PDA

View Full Version : Did Any Media Note The Cubs Loss Secured Last Place?


DrCrawdad
10-01-2006, 02:27 PM
Did any media outlets note that with the Cubbies loss yesterday and the Pirates win that the Cubbies secured at least a tie of last place in the NL Central?

soxfan80
10-01-2006, 03:06 PM
does it really matter?

DrCrawdad
10-01-2006, 03:30 PM
does it really matter?

No, but a lot of things don't really matter in the end.

However, I've heard lots of celebratory comments in the media about the Sox not repeating. So, where are the media as far as highlighting the Cubbies finishing in last place?

The Critic
10-01-2006, 03:47 PM
Yesterday's Sun-Times featured a back page caricature of Dusty Baker as a slice of toast, so it's not like the media are hiding the fact that the Cubs had a horrible year.

Hitmen77
10-01-2006, 10:24 PM
I'd rather the Cub not get any higher of a draft pick than necessary. Of course, I don't know if it really matters whether they pick ahead of Pittsburgh or not.

chisoxmike
10-01-2006, 10:57 PM
Since 2000....

WHITE SOX 617-517, 2 playoff appearances, 1 championship

cubs 542-592, 1 playoff appearance, 0 championships, 6 attendance championships

You could go back pre-2000, but I dont feel like it. :D:

FedEx227
10-01-2006, 11:27 PM
Please do :bandance:

CHISOXFAN13
10-02-2006, 12:24 AM
No, but a lot of things don't really matter in the end.

However, I've heard lots of celebratory comments in the media about the Sox not repeating. So, where are the media as far as highlighting the Cubbies finishing in last place?

I heard it several times on updates of both sports radio stations in town throughout the day.

PKalltheway
10-02-2006, 12:30 AM
Why should the media glorify a team that finishes in last place? I'm glad I haven't heard a lot about it. The more the Cubs are ignored by the media, the better.

Hitmen77
10-02-2006, 08:05 AM
Since 2000....

WHITE SOX 617-517, 2 playoff appearances, 1 championship

cubs 542-592, 1 playoff appearance, 0 championships, 6 attendance championships

You could go back pre-2000, but I dont feel like it. :D:

Here you go. Playoff teams in bold. Note that the Cubs only 2 playoff teams since 1990 had worse records than SIX White Sox teams during that time.

Best Chicago baseball record since 1990:
2005 White Sox 99 63 .611 -
1994 White Sox 67 46 .593 -
2000 White Sox 95 67 .586 -
1993 White Sox 94 68 .580 -
1990 White Sox 94 68 .580 9.0
2006 White Sox 90 72 .556 6.0
1998 Cubs 90 73 .552 12.5
2004 Cubs 89 73 .549 16.0
2003 Cubs 88 74 .543 -


Worst Chicago baseball record since 1990:
2000 Cubs 65 97 .401 30.0
2006 Cubs 66 96 .407 17.5
2002 Cubs 67 95 .414 30.0
1999 Cubs 67 95 .414 30.0
1997 Cubs 68 94 .420 16.0
1994 Cubs 49 64 .434 16.5
1996 Cubs 76 86 .469 12.0
1999 White Sox 75 86 .466 21.5

Hangar18
10-02-2006, 08:22 AM
Did any media outlets note that with the Cubbies loss yesterday and the Pirates win that the Cubbies secured at least a tie of last place in the NL Central?

I did notice in the papers this weekend, a great deal of ink being wasted on "what-went-wrong" stories, and gnashing of teeth by the sportswriters.

Hangar18
10-02-2006, 08:38 AM
Worst Chicago baseball record since 1990:
2000 Cubs 65 97 .401 30.0 2,789,508
2006 Cubs 66 96 .407 17.5 3,000,000
2002 Cubs 67 95 .414 30.0 2,693,096
1999 Cubs 67 95 .414 30.0 2,813,854
1997 Cubs 68 94 .420 16.0 2,190,308
1994 Cubs 49 64 .434 16.5 1,845,208 (in strike-shortened season!)
1996 Cubs 76 86 .469 12.0 2,219,110



EXCELLENT STAT. But heres one better ....... shows you just how foolish that fanbase really is. Seemingly, the WORSE they do, the more fans show up. Defies all logic

jenn2080
10-02-2006, 08:39 AM
Did any media outlets note that with the Cubbies loss yesterday and the Pirates win that the Cubbies secured at least a tie of last place in the NL Central?


Does it matter?

itsnotrequired
10-02-2006, 09:07 AM
White Sox baseball: 17 straight seasons of third-place or better finishes in the division. We don't know the meaning of the phrase "4th or 5th place".

