Dan Shaughnessy has basically written an entire column for CNNSI.com that talks about how great Boston sports have been over the last decade. He's right. Boston sports teams have won quite a few championships, including one in hockey, which counts as a major sport again to Dan now that the Boston Bruins have a quality team. There is no point to this article, other than to remind us all that Boston sports have been dominant of late. There is no insight, other than the fact Dan Shaughnessy is as unlikeable as his columns make him seem, and there is certainly no point to this article. But yet, the article was written anyway for no apparent reason.
I'm going to go ahead and put the "a lot of cursing" label on this post because I can only answer a column with no inherent value with retorts and words with no inherent value.
The rest of the country must be sick of us in Boston.
Not really. I'm sick of pathetic Boston-related writers making every single thing about their Boston-area teams. I'm not sure if you have heard or not, but MLB had a bad year last year, this just happened to coincide with the Red Sox not making the playoffs. Also, hockey is big again, which just happens to coincide with the Bruins being a competitive team again. It's crazy how this works.
We have all the champions. We have all the trophies.
I think "all" is overstating it a bit. I'm picking nits, but it isn't like any team other than the Bruins have won a championship in the last two years. The Celtics haven't won a championship since 2008, the Red Sox haven't won since 2007, and the Patriots haven't won since 2005. So only one major trophy currently resides in Boston. So saying Boston has "all" the trophies is inaccurate. They've won quite a few recently, but it isn't like any other major trophy resides in Boston right now.
And yes, I realize I just set Boston up for 4 championships in the next calendar year. Your welcome Boston. I have just given you 4 championships in the next year by writing this post.
Sorry. No brag, just fact.
No, it is bragging because this isn't a fact. A fact would mean the Boston-area teams have ALL of the trophies, which is not true. Only one Boston team in major sports (and hockey is a major sport in Boston now because the Bruins won the Stanley Cup) has a championship trophy right now. So talking about how many trophies your city has is accurate, but saying the city has "all" of the trophies is factually inaccurate, which means this article is probably just Dan bragging.
The Boston Bruins won the Stanley Cup in Vancouver last week, completing Boston's Grand Slam of North American sports. In seven years.
So what's your point? That's great for the city of Boston. What's the point of all this? Boston has had a great run. Dan is a sportswriter, it is his job to write about sports in the city of Boston, not gloat. Yet, gloat he does...in his own insufferable way.
No city has ever sprayed so much Champagne in so few seasons. Overall, it's seven championships since February 2002.
I am WAY too lazy to determine if this is the most champagne sprayed in so few seasons, but I am going out on a limb and say this is not true, though I have no proof.
Also, don't you love how the dates Dan is using change based on what statistic he is trying to brag about? Just a few sentences ago, it was a span of seven years he was using as the Grand Slam of majors and now he is going back to 2002 to talk about how awesome Boston sports have been since then. He doesn't want to go back in time too far back from 2002 though. Then his data doesn't look quite as good.
Sounds like Dan is more of a fan than a journalist, doesn't it?
Our confetti is knee deep. The tires on our parade Duck Boats are balding.
As is the player's hair on your basketball team! Rim shot! The Celtics are old!
From Brady to Big Papi to the Big Ticket to Big Z. We are the champions.
I hope someone puts laxatives in Dan's coffee. This isn't journalism, this is a 24 year old fan bragging about his favorite team's exploits. So why did CNNSI.com allow this to be printed? What is gained from reading this?
There's never been anything like it. Want a little perspective? Try this: our local team with the longest championship drought is now the New England Patriots. They haven't won a Lombardi trophy since way back in 2005. What's wrong with those slackers?
I get it! It's a joke. Funny!
How does Dan get to write? Who reads what he writes and says, "Holy shit, that's some top notch journalism right there." Yet, he gets to write for a local newspaper AND a national sports site. Life isn't fair.
Here's another nugget: our four championship coaches are still in office -- hoodie Bill Belichick, Terry Francona, Doc Rivers and Claude Julien. This has never happened anywhere.
