If you aren't a Red Sox fan, you have to root for the Indians (1 Viewer)

[AtomicDogg97]

Come on people, you have to root for the Indians in the ALCS. We are just a poor, small market team that is trying to compete with Goliaths like New York and Boston. Our farm system produces star after star (Albert Belle, Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, Bartolo Colon) only to see them leave for bigger paychecks. We have one of the smaller payrolls in baseball, yet here we are winning with castoffs like Casey Blake, Paul Byrd, Kenny Lofton, and Joe Borowski and young, scrappy players like Franklin Guttierez, Azdrubal Cabrerea, and Ryan Garko. And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland? There are probably no fans more passionate than Cleveland sports fans, but what have we had to celebrate. The Browns have never won a Super Bowl. The Cavaliers have never won an NBA championship. And the Indians haven't won the World Series since 1948.There is no town in America that is more deserving of a championship than Cleveland.

Go Tribe!

 

[wilked]

what if you are Japanese, and really want to see Dice-K and Oki do well?

 

[Limp Ditka]

I miss BGP

 

[Tom Servo]

I miss BGP

Personally, I don't need any postings about the Tribe's record in games on Tuesday when Joe Buck is wearing navy blue slacks or a dissection of the effect Eva Longoria has on the Spurs free throw percentage.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I really dont want to root for either team.

 

[phthalatemagic]

Come on people, you have to root for the Indians in the ALCS. We are just a poor, small market team that is trying to compete with Goliaths like New York and Boston.

Boston isn't a goliath. They're just the little guy scratching and doing whatever they can to win against the mean old Yankees.

 

[RedRaiders]

I miss BGP

Personally, I don't need any postings about the Tribe's record in games on Tuesday when Joe Buck is wearing navy blue slacks or a dissection of the effect Eva Longoria has on the Spurs free throw percentage.

I miss the "Cleveland will not have any major sports franchises in 10 years" shtick.

 

[Bobcat10]

I really dont want to root for either team.

So just watch games, grind your teeth, and picture the Tigers whipping the Sox.

 

[SofaKings]

Go Tigers!

Go Tribe!

 

[Darth Cheney]

I will root for the Indians only because the gyro I ate in Cleveland was better than the sausage sandwich I ate near Fenway......

and because I don't like the Sox.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

 

[Tom Servo]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

 

[David Yudkin]

I will root for the Indians only because the gyro I ate in Cleveland was better than the sausage sandwich I ate near Fenway......

You can attack the Red Sox all you want.You can pimp the Yankees til the cows come home.But I draw the line at attacking the sausage sandwiches outside Fenway Park. That, sir, is sacreligious and grounds for a banning. Food of the gods, and we are all lucky to be able to have it.

 

[Reaper]

IN

A really good team - Easy to root for and really good fans and a deserving city.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

 

[avoiding injuries]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?

Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.

It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW.

Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

 

[Tom Servo]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

 

[Bobcat10]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

Just let it go. People like Bob Sac just don't understand and continually contradict themselves.Plus, the Cubs would have lost that game anyways. I know things.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

Maybe bad luck isn't quite the right term...

Heartbreaking losses is probably more apt...

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

 

[Bobcat10]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play. Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play. Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

I went back and forth about either to put The Fumble or The Drive in there...I always considered The Drive worse because you were winning by 7 at the time, and Elway had to go 98 yards to tie itWith The Fumble, you were losing by 7 at the time...They're both pretty awful

 

[Bobcat10]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play. Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

I went back and forth about either to put The Fumble or The Drive in there...I always considered The Drive worse because you were winning by 7 at the time, and Elway had to go 98 yards to tie itWith The Fumble, you were losing by 7 at the time...They're both pretty awful

I thought the fumble score was 36-33....then they took a safety to make it 38-33?

 

[Tremendous Upside]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play.

Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

I went back and forth about either to put The Fumble or The Drive in there...I always considered The Drive worse because you were winning by 7 at the time, and Elway had to go 98 yards to tie it

With The Fumble, you were losing by 7 at the time...



They're both pretty awful

I thought the fumble score was 36-33....then they took a safety to make it 38-33?

From wiki (this is the way I remembered it also):

The game occurred on January 17, 1988, at Mile High Stadium. During the game, the Broncos jumped to a 21-3 halftime lead, but Browns quarterback Bernie Kosar led them back with 4 second-half touchdowns. By the middle of the fourth quarter, the game was tied 31-31. The Broncos then took the lead on a long drive that ended with a 20-yard touchdown pass from quarterback John Elway to running back Sammy Winder, making the score 38-31 with 4 minutes left in the game. Cleveland responded by advancing the ball down to Denver's 8-yard line with 1:12 left, setting the stage for the play that would make this game one of the most famous games in NFL Lore.

