PDA

View Full Version : who is the worst


stacksedwards
06-28-2006, 01:37 PM
of these four which team is the worst in chicago sports history

skottyj242
06-28-2006, 01:38 PM
:?:

AuroraSoxFan
06-28-2006, 01:49 PM
Can't count the enforcers and their 1 season of existsence. Much as I can't stand the Cubs, I have to go with Wanny's Bears. I enjoy watching the Cubs humiliate themselves. Watching the Bears in that era caused me some serious headaches.

Good choice of options though.

Johnny Mostil
06-28-2006, 01:50 PM
When did "wanstead" coach the Bears?:tongue:

Now Dave Wannstedt didn't have great teams, but I can't consider them worse than the teams of Abe Gibron (whom I actually like) or Jim Dooley's 1-13 team in '69 (that couldn't even win the coin flip for Bradshaw . . . ).


I'm not (yet) convinced this year's Cubs are worse than those in the "college of coaches" era or the '66 team Durocher protested wasn't an eighth-place team, as many pegged them in the pre-season. (He was right, of course--they finished 10th.) I'm not even sure, to be honest, that they're as bad as the '70 Sox or the dreadful Sox teams of the early '30s.

OTOH, for sheer comedic value, the '06 Cubs probably are the "best" since the '87 Cubs, the team that had an MVP (Dawson), damn near had a Cy Young winner (Sutcliffe), and still finished in last place . . .

Deuce
06-28-2006, 02:41 PM
Please use capital letters, when appropriate... especially in your sig.

Tokes
06-28-2006, 02:54 PM
don't pay attention to the cubs much but I do know they got to the playoffs under Dusty waht was that 2 years ago or so (yes that isn't this years cubs but still). I voted for the Bears because I remember those years and I remember thinking every time I went to a game that they were going to lose.

Dan Mega
06-28-2006, 03:07 PM
This season isn't over yet, and a few Flub teams from the 90's were worse than this team.

The 98-99 Bulls, however, were ridiculously bad. They get my vote.

PatK
06-28-2006, 03:31 PM
The Enforcers were one of the XFL's best teams.

Chips
06-28-2006, 03:36 PM
:threadsucks:

stacksedwards
06-28-2006, 03:37 PM
The Enforcers were one of the XFL's best teams.

but the XFL was the worst league ever. They should have had teams named after wrestlers the the San Franciso Snukas or the Boston Bushwackers or perhaps the Utah Ultimate Warriors or even the Rowanoke Rick Rudes or my personal favorite the Jackson Jake the Snake Robert's

JohnBasedowYoda
06-28-2006, 03:38 PM
"this thread sucks" guy has a damn nice suit on.

LuvSox
06-28-2006, 03:40 PM
"this thread sucks" guy has a damn nice suit on.

He spent some time on that hair too.

sullythered
06-28-2006, 03:42 PM
"this thread sucks" guy has a damn nice suit on.
Even after several hundred viewings, I still laugh every time I see that dude.

roylestillman
06-28-2006, 03:54 PM
He spent some time on that hair too.


...and the teeth

gobears1987
06-28-2006, 04:33 PM
Due to my massive amounts of hate reserved for Wannstedt, McCaskey, Jauron, and Schoop, my vote is obvious.

Johnny Mostil
06-28-2006, 04:58 PM
don't pay attention to the cubs much but I do know they got to the playoffs under Dusty waht was that 2 years ago or so (yes that isn't this years cubs but still). I voted for the Bears because I remember those years and I remember thinking every time I went to a game that they were going to lose.

Meh, Wannstedt had a team make the playoffs, even winning a game there.

Geez, this poll (and discussion) make me feel like an old fart. The original post asked "which team is the worst in chicago sports history." Did Chicago sports history really begin in 1993 (Wannstedt's first year with the Bears)?:?:

sullythered
06-28-2006, 05:11 PM
Meh, Wannstedt had a team make the playoffs, even winning a game there.

