Boston Celtics had the greatest team ever. Period.

1970s

Boston Celtics 1957-1969.

Bill Russell played 13 seasons and won 11 championships.
Tom Heinsohn and KC Jones played 9 seasons and won 8 championships.
Sam Jones played 12 seasons and won 10 championships.
Havlichek won 6.

No team in the history of professional sports compares to what these guys accomplished. Period.

perkdog

I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

1951WheatiesPremium

The Yankees had Joe DiMaggio from 1936-1951 and during that time he played 13 seasons. Joe was enlisted from 42-44 when they won one, lost one and failed to make the other; he was aged 28, 29 and 30 at that time.

Still, during his 13 active years, they won 9 titles in that span and played in 10 World Series. Bill Dickey, Phil Rizzuto, Yogi Berra, Frank Crosetti played a bulk with him with Lou Gehrig on the front end and Mickey Mantle on the back. And if you go out to ‘53, that 12 titles in that 17 year span (1936-1953) for the franchise.

The baseball equivalent.

keets

I agree with the OP but be prepared for someone who is fascinated with Dimes to come along and shred the logic, saying stuff like the League was different then, the game has changed, only one round of playoffs, etc., etc., etc..................

that run is why the Celtics are what they are and why they are talked about the way they are talked about.

keets

I will add one thing, that I feel the greatest Team in the annals of professional American sports is the 1972 Miami Dolphins.

1951WheatiesPremium

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

The baseball equivalent.

I liked your post except for this last statement. Everything was fine up till then.

Saying the Yankees are the baseball equivalent to the Boston Celtics is like saying the NY Giants 4 Super Bowl championships is equivalent to New England's 6.

Boston Celtics won 11 in 13 years. NY won 9 in 13 years. 12 in 17 years still doesn't make
it equivalent. Close, but not equal.

Celtics win.

I would argue that it is significantly more difficult to be the best (and only) team in your league over 162 games and then win a title than it is to merely make the playoffs and win. Under baseball rules, the Celtics teams that won the last three times finished 2nd, 2nd and 4th in the East and therefore would have been watching the championship.

Yankees win.

Th-uuuuuuuuuh YANKEES WIN!

1951WheatiesPremium

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

The baseball equivalent.

I liked your post except for this last statement. Everything was fine up till then.

Saying the Yankees are the baseball equivalent to the Boston Celtics is like saying the NY Giants 4 Super Bowl championships is equivalent to New England's 6.

Boston Celtics won 11 in 13 years. NY won 9 in 13 years. 12 in 17 years still doesn't make
it equivalent. Close, but not equal.

Celtics win.

I know the Giants four is not equivalent to the Patriots six. I also know that two of our wins are two of your losses and Tom Brady still has nightmares.

Keep your two extra SuperBowls and remember that the Giants slapped around Tom Brady like he stole something...

perkdog

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

The baseball equivalent.

I liked your post except for this last statement. Everything was fine up till then.

Saying the Yankees are the baseball equivalent to the Boston Celtics is like saying the NY Giants 4 Super Bowl championships is equivalent to New England's 6.

Boston Celtics won 11 in 13 years. NY won 9 in 13 years. 12 in 17 years still doesn't make
it equivalent. Close, but not equal.

Celtics win.

I know the Giants four is not equivalent to the Patriots six. I also know that two of our wins are two of your losses and Tom Brady still has nightmares.

Keep your two extra SuperBowls and remember that the Giants slapped around Tom Brady like he stole something...

Let’s not get crazy, the Giants got LUCKY in BOTH games. Fact. They definitely deserved to win but to talk like they dominated is lunacy and every Giant fan understands this.

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

The baseball equivalent.

I liked your post except for this last statement. Everything was fine up till then.

Saying the Yankees are the baseball equivalent to the Boston Celtics is like saying the NY Giants 4 Super Bowl championships is equivalent to New England's 6.

Boston Celtics won 11 in 13 years. NY won 9 in 13 years. 12 in 17 years still doesn't make
it equivalent. Close, but not equal.

Celtics win.

I know the Giants four is not equivalent to the Patriots six. I also know that two of our wins are two of your losses and Tom Brady still has nightmares.

Keep your two extra SuperBowls and remember that the Giants slapped around Tom Brady like he stole something...

