Jump to content

Choking / Cursed Franchises


OnWis97

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Mac the Knife said:

 

I understand.  And I, as one of the people who actually live there, am trying to explain to you that to some people who live here using "Raleigh-Durham" is nothing short of offensive to them, almost in the same way as if I referred to Pittsburgh as "S***sburgh", New York City as "Jew York City" or Newark as nothing more than a suburb of New York.  It is seen by some here as a slur.  The "Research Triangle" moniker was supposed to solve it and instead muddled it up worse.  An understandable situation, but one that's easily corrected going forward by learning three basic things:  Raleigh is Raleigh.  Durham is Durham.  Raleigh-Durham is an airport.  Research Triangle is a marketing moniker that has no fixed geographic bounds and is used by different companies to serve different purposes, but generally doesn't get referenced by locals at all, in any context.


Well, just know that no offense was meant on my part.  I mean, I get it.  I don't particularly care for it when people refer to "Milwaukee" when they really mean West Allis or Whitefish Bay.  But since that's still technically Milwaukee County, I tend to let it slide.  Only if they really mean Waukesha, Brookfield, or somewhere outside of the county do I feel compelled to take a stand.  But I also work in broadcasting, so it's second nature for me to refer to a lot of places by their market name.  Especially when it's a region where the big three network affiliates are all in different cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 hours ago, Mac the Knife said:

I, as one of the people who actually live there, am trying to explain to you that to some people who live here using "Raleigh-Durham" is nothing short of offensive to them, almost in the same way as if I referred to Pittsburgh as "S***sburgh" (or) New York City as "Jew York City" 

 

Then those people are morons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would a better comparison be people in Boston who hate “Beantown” or people in San Francisco who hate “Frisco?”

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OnWis97 said:

Would a better comparison be people in Boston who hate “Beantown” or people in San Francisco who hate “Frisco?”

Probably a closer comparison would be people in Orange County being offended when they're referred to as LA.

VmWIn6B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if I've ever said Raleigh-Durham, but I may have. It kind of is in the same category of Scranton-Wilkes Barre, right? I'm sure the distinction matters quite a bit to locals, but there doesn't seem to be a reason for anyone else to care.

 

Though interestingly, people generally don't confuse Minneapolis for St. Paul. Though I'd have to assume that's because people don't really think about St. Paul.

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Now, there’s no need to be insulting. ?

 

But to equate a name like “Raleigh-Durham” with the soft anti-Semitism of “Jew York City”?  Yeah, those people would be morons. 

 

 

Yeah...those are two different kinds of "offensive," which I why I brought up Frisco and Beantown.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like Dallas-Ft. Worth or Tampa-St. Petersburg. And I'm guessing if I said "Raleigh-Durham" to someone from there, they'd say nothing, I'd say "aren't you going to get wildly defensive of your hometown?", and then they would say "oh, I'm from Pittsburgh."

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder if people took "offense" to this:

 

1991-darryl-mcgill-raleigh-durham-skyhaw latest?cb=20140322124430 

 

 

FWIW, I've never heard Raleigh mentioned in any singular context outside of these boards, and Durham only because of the minor-league baseball team.  I get that you're equating saying "Raleigh Durham" to anti semitism, but for a lot (probably most) of people outside of that area, that's how they know it.  Is it because of the airport?  Probably, but that's just what it is.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, no one is equating use of "Raleigh-Durham" to anti-semitism.  It was a clumsy attempt on my part to devise a parallel of sorts.  If anyone was offended by the reference, I apologize.  Having innumerable Jewish friends and former business associates, if not recently learning that I'm part European Jew (thanks, 23andMe), will hopefully assure anyone questioning it that it wasn't my intent.

 

The Admiral's comment on the subject is remarkably spot-on though, in that virtually everyone who lives here now and is above the age of 16 likely came from somewhere else.  Consequently the offense level may not be what it once was.  And while the Skyhawks were (slightly) before my arrival in the area, I can tell you that there were businesses approached about corporate sponsorships and group ticket sales that turned them down flat out of offense over use of "Raleigh-Durham."

nav-logo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On May 26, 2018 at 9:17 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Secondly, the Nets are most definitely not top dogs in Brooklyn, as Knick fans overwhelmingly outnumber Net fans in that borough as they do in every other borough. Indeed, there are probably more fans of the Celtics and Lakers in Brooklyn than there are fans of the Nets.