Browns running back Earnest Byner took a handoff and appeared to be on his way to score the game-tying touchdown. But he was stripped of the ball by Broncos defensive back Jeremiah Castille, and fumbled at the 3-yard line. The Broncos recovered the ball, gave the Browns an intentional safety, and went on to win 38-33. While Byner took a lot of heat from Browns fans and the media for his fumble, what is often overlooked is that he was one of the main reasons Cleveland came so close to winning the game. He had a superb performance with 67 rushing yards, 7 receptions for 120 yards, and 2 touchdowns.

ETA:From clevelandbrowns.com

But before we say another word, let us be clear in pointing out that Earnest Byner was trying merely to tie the game, not win it, when he coughed the ball up at the Denver 3 with just over a minute left. The Broncos had not been stopped all day -- they had put together a 75-yard drive for a touchdown just four minutes before -- so even if Byner had scored, Elway and his buddies still would have had plenty of time to drive back down the field and get a score of their own to win it.

 

[Bobcat10]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play.

Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

I went back and forth about either to put The Fumble or The Drive in there...I always considered The Drive worse because you were winning by 7 at the time, and Elway had to go 98 yards to tie it

With The Fumble, you were losing by 7 at the time...



They're both pretty awful

I thought the fumble score was 36-33....then they took a safety to make it 38-33?

From wiki (this is the way I remembered it also):

The game occurred on January 17, 1988, at Mile High Stadium. During the game, the Broncos jumped to a 21-3 halftime lead, but Browns quarterback Bernie Kosar led them back with 4 second-half touchdowns. By the middle of the fourth quarter, the game was tied 31-31. The Broncos then took the lead on a long drive that ended with a 20-yard touchdown pass from quarterback John Elway to running back Sammy Winder, making the score 38-31 with 4 minutes left in the game. Cleveland responded by advancing the ball down to Denver's 8-yard line with 1:12 left, setting the stage for the play that would make this game one of the most famous games in NFL Lore.

Browns running back Earnest Byner took a handoff and appeared to be on his way to score the game-tying touchdown. But he was stripped of the ball by Broncos defensive back Jeremiah Castille, and fumbled at the 3-yard line. The Broncos recovered the ball, gave the Browns an intentional safety, and went on to win 38-33. While Byner took a lot of heat from Browns fans and the media for his fumble, what is often overlooked is that he was one of the main reasons Cleveland came so close to winning the game. He had a superb performance with 67 rushing yards, 7 receptions for 120 yards, and 2 touchdowns.

ETA:From clevelandbrowns.com

But before we say another word, let us be clear in pointing out that Earnest Byner was trying merely to tie the game, not win it, when he coughed the ball up at the Denver 3 with just over a minute left. The Broncos had not been stopped all day -- they had put together a 75-yard drive for a touchdown just four minutes before -- so even if Byner had scored, Elway and his buddies still would have had plenty of time to drive back down the field and get a score of their own to win it.

I'm a #######, never mind.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play.

Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

I went back and forth about either to put The Fumble or The Drive in there...I always considered The Drive worse because you were winning by 7 at the time, and Elway had to go 98 yards to tie it

With The Fumble, you were losing by 7 at the time...



They're both pretty awful

I thought the fumble score was 36-33....then they took a safety to make it 38-33?

From wiki (this is the way I remembered it also):

The game occurred on January 17, 1988, at Mile High Stadium. During the game, the Broncos jumped to a 21-3 halftime lead, but Browns quarterback Bernie Kosar led them back with 4 second-half touchdowns. By the middle of the fourth quarter, the game was tied 31-31. The Broncos then took the lead on a long drive that ended with a 20-yard touchdown pass from quarterback John Elway to running back Sammy Winder, making the score 38-31 with 4 minutes left in the game. Cleveland responded by advancing the ball down to Denver's 8-yard line with 1:12 left, setting the stage for the play that would make this game one of the most famous games in NFL Lore.

Browns running back Earnest Byner took a handoff and appeared to be on his way to score the game-tying touchdown. But he was stripped of the ball by Broncos defensive back Jeremiah Castille, and fumbled at the 3-yard line. The Broncos recovered the ball, gave the Browns an intentional safety, and went on to win 38-33. While Byner took a lot of heat from Browns fans and the media for his fumble, what is often overlooked is that he was one of the main reasons Cleveland came so close to winning the game. He had a superb performance with 67 rushing yards, 7 receptions for 120 yards, and 2 touchdowns.

ETA:From clevelandbrowns.com

But before we say another word, let us be clear in pointing out that Earnest Byner was trying merely to tie the game, not win it, when he coughed the ball up at the Denver 3 with just over a minute left. The Broncos had not been stopped all day -- they had put together a 75-yard drive for a touchdown just four minutes before -- so even if Byner had scored, Elway and his buddies still would have had plenty of time to drive back down the field and get a score of their own to win it.

I'm a #######, never mind.

I think you just had them reversed...But they both sucked...