Let’s not get crazy, the Giants got LUCKY in BOTH games. Fact. They definitely deserved to win but to talk like they dominated is lunacy and every Giant fan understands this.

Call it luck. Twice. Feel free.

The Giants beat the Patriots by getting to Brady and beating him up. And that’s the only fact that matters.

Slapping him around with Strahan, Osi, Tuck and JPP.

Twice.

1951WheatiesPremium

Remember, Paul, if we’re calling it luck...

perkdog

Tim I have already stated that luck had a big role in every Super Bowl the Pats won 100%, I’m not taking anything away from the Giants or any Super Bowl winning team. Me saying it’s absurd to say the Giants slapped around the Pats is the same as if I said the Pats slapped around any team they beat in the Super Bowl. Sure they won but it was close as was both Giants games. I will take 6 Super Bowl wins than 4 any day so call it however you want

perkdog

If you were talking the D line slapping around Brady then yea they definitely beat him up, I got no problems with that...

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:
If you were talking the D line slapping around Brady then yea they definitely beat him up, I got no problems with that...

Precisely what I meant. Quite frankly, during their run it has basically been the only way to beat the Patriots; to put Tom on his back.

perkdog

🍻

keets

Me saying it’s absurd to say the Giants slapped around the Pats is the same as if I said the Pats slapped around any team they beat in the Super Bowl.

Super Bowl XX had to be one of the more dominant games in NFL Championship History. the Patriots had a pretty good Team and surprised a lot of people that year but Chicago was really a special Team. the Bear defense that year has to be one of the best all-time.

doubledragon

If Jordan had not left basketball for the 94 and 95 seasons, the Bulls more than likely would have won 8 championships. The Celtics run is the greatest though, bar none.

daltex

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

perkdog

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

Sure. They had one of the greatest Hockey teams ever assembled, 5 Cups in 6 years?

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

Sure. They had one of the greatest Hockey teams ever assembled, 5 Cups in 6 years?

I know nothing about hockey; but what about the Montreal Canadiens? Always heard they were the hockey version of the Yankees.

perkdog

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

Sure. They had one of the greatest Hockey teams ever assembled, 5 Cups in 6 years?

I know nothing about hockey; but what about the Montreal Canadiens? Always heard they were the hockey version of the Yankees.

Montreal is the correct answer

PaulMaul

And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

perkdog

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

I guess it should be Montreal, I didn’t realize they had 23 Cups!

1951WheatiesPremium

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

PaulMaul

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

PaulMaul

I wonder if anyone has ever written a book on the “interesting” relationship the Yankees and Athletics had during the “bonus rule” days?

“For many years, the most famous connection between these teams were the many future stars who began their careers with the Kansas City Athletics before winding up in the Bronx. It began when Arnold Johnson, a longtime Yankees business associate, sold his share in Yankee Stadium before buying the A's and moving them from Philadelphia to K.C. in 1954. For the next six years, a number of budding A's, including Clete Boyer, Art Ditmar, Enos Slaughter and Bobby Shantz (a 24-game winner for Philadelphia in '52) found themselves packing their bags for New York. The Yanks won five pennants in a span of six years to close out the decade, while the Athletics routinely languished in the AL cellar.”

“The New York Yankees worked out a deal with the Kansas City Athletics where the Athletics signed Clete Boyer to a contract. The Athletics used Boyer sparingly for the two years they had him. Then, just days after the first date at which the Athletics could send Boyer down to the minor leagues, they traded him to the Yankees as the player to be named later from a trade the previous winter. This trade did not sit well with the owners of the other American League teams. They claimed that the Yankees had used the Athletics to hold Boyer. However, the deal was allowed by the league.”

perkdog

@1970s said:

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

Waking up this morning to some good Dunkin Donuts coffee and appreciating the fact that PaulMaul has brought to light what every old time Yankee fans doesn't want published or known.

It’s a great dash of truth to the ageless robot auto statement “Yankees are the best” blabber 😂

1951WheatiesPremium

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

perkdog

I knew Tim would be firing back 😂. It’s true, the Yankees spent more money than every other MLB team and won because of it. Once the Red Sox started to do that the Yankees have taken a backseat to the Sox. Simple facts nothing more nothing less

PaulMaul

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

MLB itself is functioning as a business within a capitalist system. Individual teams are not. They are part of a semi-cooperative enterprise. They can’t and do not want to put other teams out of business, obviously.