Geez, this poll (and discussion) make me feel like an old fart. The original post asked "which team is the worst in chicago sports history." Did Chicago sports history really begin in 1993 (Wannstedt's first year with the Bears)?:?:
No kidding. We've had teams in this town for, like, a hundred years. I seriously doubt the "worst" one should be contained to the last thirteen, or so.
Didn't the cubs lose their first twenty or something a few years back? The Bears for the first part of Payton's career were BRUTAL. And take your pick of Blackhawk teams since they decided to stop keeping anybody of worth on their roster.

Lip Man 1
06-28-2006, 05:24 PM
Ummm did you take a look at the record of the 1970 White Sox?

Lip

Johnny Mostil
06-28-2006, 05:35 PM
Ummm did you take a look at the record of the 1970 White Sox?

Lip

Yep (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1209002&postcount=4). And, as also noted, their teams from '29 to '34 were awful as well.

fusillirob1983
06-28-2006, 11:54 PM
I think the Bulls might've been worse in one of the years following the 98-99 season. Either way, there's been worse Bears and Cubs teams, record-wise, than the ones in the poll. If the poll was "who finds the most unique ways to lose in Chicago history?", then I'd definitely give it to this year's Cubs.

JB98
06-29-2006, 12:17 AM
This isn't even the worst Cubs team I've seen. In 1997, they started 0-14.

gbergman
06-29-2006, 12:24 AM
who are the enforcers

Smokey Burg
06-29-2006, 12:44 PM
I have to go with the Wanny Bears, because when he took over there was enough talent on the team to win. Under his austere leadership they got progessively worse. This years Cubs team does not have the talent to compete, similar to the 98 - 99 Bulls. I doubt that any sane, rational person could have possibly picked the Cubs to finish any better than 20 games below.500 for this season.

viagracat
06-29-2006, 01:02 PM
The '70 White Sox were 56-106 and nearly booed and/or ignored right out of Chicago. Yikes!

The '69 Bears were 1-13 and I remember going to the last game of the season (good job Dad scoring those tickets :D: ); absolutely freezing my ass off that December day at Wrigley Field.

I also remember the Bears teams of the mid-late 60s, while not always bad, NEVER being able to beat the Packers; my dad actually once threw something like a beer can at the TV when the Bears screwed up a play one day vs Green Bay.

PS: no mention of Alpo Suhonen's Blackhawks in 2000-2001 in the poll? No teal.

jdm2662
06-29-2006, 02:35 PM
The worst Bears I've lived through was the 1997 team. I grew up during the Ditka years, so I didn't get to experience the late 60s and 70s.

The worst White Sox team I saw, hands down, was the 1989 team. Of course, the 1986, 1987, and 1988 weren't much better. How they won eight in a row at one time was beyond me.

It's pretty much a toss up for any Tim Floyd's team. Watching Elton Brand play was pretty much the only reason to follow them. Surely, he couldn't be traded, oh wait...

You can pick almost any Blackhawk team since 1997, but they're so far off the radar of revelance, should it matter?

The 1997 Cubs started 0-14. It's a safe vote.

Which is the worst? Who cares? They were all bad...

Nellie_Fox
06-30-2006, 12:29 AM
Ummm did you take a look at the record of the 1970 White Sox?

LipThat was going to be my vote. I was surprised when it wasn't listed. It actually made me glad that I spent that year in Viet Nam and didn't even find out about it until it was history.

kittle42
06-30-2006, 12:47 AM
but the XFL was the worst league ever. They should have had teams named after wrestlers the the San Franciso Snukas or the Boston Bushwackers or perhaps the Utah Ultimate Warriors or even the Rowanoke Rick Rudes or my personal favorite the Jackson Jake the Snake Robert's

English is fundamental.

gbergman
06-30-2006, 03:56 AM
no one answered my question who are the enforcers?

Chips
06-30-2006, 04:01 AM
no one answered my question who are the enforcers?
Did you actually read the thread? I am pretty sure you will find the answer.


The Enforcers were the Chicago team in the XFL.

TDog
06-30-2006, 04:20 AM
Ummm did you take a look at the record of the 1970 White Sox?

