In football it has to be the Lions or the Cardinals. The Lions have been around since 1930, been to the Super Bowl never, 4 division championships , 4 league championships and 15 playoff appearances. Meanwhile, the Cardinals have been around since 1920, been to one Super Bowl, 6 division championships, two league champions and just 8 playoff appearances.
For Baseball it has got to be the Cubs, right?
For Hockey it might have been the Kings until last year. The Sabres?
For Basketball I thikn the Clippers are the obvious choice, but maybe I am wrong.
The Indians are in the hunt for sure - they’ve won two World Series (same as the Cubs), and, other than a brief spate of good teams between 1995 and 2001 (and 2007), never reached the playoffs - never finished higher than fourth in their division from the 60s through 1993. They’ve won a total of five pennants in their 112-year history. The Cubs have won 16 pennants. I’d call that a lot more successful.
Them there are the Browns, who last won a championship in 1964. They have never been to the Super Bowl, and their playoff appearances have been pathetically few. This is true of both versions of the Browns. While some of their early teams were good, nothing really good has happened for them since 1970.
Of course, as long as we’re on Cleveland teams, there are the Cavs. Granted, they’ve only been around since the early 70s, but they’ve made one measly NBA Final in their history, which they lost.
The Wizards are contenders for the NBA. One championship more than 30 years ago, followed almost uninterruptedly by amazing, self-destructive futility.
The Vancouver/Memphis Grizzlies actually have a lower winning percentage than the Clippers. Granted, the Clippers have been in existence longer, but the Grizzlies have been sucking hard for more than two decades.
Worst is a flexible term in the NHL, but the Sabres don’t compare with teams like the Panthers, and once-proud losers like the Maple Leafs, who haven’t won a Stanley Cup since the league had only six teams.
Pirates and Royals fans (if any are left) would probably disagree with you about the Cubs.
The Royals have only been around since 1969, but won the World Series in 1985 and have two pennants. The Pirates actually have FIVE World Series titles to their credit (though only nine pennants - still more than the Indians, though). So the Pirates have been lots more successful than both the Cubs and the Indians (and I still hold the Cubs to be more successful than the Indians). However, that said - two pennants in 43 years (for the Royals) versus five in 112 for the Indians - it’s a close race.
The Astros don’t have the long service time the Cubs or Indians have, but in 50+ years they’ve been to the World Series once (and lost all 4 games). (They did have a decent run in the late 90s and early 2000s, but there you go.)
All things considered over the history of the franchise, I’d vote for the Phillies. The Indians, surprisingly, actually have an overall winning record at 8,841-8,543 (.509). The Phillies have the worst record of any non-expansion team at 9,318-10,375 (.473), and are an astonishing 1,057 games under .500 since 1883. The Phillies were the last of the pre-expansion teams to win a World Series, in 1980, and still have only won 2 (tied with the Indians for worst). They never won an NL championship before the World Series era either. Admittedly they have won 7 pennants to 5 for the Indians, but two of those have been in the last few years. Their recent success disguises the fact that they have the most prolonged history of suckitude in the Major Leagues.
College football would be harder, since there’s so many variables.
The school sizes and budget differences can be enormous. (directional or non-BCS schools)
Schools that focus on academics in strong football conferences tend to have less success. (Northwestern, Vanderbilt)
Hard to define failure, since nearly 50% of the team can get bowl invites. (like Northwestern or Vanderbilt)
But if I were to pick a school that I’d always equate with failure is Indiana. One Rose Bowl appearance in the 60s and then one bowl in the last 20 years (keep in mind that the Big Ten usually sends 7 or 8 teams bowling since then).
Traditional big conference doormats like Kansas State, Kansas*, Oregon State, and Kentucky* have seen rises, but I think the Hoosiers have always sucked.
*(Yes, I know Indiana is a basketball school, but Kansas and Kentucky have had bowl appearances)
The Cubbies are actually in fifth place in terms of all-time winning percentage (after the Yankees, Giants, Dodgers, Cardinals, and Red Sox), at 10,373-9,881 (.512). All expansion franchises have losing records, the best being the Angels at 4,143-4,153 (.499). One more winning season should put them over .500.
Phillies hold the record for most losses in MLB. They break the record every time they lose a game. The Braves are in second place and would have to lose every game for at least one season to catch up. These are two of the oldest teams in baseball giving them a leg up in loss records, but the Braves were around even longer than the Phillies.
The Braves however are seven years older than the Phillies. The Yankees have the most wins in the AL. All of the pre-expansion NL teams have more wins than the Yankees (9,862), except the Phillies (9,318), despite the Phillies having played 18 more seasons.
It seems unfair to award this… uh… award to a team that has actually won a championship. As futile as the Phillies have been at times, in my lifetime they have been a reasonably successful franchise. It seems like they deserve some credit for that.
In baseball I think you have to give it up to the Montreal Expos/Washington Nationals, who in 44 years of play have not made the World Series, ever, and have made the playoffs only twice and won just one playoff series. And in one of the years they made the playoffs, it was only because of the strike. The only other team to never be in a World Series is Seattle, who’ve not been around as long and have more playoff appearances and series wins.
In hockey, you’d have trouble topping the California Seals / Cleveland Barons, who went through eleven horrible seasons before collapsing. They made the playoffs twice and were blown out in the first round. They never had a winning record and were never even close. They have the worst goal differential of any franchise in NHL history despite the short tenure of their existence.
Columbus has a pretty good shot at surpassing them.
Duke has sucked for a long time in Football, although they did go bowling this past year
I wonder what schools have the least amount of bowl appearances + NCAA B-Ball invites in the last ~30 yrs of schools in the Big 5 conferences. (ACC, B1G, SEC, B12, PAC14)
Most schools are either a lock for a Bowl Game (eg Penn St) or a NCAA bid (eg Duke) or both but there are few schools who only make rare appearances in either.
Schools that I do not think will do very well are Wake Forest, Northwestern, Iowa St, Oregon St and Washington St.
Without looking at that data, my guess would be Washington St.