The goal of individual franchises is to put together the best team within the confines of that cooperative framework. The Yankees made a smart move in acquiring Babe Ruth. Pretty much from that point on (with the exception of 1965-1974....post draft and pre free agency) they enjoyed an advantaged position in pursuing that goal. Ruth singlehandedly improved attendance massively and gave the franchise a national profile, all of which resulted in the Yankees being wealthier than almost every other franchise. It allowed them to more easily sign and stockpile players pre-draft, and to buy players in free agency with their superior revenue.

Hence their ability to “spend money to make money” much more effectively than most other teams.

Don’t compare Yankees vs. Red Sox to Pepsi vs. Coke. The situations are not at all analogous.

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:
I knew Tim would be firing back 😂. It’s true, the Yankees spent more money than every other MLB team and won because of it. Once the Red Sox started to do that the Yankees have taken a backseat to the Sox. Simple facts nothing more nothing less

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

Celtics ain't crying, and the Yankees can't match what they did.
Patriots ain't crying either.

@ perkdog - Correct on both counts. Though I would say, in both cases it is also related to the ownership and the desire to win. Clearly, the sons of George Steinbrenner do not carry the same passion for the Yankees as their father and it shows in a great number of ways. But I agree that it was finally spending that allowed the Red Sox to compete with and ultimately beat the Yankees.

@1970s

Your comments are more smack talk than anything. Which I enjoy but don’t really engage in. I will say you are right about the Patriots in the sense that Kraft came in and prioritized winning and spending and look at what that did for New England sports.

That’s what makes it funny to me when New England fans cry about past Yankee spending. Not our fault you had racist and cheapskate owners and not our fault your fans took it for so long and packed the Stadium anyway to root for losers.

Huge Bird and Celtic fan so I’m not going to hate on the Celtics but Red was a pretty dirty dealing dog and a shrewd, brilliant business man. One of the greatest sports figures in american history.

perkdog

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:
I knew Tim would be firing back 😂. It’s true, the Yankees spent more money than every other MLB team and won because of it. Once the Red Sox started to do that the Yankees have taken a backseat to the Sox. Simple facts nothing more nothing less

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

Celtics ain't crying, and the Yankees can't match what they did.
Patriots ain't crying either.

@ perkdog - Correct on both counts. Though I would say, in both cases it is also related to the ownership and the desire to win. Clearly, the sons of George Steinbrenner do not carry the same passion for the Yankees as their father and it shows in a great number of ways. But I agree that it was finally spending that allowed the Red Sox to compete with and ultimately beat the Yankees.

@1970s

Your comments are more smack talk than anything. Which I enjoy but don’t really engage in. I will say you are right about the Patriots in the sense that Kraft came in and prioritized winning and spending and look at what that did for New England sports.

That’s what makes it funny to me when New England fans cry about past Yankee spending. Not our fault you had racist and cheapskate owners and not our fault your fans took it for so long and packed the Stadium anyway to root for losers.

Huge Bird and Celtic fan so I’m not going to hate on the Celtics but Red was a pretty dirty dealing dog and a shrewd, brilliant business man. One of the greatest sports figures in american history.

Tim you need a history lesson on the Pre Kraft Patriots, the fans did not pack the stadium and accept how pathetic they were by any stretch, the Pats almost moved out of Foxboro actually but Kraft came along and put them on the map. The stadiums and fans started getting into it once Parcells showed up.

1951WheatiesPremium

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

MLB itself is functioning as a business within a capitalist system. Individual teams are not. They are part of a semi-cooperative enterprise. They can’t and do not want to put other teams out of business, obviously.

The goal of individual franchises is to put together the best team within the confines of that cooperative framework. The Yankees made a smart move in acquiring Babe Ruth. Pretty much from that point on (with the exception of 1965-1974....post draft and pre free agency) they enjoyed an advantaged position in pursuing that goal. Ruth singlehandedly improved attendance massively and gave the franchise a national profile, all of which resulted in the Yankees being wealthier than almost every other franchise. It allowed them to more easily sign and stockpile players pre-draft, and to buy players in free agency with their superior revenue.

Hence their ability to “spend money to make money” much more effectively than most other teams.

Don’t compare Yankees vs. Red Sox to Pepsi vs. Coke. The situations are not at all analogous.

