PDA

View Full Version : A Myth That Won't Die...


DrCrawdad
05-05-2005, 08:40 PM
http://www.tommcmahon.net/images/johnstone.jpg

Everybody talked about the goat in Wrigley Field, and remember, because we didn't have lights in the 1984 playoffs, the San Diego Padres were awarded the final three games because the commissioner's office wanted to have night games. - as quoted in a Cubune interview.

This is a myth that won't die. The Cubs DID NOT LOSE A PLAYOFF HOME GAME. The playoffs rotated at that time. Had the Cubs made it to the World Series they would have rearranged games for maximum TV revenue, at that time the Cubs didn't have lights.

The Cubs did not lose home field advantage and the NLCS was not altered in 1984. And to the delusional Cubbie fans who say the Cubbies would have won had they played the Tigers, we'll never no because the Cubbies lost and never made it to the '84 World Series.

VA_GoGoSox
05-05-2005, 10:23 PM
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y164/ui_fins2left/logo.jpg

I love this freakin' site.

SOXPHILE
05-05-2005, 10:56 PM
I know. I've been telling this to Cub fans ever since 1984. As you said, back then, the one round, best of 5 playoffs for the AL and NL rotated. It was a 2-3 format, and one year the East Division got the first 2 home games, the next year the West got the first home games. Same as the World Series, and it's 2-3-2 format. One year the AL got the first 2 and last 2, the next year the NL did, until this moron- :tool- decided the All-Star game results would determine the World Series format. When I patiently explain this to the members of the "Blue Cult", they usually just stand there and give me a look that can be compared to a puzzled dog hearing a strange high pitched noise.

Brian26
05-05-2005, 11:36 PM
I know. I've been telling this to Cub fans ever since 1984. As you said, back then, the one round, best of 5 playoffs for the AL and NL rotated. It was a 2-3 format, and one year the East Division got the first 2 home games, the next year the West got the first home games.

Hmmm.

Just thinking out loud here. In 1985, my biggest memory of the NL series was Jack Clark hitting that homer in LA when Lasorda decided to pitch to him rather than to put him on with first base open. I think that was Game 5, and the Cardinals won the series with that victory. So, if Game 5 was in LA (Western Division), shouldn't it have been the other way around the previous year? Now, I'm thinking about the '86 series that, I think, went 5 games between the Mets and Astros. The Mets won Game 5 in Houston (West). Am I wrong about the '85 series? Was that not Game 5 in LA? It seems like '84, '85, and '86 all had the final three games for the western division team as the home team.

Are you guys sure the ALCS and NLCS weren't based on RECORD instead? Maybe only the World Series rotated every year.

Brian26
05-05-2005, 11:44 PM
Ok- I just checked retrosheet. The Cubs had 96 wins in '84, and the Padres only had 92. I think the Cubs should have had the last three games of that series at home. The ALCS and the NLCS weren't rotated...they were based on record.

Brian26
05-05-2005, 11:49 PM
Ok, I'm totally, utterly wrong. Crawdad and Soxphile are correct.

'85 was the first year they went to a SEVEN games series. And I went back and checked retrosheet....the ALCS and NLCS were indeed rotated every year, independent of record.

You guys are correct...it's a total myth.

dcb33
05-05-2005, 11:50 PM
Hmmm.

Just thinking out loud here. In 1985, my biggest memory of the NL series was Jack Clark hitting that homer in LA when Lasorda decided to pitch to him rather than to put him on with first base open. I think that was Game 5, and the Cardinals won the series with that victory. So, if Game 5 was in LA (Western Division), shouldn't it have been the other way around the previous year? Now, I'm thinking about the '86 series that, I think, went 5 games between the Mets and Astros. The Mets won Game 5 in Houston (West). Am I wrong about the '85 series? Was that not Game 5 in LA? It seems like '84, '85, and '86 all had the final three games for the western division team as the home team.

Are you guys sure the ALCS and NLCS weren't based on RECORD instead? Maybe only the World Series rotated every year.


