ESPN's Annual Franchise Rankings

Pro Sports 22 replies 1,042 views
like_that's avatar
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Sep 7, 2012 3:00pm
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/teamrankings

Pretty surprised to see the Indians not near the very bottom.
gorocks99's avatar
gorocks99
Posts: 10,760
Sep 7, 2012 3:10pm
Columbus Blue Jackets:

Title Track (TTR):
Championships already won or expected in the lifetime of current fans.

Rank 122/122

justincredible's avatar
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Sep 7, 2012 3:10pm
Reds near the top, Jets near the bottom. Sounds about right.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Sep 7, 2012 3:12pm
gorocks99;1263988 wrote:Columbus Blue Jackets:

Title Track (TTR):
Championships already won or expected in the lifetime of current fans.

Rank 122/122

A decent barn keeping them out of dead last.
Ironman92's avatar
Ironman92
Posts: 49,363
Sep 7, 2012 3:53pm
Lakers are back to back with the Astros. Lol
Azubuike24's avatar
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Sep 7, 2012 9:24pm
Relevant, at least to this site. Out of 122...

12. Pittsburgh Steelers
19. Pittsburgh Penguins
23. Cincinnati Reds
30. Detroit Red Wings
31. Miami Heat
50. Cleveland Cavaliers
52. Detroit Tigers
54. Pittsburgh Pirates
66. Cleveland Indians
89. Los Angeles Lakers
102. Cincinnati Bengals
107. Cleveland Browns
116. Columbus Blue Jackets
122. Toronto Maple Leafs???
Azubuike24's avatar
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Sep 7, 2012 9:27pm
Players (PLA): Effort on the field and likability off it.
Columbus Blue Jackets 122/122

Coaching (CCH): Strength of on-field leadership.
Columbus Blue Jackets 120/122

The Jackets just get crushed...
dazedconfused's avatar
dazedconfused
Posts: 2,662
Sep 7, 2012 10:35pm
Azubuike24;1264221 wrote:Players (PLA): Effort on the field and likability off it.
Columbus Blue Jackets 122/122

Coaching (CCH): Strength of on-field leadership.
Columbus Blue Jackets 120/122

The Jackets just get crushed...
deserved imo
Classyposter58's avatar
Classyposter58
Posts: 6,321
Sep 7, 2012 11:41pm
Azubuike24;1264218 wrote:Relevant, at least to this site. Out of 122...

12. Pittsburgh Steelers
19. Pittsburgh Penguins
23. Cincinnati Reds
30. Detroit Red Wings
31. Miami Heat
50. Cleveland Cavaliers
52. Detroit Tigers
54. Pittsburgh Pirates
66. Cleveland Indians
89. Los Angeles Lakers
102. Cincinnati Bengals
107. Cleveland Browns
116. Columbus Blue Jackets
122. Toronto Maple Leafs???
Lakers and Red Wings really this far down? They're two of the best franchises in their leagues
said_aouita's avatar
said_aouita
Posts: 8,532
Sep 8, 2012 4:52am
Azubuike24;1264218 wrote: 107. Cleveland Browns
116. Columbus Blue Jackets
Browns below the Blue Jackets? Shocking. Honestly. Even a bad NFL team should not be lower than the Blue Jackets. Surprised Redwings are so low. Is it Detroit the town or because still paying for past super stars?
Mulva's avatar
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Sep 8, 2012 6:01am
said_aouita;1264366 wrote:Browns below the Blue Jackets?
Usually, when things are ranked, the lower number is better. #1 is normally the best ranking. Meaning 107 would be better than 116.
like_that's avatar
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Sep 8, 2012 10:16am
said_aouita;1264366 wrote:Browns below the Blue Jackets? Shocking. Honestly. Even a bad NFL team should not be lower than the Blue Jackets. Surprised Redwings are so low. Is it Detroit the town or because still paying for past super stars?
SMH, I think this answers your question from that other thread you started...
ts1227's avatar
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
Sep 8, 2012 10:22am
The Indians "bang for the buck" rating should freefall for next year, so they won't be rank as anomolously high next time.
jordo212000's avatar
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Sep 8, 2012 10:24am
Browns shouldn't be so close to the Bengals. The franchises are headed two different directions
said_aouita's avatar
said_aouita
Posts: 8,532
Sep 8, 2012 11:55am
like_that;1264414 wrote:SMH, I think this answers your question from that other thread you started...
Glad to see your putting intelligent thought into responses now.