:cool:

vegyrex
10-02-2006, 01:27 PM
EXCELLENT STAT. But heres one better ....... shows you just how foolish that fanbase really is. Seemingly, the WORSE they do, the more fans show up. Defies all logic

That's what's so weird about Cubdum. NO other franchise in MLB would draw 3 MILLION fans to see a LAST PLACE TEAM. :D:

vegyrex
10-02-2006, 01:35 PM
1. 1948
2. 1949
3. 1951
4. 1956
5. 1957
6. 1966
7. 1974
8. 1975
9. 1980
10. 1981
11. 1987
12. 1999
13. 2000
14. 2006

Notice how many times the Cubbies finished last BACK TO BACK. :smile:

jenn2080
10-02-2006, 01:56 PM
That's what's so weird about Cubdum. NO other franchise in MLB would draw 3 MILLION fans to see a LAST PLACE TEAM. :D:


The Red Sox. IT IS THE STADIUM.

CHISOXFAN13
10-02-2006, 01:58 PM
The Red Sox. IT IS THE STADIUM.

Well if we are going to get tehcnical, there's no way because Fenway's capacity is too small.
:D:

itsnotrequired
10-02-2006, 02:08 PM
The Red Sox. IT IS THE STADIUM.

The key here is that the Red Sox have been nowhere near as bad as the Cubs. The Red Sox finished last in their division in 1992 yet still drew 2.4 million. That's 500k off a sellout pace.

The Cubs finished last in their division in 1999 and 2000. Attendance for those two seasons averaged 2.8 million. That's only 200k off a sellout pace.

That 1992 Red Sox team was only 9 games under .500. Those 1999-2000 Cubs teams were 17 games under .500.

Hitmen77
10-02-2006, 02:20 PM
The Cubs finished last in their division in 1999 and 2000. Attendance for those two seasons averaged 2.8 million. That's only 200k off a sellout pace.


One factor in those years is that alot of people were coming to the park just to see Sammy Sosa. I had many people tell me during the Sosa years that they went to Cub games primarily to see a Sosa HR and whether the Cubs won or lost was secondary.

Now, I'm not saying that's how die-hard Cub fans felt, but many casual fans felt this way and they helped drive up ticket sales. I'm also not suggesting their attendance would have been 1.5 million w/out Mr. Cork - but rather just pointing out he was a significant factor in boosting ticket sales and was a commodity that many last place teams don't have.

itsnotrequired
10-02-2006, 02:23 PM
One factor in those years is that alot of people were coming to the park just to see Sammy Sosa. I had many people tell me during the Sosa years that they went to Cub games primarily to see a Sosa HR and whether the Cubs won or lost was secondary.

Now, I'm not saying that's how die-hard Cub fans felt, but many casual fans felt this way and they helped drive up ticket sales. I'm also not suggesting their attendance would have been 1.5 million w/out Mr. Cork - but rather just pointing out he was a significant factor in boosting ticket sales and was a commodity that many last place teams don't have.

I have a feeling that Red Sox fans wouldn't have been flocking to Fenway if a similar situation existed in Boston.

kittle42
10-02-2006, 04:07 PM
Is this **** starting again? Jeez, people.

Baby Fisk
10-02-2006, 04:13 PM
Is this **** starting again? Jeez, people.
No kidding.

GoSox2K3
10-02-2006, 04:52 PM
Hangar stirring up the attendance pot again. tsk, tsk, tsk.:wink:

Soxfanspcu11
10-02-2006, 07:43 PM
Does it matter?


I'd like to say that NO, it DOES NOT matter, but unfortunately it does.

I have never seen the media of a home town team hate on that team sooooooooooo much.

The Sox are a 90 win team, in the toughest division in baseball, and yet they still get disrespected by their home media.

It is beyond a disgrace and this mistreatment does need to be addressed.

kittle42
10-02-2006, 09:52 PM
I'd like to say that NO, it DOES NOT matter, but unfortunately it does.

I have never seen the media of a home town team hate on that team sooooooooooo much.

The Sox are a 90 win team, in the toughest division in baseball, and yet they still get disrespected by their home media.

It is beyond a disgrace and this mistreatment does need to be addressed.

I haven't seen any "disrespect" in a while.

Also, please remember that one of the newspapers owns one of the teams. Don't read that one.

kittle42
10-02-2006, 09:54 PM
Oh, and :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:[infinity]

TornLabrum
10-02-2006, 10:12 PM
I haven't seen any "disrespect" in a while.

Also, please remember that one of the newspapers owns one of the teams. Don't read that one.

You mean like Jimmy Greenfield's description of this season as a worse collapse than the '69 Cubs? No, no disrespect there!

And as for the other major rag in this town, don't forget that they employ the biggest ******* writer in the city, Jay Moronotti. No disrespect from him!

FarWestChicago
10-02-2006, 10:13 PM
Did any media outlets note that with the Cubbies loss yesterday and the Pirates win that the Cubbies secured at least a tie of last place in the NL Central?You should know, Doc. Hell, you follow the Flubbies much more closely than the Sox. :rolleyes:

DrCrawdad
10-03-2006, 07:23 AM
You should know, Doc. Hell, you follow the Flubbies much more closely than the Sox. :rolleyes:

Easy with the insults...

:)

My comment though has nothing to do with following the Cubbies. I'm talking about the media here in Chicago taking delight in their reports on the Sox and wondering if they followed suit with when the other Chicago team clinced 6th place.