Well that's because, as Dan stated earlier, few teams have won four titles in four sports over a short time span. It's impressive. So in such a short span of time I wouldn't expect the head coach or manager of a successful team to change.
A club of four. All champs. All still in power.
Your perm. Still has. All of its original bounce.
They support one another. Francona wore a Bruins jersey to his pregame press conference when the Milwaukee Brewers came to Fenway last Friday.
When Francona was on a long road trip on the West Coast, Bill Belichick offered to go Francona's house and have sex with his wife. No big deal to him. He'll do what it takes. These four guys will do ANYTHING for each other...except Francona, Belichick and Julien still refuse to hold a conversation with Austin Rivers even though Doc Rivers insist they try. That kid just seems like an asshole to them.
Francona was unable to attend any Bruins playoff games because he's in season. But Rivers went to the Garden, conceded he knows little about hockey, then said he was impressed by the beer consumption of the Hub Hockey Krishnas.
Not only is Boston the greatest city of champions if you count the last 7-9 years and don't include any other time span, their fans drink more beer than any other fans because they care more about their team.
Belichick, meanwhile, was a regular on Causeway Street, appeared on the JumboTron, and was honored as "Bruins Fan of the Game'' during the Eastern Conference Final against Tampa Bay.
An honor I am sure he earned by standing up all game and vocally cheering the Bruins team very loudly and not simply because he is the head coach of the NFL team in town and the person who runs the JumboTron felt like highlighting that Bill Belichick was at the hockey game.
In our town, the Bruins' championship quest most closely resembled the Red Sox's biblical journey to the World Series title in 2004.
The Bruins winning the Stanley Cup doesn't resemble the Red Sox journey at all. Also, I just re-read the Bible and nowhere in there can I find anything about the Red Sox winning a World Series in 2007. I guess that wasn't a very special team. Leviticus 16:2 does say Jesus was a huge Patriots fan though and I am pretty sure Paul wrote a letter about the Red Sox run to the World Series title in 2004 at some point...but nothing about the Red Sox winning the World Series.
The Sox hadn't won in 86 years, the Bruins 39 years. There was a full eclipse of the moon on the night of both team's clinchers.
Here's another coincidence. The same hack writer, we'll call him Shan Danaughnessy, wrote about both of these title victories! Then, as described in the Bible, this writer shall talk about this 2004 Red Sox World Series win until all patience with him has run out among the people of the lands, at which point he will be banished into the desert.
The Sox of '04 were recovering from the hideous ALCS loss to the Yankees in Game 7 of 2003. Grady Little forgot to pull Pedro Martinez
He "forgot" to pull Pedro Martinez? Was he ordering a pizza or something? It isn't like Little just absentmindedly didn't take Martinez out of the game because he was busy, he made a concerted decision to leave Pedro in the game.
Also, why does Dan Shaughnessy recap the Red Sox 2004 World Series win in every single article he writes? Nobody is buying your stupid books anymore Dan, no matter how hard you try.
and the Sox blew a 5-2 lead in the eighth, then lost when Aaron Boone homered in the 11th.
Aaron Boone then blew out his ACL over the summer, which wasn't an accident, but willed to happen by Red Sox Nation. They have that power you know.
In 2010, the Bruins led the Philadelphia Flyers, three-games-to-zero, then lost four straight. In Game 7 at home, the B's led 3-0, but lost, 4-3. It was bad.
Oh I get it. The similarity in the 2004 Red Sox team and the 2011 Bruins team is the 2003 Red Sox lost Game 7, while the 2010 Bruins team blew a 3-0 deficit. That's pretty much the same thing. THEN the next year, in an eerie similarity between these two teams, the 2004 Red Sox came back from a 3-0 deficit, while the Bruins won the Stanley Cup in a Game 7. It's like these two teams were destined to play in the same city. THEN, in an even more eerie coincidence, both the 2004 Red Sox and 2011 Bruins had players with facial hair on their roster. This was destiny as well.
