I think we're all pretty familiar with "The Mailbag." You know, the SG's weekly ego boost that doubles as an excuse to write 20,000 word articles/bash other teams/make obscure pop-culture references/make rash often illogical judgments based on little else than his own disillusion misjudgments/have his wife do his job (he's so quirky!!)/reinforce his "everyman" status.
Typically, I don't bother to read the Mailbag, mostly because I can't stand the questions from SG-loving readers (ex. "I would like to nominate you, Bill Simmons, for a new Sports Czar position in the Obama cabinet. It's a position that's needed in government, no? You're the only one who can save this country from future sports missteps"... ugh). But, since this week's was a two-part series, I figured it must have something worthwhile.
I'll give the SG the benefit of the doubt and say there was probably a hidden gem in there somewhere. Unfortunately, I had to stop before the part duex because of this insightful Q&A..
Q: I was in the Verizon Center in D.C. the other night when I looked up to the rafters to see banners claiming the Washington Mystics led the WNBA in attendance, not once, not twice, but THREE times (1998, 1999 and 2002). Has it really been that long for a championship in the D.C. area that they are clinging to WNBA attendance titles? Shouldn't there be a rule stating a city must be in a championship drought for a set number of years before hanging up meaningless banners? We need your expertise on this one.
-- Steve, Needham Heights, Mass.
SG: I don't consider those three WNBA attendance titles valid because half of those crowds were made up of Pittsburgh Steelers fans. But I mentioned your e-mail to my buddy House (a D.C. fan and resident) and he shamefully passed this tidbit along: Apparently last month during a Capitals game, the Caps raised a banner to commemorate their 2007-08 Southeast Division title. If you came up with some sort of formula to determine the worst four-sport city in America that included things like "sweeping lack of success," "general apathy," "ability of opposing fans to overwhelm your home crowd," "lack of tradition," "most transplants living in the city and rooting for other teams" and everything else, wouldn't Washington and Atlanta end up battling it out for the title like Sebastian Coe and Steve Scott in the '80s, like, they'd be so far ahead of the pack that it would be foolish to even mention the other contenders?
Obviously this one hits a little close to home. I mean, a top-four city with a "sweeping lack of success"? Before 2001, the Sox and the Pats couldn't even make it to a championship, let alone win one. Last I checked the Redskins and the Patriots both have 3 titles. The Nats have been in D.C. for three years. It's hard to argue about the Caps and the Wizards, but as Dan Steinberg pointed out in his D.C. Sports Bog, it's not like another particular arena hasn't hung up banners that weren't world championships.
As far as" lack of tradition," check out any NFC East game (particularly tonight's Skin's, Cowboys matchup) to refute that. It'll be a far cry from the Jets v. Pats match up the SG's dad probably gets all lathered up into a frenzy about each year, just to argue with Jets fans about whose coach is douchier.
And to touch on the fan base, I seem to remember the SG's fan base walking out of their stadium at halftime this year... and in the playoffs.
No comments:
Post a Comment