by Dex on Apr 14, 2008 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

No kidding

The last 2 years were such completely wide open fields in the NL...there really wasn't any one dominant team, just 4 pretty good ones.

I have long thought that recent San Diego teams picked poor years to make their Championship runs. 1998 Yankees--one of the winningest teams in all baseball history to that point? The 18-0 Patriots (who were vulnerable, obviously...but had still had a season no team in decades had)? The 49ers dynasty?

by goose1 on Apr 14, 2008 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Throw in the '84 Tigers as well

"All the big fellas in baseball are gonna get scrawny and weak like those stat geeks that nobody likes." -- Roger Clemens

by TheGrandHatching on Apr 14, 2008 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's a pattern not just of losing...

But of running into whoever is the best team that stupid decade....One would think this would be some sort of consolation. It isn't, really.

by goose1 on Apr 14, 2008 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's a pattern not just of losing...

Although not exactly the '98 Yankees, the '84 Tigers were ranked #9 in the post-1947 era and #7 in the post-1961 era in Baseball Almanac's article "Determining the Best Major League Team Ever Through Logical Statistical Comparison".

"All the big fellas in baseball are gonna get scrawny and weak like those stat geeks that nobody likes." -- Roger Clemens

by TheGrandHatching on Apr 14, 2008 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

This guy lost me in paragraph two.

"The 1998 Atlanta Braves are included in the rankings although their winning percentage was just .654. They played dominantly, and if not for a very "lucky" San Diego Padres team, these Braves may have won the World Series."

F this guy. Did we not beat them 4-2? With them holding home field advantage? Did we not beat them THREE times on their home field? Including the series clincher? Did we not shut them out TWICE in that series?

by Drama on Apr 14, 2008 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

I didn't understand that at all. Not knowing what his criterion was for playing "dominantly" or being "lucky", I decided to read that paragraph as sarcastic.

"All the big fellas in baseball are gonna get scrawny and weak like those stat geeks that nobody likes." -- Roger Clemens

by TheGrandHatching on Apr 14, 2008 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yet...

"A large determinant of a team's greatness is how it performs in the postseason. Great teams don't choke. They continue to play as they had all season long, or better in the postseason, dominating their opponents in the World Series, and any Playoffs."

Also, apparently great teams make sure that if they give up runs they aren't earned!

by Wes on Apr 14, 2008 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would think....

....if you have to live somewhere where all the sports teams suck, San Diego would be the nicest place to be. Compared to—say, Detroit, Buffalo, Seattle, Atlanta, etc;

"I was tied to a chair and he had a baseball bat. Pissing him off was the smart thing to do."

by DbacksSkins on Apr 15, 2008 6:31 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Cognitively aware of the San Diego Padres since about 1980-1981... Fans since '76.

FanPosts

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Kinghippo_small Dex

Untitled_small jbox

Faith Keeper

P1230002_small jodes0405