PDA

View Full Version : Which is worse?


Iwritecode
10-23-2001, 12:42 PM
Seeing as the Yankees are probably on their way to another WS title, I was just thinking about this and wondering which is worse...

Being a White Sox fan and having to put up with the "Black Sox Curse". Hey, at least we aren't as bad as the Cubs! Only one WS apperance since then and very few post-season apperances.

Being a Cubs fan and having to put up with <insert curse here>. Going on almost 100 years with no WS ring. I guess the biggest problem is that after a while you start to think "losing isn't really all that bad..."

Being a Red Sox fan and having to put up with the curse of the Bambino. Only the Cubs have gone longer without a WS. Meanwhile the Yankees continue to pile them up. They have 26? since aquiring Babe Ruth?

cheeses_h_rice
10-23-2001, 01:02 PM
Hate to correct you, IWC, but the White Sox have also gone longer w/o a WS title than the BoSox -- our last title was in 1917, theirs in 1918.

We *could* have won one in 1919, but we all know what happened that particular disgraceful annum...

In other words, we both suck (Cubs/Sox).

FarWestChicago
10-23-2001, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
In other words, we both suck (Cubs/Sox). This is very true. We just don't suck quite as much. And there's always 1906. :)

Iwritecode
10-23-2001, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
Hate to correct you, IWC, but the White Sox have also gone longer w/o a WS title than the BoSox -- our last title was in 1917, theirs in 1918.

We *could* have won one in 1919, but we all know what happened that particular disgraceful annum...

In other words, we both suck (Cubs/Sox).

Oops, thanks Cheeses. I have concluded that the Bosox fans have it the worst. While the Sox have sucked for longer, at least we have the Cubs to laugh at.

Cubs fans are so blissfully unaware that they suck, they actually enjoy it.

The Bosox have actually gotten close a few times.
*see Bill Buckner

They also have one of the best pitchers in the majors, one of the best SS, and added a top RBI guy in RF this year. Yet it never quite seems to come all together for them. Plus, they have given up some pretty big names in years past. Meanwhile, Yankee fans get to laugh at them year after year...

Jerry_Manuel
10-23-2001, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
They also have one of the best pitchers in the majors, one of the best SS, and added a top RBI guy in RF this year. Yet it never quite seems to come all together for them.

Red Sox: Gammons
Cubs: Mariotti

If that's not a curse I don't know what is.

Spiff
10-23-2001, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
The Bosox have actually gotten close a few times.
*see Bill Buckner

I hope you don't think Buckner is the sole reason they didn't win in 1986.

oldcomiskey
10-23-2001, 05:11 PM
if Bob Stanley dont throw that WP--if Calvin Shiraldi could get anyone out---and then there IS the 3 cub rule--
Shiraldi
Buckner
Dave Henderson

PaleHoseGeorge
10-23-2001, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
I have concluded that the Bosox fans have it the worst. While the Sox have sucked for longer, at least we have the Cubs to laugh at....


Well I admit to a bias, but...

Read the site's manifesto at WSI Manifesto (http://whitesoxinteractive.com/Columnists/Bova/Welcome.htm)

There are three major themes answering your question.

1. Sox Fans have lost longer and more frequently than Boston's.
2. All of New England has embraced the Red Sox while our team is strictly second-class in Chicago.
3. Even our "achievement" as losers in the city is overshadowed by the futility of the Cubs. The Red Sox have no such problem.

Not only do we lose (and lose pathetically), but we lose in utter anonymity. Forget about national attention. We can't even get attention in our own city! (Discounting the negative attention local jerks like Moronotti and Clueless give us).

Sure, Boston has come close to winning several World Series and their anguish from that sort of disappointment surely hurts deeply.

But what is worst--to have loved and lost, or to have never loved at all?

NOBODY has it worse than White Sox Fans.

Bmr31
10-23-2001, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
Seeing as the Yankees are probably on their way to another WS title, I was just thinking about this and wondering which is worse...

Being a White Sox fan and having to put up with the "Black Sox Curse". Hey, at least we aren't as bad as the Cubs! Only one WS apperance since then and very few post-season apperances.

Being a Cubs fan and having to put up with <insert curse here>. Going on almost 100 years with no WS ring. I guess the biggest problem is that after a while you start to think "losing isn't really all that bad..."

