Guest The Czech Republic Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 I just thought I'd bring to attention what anyone can find from a sports almanac, that being a look at which teams have been winning their respective league championships over the last several years, specifically 1989 to 2003. I can't think of any real purpose for this, but in case anyone wants to sound of on how teams are monopolizing leagues, here. NHL's last 15 years: Detroit has won 3, New Jersey has won 3, Colorado 2, and New York, Calgary, Montreal, and Dallas 1. NBA's last 15 years: Chicago 6, LA Lakers 3, Detroit 2, San Antonio 2, Houston 2. NFL's last 15 years: Dallas 3, San Francisco 3. Denver 2, Tampa Bay, New England, Baltimore, St. Louis, Green Bay, NY Giants, Washington. American League(1987 to 2002, no 1994) : New York 5, Oakland 3, Cleveland 2, Minnesota 2, Toronto 2, Anaheim 1. National League(1987 to 2002, no 1994) : Atlanta 4, San Francisco 2, Arizona, New York, San Diego, Florida, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Los Angeles, and St. Louis 1. so with the NL and NFL, it took a comparatively longer time to write than with the NBA or NHL. Is it a good thing to have parity and never know which team can end up winning it all? Or do you prefer having a few established teams that dominate the league?
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 Nothing kills interest in a league faster than the same team winning all the time.
Guest The Czech Republic Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 Nothing kills interest in a league faster than the same team winning all the time. I don't think the Bulls double 3-peat did much harm to the NBA. In fact, that was the peak of the league's popularity. Of course, just like with attributing part of Hulkamania to Bundy, Piper, Earthquake, and co., you gotta hand it to Magic, Drexler, Barkley, Kemp, and Stockton.
Guest razazteca Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 Nothing kills interest in a league faster than the same team winning all the time. What kills interest is the big build up of the individual star and not the emphasis on the team. NYC and LA does not need to win everything every year.
Guest alkeiper Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 The same team winning isn't good, but neither is a new winner every single year. Just like in wrestling, sometimes you need a big heel to take down.
Guest Kingpk Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 The Bulls' dominance (coupled with the Celtics freefall) turned me right off from the NBA. It makes fans of some teams ask "Why should I care anymore if the same damn team is on top every year?" I like parity, it brings an air of unpredicability, a feeling of "it's anyone's title to win".
Guest MaxPower27 Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 That's why I really liked the baseball playoffs last year, and the hockey playoffs this year.
Guest Human Fly Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 But this year when the Lakers lost the ratings went into the toilet. I am glad that a new team won, but it seems that the majority of fans aren't.
Guest razazteca Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 NFL is the best sport league period. Has a short season with every game meaning something and the biggest championship game in sports.
Guest ISportsFan Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 NHL's last 15 years: Detroit has won 3, New Jersey has won 3, Colorado 2, and New York, Calgary, Montreal, and Dallas 1. We're starting at 1989, right? Because you only had 12 champions over a 15 year period. Pittsburgh 2 times (1991-92), Edmonton (1990), and possibly Calgary (if we're counting the 16th most recent champion in 1989) should also be included. It's only fair, because you said that the NHL wasn't as long to type. That could be because you didn't type as many teams. Jason
Guest The Czech Republic Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 NHL's last 15 years: Detroit has won 3, New Jersey has won 3, Colorado 2, and New York, Calgary, Montreal, and Dallas 1. We're starting at 1989, right? Because you only had 12 champions over a 15 year period. Pittsburgh 2 times (1991-92), Edmonton (1990), and possibly Calgary (if we're counting the 16th most recent champion in 1989) should also be included. It's only fair, because you said that the NHL wasn't as long to type. That could be because you didn't type as many teams. Jason My apologies. I got Calgary in there but missed Edmonton. D'oh.
Guest Vern Gagne Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 Going further back with NBA. Since 1979 the 76ers are the only team to win one championship. The Lakers, Celtics, Pistons, Rockets, and Spurs have won multiply titles.
Guest Vern Gagne Posted June 18, 2003 Report Posted June 18, 2003 NFL is the best sport league period. Has a short season with every game meaning something and the biggest championship game in sports. It also has the best chance of not having the best team win the Super Bowl at the end of the season. Which is a good or bad thing depending on how you look at it. IMO..I don't like it. I actually like Dynasties. They're good, and dominate teams. Even the Cowboys of the 90's who I personally didn't like where enjoyable to watch, and it was fun rooting against them. Beating these guys really meant something. Know days I don't get that feeling. The team has become to mediocre.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now