Jump to content

Why hate smaller, unsuccessful teams?


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, heavybass said:

Would of been swept under the rug except the NCAA validated their unbeaten season so UCF has a national title of sorts.

 

All you need is one recognized selector putting you at #1, iirc.  The Colley Matrix had UCF at #1.  The Colley Matrix is kind of a joke, though.  I think UCF's national championship claim is ridiculous.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, See Red said:

 

As far as r/hockey goes, yes.  Mostly because of the whole Kucherov LTIR thing.

 

Guess they should have done dance routines and chucked 80 bad shots per night and called it "analytics" so redditors would respect them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I’m looking forward to the Saturday Night Wars between the SEC and the PAC-12/Big “10”/ACC. We’ll get an expanded playoff as a side effect and the next UCF can see if they actually can be champions. Knowing what I do know? They’ll make Notre Dame look competitive. That’s why people hate UCF. If Notre Dame is going to get its rear handed to them, what chance does a UCF have? 
 

And I say this as a Fighting Irish fan. 

Edited by Red Comet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 9:42 AM, OnWis97 said:

The only example I can think of is small-market teams that don't spend enough on salary, most notably MLB at the height of the payroll gap. All the Yankee hate/fatigue did result in some blowback at teams like the Pirates, Twins, and Royals not spending money. For every fan that thought the Yankees were ruining baseball, there was a fan that thought the Pirates were.

As a Dodgers fan, I’m going through this right now. Don’t get mad that my team has the money to stay competitive and uses that money. Many of these owners are billionaires and choose NOT to spend money.

 

”They’re a big market team!” So are the Mets and Cubs and look at what they’re doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say this from the perspective of a small-market fan: Very few fans actually believed that David Glass was actually trying to make the Royals competitive and that only big market teams existing prevented that. We all knew he was just bringing his Walmart philosophy to the major leagues.

 

Yeah, we wanted a salary cap so it wouldn’t be the Yankees and Dodgers every year but we also wanted a salary floor so cheap bastards like Glass and Loria would pay up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ben in LA said:

As a Dodgers fan, I’m going through this right now. Don’t get mad that my team has the money to stay competitive and uses that money. Many of these owners are billionaires and choose NOT to spend money.

 

”They’re a big market team!” So are the Mets and Cubs and look at what they’re doing.

The Met's just signed Lindor to a huge extension. And I think the Cubs recognize the team is in need of a rebuild, I'm not sure I would say they are necessarily being cheap. 

 

The fact of the matter is big market teams do have a leg up on the small market teams. They will almost always be able to generate more revenue, no matter how much they spend. I saw a good example a few years ago comparing 2019 Twins to the 2019 Yankees. 

 

2019 Twins breakdown (according to Forbes)

 

- Player Expenses: $144M

- Revenue: $269M

- Operating Income: $14M

 

Now let's look at the Yankees in 2019 (according to Forbes)

 

- Player Expenses: $193M

- Revenue: $668M 

- Operating Income: $29M 

 

The revenue and operating income difference is staggering, even when the Yankees spend almost $50M more on their roster. The Twins have to be much more careful when making free agent moves than the Yankees. Can they afford the same players? In theory, sure they could. But they are going to be spending much more of the teams generated revenue than the big market teams, which can have a lasting impact. What happens when that superstar player is signed to a 10-12 year contract and then begins declining in year 5 or 6 of said contract? If you're a small market team that will set you back 5-6 years at least - see the Tigers with Miggy's contract. The Pujols deal aged poorly for the Angels, but they were still able to afford big contracts for Trout, Rendon, and Upton. The benefit of being a big market team. 

 

All of that being said, I don't know if a salary cap necessarily fixes any of this. A salary floor is definitely needed - some teams I think cry poor more than others. But to say every team, or even most teams, are capable of operating like the Yankees or Dodgers is just not true in my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2021 at 9:36 PM, CrimsonBull9584 said:

...while teams like UCF are hated when they succeed, like when they won the National Championship. 