Sure they are - a great rivalry predicated on competing with one another for fans and more importantly their money. I agree there is no revenue sharing between Pepsi and Coke but I do not agree that there is not a massive incentive to compete directly with one another for prestige, branding and revenue and that the actions of one often directly and indirectly drive the actions of the other. They may exist cooperatively but certainly do not function as such.

Can’t make an argument against the importance of Ruth to the Yankees but I can fault the ownership of the Red Sox for letting him go to the Yankees in the first place. There’s this new false narrative out there that it was done ‘for the good of the game’ to get Ruth to NY - which is utter nonsense. It was to get the team (and owner) out of terrible financial difficulties. And perhaps had he focused on baseball and winning only, the Boston Red Sox would be what the Yankees are today.

erikthredd

@1951WheatiesPremium That Brady picture you posted is soooo outdated,why don't we update this one instead?

stevek

I would have guessed the Philadelphia Eagles.

After all, they've won 50% of the last two Super Bowls, and it will be 66.666666% after the 2019 season is over. Oh what the yell, let's round it off to 67%.

daltex

@perkdog said:

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

Sure. They had one of the greatest Hockey teams ever assembled, 5 Cups in 6 years?

5 Cups in 7 years. Could go with the '56-'60 Canadiens with five cups in five years, but much less impressive with only six teams in the league. I'd prefer the '76-'79 Canadiens or '80-'84 Islanders with 4 in 4. IMO it is silly to include the '59-'69 Celtics with the '84-'87 Celtics, and you'll have to explain further with the Yankees.

perkdog

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:

@daltex said:

@perkdog said:
I’d have to agree, I’m not a Basketball guy either. Best franchise runs by teams in each sport are as follows... Boston Celtics, New York Yankees, Edmonton Oilers, New England Patriots

Edmonton is a very odd choice. Care to explain?

Sure. They had one of the greatest Hockey teams ever assembled, 5 Cups in 6 years?

5 Cups in 7 years. Could go with the '56-'60 Canadiens with five cups in five years, but much less impressive with only six teams in the league. I'd prefer the '76-'79 Canadiens or '80-'84 Islanders with 4 in 4. IMO it is silly to include the '59-'69 Celtics with the '84-'87 Celtics, and you'll have to explain further with the Yankees.

The Yankees won 6 World Series in the 1950’s. I think that is a good explanation. As far as “All time winning history” of franchises it would be exactly what I said save the Oilers and add the Canadians. Celtics, Yankees, Canadians and Patriots. I’d love to hear you counter that

1951WheatiesPremium

I’d probably entertain an argument for the Steelers over the Pats. Not saying it wins, but it would be worth entertaining the argument. The Pats dynasty has lasted a long time and seen a lot of turnover outside of two key pieces being the big argument against.

The 2001-2007 Patriots vs those 70s Steelers teams...

1951WheatiesPremium

....pretty close. Without hashing it out in depth, that Steelers defense was pretty outrageous as was the Patriots defense. With Brady vs Bradshaw, I just see the Pats coming out on top more often than not.

And perhaps I short changed the Yankees some by focusing on Joe D and ending it at ‘51 when the Yankees were in the middle of 5 straight?

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:
I knew Tim would be firing back 😂. It’s true, the Yankees spent more money than every other MLB team and won because of it. Once the Red Sox started to do that the Yankees have taken a backseat to the Sox. Simple facts nothing more nothing less

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

Celtics ain't crying, and the Yankees can't match what they did.
Patriots ain't crying either.

@ perkdog - Correct on both counts. Though I would say, in both cases it is also related to the ownership and the desire to win. Clearly, the sons of George Steinbrenner do not carry the same passion for the Yankees as their father and it shows in a great number of ways. But I agree that it was finally spending that allowed the Red Sox to compete with and ultimately beat the Yankees.

@1970s

Your comments are more smack talk than anything. Which I enjoy but don’t really engage in. I will say you are right about the Patriots in the sense that Kraft came in and prioritized winning and spending and look at what that did for New England sports.

That’s what makes it funny to me when New England fans cry about past Yankee spending. Not our fault you had racist and cheapskate owners and not our fault your fans took it for so long and packed the Stadium anyway to root for losers.

Huge Bird and Celtic fan so I’m not going to hate on the Celtics but Red was a pretty dirty dealing dog and a shrewd, brilliant business man. One of the greatest sports figures in american history.