Didn't the LCS switch to a 7 game format in 85? If that were the case the first and final two games would be in St. Louis and the middle 3 would be in LA

EDIT: LA actually had HFA that year so the first two were played at Dodger Stadium followed by the next 3 at Busch followed by a return to LA

Brian26
05-05-2005, 11:54 PM
Didn't the LCS switch to a 7 game format in 85? If that were the case the first and final two games would be in St. Louis and the middle 3 would be in LA

Yep, you're 100% correct. See my post above. I still love watching that game whenever it's on ESPN Classic....after Clark hits the homer, Lasorda becomes the Tazmanian Devil and starts kicking over water coolers in the dugout. Great stuff.

Irishsox1
05-06-2005, 12:06 AM
NL Championship Playoffs home field advantage:

1969 - East
1970 - West
1971 - East
1972 - West
1973 - East
1974 - West
1975 - East
1976 - West
1977 - East
1978 - West
1979 - East
1980 - West
1981 - Screwed Up due to strike
1982 - West
1983 - East
1984 - WEST!!!!!!!
1985 - Changed to best of seven

As you can clearly see, the Cubbies didn't give up home field advantage due to MLB, television or not having lights. It was the NL west's turn to have home field advantage. Cub fans need to put down the Cubbie Kool-Aid and stop making excuses for bad play.

Postseason Index from Baseball-Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/)

dcb33
05-06-2005, 12:19 AM
Yep, you're 100% correct. See my post above. I still ...love watching that game whenever it's on ESPN Classic....after Clark hits the homer, Lasorda becomes the Tazmanian Devil and starts kicking over water coolers in the dugout. Great stuff.

For whatever reason, it looks like the West champion actually had HFA in 85, too, as the first two games were played at Dodger Stadium then the middle three were played at Busch. The sequece ended up going like this:
82-West
83-East
84-West
85-West(?)
86-West
87-East
88-West
89-East
90-West
91-East

It looks like they gave the West HFA 3 years in a row in order to maintain the sequence of having the West get HFA during even years and teh East get HFA during odd years. Does anyone know how/why this eccentricity came about?

jdm2662
05-06-2005, 12:33 AM
Les has stated on MANY occasions it was the NL West's turn to have the three home games. He has shot down this "myth" many times as well. I think if someone would know this, it would be him.

As for not making the series, quit whinning. You didn't make it, period. It's the same BS I hear that if the dolphins made it to the Super Bowl to play the Bears, they would've won since they already beat them. The Dolphins got crushed by the lowest seeded playoff team, at home!!!!!
________
Ass Ebony (http://www.****tube.com/categories/149/ebony/videos/1)

Brian26
05-06-2005, 10:23 AM
It's the same BS I hear that if the dolphins made it to the Super Bowl to play the Bears, they would've won since they already beat them. The Dolphins got crushed by the lowest seeded playoff team, at home!!!!!

No way in hell would Miami have ever beaten the Bears a 2nd time in '85/'86. That first loss awakened a sleeping giant.

Orta 4-6-3
05-06-2005, 11:04 AM
Cub fans always seem to get two things mixed up (not very difficult for them) to perpetuate the myth.

First, the National League had home field advantage for the 1984 World Series, but MLB decreed that if the Cubs won the pennant, the AL would host four games, due to the lack of lights (and therefore no prime time) at Wrigley. But thanks to that wonderful weekend in San Diego, the point became moot*.

Second, 1984 was the last season for the best-of-five LCS. If that format had been in place in '84, the Cubs would have had home field, and would have gone back to Chicago trailing 3-2.




*The greatest day in Chicago sports history, 10-7-84: Walter Payton breaks Jim Brown's rushing record, and the Cubs lose Game Five.

Dan H
05-06-2005, 11:08 AM
What really won't die is Cub fans excuses. They just cannot accept defeat or failure. I don't know how many books have been written about the 1969 debaccle. The main point is that the Cubs blew it that year as they did in '84, '89, and '03. And you can put a fork in them for '05. It's already over.

