PDA

View Full Version : The Cubs are the Only Losing Team in Chicago


IlliniSox4Life
12-14-2006, 03:40 AM
I'm usually not one for ragging on the Cubs (ok, I do sometimes). I just noticed the Blackhawks got to .500 recently though. Then I started to think about all of Chicagos "pro" teams being better than 3-5 years ago. The Bears, Bulls, and Hawks all needed some improvement. Well, let's look at the most recent records/winning percentages of pro sports teams in Chicago (current or record at the end of the last season):

Bears 11-2
White Sox 90-72
Rush 11-9 (incl playoff)
Bulls 12-10
Fire 13-11-8
Blackhawks 12-12-5

Cubs 66-96

The Cubs are the only team in Chicago with a losing record. Sure, you could probably pull up stats for even more obscure teams like Lacrosse, the Bandits, etc, but the Fire and Rush are pretty obscure themselves. Also, the Rush actually finished the regular season 7-9, but won 4 games in the playoffs to win the Arena Bowl, so I figure that counts as a winning record.

QCIASOXFAN
12-14-2006, 03:49 AM
That's the way it should be. :thumbsup:

kevin57
12-14-2006, 08:58 PM
And their fans will still eat it up...as well as the press.

But that's slowly changing. :bandance:

itsnotrequired
12-14-2006, 11:14 PM
The Chicago Sky and their 5-29 record is conspicuously missing from this list.:tongue:

Hitmen77
12-14-2006, 11:44 PM
I'm usually not one for ragging on the Cubs (ok, I do sometimes). I just noticed the Blackhawks got to .500 recently though. Then I started to think about all of Chicagos "pro" teams being better than 3-5 years ago. The Bears, Bulls, and Hawks all needed some improvement. Well, let's look at the most recent records/winning percentages of pro sports teams in Chicago (current or record at the end of the last season):

Bears 11-2
White Sox 90-72
Rush 11-9 (incl playoff)
Bulls 12-10
Fire 13-11-8
Blackhawks 12-12-5

Cubs 66-96

The Cubs are the only team in Chicago with a losing record. Sure, you could probably pull up stats for even more obscure teams like Lacrosse, the Bandits, etc, but the Fire and Rush are pretty obscure themselves. Also, the Rush actually finished the regular season 7-9, but won 4 games in the playoffs to win the Arena Bowl, so I figure that counts as a winning record.

Yeah, but they have the highest payroll of any Chicago team - therefore they are the best and deserve the nonstop positive coverage they are getting from the city's largest newspaper. They certainly deserve more praise than the no-good cheap-bastards White Sox who have never done anything for their fans or this city.

DSpivack
12-15-2006, 12:18 AM
Yeah, but they have the highest payroll of any Chicago team - therefore they are the best and deserve the nonstop positive coverage they are getting from the city's largest newspaper. They certainly deserve more praise than the no-good cheap-bastards White Sox who have never done anything for their fans or this city.


Well, now they do. These records are for last season, when the Sox had a higher payroll.

Anyone know the Bears payroll? Don't really see those numbers often, what with the NFL actually having a salary cap, thus I'm curious.

oeo
12-15-2006, 02:02 AM
The Chicago Sky and their 5-29 record is conspicuously missing from this list.:tongue:

Aren't they an expansion team? (aka, doesn't count)

ewokpelts
12-15-2006, 03:40 AM
Well, now they do. These records are for last season, when the Sox had a higher payroll.

Anyone know the Bears payroll? Don't really see those numbers often, what with the NFL actually having a salary cap, thus I'm curious.$102 million.

KyWhiSoxFan
12-15-2006, 07:39 AM
There you go, trying to use facts to show how bad the Cubs have been. You'll never get a job at the Tribune with that approach.

itsnotrequired
12-15-2006, 08:03 AM
Aren't they an expansion team? (aka, doesn't count)

Why wouldn't they count, expansion or otherwise?

oeo
12-15-2006, 10:03 AM
Why wouldn't they count, expansion or otherwise?

Because it's a total different situation than the Flubs. You don't just come roaring out of the gates as an expansion team, it takes time...the Flubs have been sucktacular for decades now.

itsnotrequired
12-15-2006, 10:18 AM
Because it's a total different situation than the Flubs. You don't just come roaring out of the gates as an expansion team, it takes time...the Flubs have been sucktacular for decades now.

The Chicago Fire is an expansion team and won the MLS Cup in their first season.

miker
12-15-2006, 10:58 AM
The Chicago Sky and their 5-29 record is conspicuously missing from this list.:tongue:
They're hoping to survive with the "lovable loser" paradigm until they get some better talent.

After all, look at what that's done for the Chicago National League Ball Club...

Vernam
12-15-2006, 01:08 PM
I was thinking this very thing last night. The cheese stands alone! I believe the 2007 Flubs will go down as The Worst Team Money Could Buy. Some say they're bound to be better than last year -- hell, that's a safe bet with Piniella. But I think they'll continue to under-perform relative to their payroll. Maybe even worse, if you did a cost-per-win analysis.

But from a positive perspective, I wonder when the last time was that the Bears, Bulls, Sox and Hawks were all playoff-quality. Kind of exciting.

Vernam

I want Mags back
12-15-2006, 01:25 PM
The Hawks are now 12-13:whiner:

you forgot the Wolves, 1st place in the Western conference

areilly
12-15-2006, 01:54 PM
You also forgot the Chicago Bandits. They've existed for two seasons and finished as NPF champions in both of them. Not bad at all.

Juice16
12-15-2006, 03:11 PM
The Chicago Sky and their 5-29 record is conspicuously missing from this list.:tongue:

who?

RadioheadRocks
12-15-2006, 09:41 PM
who?


Chicago's new WNBA franchise.

markopat
12-17-2006, 10:10 AM
The Chicago Sky and their 5-29 record is conspicuously missing from this list.:tongue:

So maybe the question is...which team turns thier record to the winning side the soonest? The Cubs or the Sky? Should we start a pool? Hee hee!

Oh wait...who cares!

I want Mags back
12-17-2006, 02:55 PM
The Hawks are now 12-13:whiner:

you forgot the Wolves, 1st place in the Western conference
back to .500 now

DSpivack
12-17-2006, 06:58 PM
back to .500 now

They have 13 wins, 13 losses in regulation, and five losses in overtime. That's below .500 to me.

SOXBOY
12-17-2006, 08:03 PM
Who cares?

I want Mags back
12-17-2006, 09:36 PM
They have 13 wins, 13 losses in regulation, and five losses in overtime. That's below .500 to me.

why? 5 OTL's is the equivlant of 2.5 wins