WGN radio, for example, was in absolute ectasy when the Sox got eliminated. The WGN morning radio show news/sports reports were without a doubt anti-Sox.

And if you honestly believe that I "follow the Flubbies much more closely than the Sox" then you don't really know me at all. Nice slam though.

Hitmen77
10-03-2006, 10:05 AM
I couldn't help but notice that Dusty's dismissal yesterday was pretty much one big nostaglic love-fest in the media yesterday. It was just the same old "we're going to make everything associated with the Cubs seem wonderful and special". Unreal.

Even the headlines said it all. Dusty wasn't fired - he and the Cubs "parted ways". GMAB. I seem to remember that Jerry Manual was fired. I bet when Ozzie's turn comes (in the distant future), it'll be "Ozzie Fired".

C-Dawg
10-03-2006, 12:31 PM
Eh, whatever.

The Ch. 7 news talked to a fan outside the ballpark after Dusty's dismissal. When asked if he would prefer a well-known established manager, or an unknown, as a replacement, he shrugged and said "It doesn't matter; we'll keep coming to the games no matter who they hire. After all its Wrigley.... The Mecca of Baseball!"

Business as usual for the loveable ones!

palehozenychicty
10-03-2006, 01:37 PM
Eh, whatever.

The Ch. 7 news talked to a fan outside the ballpark after Dusty's dismissal. When asked if he would prefer a well-known established manager, or an unknown, as a replacement, he shrugged and said "It doesn't matter; we'll keep coming to the games no matter who they hire. After all its Wrigley.... The Mecca of Baseball!"

Business as usual for the loveable ones!

Shocker.

kittle42
10-03-2006, 02:53 PM
Eh, whatever.

The Ch. 7 news talked to a fan outside the ballpark after Dusty's dismissal. When asked if he would prefer a well-known established manager, or an unknown, as a replacement, he shrugged and said "It doesn't matter; we'll keep coming to the games no matter who they hire. After all its Wrigley.... The Mecca of Baseball!"

Business as usual for the loveable ones!

And this is why this discussion is pointless.

Scottzilla
10-03-2006, 04:07 PM
i actually read the dusty baker and andy macphail stuff on the tribune and all the columnists were pretty harsh on there employers. the tribune even though they own the cubs is still a much better paper than the sun times. they both will cover the cubs more because of the perceived fanbase.
also alot of you guys are talking about cubs attendance i think alot of those numbers are tourism / entertainment i.e beer garden. i actually think that the fan bases are roughly the same size.

Flight #24
10-03-2006, 04:28 PM
Interesting quote from one of the BP guys adressing the difference in quality between the AL & NL

In my lifetime, the leagues have never been as imbalanced as they are today. I'll wait to see what Clay Davenport says when he runs the numbers, but the quote from an unnamed Red Sox source earlier this year which put the difference between leagues at 10 games over the course of the season seems reasonable to me. If the Royals were in the NL, they probably would have gone about 72-90.

Which raises the question: exactly how bad are the Cubs?

:rolling:

GoSox2K3
10-03-2006, 07:55 PM
And this is why this discussion is pointless.

I take it you have nothing better to do than open threads on What's the Score that have the words "media" and "Cubs" in the title and then repeatedly complain about the discussion.

It's called flubsession-session. There is another alternative - don't read the thread!

cheezheadsoxfan
10-03-2006, 08:28 PM
Eh, whatever.

The Ch. 7 news talked to a fan outside the ballpark after Dusty's dismissal. When asked if he would prefer a well-known established manager, or an unknown, as a replacement, he shrugged and said "It doesn't matter; we'll keep coming to the games no matter who they hire. After all its Wrigley.... The Mecca of Baseball!"

Business as usual for the loveable ones!

What an *******.

cheezheadsoxfan
10-03-2006, 08:37 PM
i actually read the dusty baker and andy macphail stuff on the tribune and all the columnists were pretty harsh on there employers. the tribune even though they own the cubs is still a much better paper than the sun times. they both will cover the cubs more because of the perceived fanbase.
also alot of you guys are talking about cubs attendance i think alot of those numbers are tourism / entertainment i.e beer garden. i actually think that the fan bases are roughly the same size.

That has always been my dilemma. I've kept reading the Trib only because it's the best paper I can get up here in Dairyland. However, the coverage of the Sox in September (and other issues not appropriate for this board) have finally pushed me to cancelling.

I agree about the size of the fan bases. I think a lot of those casual fans showed up at the Cell this year. Probably the biggest booers but we can use the their money for quality players.

kittle42
10-03-2006, 10:47 PM
I take it you have nothing better to do than open threads on What's the Score that have the words "media" and "Cubs" in the title and then repeatedly complain about the discussion.

It's called flubsession-session. There is another alternative - don't read the thread!

Does that make you anti-flubsession-sessed? :cool:

Hangar18
10-04-2006, 04:57 PM
It's called flubsession-session. There is another alternative - don't read the thread!


HEH HEH HEH. First time I've ever heard that one ....