Grobber33
05-06-2005, 06:42 PM
OK, lets clear it up. The NL West WAS scheduled to host games 3,4 & 5 in the 1984 NLCS. The lights thing had NOTHING to do with the Padres having Home Field. The team with the better record(in that case the Cubs)did not get Home Field in those days. NOW,,had the Cubs won the pennant,then they would have been forced to play WS games 3,4 & 5 at Wrigley while games 1,2,6 & 7 would have been in Tiger Stadium. The Pads won the Pennant so,since the NL was SCHEDULED to host games 1,2,6 & 7,the WS started in SD and went to Detroit where it ended of course in 5 games. Some of my fellow Cub Fans(not all)are still mistaken about that subject. The Cubs lost that series plain and simple as Jim Frey was outmanaged by Dick Williams.

NOW,,had the Cubs repeated in the NL East in 1985, Peter Uberoff was forcing them to play their post season games in St.Louis due to lack of lights and pressure from the TV Netwroks.

Also,,,the BEARS would have bit--slapped the Dolphins in SB XX had the Phins not gagged against New England in the AFC Title game. The Bears did not need the Dec 2,1985 Monday night game,as they wrapped up Home Field the day before when the Rams lost. Buddy Ryan screwed around with his defensive alignments against Miami which ticked Ditka off and they almost came to blows in the Orange Bowl tunnel at halftime.Ditka wanted to beat Shula and stay unbeaten, Ryan did'nt care about that.

Had the Bears rematched Miami, Marino would have been on his back just like Tony Eason and Steve Grogan were. And big mouth Mark Duper would have gotten his clock cleaned also. BTW, how many SB's have the Phins been in since then? How about ZERO!!!!!

doublem23
05-06-2005, 06:54 PM
BTW, how many SB's have the Phins been in since then? How about ZERO!!!!!

Unfortunately, that's the same for da Bears. :(:

TommyJohn
05-06-2005, 08:02 PM
This is a myth that won't die. The Cubs DID NOT LOSE A PLAYOFF HOME GAME. The playoffs rotated at that time. Had the Cubs made it to the World Series they would have rearranged games for maximum TV revenue, at that time the Cubs didn't have lights.

The Cubs did not lose home field advantage and the NLCS was not altered in 1984. And to the delusional Cubbie fans who say the Cubbies would have won had they played the Tigers, we'll never no because the Cubbies lost and never made it to the '84 World Series.

Believe it or not, the myth was perpetrated by none other than Harry Caray
during Game 5 of the Cubs-Padres series!!!! I was listening to it several
months ago on mlb.com's "Baseball's Best" series. I wanted to hear Harry
during the last couple of innings. In one inning toward the end of the game,
Harry started talking about how the league switched the games in order to
have the last three in San Diego!!! My jaw dropped when I heard it! I couldn't
believe that, nor the fact that neither guy on the radio with him (one was
Lou Boudreau I think) bothered to correct him!! Harry was obviously confusing
that series with the World Series, but didn't realize it. It has now gotten so
bad that now members of the Cubs like Rick Sutcliffe "remember" being
"robbed" of that last home game.

I'm glad Les finally chimed in with his formidable knowledge on the
subject; I've started threads in the past ranting about this subject
and he never posted about it. I'm glad to see that he has, although
it is kind of like preaching to the choir. Mike Murphy, as much as he
is bashed on this site, has also shot down this myth on his show,
or tried.

There is one thing about 1984 that I do wonder, however. Has Lester
Munson ever vowed to strangle Leon Durham with his bare hands? I'd
say probably not, as Durham is much bigger than Munson and could rip
that SOB a new one with relatively little effort.

As far as the myth, I used to get worked up about it and post frothing rants
on here, but no longer. I just realize that people are going to believe what
they want to believe, regardless of facts. Personally, I think it's all Steve
Bartman's fault.