 

[wadegarrett]

And honestly, which city can trot out a worse trifecta of pain than Jordan Over Ehlo/The Drive/Renteria vs. Mesa?

This is probably true.It's hard to separate the Drive and the Fumble. We were gonna win the Fumble game. After the Drive, the Broncos still had to win the game in OT (and that FG was not good). So really, looking back, the Fumble seems worse to me, although the Drive was just painful play after play.

Plus, we would have beat the Giants and the Redskins.

You can torture me until I die b/c I will NEVER admit that Karlis FG was good.ETA: #### YOU RICH KARLIS!!! I HOPE YOU'RE ROTTING IN A ####### GUTTER SOMEWHERE ####FACE!!!!

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

Just let it go. People like Bob Sac just don't understand and continually contradict themselves.Plus, the Cubs would have lost that game anyways. I know things.

I'm not contradicting myself in the least. I was looking at it on the macro level: Generally, your teams suck. Sorry. He was asking about specific points in time. In those instances, those teams weren't quite good enough to get over the hump.I'll be pulling for the Indians. Hopefully I'll get to see them in Phoenix in games 3-4-5. I just didn't agree with the assessment that it was bad luck.

 

[Bobcat10]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

Just let it go. People like Bob Sac just don't understand and continually contradict themselves.Plus, the Cubs would have lost that game anyways. I know things.

I'm not contradicting myself in the least. I was looking at it on the macro level: Generally, your teams suck. Sorry. He was asking about specific points in time. In those instances, those teams weren't quite good enough to get over the hump.I'll be pulling for the Indians. Hopefully I'll get to see them in Phoenix in games 3-4-5. I just didn't agree with the assessment that it was bad luck.

Generally, then, most teams suck. A select few are the opposite of suck.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

Just let it go. People like Bob Sac just don't understand and continually contradict themselves.Plus, the Cubs would have lost that game anyways. I know things.

I'm not contradicting myself in the least. I was looking at it on the macro level: Generally, your teams suck. Sorry. He was asking about specific points in time. In those instances, those teams weren't quite good enough to get over the hump.I'll be pulling for the Indians. Hopefully I'll get to see them in Phoenix in games 3-4-5. I just didn't agree with the assessment that it was bad luck.

Generally, then, most teams suck. A select few are the opposite of suck.

I'm talking about collective sports franchises in cities more than specific teams. I've been rooting for a hockey team that, until the lockout, had been to the playoffs almost every year I'd been alive. They never won a Stanley Cup, mind you. I would have told you they sucked if you had asked me during the playoff run. Now that they actually do suck, it really sucks. Fortunately, however, the Cardinals have traditionally made being a STL sports fan worthwhile. Most cities have some team with a richly successful history to fall back on. One that doesn't have 20+ year gaps to fill. But if you think about cities having traditionally successful sports franchises, Cleveland just isn't one that comes to mind for any reason until well, well, well down the list.

 

[Tom Servo]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW. Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

Just let it go. People like Bob Sac just don't understand and continually contradict themselves.Plus, the Cubs would have lost that game anyways. I know things.

I'm not contradicting myself in the least. I was looking at it on the macro level: Generally, your teams suck. Sorry. He was asking about specific points in time. In those instances, those teams weren't quite good enough to get over the hump.I'll be pulling for the Indians. Hopefully I'll get to see them in Phoenix in games 3-4-5. I just didn't agree with the assessment that it was bad luck.

Generally, then, most teams suck. A select few are the opposite of suck.

Who's not letting it go?

 

[Bobcat10]

And as much talk as we heard about the plight of Red Sox fans and the curse of the Bambino, is there any city that has more bad luck with its sports teams than Cleveland?

It's bad luck that your teams suck?

Browns late 80s down?

Indians 1995-2001 down?

Getting beat is not bad luck. Not being able to stop John Elway isn't bad luck. It's bad defense. Did The Fumble suck? Of course, but I wouldn't call that luck.

It's not like Jeffrey Maier screwed your team out of a chance at a title or your starting CF got run over by a tarp right before a WS game. at Vince Coleman, BTW.

Is there something epic in the history of Cleveland sports that I'm not remembering here besides having teams that just weren't quite good enough to get over the hump?

There's a difference between sucking and not getting over the hump. Which is it?

Just let it go. People like Bob Sac just don't understand and continually contradict themselves.Plus, the Cubs would have lost that game anyways. I know things.

I'm not contradicting myself in the least. I was looking at it on the macro level: Generally, your teams suck. Sorry. He was asking about specific points in time. In those instances, those teams weren't quite good enough to get over the hump.

I'll be pulling for the Indians. Hopefully I'll get to see them in Phoenix in games 3-4-5. I just didn't agree with the assessment that it was bad luck.

Generally, then, most teams suck. A select few are the opposite of suck.

Who's not letting it go?

I could go into alot more detail, you know.GO TRIBE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Sea Bass]

I would probably root for Cleveland.