Forget predictions and projections. Who are you *rooting* for?
| Detroit |  95 (51.91%) |
| St. Louis | 23 (12.57%) |
| Neither, just want a good series | 46 (25.14%) |
| Don't care; not even going to watch | 19 (10.38%) |
183 votes | 10 featured comments
I figured this was a safer question to post, given the previous two Bauxite predictions of wins by Oakland and New York.
Whoops.
Whoops.
Here's my prediction:
The first few games of this series will get below-average TV ratings because people aren't interested in these two clubs.
Sometime in May after the Yankees go on a hot streak, some writer will write how big market clubs like New York and Boston are ruining baseball and how everyone wants more parity.
The first few games of this series will get below-average TV ratings because people aren't interested in these two clubs.
Sometime in May after the Yankees go on a hot streak, some writer will write how big market clubs like New York and Boston are ruining baseball and how everyone wants more parity.
Can't forget the Motor City
All we need is music, sweet sweet music
there'll be music everywhere
there'll be singing, swaying, players playing
dancing in the street
It is a felony to edit the lyrics to a Marvin Gaye song, but I took my chances.
It is easy to root for the Tigers.
All we need is music, sweet sweet music
there'll be music everywhere
there'll be singing, swaying, players playing
dancing in the street
It is a felony to edit the lyrics to a Marvin Gaye song, but I took my chances.
It is easy to root for the Tigers.
Not a fan of the TIgers (old wounds dig deep) but no way am I wanting to see LaRussa get a second WS win on his resume. So I guess I'm cheering for the Tigers.
The problem with this is, Mike, people aren't interested in the New York clubs either... the Yankees-Mets world series drew the lowest ratings in history.
I think Tigers-Cardinals will do relatively well.
Thanks, Mike G, now I have Bowie and Jagger's skinny legs dancing through my head.
That was a quality game last night. Chavez' catch forced me to sit through 5 minutes of commercials in anticipation of the multiple replays after the break (Devo's catch will still rank higher because the Jays ultimately won that series). With apologies to King Carlos, Shawn and Woody, I am glad St. Lou took it because the Tigers would simply crush the weak arms the Mets would keep sending out (ya think Perez would keep it up for another 1-2 starts?)
I am not *that* bitter over '87. I think the Tigers are a better story; in that same time span, the Cards have made the WS (1987, 2004), LCS (1996, 2000, 2002, 2005), and LDS (2001). Sure, they haven't won the Selig Cup since '82 but they certainly have been an above average successful franchise. In that same time frame, the Tigers have done bupkes and were expected to come in no higher than 3rd or 4th this year. Thus, I think there will be better ratings than usual.
That was a quality game last night. Chavez' catch forced me to sit through 5 minutes of commercials in anticipation of the multiple replays after the break (Devo's catch will still rank higher because the Jays ultimately won that series). With apologies to King Carlos, Shawn and Woody, I am glad St. Lou took it because the Tigers would simply crush the weak arms the Mets would keep sending out (ya think Perez would keep it up for another 1-2 starts?)
I am not *that* bitter over '87. I think the Tigers are a better story; in that same time span, the Cards have made the WS (1987, 2004), LCS (1996, 2000, 2002, 2005), and LDS (2001). Sure, they haven't won the Selig Cup since '82 but they certainly have been an above average successful franchise. In that same time frame, the Tigers have done bupkes and were expected to come in no higher than 3rd or 4th this year. Thus, I think there will be better ratings than usual.
"The
problem with this is, Mike, people aren't interested in the New York
clubs either... the Yankees-Mets world series drew the lowest ratings
in history."
Well, that series was a little insular. Nobody outside of the Northeast wants to see NY^2. Plus the games themselves were pretty boring. But Yankees-Dodgers or Red Sox-Cubs.. that'd be a ratings winner.
Well, that series was a little insular. Nobody outside of the Northeast wants to see NY^2. Plus the games themselves were pretty boring. But Yankees-Dodgers or Red Sox-Cubs.. that'd be a ratings winner.
I think the Cardinals are the worst team ever to be in a World Series
No, sir! By record alone, you have to go with the 82-79 Mets of 1973. But on sheer talent (or lack thereof), I'd nominate the 1988 Dodgers ... how in the world did that team win 94 games? (Of course they were "just" 71-59 in decisions not earned by Orel Hershiser that year.)
The 87 Twins were outscored by their opponents, but still won. A young outfielder named B. Beane got his first lesson in the importance of sample size.
Kent Hrbek, Kirby Puckett, Tom Brunansky, Frank Viola and Bert Blyleven sounds like the core of a ballclub, but they had huge holes at catcher and second base and Gladden was more sad than glad. The pitching staff was truly mediocre.
Kent Hrbek, Kirby Puckett, Tom Brunansky, Frank Viola and Bert Blyleven sounds like the core of a ballclub, but they had huge holes at catcher and second base and Gladden was more sad than glad. The pitching staff was truly mediocre.
I think Detroit will win, but I'm pulling for St. Louis. Any team that can win the World Series while sending out Eckstein-Wilson-Pujols-Encarnacion (in other words, 5%-0%-93%-2%) as their top 4 must be doing something right.