Rooting interest poll: Tigers vs. Athletics

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Who are you rooting for in the ALCS? Detroit or Oakland?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I have to go with Detroit here. I always feel a sense of gratitude to the team that bumps the Yankees. Also, it's nice to see Detroit succeed so soon after losing 119 games. (And I was rooting hard for them to lose that year, so it's only fair that I root for them to win this year.)

Nothing against Oakland, though. If they win, I'll get a chance to see Barry Zito pitch, as a possible 2007 Mets preview. (I know I can watch him in the ALCS, but I probably won't, at least, not for more than an inning or two.)

[Guest OlerudOwned]

I picked the A's and I want to sound smart.

[dinosaur jesus]

I want the A's to win so I don't have to hear any more about Tiger Magic. They beat the Y's because they were a better team. Nothing magical about it.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

I'm an A's fan. I have been since 2001.

It wouldn't break my heart if Detroit won - I have a Tigers fan acquaintance with whom I correspond. But I'd be happy to see Zito and Chavez make it to the World Series.

[Theoldmole]

For pretty much Yancy's reasons, plus I have a general tendency that where there's not a stronger rooting influences, I root for the original teams. Except the Yankees, of course.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I like that it's come down to two old-school, traditionally black union cities in economic tough times. Well, last I heard Oaktown was on the upswing, but Detroit is in shambles. It will be a nice boost for people in either town.

I'll probably lean to Detroit here for having the best home unis in baseball, having a great history and overcoming a lot. But what I want most is good games.

[Guest OlerudOwned]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: I like that it's come down to two old-school, traditionally black union cities in economic tough times. Well, last I heard Oaktown was on the upswing, but Detroit is in shambles. It will be a nice boost for people in either town. I'll probably lean to Detroit here for having the best home unis in baseball, having a great history and overcoming a lot. But what I want most is good games.

Seven good, long, grinding games that wear both teams down so that the winner has nothing left in the tank for the World Series.

[Guest cooby]

Tigers. Sorry Jay.

I liked seeing those little kids in the furry tiger jackets too

[Valadius]

I said the A's before, and I'm holding myself to that. It's payback time for '73.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Valadius wrote: I said the A's before, and I'm holding myself to that. It's payback time for '73.

Payback time? Would an Oakland loss in 2006 cause Joe Rudi to lose a moment of sleep?

There's no need for vengence against the 1973 Athletics.

[Zvon]

This is a tuff one--
In terms of how it effects the Mets both pitching staffs worry me.
But the A's less so, I think.
And yea-a rematch of the 73 series--Id enjoy that angle.

Many forget that went 7 exciting games.
We really should have taken that series.

[stevejrogers]

Yeah if Seaver wasn't being such a Diva about wanting to close out the series on his own and all

[Guest KC]

Tigers in six, Zito becomes a Yankee asap per FA rules and regs (even
though those don't apply to the Yanks, like when Mother Torressa called
Musina when he had no legal right to do so after the WS years ago)

[Guest vtmet]

This is a tough call...I think that the Tigers have the better pitching staff and offense & also deserve to be in the WS more...but at the same time, The A's would give us a better chance to assess Zito before wasting money on him, and the A's might be easier to beat...I think that Comerica Park matches up with Shea the best for our pitchers...

I'll go with the Tigers...the A's don't really pique my interest...

[Elster88]

Jay Fucking Payton baby.

[DocTee]

The A's. After moving from NYC we lived in Oakland for a spell-- they, and the city they represent, are the red-headed stepchildren of the SF media and I always liked the fact that they seemed as if they had something to prove. While the Giants get the headlines, they get the championships.

The Coliseum is nothing to write home about, but until they closed the upper deck this year, you could walk up and get tix to any game. For awhile, they had dollar tix (and hot dogs) on Wednesday, but the team never drew like their cross-bay brethren.

Go Mets, go A's...

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

The Coliseum is one of the very few current Major League parks that is crappier than Shea. The A's are in desperate need of a new stadium.

[Frayed Knot]

Basically what Dickshot said.