HAHAHAHAHAHA!  Um, they NEVER won the national championship.

 

On 8/20/2021 at 3:52 PM, heavybass said:

UCF had a VERY legit national championship claim though... which pissed off the playoff :censored:s.

No, they didn't. 

No more than Tulane in 1998 (12-0).   And unlike UCF and its fans, Tulane and its fans never petulantly claimed to be national champions that year, or bad-mouthed the selection committee, and thus no one 'hated' them. 

 

On 8/20/2021 at 5:59 PM, SFGiants58 said:

In no FBS championship system would UCF have been declared champions. Not in the poll, not in the BCS, and not in the playoffs. Heck, they'd have probably lost in the expanded playoffs.

Correct.  Thank you.

 

On 8/20/2021 at 8:27 PM, heavybass said:

Would of been swept under the rug except the NCAA validated their unbeaten season so UCF has a national title of sorts.

It's "would've" (short for would have) -- not "would of". 

And re: the "national title of sorts", I defer to oldschoolvikings:

 

On 8/21/2021 at 1:38 PM, oldschoolvikings said:

If by "of sorts" you mean "not in the slightest", sure.

😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that there's no reasonable way UCF would've won the championship, I dislike that there's no way for us to know because the Alabamas, Clemsons, and Ohio States of the world are interested in making sure they're the only ones that can claim a legit national title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, heavybass said:

Its those :censored:s against teams like UCF... honestly more teams need to have bigger balls to claim a national title.

I can claim to be the richest man in the world who dates supermodels and just happens to be the President of the US, the Pope and the Dalai Lama all at the same time  Just because you claim it doesn't make it so and no amount of claiming will EVER make UCF National Champions.  Not then, not now, and not 100 years from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still believe that only conference champions, should be in the playoff.  It would still be debatable whether UCF would still have be considered if that was the case, but they should have been given the chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a superiority complex. Those small market teams are not built to have sustainable success. They usually have a fluke championship season. Then the team delves back into mediocrity (or worse). The Miami Florida Marlins are a classic example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BryanSmalls said:

This is a superiority complex. Those small market teams are not built to have sustainable success. They usually have a fluke championship season. Then the team delves back into mediocrity (or worse). The Miami Florida Marlins are a classic example.

 

Are we speaking the Miami Marlins of late, or of overall? Because if we're talking over the scope of their existence, they didn't exactly fall back into mediocrity as much as their owner(s) literally sold them off back into mediocrity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2021 at 4:49 PM, tp49 said:

I can claim to be the richest man in the world who dates supermodels and just happens to be the President of the US, the Pope and the Dalai Lama all at the same time  Just because you claim it doesn't make it so and no amount of claiming will EVER make UCF National Champions.  Not then, not now, and not 100 years from now.

 

College football's weird, though. Everybody seems to accept Alabama's 18 national championships even though one of them is a year they finished 9-2, 3rd in the SEC, and #20 in the AP.   Granted, the BCS and Playoff systems were supposed to prevent split championships, it still takes only one selector to make it a legit claim (officially).

 

Again, though, it's the Colley Matrix that had them #1.  The Colley Matrix is terrible and, in 2013, ranked Notre Dame ahead of Alabama after Alabama curb-stomped them in the national title game. 

 

UCF's title claim is absurd, though.  The schedule was way too weak.   There's no way they go close to undefeated that season with a P5 schedule in any conference. I don't know on what basis anybody would think they would. Were they more talented than every other team?  Based on recruiting and players getting drafted, they were not. Were they better coached to make up for the talent gap?  Based on Nebraska under Scott Frost, they were not. 

 

That said, they've really built their entire brand off of it so teams should do it when they get the chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/22/2021 at 4:24 PM, Ben in LA said:

 

”They’re a big market team!” So are the Mets and Cubs and look at what they’re doing.

