The difference between 2 franchises

[UMFan83]

I was bored and did some looking on baseball reference to compare the Red Sox and the Cubs.

 

 

The last time the Red Sox were 21 games under .500 at ANY point in a season was September 11, 1966.

 

Since 1966, assuming this season counts, the Cubs have FINISHED more then 20 games under .500 ELEVEN TIMES.

 

Man, we have been historically bad. Even though the Red Sox didn't win one until 2004, they have consistantly fielded non-pathetic teams.

[dalgreen]

I was bored and did some looking on baseball reference to compare the Red Sox and the Cubs.

 

 

The last time the Red Sox were 21 games under .500 at ANY point in a season was September 11, 1966.

 

Since 1966, assuming this season counts, the Cubs have FINISHED more then 20 games under .500 ELEVEN TIMES.

 

Man, we have been historically bad. Even though the Red Sox didn't win one until 2004, they have consistantly fielded non-pathetic teams.

 

In rivalries, I stated how Cardinal fans were going ballistic because the Cards were on an eight game losing streak, their first since 1988. I wonder how many eight game + losing streaks we've had over the last eight years let alone the last eighteen!

[soccer10k]

I was bored and did some looking on baseball reference to compare the Red Sox and the Cubs.

 

 

The last time the Red Sox were 21 games under .500 at ANY point in a season was September 11, 1966.

 

Since 1966, assuming this season counts, the Cubs have FINISHED more then 20 games under .500 ELEVEN TIMES.

 

Man, we have been historically bad. Even though the Red Sox didn't win one until 2004, they have consistantly fielded non-pathetic teams.

 

In rivalries, I stated how Cardinal fans were going ballistic because the Cards were on an eight game losing streak, their first since 1988. I wonder how many eight game + losing streaks we've had over the last eight years let alone the last eighteen!

 

I thought about this for a few minutes but can't remember where I read it so please, if somebody remembers, let me know. There was something that talked about which team was the more cursed team, the Red Sox or the Cubs. It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

It's my feeling exactly. Even though neither team won a series for a LONG time but at least the Red Sox have been close. The Cubs are known as the lovable losers because they lose. The Red Sox were known for choking against the Yankees. But at least the Red Sox tasted success. Every team goes through a few down years in a row. But the Cubs have had a down 60 years since their last World Series appearance. That's a longer drought than the second longest World Series championship drought (Cleveland). If that's a little confusing it means the Indians have won a World Series since the Cubs have been in a World Series.

 

Sometimes it's just sad how more pathetic the Cubs are as a franchise than other teams.

[J.R.]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

[CubsBullsBears]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

As if 1969, 1984, 1989, 2003 were any easier to take than the ball going thru Buckner's legs?? IMO that was the worst, b/c the Red Sox were 1 strike away.

[dalgreen]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

As if 1969, 1984, 1989, 2003 were any easier to take than the ball going thru Buckner's legs?? IMO that was the worst, b/c the Red Sox were 1 strike away.

 

At least the Red Sox had won pennants, unlike those years you describe of the Cubs. Plus, how many years has the Cubs season been over by June 15th? Many more than the Red Sox.

[Soul]

Owners of the Red Sox care about baseball above all.

 

Owners of the Cubs care about the stock price above all.

 

 

 

There's the root cause difference right there, IMO.

[Sammy Sofa]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

As if 1969, 1984, 1989, 2003 were any easier to take than the ball going thru Buckner's legs?? IMO that was the worst, b/c the Red Sox were 1 strike away.

 

Yeah, the Sox choked often, but really, who in their right mind ever thought of them as a "bad team?" The Red Sox regularly made the playoffs and went to the WS a number of times...they just couldn't seal the deal. But they were still respected as a good and often great team at the end of the day, season after season.

 

The Cubs, on the other hand, have had some flukey good seasons, and that's it. They're not respected at all. They have had respected players...they have a respected stadium. Hell, the scoreboard is more respected than the team itself. The team is a joke, year in and year out, with a few exceptions here or there...not that those exceptions matter, since they faithfully enforce the joke the next year, without fail.

[TB_11]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

 

Playoff appearances since WWII:

 

Red Sox:

1946

1967

1975

1986

1988

1990

1995

1998

1999

2003

2004

2005

 

Cubs:

1945

1984

1989

1998

2003

 

I'll gladly take the Red Sox "suffering." Heartbreaks for the Red Sox like 1986 and 2003 are preceded by full seasons of success.

[soccer10k]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

As if 1969, 1984, 1989, 2003 were any easier to take than the ball going thru Buckner's legs?? IMO that was the worst, b/c the Red Sox were 1 strike away.

 

Yeah, the Sox choked often, but really, who in their right mind ever thought of them as a "bad team?" The Red Sox regularly made the playoffs and went to the WS a number of times...they just couldn't seal the deal. But they were still respected as a good and often great team at the end of the day, season after season.

 

The Cubs, on the other hand, have had some flukey good seasons, and that's it. They're not respected at all. They have had respected players...they have a respected stadium. Hell, the scoreboard is more respected than the team itself. The team is a joke, year in and year out, with a few exceptions here or there...not that those exceptions matter, since they faithfully enforce the joke the next year, without fail.

 

Cubs are known as the Lovable Losers. Red Sox were known as the team that couldn't beat the Yankees.

[soccer10k]

It said that Cubs fans would love to have gone through the suffering that the Red Sox have gone through over the years.

 

Yes.

 

Playoff appearances since WWII:

 

Red Sox:

1946

1967

1975

1986

1988

1990

1995

1998

1999

2003

2004

2005

 

Cubs:

1945

1984

1989

1998

2003

 

I'll gladly take the Red Sox "suffering." Heartbreaks for the Red Sox like 1986 and 2003 are preceded by full seasons of success.

 

World Series Appearances since WWII

 

Red Sox:

1946

1967

1975

1986

2004

 

Cubs:

1945