I just root for entertaining games in series like this as I don't a specific rooting interest but could make decent cases for both sides:

Detroit - because it would be nice to see that city revive its great baseball tradition which has taken somewhat of a beating in recent years.

Oakland - because it would be nice to see them build some momentum into hopefully getting a better site to play in and also to shut those up who see the A's recent playoff failures as "proof" that 'Moneyball' doesn't work even as many who say that so totally don't "get it" that their arguments aren't even worth discussing.

[soupcan]

I'm 50-50 here.

I would like for the Mets to play the Tigers because I like having old traditional teams in the WS and although the A's have lineage to the Philadelphia A's I personally don't consider them the 'same' team.

I would like to play the A's because I also like seeing WS rematches.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I actually prefer new matchups, so Mets-Tigers helps fit that bill.

Original team vs. original team is nice, and quite rare. (Cardinals-Tigers could happen this year, but of course we all hope it doesn't!) It happened recently with Cardinals-Red Sox. Before that we have to go all the way back to 1976 with Yankees-Reds.

[Valadius]

What do you consider an original team?

[Gwreck]

I'm not Yancy, but I was under the impression that the "original teams" consisted of the 8 teams in each league in 1903, the start of World Series play.

FWIW, the stats he quotes are based on clubs that have not moved cities since 1903. Otherwise the most recent prior to 2004 would've been 1999.

[u:38c9b196fb]National[/u:38c9b196fb]
Boston
Brooklyn
Chicago
Cincinatti
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
St. Louis

[u:38c9b196fb]American[/u:38c9b196fb]
Boston
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
New York
Philadelphia
St. Louis
Washington

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Valadius wrote: What do you consider an original team?

One of the original 16, still playing in its original city. (I base "original" on the early 20th Century, when baseball's alignment started a long term period of stability.)

St. Louis Cardinals. Philadelphia Phillies. Pittsburgh Pirates. Chicago Cubs. New York Yankees. Cleveland Indians. Detroit Tigers. Chicago White Sox.

[MFS62]

ScarletKnight41 wrote: The Coliseum is one of the very few current Major League parks that is crappier than Shea. The A's are in desperate need of a new stadium.

When I was listening to one of their games on radio, I heard the announcer say it was a "full house" in Oakland. Later, he said the attendance was (IIRC) 35,000+.
As I recalled, they play football in the Oakland Alameda County Stadium, so attendance is at least 55,000. Were the other 20,000 people disguised as empty seats?

I sent an email to an A's fan friend and he told me that they rope off the upper deck for baseball games and don't sell tickets to those seats.

Later

[Gwreck]

MFS62 wrote: I sent an email to an A's fan friend and he told me that they rope off the upper deck for baseball games and don't sell tickets to those seats.

Indeed. They have green tarps over the seats.

One wonders if in the World Series those seats won't be opened up, similar to what happened in Flordia in '97 and '03.

[Guest Rotblatt]

The city of Detroit needs the business.

On the other hand, if Oakland wins, it will piss off the old skoolers who have been able to point at Billy Beane's lack of postseason success and say, "Hah! Eggheads don't know shit!"

So I'm conflicted, but I think I'll go with Detroit. Their fans were so excited when their boys clinched, and I bet they stay a whole lot longer at their games than the fans from Oakland.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

Don't dis the fans in Oakland - they're not like Dodgers fans, you know.

In fact, there's a fairly large group of die hards who show up in Oakland every game with flags, drums, horns, and all sorts of noisy stuff. They're in left field and in right field each game. It's worth the price of admission just to see these guys in action - they're hysterical.

[Guest silverdsl]

I went with the A's because I've long liked the A's. However, even though the Tigers beat the Yankees, I wouldn't mind seeing them advance. Detroit doesn't have all that much to get excited about these days, and it's always neat to see a team that few take seriously make some noise.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

I've never really been a fan of either the A's or the Tigers, but the resurrection of the Tiger's franchise is a good story. They went from "challenging" the 1962 Mets record for losses in a season to playing in the ALCS in a few short years. A remarkable turnaround. Besides, they humiliated the Yankees in the playoffs which earned my affection. I will be cheering for the Tigers in the ALCS.