The Final Four

[Frayed Knot]

So we've got the;

Dodgers: been to the WS 23 times, won 9 of them including three times in the last six years

Indians/Guardians: been to six, won twice but not since the first half of the 20th century [1920 & 1948] they lost the WS in 1954, 1995, 1997, 2016

Rays: Been to two WS (2008 & 2020) but lost both

Brewers/Pilots: won none, been to none

So you've got a multi-time regular plus two 'nevers' and one 'not since the Truman administration'. Or, as they'd say on Sesame Street, One of these things is not like the others ... 

 

 

I wonder if/how many Pacific Northwesterners who were baseball fans back in 1969 are still clinging allegiance to 'their' team and are therefore rooting for the Brewers over these next couple weeks? 53 players suited up for the lone Seattle Pilots squad. A couple years back I noted that just over half of those 53 were still living although there's likely a couple fewer by now. Be kinda cool if the Brewers invite the lot of living Pilots for introductions at one of their WS home games. Too late for Jim Bouton but I bet 90 y/o Jerry McNertney from Boone, Iowa would get a kick out of it. Or the youngest of the bunch, the now 78 y/o Gary Timberlake (I think I stayed a Camp Timberlake once) whose only two ML appearances both came for the Pilots. He pitched a total of six innings over two games allowing five earned on seven hits but he was still a ML player and I bet it's been a while since he was honored as such.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The Brewers were there once, in 1982, when they lost to the Cardinals.

[Edgy MD]

The Battle of the Beertowns, they called it.

The Keith Hernandezes bested the Cecil Coopers, 4 games to 3.  Good matchup.  Brewers had the best player on the field in Robin Yount, but came up just one pitcher short.

[Centerfield]

I know why they did it and fully agree with it. 
 

But I wish they could have been the Indians when they break that curse. 

[Cowtipper]

Guardians vs. Brewers would be cool. 

[Frayed Knot]

How could I forget Harvey's Wallbangers?!?!?

[metirish]

I would be happy for any of these teams to win , Dodgers would be my 4th choice though,  agree that Cleveland V Milwaukee would be cool

[Frayed Knot]

I'm going for Tampa v Milwaukee, two teams that have yet to win one. Although considering that Cleveland's last win dates back to the Truman administration, they're sort of an honorary never-won franchise.

[Gwreck]

13 hours ago, Centerfield said:

But I wish they could have been the Indians when they break that curse. 

Why?  (Serious question)

[Centerfield]

The history behind the name. I was rooting for the Indians to break the curse a few times they made it. 
 

im sure the fans won’t be complaining whatever the team name is if it happens, but I think it would have been special to declare the Indians world champions again. 

[Gwreck]

7 minutes ago, Centerfield said:

The history behind the name. I was rooting for the Indians to break the curse a few times they made it. 
 

im sure the fans won’t be complaining whatever the team name is if it happens, but I think it would have been special to declare the Indians world champions again. 

Isn’t the “history” behind the name one that everyone involved should all be rightfully ashamed of?  On about 15 different levels?

I too was rooting for Cleveland to win in 1995 and 1997 (not as much in 2016).  Although I’m not from Cleveland, I would expect the civic pride that comes from the franchise in one’s city winning the championship is massive.  And far exceeds any “pride” from the particular nickname the franchise is operating with.  And is not diminished just because the franchise got rid of a particularly shameful choice of name. 

[Centerfield]

The choice of name was not shameful. The Indians were born in 1915, long before anyone considered it disrespectful or offensive. The racist caricature Chief Wahoo didn’t come into existence until decades later. Maybe you can argue that the shameful part of their history starts there. Certainly by the time the protests began in the 1970’s. Obviously its crazy that it took 50 years to finally effectuate the change. 
 

Still, I find it hard to apply modern ethical standards to periods of time where none of this was ever a thought. And I don’t think that the franchise should be ashamed that they were the Indians. There was a long period of time where they carried the name without a hint of controversy. The shame is that it took them 50 years to change after the affected groups started voicing their concerns. 
 

In any case, the name “Indians” meant something special to a lot of well-intended folks.  It would have been nice for them to break the curse before changing the name. 
 

Just an opinion.  Your mileage may vary. 

[Centerfield]

And it’s silly to assert that the pride of a championship is not diminished by a nickname. 
 

If Cohen sold the naming rights next year and we became the NY DraftKings, we’d celebrate a championship in 2027 but there would be tons of regret that it couldn’t be the Mets. 

[Centerfield]

Also. I have no idea why the Braves or Chiefs are allowed to keep the nickname. I get that Indians and Redskins are worse, but I feel like this should be a clean sweep type of issue. 

[Gwreck]

A couple quick observations:

1. That something did not generate significant opprobrium at the time does not make it retroactively acceptable.

2. Using Native-related terms to name sports teams was a bad thing even in the early 1900s.  Full stop.  At bottom, the reason so many teams had/have such names is because of the stereotypes/caricature that Natives were “fierce” and “warriors” and whatnot, and thus seemed like good choices for a team that would “battle” its opponents. Same reason so many teams are Lions or Tigers or Bears.  Except of course those names are not derived from people.

3. The “NY DraftKings” analogy is not a serious argument.  C’mon.  

Now, if the New York National League baseball franchise was for some reason renamed, say… the New York Defenders…I do think people would rightfully miss the old name.  (But of course in that situation, there was nothing wrong with the old name).

[Centerfield]

My argument isn’t that it was ok to call the team Indians because no one objected. Obviously objectifying and stereotyping an entire race of people is wrong and it should never have happened. My feeling is that there is no shame for the Indians owners and fans in failing to recognize something that was not understood at the time. 
 

Throughout their rich history, the fans developed an affection for that nickname. They didn’t do anything wrong. I’m sure many of them even understood the problematic nature of it. But sports are funny. You love it anyway. I wish these fans could have gotten closure on the curse. If I was writing the script, I would have broken the curse as the Indians and then moved forward with a new chapter as the Guardians. 

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think I get what CF is saying. It might have been more special for some (or even many) of the fans to see "World Champion Cleveland Indians" on banners and merchandise. It's been a long time, and now it will never happen. But of course, if the Guardians win the World Series this year, there will be many very happy people. 

[smg58]

If the Dodgers lose to the Brewers, the World Series will have two small-market, low-budget teams just before the league tries to make the argument that small-market, low-budget teams can't compete so we need to punish the players for accepting the contracts that were offered them and to punish the fans for, um, something.  So yeah, go Brewers.

[Benjamin Grimm]

That's as good a reason as any to root for the Brewers. That, and enough with the Dodgers already!

[Centerfield]

Anyway. Back to the point. The dodgers are the only bad guys left. So long as any of the other three win I’m totally fine with it. 

[Frayed Knot]

5 hours ago, Benjamin Grimm said:

That's as good a reason as any to root for the Brewers. That, and enough with the Dodgers already! Front Row Amy.