Oh wait, this isn't the opposite thread.
Rotinaj's avatar
Rotinaj
Posts: 7,699
Sep 8, 2012 12:03pm
jordo212000;1264419 wrote:Browns shouldn't be so close to the Bengals. The franchises are headed two different directions
Neither are really headed anywhere special.
jordo212000's avatar
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Sep 8, 2012 2:38pm
Rotinaj;1264450 wrote:Neither are really headed anywhere special.

Bengals went to playoffs with talented young core
Commander of Awesome's avatar
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Sep 8, 2012 4:09pm
jordo212000;1264419 wrote:Browns shouldn't be so close to the Bengals. The franchises are headed two different directions
Trolling turdo is trolling. Not fooling anyone.
Rotinaj's avatar
Rotinaj
Posts: 7,699
Sep 8, 2012 4:40pm
jordo212000;1264626 wrote:Bengals went to playoffs with talented young core
They lost to every good team they played against.
like_that's avatar
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Sep 8, 2012 4:44pm
said_aouita;1264447 wrote:Glad to see your putting intelligent thought into responses now.



Oh wait, this isn't the opposite thread.
Either you are stupid as hell, or your post was meant as a "joke" (cop out alert), but instead failed miserably.

You pick.
jordo212000;1264626 wrote:Bengals went to playoffs with talented young core
Ok, I will bite. Once again jordo shows his idiocy. If the rankings were based on success a bunch of teams would be much higher. i.e. Lakers would not be #86 below teams like the Indians, Pirates, or even Cavs. Not surprised the purpose of the rankings went over your head though.

The Bengals have had 2 playoff seasons the past 3 years and they still can't get anybody to go to their games. Maybe that has something to do with being ranked so shitty? Next time at least read what is posted before you make yourself look like an idiot. Not too sure why I am trying to help you though, it will all go over your head.
Azubuike24's avatar
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Sep 8, 2012 4:46pm
jordo212000;1264419 wrote:Browns shouldn't be so close to the Bengals. The franchises are headed two different directions
I was gonna say. I love the Bengals, but both franchises are appropriately rated (badly).
said_aouita's avatar
said_aouita
Posts: 8,532
Sep 8, 2012 7:16pm
like_that;1264766 wrote:Either you are stupid as hell, or your post was meant as a "joke" (cop out alert), but instead failed miserably.

You pick.
.
Pleas explain why I'm so stupid? Not saying you are wrong but I'm ignorant why you think that.

My post reads-
said_aouita;1264366 wrote:Browns below the Blue Jackets? Shocking. Honestly. Even a bad NFL team should not be lower than the Blue Jackets. Surprised Redwings are so low. Is it Detroit the town or because still paying for past super stars?
I thought with the NFL's TV contract itself every pro football team would be worth more than a bottom-feeder NHL team, who's never won anything meaningful.

OK, I'm stupid. Why is Cleveland lower than the Blue Jackets?


Thanks.
dazedconfused's avatar
dazedconfused
Posts: 2,662
Sep 8, 2012 7:23pm
said_aouita;1264914 wrote:Pleas explain why I'm so stupid? Not saying you are wrong but I'm ignorant why you think that.

My post reads-



I thought with the NFL's TV contract itself every pro football team would be worth more than a bottom-feeder NHL team, who's never won anything meaningful.

OK, I'm stupid. Why is Cleveland lower than the Blue Jackets?


Thanks.
you can't be serious with this post, can you? since when is 107 below 116?
said_aouita's avatar
said_aouita
Posts: 8,532
Sep 8, 2012 7:26pm
dazedconfused;1264924 wrote:you can't be serious with this post, can you? since when is 107 below 116?
Oops. lol. OK. Either I'm stupid or don't pay close enough attention.

haha