Lip

I watched the team play. The record doesn't do justice to their game. They had some exciting moments and some good young players, but their real talent was for losing. Jerry Crider and Jerry Janeski were in the starting rotation because someone had to be. Before the end of the season, they traded for a starting pitcher who had seen worse than that season's brand of White Sox baseball. Robert Lane Miller went 4-6, which wasn't bad, despite an ERA of 5. He had gone 1-12 with the 1962 Mets.

Johnny Mostil
06-30-2006, 08:00 AM
I watched the team play. The record doesn't do justice to their game. They had some exciting moments and some good young players, but their real talent was for losing. Jerry Crider and Jerry Janeski were in the starting rotation because someone had to be. Before the end of the season, they traded for a starting pitcher who had seen worse than that season's brand of White Sox baseball. Robert Lane Miller went 4-6, which wasn't bad, despite an ERA of 5. He had gone 1-12 with the 1962 Mets.

Morbid curiosity made me look up the game-by-game log for that team, as posted to http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHW/1970_sched.shtml. Apparently they were 15-17 on May 16, but then things really went sour. They had eight two-game winning "streaks" and one three-game one, but the remaining wins were singletons scattered among lots and lots of losses. From August 30 to season end they were 7-22. Chuck Tanner got his first managerial job with this team starting in game 147, and led it to a 3-13 finish. Yowza . . .

Maybe it just goes to show that if a Sox team sets its mind on losing then they can beat the Cubs at that, too:tongue: .

VenturaSoxFan23
06-30-2006, 12:39 PM
My vote goes to the '62 Cubs, the only team to have a losing record against the expansion and immortally bad Mets of that season.

FireMariotti
06-30-2006, 06:51 PM
2006 Chicago Sky:redneck

Lip Man 1
06-30-2006, 07:16 PM
Fire:

Who???

:D:

Lip

TDog
07-01-2006, 04:19 PM
Actually, after Saturday's game, the Cubs are beginning to look a lot like the 1970 Sox. If only they can keep of the toroid pace of ineptitude.

At least through Sunday.

Railsplitter
07-01-2006, 07:01 PM
Not the 1969 1-13 Bears? Wanny went to the playoffs once, without a Pro Bowl player.

PKalltheway
07-06-2006, 01:46 AM
How about the 2000 Cubs? They lost nearly 100 games! I mean, Sammy Sosa had nearly 100 more RBI's than the second place player on the team did!:o:

QCIASOXFAN
07-06-2006, 02:04 AM
I would vote for the Cubbies but I have to PUNCH Wanny's Bears. The reason being is that I actually care about the Bears. I care about the Bears a lot and that was just a stupid time to be a Bears fan, we lost all the time, our coach was a joke, and we were the laughing stock of the league. Did I just describe this years Cubs?:rolleyes:

TommyJohn
07-06-2006, 08:16 AM
This goes back a bit, but the 1932 White Sox were truly one of the most
awful teams in Chicago sports history. They went 49-102 and barely cracked
200,000 in attendance for the entire year. Their most noted feat was
beating up umpire George Moriarty on Memorial Day. To top things off, the
Cubs won the pennant and played the Yankees in the Series that year.
Sounds like a Chicago media wet dream.

Believe it or not, they didn't finish in last place that year. They were saved
from the rear of the league by the Boston Red Sox, who went 43-111.

Despite the stink emanating from the south side that year (besides the one
from the stockyards, that is) the 1932 Sox had three future Hall of Famers
on the roster: Red Faber, Ted Lyons and Luke Appling.

Dancin' Homer
07-07-2006, 07:37 AM
Actually, after Saturday's game, the Cubs are beginning to look a lot like the 1970 Sox. If only they can keep of the toroid pace of ineptitude.

At least through Sunday.

I had toroids once, couldn't even sit down until I had one a them laser surgeries.

Dancin' Homer
07-07-2006, 07:38 AM
This poll sucks - no Blackhawks or Sting option??

But the Wanny Bears allowed me to stop watching football.

miker
07-07-2006, 02:10 PM
This poll sucks - no Blackhawks or Sting option??

But the Wanny Bears allowed me to stop watching football.
The Sting actually won a title and the Blackhawks are given a pass until the Wirtz family is exiled or eliminated.