Being a Red Sox fan and having to put up with the curse of the Bambino. Only the Cubs have gone longer without a WS. Meanwhile the Yankees continue to pile them up. They have 26? since aquiring Babe Ruth?


The cubs situation is much worse. At least the sox and redsox TRY to win every once in awhile......

Iwritecode
10-24-2001, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00


I hope you don't think Buckner is the sole reason they didn't win in 1986.

No, I know there where plenty of other things. Plus, there was always game 7. It was just one of the times I could remember where they were THIS close and didn't make it.

Iwritecode
10-24-2001, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge



Well I admit to a bias, but...

Read the site's manifesto at WSI Manifesto (http://whitesoxinteractive.com/Columnists/Bova/Welcome.htm)

There are three major themes answering your question.

1. Sox Fans have lost longer and more frequently than Boston's.
2. All of New England has embraced the Red Sox while our team is strictly second-class in Chicago.
3. Even our "achievement" as losers in the city is overshadowed by the futility of the Cubs. The Red Sox have no such problem.

Not only do we lose (and lose pathetically), but we lose in utter anonymity. Forget about national attention. We can't even get attention in our own city! (Discounting the negative attention local jerks like Moronotti and Clueless give us).

Sure, Boston has come close to winning several World Series and their anguish from that sort of disappointment surely hurts deeply.

But what is worst--to have loved and lost, or to have never loved at all?

NOBODY has it worse than White Sox Fans.

You make some valid points PHG. I am really torn about #1 though. Have we really lost longer and more frequently? Are you going by number of losing seasons? Or length of time since last WS ring? I think I can actually handle not making the playoffs a little better than getting there and losing then. Just compare 2000 and 2001. Losing in the first round hurt a lot worse than being eliminated in September. Maybe it's just because it happened so quickly. The whole season was washed away in just 3 games. In 2001, we had a little more time to get used to the fact that we wouldn't make the post-season. Again.
I agree with #2 and #3, although that can also help. We know we are second-class and overshadowed by the futility of the Cubs, yet that makes it all the more sweeter when we finish better than them. We Sox fans know the truth, even if the media is blind to it.

Paulwny
10-24-2001, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by Iwritecode

I think I can actually handle not making the playoffs a little better than getting there and losing then.

I wish we'd be more consistant in making the play-offs, at least we'd know the team is near the top of mlb.
I'm sure some non Chicago sox fans receive the strange looks and comments that I receive when I'm wearing a sox cap or shirt, "A white sox fan, you've got to be kidding".
There's more team and player recognition in the country when you consistantly make the play-offs.
Making the play-offs and losing is painful but, with the high expectations of this year and the season ending in ~ 3wks. was hell.

DVG
10-24-2001, 12:33 PM
PHG is right. The Cubs and the Red Sox are losers as far as
championships go, but their futility is admired across the nation.
The White Sox are completely ignored while sportswriters and
others fawn over Cub and Bosox woes.

Why, no less an authority than Bob Costas, the noted base-
ball philosopher, has stated that the difference between the Cubs and the Red Sox is that the Cubs are farce, the Red Sox
are tragedy. Oh, please. Gag me with Bill Buckner's glove.

Let's see. The Red Sox have been to 4 WS since WW I, the
White Sox one. They went to game 7 all four times. They even
beat out the White Sox during the Impossible Dream season
of 1967, after which the Sox went into a twelve year coma.
And let's not forget the 1919 boys and their treatment of the
fans. If the Red Sox are tragedy, what does that make the White
Sox? A Wagnerian Opera?

The Cubs are farce, the Red Sox are tragedy, and Bob Costas
is a pompous, blow-dried goofball.

FarWestChicago
10-24-2001, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by DVG
If the Red Sox are tragedy, what does that make the White
Sox? A Wagnerian Opera?

The Cubs are farce, the Red Sox are tragedy, and Bob Costas
is a pompous, blow-dried goofball. I like that. Good stuff.

DVG
10-24-2001, 12:36 PM
Oy, geyvalt. Such spelling. In my last post, one of my sen-
tences should read: They WENT to Game 7 all four times.
Sorry. But Bob Costas is still a blow-dried goofball.