Tim you need a history lesson on the Pre Kraft Patriots, the fans did not pack the stadium and accept how pathetic they were by any stretch, the Pats almost moved out of Foxboro actually but Kraft came along and put them on the map. The stadiums and fans started getting into it once Parcells showed up.

This refers to the former Red Sox, - and the former Cubs and forever Jets. Stop going.

Sadly, I knew far to much about Patriots history from my college roommates who were convinced Steve Grogan would have been Joe Montana with a little better line...

daltex

@1970s said:
76-79 Canadiens would not have had their run if Bobby Orr's knees were healthy IMO, and he did not get swindled to the Blackhawks. Those late 70s Bruins teams would have been nasty with a healthy Orr.

The Islanders were amazing, until a young Oilers team knocked them off their throne with 4 straight of their own.

I will not discuss sports with anyone who can not count to 2.

perkdog

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:
I knew Tim would be firing back 😂. It’s true, the Yankees spent more money than every other MLB team and won because of it. Once the Red Sox started to do that the Yankees have taken a backseat to the Sox. Simple facts nothing more nothing less

@1970s said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@PaulMaul said:
And of course the Celtics did it in the context of a draft system, whereas the Yankees, everone’s Favorite team since Babe Ruth, could sign anyone they wanted.

Sort of true?

The Celtics and Red Auerbach were fleecing teams and pulling moves left and right. All legit but almost the same as the Yankees; doing it better than everyone else.

Doing it with more money than most anyone else. That’s why MLB implemented the bonus rule (which was largely circumvented by the Yankees and Cardinals) and ultimately the draft system, which the Yankees and Cardinals vehemently opposed.

Spending money to make money is capitalism. Embracing that fact is why the Red Sox finally starting winning again after 87 years.

It’s a crybaby narrative that has persisted for years among people with a losers mentality. Should businesses in the world should try to help their competitors and curb their spending when their advantage becomes outsized on their competition?

That’s a ridiculous notion.

Celtics ain't crying, and the Yankees can't match what they did.
Patriots ain't crying either.

@ perkdog - Correct on both counts. Though I would say, in both cases it is also related to the ownership and the desire to win. Clearly, the sons of George Steinbrenner do not carry the same passion for the Yankees as their father and it shows in a great number of ways. But I agree that it was finally spending that allowed the Red Sox to compete with and ultimately beat the Yankees.

@1970s

Your comments are more smack talk than anything. Which I enjoy but don’t really engage in. I will say you are right about the Patriots in the sense that Kraft came in and prioritized winning and spending and look at what that did for New England sports.

That’s what makes it funny to me when New England fans cry about past Yankee spending. Not our fault you had racist and cheapskate owners and not our fault your fans took it for so long and packed the Stadium anyway to root for losers.

Huge Bird and Celtic fan so I’m not going to hate on the Celtics but Red was a pretty dirty dealing dog and a shrewd, brilliant business man. One of the greatest sports figures in american history.

Tim you need a history lesson on the Pre Kraft Patriots, the fans did not pack the stadium and accept how pathetic they were by any stretch, the Pats almost moved out of Foxboro actually but Kraft came along and put them on the map. The stadiums and fans started getting into it once Parcells showed up.

This refers to the former Red Sox, - and the former Cubs and forever Jets. Stop going.

Sadly, I knew far to much about Patriots history from my college roommates who were convinced Steve Grogan would have been Joe Montana with a little better line...

Poor Steve Grogan, everyone loved him. 😂😂😂

thisistheshow

Steve Grogan. A legend from my youth. I was 9 when we got murdered by the Bears in the SB. Tough loss.

I can't wait for September.

perkdog

@thisistheshow said:
Steve Grogan. A legend from my youth. I was 9 when we got murdered by the Bears in the SB. Tough loss.

I can't wait for September.

I was 15, I remember how amped up everyone got for the “Squish the Fish” in Miami, T shirts were made and we won, then onto the “Bury the Bears” until reality set in and the fun ended 😰

DIMEMAN

@perkdog said:

@thisistheshow said:
Steve Grogan. A legend from my youth. I was 9 when we got murdered by the Bears in the SB. Tough loss.

I can't wait for September.

I was 15, I remember how amped up everyone got for the “Squish the Fish” in Miami, T shirts were made and we won, then onto the “Bury the Bears” until reality set in and the fun ended 😰

Da Bears were tuff that year!