 

By taking the Brooklyn name rather than the name of their city, the Nets needlessly imposed a ceiling upon themselves. Even in the fantasy scenario in which every single Knick fan in Brooklyn had switched to being a Net fan, this ceiling would still be limiting the team. In the real-world scenario, it cripples them.

They may be Knicks fans but I guarantee that they own some form of Brooklyn Nets gear (a t-shirt or a hat or even a jersey), because it says Brooklyn on it.

YVRMUBj.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, tp49 said:

I now wish to add the New York Mets to the list of cursed/choking franchises. 

Willets-Point is cursed ground. The Mets don't just lose games, they do it in the most heartbreaking way ever. They lose in some of the most embarrassing ways possible that makes you go, "Well that's the Mets for ya."

I still have nightmares over 2007-08. 

XM4KeeA.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Submitting the New England Revolution to the list.

One of the founding teams of MLS, 5 appearances in the MLS Cup, and the only hardware they have is one Open Cup (2007) and the SuperLiga in 2008, which is no longer contested.

LvZYtbZ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's throw the Jets in there. So the story is Namath makes a deal with the Devil before Super Bowl III, "Give us this 1 win and the Jets don't have to win another for the rest of my life". Seems to be working. It's gonna be 50 years, no AFC Title to show for it but we got that damn butt fumble moment, huh? Gee, thanks Gang Green.

 

New York Knicks? Dolan and his fat little fingers cursed that damn team (and probably the Rangers). You can't be this bad at running a team. Basketball is the most popular sport in this city and that organization can't figure out how to build a good team? It's been 20 years since they were last relevant! They get a lucky 3 year run where they can only muster 1 series win. WOW. SUCH A GOOD JOB. WANT A COOKIE? (I bet he does). He has made a mockery out of this team and their fanbase and I am sick of it! 

XM4KeeA.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll mention some college suckatude.

 

The following Power 5 program have never won a NCAA team title in any sport.

 

Mississippi State (has fielded teams for 123 years)

Virginia Tech

Kansas State

 

Now, there are two others who I won't include as they "won" in Division 1 football: Pitt and Ole Miss. Pitt's 1976 Championship was unanimous (even though they claim eight others).

Ole Miss claims three with 1962 being recognized by three lesser of those who polled, but not AP or UPI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dfwabel said:

I'll mention some college suckatude.

 

The following Power 5 program have never won a NCAA team title in any sport.

 

Mississippi State (has fielded teams for 123 years)

Virginia Tech

Kansas State

 

Now, there are two others who I won't include as they "won" in Division 1 football: Pitt and Ole Miss. Pitt's 1976 Championship was unanimous (even though they claim eight others).

Ole Miss claims three with 1962 being recognized by three lesser of those who polled, but not AP or UPI.

The 1937 Pitt team was also the consensus National Champs, and we can't forget about the great teams in the early 1980s. Given the success of Pitt players in the NFL, there's no doubt the program should have won more since the 1990s. Younger fans may not realize how dominant that 1976 team was, they destroyed Notre Dame in South Bend, beat Penn State convincingly, and handed SEC Champion Georgia one of the most lopsided defeats that conference has suffered in Sugar Bowl history. Much more recently, they've had some impressive signature wins over Clemson, Penn State, and Miami.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tp49 said:

I now wish to add the New York Mets to the list of cursed/choking franchises. 

 

The first WS that I ever really watched was '86, so I can never consider the Mets "cursed", considering they won because the other team was cursed.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gold Pinstripes said:

The 1937 Pitt team was also the consensus National Champs, and we can't forget about the great teams in the early 1980s. Given the success of Pitt players in the NFL, there's no doubt the program should have won more since the 1990s. Younger fans may not realize how dominant that 1976 team was, they destroyed Notre Dame in South Bend, beat Penn State convincingly, and handed SEC Champion Georgia one of the most lopsided defeats that conference has suffered in Sugar Bowl history. Much more recently, they've had some impressive signature wins over Clemson, Penn State, and Miami.

Umm, your lil' story regarding Pitt is not the topic of the thread, B.

 

I had EA's Bill Walsh Football too in 1994 and the '82 Pitt squad was surprisingly wonderful along with '80 Georgia and '84 Auburn as Marino was money, but they has one really, really slow SE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.