Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Jul 23, 2008 17:34:12 GMT -5
Convenient time frame to use. We could talk about 7 total championships, which is admittedly far fewer than 26, but you'd think all Yankee fans remember watching Murderer's Row while at the same time ignoring the early Red Sox early championships. The 90's Yankee dynasty was great and they continue to be contenders year in and year out, but most fans today have no recollection of Mantle and Maris, much less Ruth and Gehrig. You really think most fans today don't know who Babe Ruth was? Of course they know who he is- they just have no personal recollection of seeing him play because they were not alive then. And the same goes for Mantle, etc. for anyone under the age of 45.
|
|
FewFAC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,032
|
Post by FewFAC on Jul 23, 2008 18:06:05 GMT -5
Had no idea this was about ESPN. Where's Van Earl Wright when you need him?
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jul 23, 2008 21:48:52 GMT -5
You really think most fans today don't know who Babe Ruth was? Of course they know who he is- they just have no personal recollection of seeing him play because they were not alive then. And the same goes for Mantle, etc. for anyone under the age of 45. OK, so what does that have to do with Title Town?
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jul 23, 2008 22:16:45 GMT -5
My problem with Title Town, and it's been definitely touched on here, is WHAT THE Edited ARE THE CRITERIA?! Are we talking all-time, every team? Are we talking recently? Are we talking wins per team per year? Championships per team per year? Star athletes per capita? What are we trying to do, ESPN?!?! Please tell me.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Jul 23, 2008 22:41:27 GMT -5
Of course they know who he is- they just have no personal recollection of seeing him play because they were not alive then. And the same goes for Mantle, etc. for anyone under the age of 45. OK, so what does that have to do with Title Town? No idea, I don't watch that nonsense.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 24, 2008 4:27:55 GMT -5
I think Jack's point was that they count all 26 of the Yankees titles, but only count 2 of the Red Sox titles -- not counting those before this century for no apparent reason.
My point still stands on per capita over the years. You want to pretend NYC is titletown? Fine, acknowledge that the title that make it so were primarily driven by demographics and nothing more. There's nothing in the water that makes NYC "Titletown" except more people, which leads to more money. At one point, the Yankees were so bad, MLB created an expansion draft for the Highlanders/Yankees to get talent to NYC. In later years, players like Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, etc., were Yankees because they had the money to scout and sign them -- the Yankee way historically is simply to pay more. Let's not pretend there is mystique here. And if there is in baseball, it's in St. Louis -- where Branch Rickey invented the farm system.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jul 24, 2008 7:59:55 GMT -5
I think Jack's point was that they count all 26 of the Yankees titles, but only count 2 of the Red Sox titles -- not counting those before this century for no apparent reason. My point still stands on per capita over the years. You want to pretend NYC is titletown? Fine, acknowledge that the title that make it so were primarily driven by demographics and nothing more. There's nothing in the water that makes NYC "Titletown" except more people, which leads to more money. At one point, the Yankees were so bad, MLB created an expansion draft for the Highlanders/Yankees to get talent to NYC. In later years, players like Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, etc., were Yankees because they had the money to scout and sign them -- the Yankee way historically is simply to pay more. Let's not pretend there is mystique here. And if there is in baseball, it's in St. Louis -- where Branch Rickey invented the farm system. SF -- if you want to talk about pretending, then why stop at NYC? Obviously, this whole exercise is pretending. But if the objective is to determine which city is most deserving of the name Title Town.... No city has anywhere close to the number of titles that NYC does. It's pretty simple. Now if you don't like NYC, that's another discussion entirely.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Jul 24, 2008 8:21:34 GMT -5
I think Jack's point was that they count all 26 of the Yankees titles, but only count 2 of the Red Sox titles -- not counting those before this century for no apparent reason. Exactly. I can't believe how many bitter mouth-breathers I heard say something to the effect of "Congratulations, now let's see you guys get 25 more" after 2004.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jul 24, 2008 8:47:01 GMT -5
Well, at least they said "congratulations." I wouldn't have expected that much.
I think we should not only look at history, but also project this out over the next 25 years.
Which, of course, means that the definitive Titletown, USA, is none other than....
....Oklahoma City!!
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jul 24, 2008 9:03:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jul 24, 2008 9:19:30 GMT -5
I feel like this would be more interesting if they ignored professional sports and simply focused on college and high school titles. That'd be more entertaining to me.
|
|
FormerHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by FormerHoya on Jul 24, 2008 19:16:18 GMT -5
The answer to this question is ESPN, plain and simple. With the exception of live sports (which they also manage to Edited up [thanks Joe Morgan]), there is no reason to watch that festering pile of garbage.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 25, 2008 4:00:31 GMT -5
I love NY. Fun city.
But were I setting the criteria, I'd find a place that has won more titles than you'd expect -- someplace that fared abnormally well. Not something incredibly obvious based on simply demographic trends.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 25, 2008 11:11:31 GMT -5
I feel like this would be more interesting if they ignored professional sports and simply focused on college and high school titles. That'd be more entertaining to me. I'm with you on that one.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jul 29, 2008 6:38:55 GMT -5
Well, the election is over. Titletown, USA is ::drumroll:: VALDOSTA, GEORGIA!!
I've said it once, and I'll say it again: democracy simply doesn't work.
|
|
ScreamingHoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Ted Valentine: Getting it wrong since 1979.
Posts: 451
|
Post by ScreamingHoya on Jul 29, 2008 10:36:07 GMT -5
That just happened. Following the absurdity that is this decision, there should be no further discussion on which is a bigger plague on American sports. TitleTown just took the cake. "Valdosta, with its high school football tradition, young but powerful Division II college football (yes, that was just said) and overwhelming spirit is TitleTown USA." ESPN has officially jumped the shark. At least Valdosta can revel in being known as TitleTown USA now, and not "Azalea City"- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valdosta
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 29, 2008 11:11:45 GMT -5
Why should they be on the other side? Those four teams you mentioned have combined for TWELVE championships in their respective sports (Islanders - 4, Rangers - 4, Mets - 2, Knicks - 2). I think he understood your point, he was merely pointing out how dumb it was. Well done Buffalo. I might add that the Red Sox have barely managed to match the Mets and Knicks over the last 90 years by winning two titles, which is half as many as the Rangers and Islanders over that time frame. Sorry I didn't see this sooner. Edited. As someone pointed out, the greater Boston area has claimed football, basketball and baseball in the past several years. And in the case of football and baseball, have been "right there" consistently. While the Giants are the current football kings and the Yankees have been competitive recently as well as a title not that long ago, you still can't argue that the Mets, Jets, Rangers, Knicks and Islanders haven't really added much to the asset side of the balance sheet recently. Don't get me wrong: I am certainly not praising Boston nor am I slamming New York. But there's no doubt that if you look at the issue in recent history, then you certainly couldn't hand the title over to the Big Apple. Additionally, talking about the "success" of the Mets/Knicks etc... because of their ancient history is much the same as praising the "Fightin' Irish" because of their history. Feel free to do that if you wish, but the Notre Dame I know, hasn't won a bowl game since people thought Spiro Agnew was chewing gum. By the way, what exactly does crow taste like?
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Jul 29, 2008 17:04:50 GMT -5
Crap like this is exactly why I stopped watching that circus of a channel. What a joke. When ESPN starts covering sports the way ABC used to, then I'll start watching again. Until then, it's only in hotel rooms (out of sheer boredom) and when one of my teams is on. Besides, everybody knows that TitleTownUSA is New York: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America's_Cup#America.E2.80.99s_Cup_challengers_and_defenders www.gizmag.com/go/7306/
|
|