I'll take Miracle on Ice.
Personally, I think the Mets as a choice is misplaced. If you want to look at the long odds of them getting to the Series and all of that (contributed in large part to a huge Cubs choke), then I guess it fits. Otherwise, that team won 100 games, and to think that a team with 100 wins is such an underdog that winning the World Series is a longshot seems borderline specious to me. I get the whole miserable 60's Mets teams and meteoric rise in '69, but by the time the series rolled around, they had a legitimate shot. Sure they finished 9 games worse than Baltimore, but since that series, one team has finished 9 games or worse than its opponent 15 times and managed to win nearly half of them (seven), and nearly won in '86 as well. Frankly, had the so-so '73 Mets won Game 7 of the '73 World Series, now then you'd have a story.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.
|
07-20-2013, 02:23 PM
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
