So what does “losingest” (a horrible horrible turn of phrase if you ask me) mean? The team that has lost the most games?
RealityChuck:
First of all, the original post seemed specifically to be referring to the Royals/Kings as a four-city team, and more specifically as the first one, in order to contrast it to the Philadelphia-Kansas City-Oakland-possibly Silicon Valley A’s. So my correction is that the Hawks preceded them; they had moved to their fourth city before the Royals moved to their third.
Second of all, I don’t know that I’d consider Omaha as a separate home city for the Royals/Kings. They were never the Omaha Kings; they were for a while the Kansas City-Omaha Kings, and eventually just stopped playing in Omaha at all. YMMV, I guess.
In the little humorous featurette ESPN did on the Phillies last night, one figure stuck out to me: the Phillies have lost more games than all the NFL teams put together. :eek:
[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried]
So what does “losingest” (a horrible horrible turn of phrase if you ask me) mean? The team that has lost the most games?
[/QUOTE]
It basicly means that offically, the phillys have lost the most games of any pro team in america.
Even the Washington Generals?
[QUOTE=cmkeller]
Even the Washington Generals?
[/QUOTE]
Those games are fixed. The Globetrotters use a freakin’ ladder, for God’s sake! (Simpsons reference aside, Wikipedia says the Generals lost over 13,000 games to the Harlem Globetrotters. However, the Generals- and their successor, the New York Nationals- are not actually real professional sports teams, as their main goal is to provide competition for the Globetrotters to beat.) Here’s an article on Red Klotz, the Generals/Nationals creator and coach.
[QUOTE=Cartooniverse]
CH East or CH West? 
I used to spend a lotta time in Cennercity. Best pizza? Paul’s Pizza on 20th just north of Spruce. My god.
My understanding is that the Flyers may become a practice squad for the Penn Quakers. 
[/QUOTE]
West. I like Paolo’s Pizza on Pine. They make a pie with eggplant, feta, and olives, and it’s a revelation. I’ve never had Paul’s, I’ll have to check it out.
[QUOTE=CJJ*]
This is exactly right. I’d only add that there is also the mystique of squandering championship chances in memorable/fantastic ways: The Lou Brock trade, the black cat in 1969, Durham’s wet glove in '84, the Bartman game…
But I wonder if even this is legitimate; doesn’t just about every team that comes close but loses have a key moment they can point to as the legendary “reason”? Yes, the ball dribbling thru Buckner’s legs in '86 was an unusual play, but I don’t think it’s fair to call it the key reason for the Sox choke (for one thing, there was still a game 7 to play), and even if the Sox had lost in some other, more routine way, I’m sure some other “key” moment in the series would get the focus…
[/QUOTE]
What makes Game 6 in 1986 so distinctive is that no team has ever been so close to winning a World Series and still lost. The Red Sox, remember, had a two run lead with nobody on and were a strike away (in fact, they were a strike away several times in that inning.) There’s no other case in World Series history of a team blowing it from such a commanding position.
[QUOTE=RealityChuck]
Can’t anyone count? The Royals/Kings are five cities:
- Rochester
- Cincinnati
- Kansas City
- Omaha
- Sacramento
“Tri-Cities” count as one, since it’s only named once. “Omaha” was part of the Kings name for several years.
The only other candidate for five is the Houston Mavericks/Carolina Cougars/Spirits of St. Louis of the ABA, since they had three home locations in Carolina.
[/QUOTE]
Chuck, we all know that 5 > 4. What I and some others were doing were listing others with 4. You win the game of can you top this though. Congrats!
[QUOTE=RickJay]
What makes Game 6 in 1986 so distinctive is that no team has ever been so close to winning a World Series and still lost. The Red Sox, remember, had a two run lead with nobody on and were a strike away (in fact, they were a strike away several times in that inning.) There’s no other case in World Series history of a team blowing it from such a commanding position.
[/QUOTE]
I dunno Rick. I cannot associate “Calvin Scharldi” with “commanding position.”
[QUOTE=RickJay]
What makes Game 6 in 1986 so distinctive is that no team has ever been so close to winning a World Series and still lost. The Red Sox, remember, had a two run lead with nobody on and were a strike away (in fact, they were a strike away several times in that inning.) There’s no other case in World Series history of a team blowing it from such a commanding position.
[/QUOTE]
It may be true that no team has been “closer” to winning the series before being defeated. But consider Dekinger’s blown call in the 1985 WS, or Lonnie Smith’s baserunning blunder in the 1992 version.
It seems every close WS has one of these singular moments which (so the legend goes) cost the team that “should have won” a victory. My contention is these moments just aren’t that rare, and reflect more the sports fan’s need to see a higher power at work that to chalk it up to a bad break.
And let me be the first to correct it: the Lonnie Smith blunder occurred in the 1991 WS, not 1992…
This being a Phillies thread, we would be remiss if we failed to mentioned Wild Thing, Joe Carter and the WS of 1993.