Yeah, the Dodgers didn't trade any of their stars, let alone all of them :( then again, the Dodgers also didn't pull an '89 Orioles impersonation and fall out of contention with a crazy long losing streak...but even if they had, I'd have been shocked if they even thought about trading Kershaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 11:42 AM, OnWis97 said:

I do recall around 1990 in high school I had a friend who fell in love with the Charlotte Hornets (and their colors). But I recall, as a Laker hater, him saying how much he hated the Bucks, Mavericks, and Nuggets. And there was absolutely no point in hating any of those teams at that time (the Mavs and Nugs were pretty moribund and the Bucks were recently removed from being competitive but not winning anything).  It sounded so strange when he said it and to this day I don't know what prompted that. But that really seems like an outlier (and that guy was a clown).

I know one thing, back in middle school, and later high school, the only people who had any business hating the Bucks...were Bucks fans (this was later in the 90s when the Bucks were mediocre to crappy and Big Dog, Ray and Vin were basically their only good players).  It would sound patently absurd to anybody who's a kid now, but I remember a time I could go weeks before I saw anyone with so much as a Bucks keychain, but I'd see a Hornets jacket or Magic jersey or the like every other day, and Bulls gear daily (hell, I remember a guy who wore their full warmup suit around middle school once or twice...all he needed for completion's sake woulda been Benny the Bull following him around with a boombox playing Sirius all day).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Discrim said:

I know one thing, back in middle school, and later high school, the only people who had any business hating the Bucks...were Bucks fans (this was later in the 90s when the Bucks were mediocre to crappy and Big Dog, Ray and Vin were basically their only good players).  It would sound patently absurd to anybody who's a kid now, but I remember a time I could go weeks before I saw anyone with so much as a Bucks keychain, but I'd see a Hornets jacket or Magic jersey or the like every other day, and Bulls gear daily (hell, I remember a guy who wore their full warmup suit around middle school once or twice...all he needed for completion's sake woulda been Benny the Bull following him around with a boombox playing Sirius all day).  

I went to UW in the mid-1990s and obviously I knew tons of Packer fans. I knew a good number of Brewer fans but really no hard-core Bucks fans. Maybe a couple casual fans.  There was definitely more interest in the Bulls. I understand why people paid attention to the Bulls, but it's not like the baseball fans were talking about the Braves all the time. Most of the Wisconsinites were Brewers fans, with a few Cubs fans sprinkled in. But with the NBA, it almost felt like I was in a state with no team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

I went to UW in the mid-1990s and obviously I knew tons of Packer fans. I knew a good number of Brewer fans but really no hard-core Bucks fans. Maybe a couple casual fans.  There was definitely more interest in the Bulls. I understand why people paid attention to the Bulls, but it's not like the baseball fans were talking about the Braves all the time. Most of the Wisconsinites were Brewers fans, with a few Cubs fans sprinkled in. But with the NBA, it almost felt like I was in a state with no team.

Isn't this kind of how it is now in Minnesota? I go back a few times a year and — though I'm mostly upstate — I see next to zero references to the Timberwolves existence. Plenty of hats, apparel, bar signs, etc. for the Twins, Vikings, Gophers, Wild and even the Loons.  Next to nothing on the Wolves. 

 

I realize there's seasonality in play, and I'm usually visiting in the summer, but it really seems as if the team has fallen off the sporting landscape into irrelevancy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

Isn't this kind of how it is now in Minnesota? I go back a few times a year and — though I'm mostly upstate — I see next to zero references to the Timberwolves existence. Plenty of hats, apparel, bar signs, etc. for the Twins, Vikings, Gophers, Wild and even the Loons.  Next to nothing on the Wolves. 

 

I realize there's seasonality in play, and I'm usually visiting in the summer, but it really seems as if the team has fallen off the sporting landscape into irrelevancy. 

There's some support for the Wolves in The Cities, and I'm actually wearing a Wolves shirt as I type this. That said I probably mostly see people wearing Wolves stuff at games and there's definitely less Wolves merchandise available at stores like Target, Kohl's, etc. than other Minnesota teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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