The Sox of '04 trailed the Yankees three-games-to-zero, then came back and won. The Bruins of '11 lost their first two games (both at home) of the first round series against Montreal, then won. They trailed the heavily-favored Canucks two-games-to-zero in the Cup final, then won.
I guess Dan Shaughnessy figures if CNNSI.com is going to let him write an entire article being an unsufferable douchebag and brag about how great Boston sports are, and we all know he will talk about the 2004 Red Sox team, he may as well sttttttttttttrrrrrrrrrrrrretch to get a comparison between the 2004 Red Sox and the 2011 Bruins. I'm just surprised he didn't tie this into the 2008 Celtics somehow.
Good times never seemed so good.
That's from "Sweet Caroline!" The Red Sox play that song at their home games! Now, all Dan has to do is make up a fake curse in an effort to sell books and he can call it a day.
Not to rub it in, but things are looking pretty good for the future, too.
Absolutely. This doesn't sound like bragging at all, nor is discussing how great the future looks for the Boston-area teams rubbing anything in. This is a sportswriter writing this by the way. Not a fan of the Boston-area teams, but a sportswriter. Just thought I would clear up the confusion I was personally having in case someone else was confused too. Even most Boston sports team-based blogs don't have this much homer-ism and bravado contained in them.
Despite a slow start, the Red Sox have the best record in the American League and look like favorites to win the whole thing for the third time since 2004.
Favorites as determined by Dan Shaughnessy. My "favorite" at this point is still the Philadelphia Phillies, they have the best record in the American and National League.
I know if he could read what I just wrote, Dan Shaughnessy would say, "The National what?" He thinks to win the World Series you just have to beat the Yankees in the playoffs.
The Patriots are coming off a 14-2 campaign, have a raft of draft picks, and figure to benefit from the lockout because of the brilliance of the Belichick system.
The Bruins have a young roster, a lot of signed players and room under the cap.
"A young roster, a lot of signed players, and room under the cap." Let's not get too specific here, Dan.
The Bruins had the 11th (or 15th depending on what you believe) oldest team in the NHL this year. They appear to be 23rd in cap space. I don't know much about hockey, but I get the feeling Dan doesn't either.
At this hour, the Celtics are probably the longest shots to get back to the championship circle. But they still have three Hall of Famers, plus an All-Star point guard in Rajon Rondo.
They have three Hall of Famers who are considered Hall of Famers right now because (a) they are older and (b) they are declining...the Celtics have no real center, and they play in the Eastern Conference which has two teams clearly on the rise (Chicago and Miami). So I am not sure the Celtics are on the rise nor does saying how many Hall of Famers prove much but to show how good these players on Celtics used to be, but may not be in the future.
It's been difficult to explain this to New England youngsters who have never had to wait. A teenager in Greater Boston knows only championships.
10 years ago Dan Shaughnessy bitched about how cursed the Boston-area was, now he is bitching they have too many championships and "the kids" don't know what it is like to have failure.
There's no Curse of the Bambino,
There never was. You made it up to sell books.
no pathetic Patriots of the 1990s,
They only made ONE Super Bowl. How pathetic!
no 22-year Celtic drought.
A 22 year drought? How were there not mass suicides in the Boston area? What human being could survive going 22 years without a championship from an NBA team?
The dark days of Butch Hobson, Rod Rust, Rick Pitino and Dave Lewis are far behind us. Today it's all sellouts, balloons and parades.
"Us." I think this is a case where a writer over-identifies with the teams he is writing about.
Truly, we're feeling a little guilty about all this success.
I mean this in the nicest possible way, but you can shove this sentence up your ass. Yes, shove this non-tangible object up your ass. Sure, it may seem impossible, but not as impossible as being a Boston sports fan in the 90's!
Our hearts bleed for folks in Cleveland, who haven't won anything since ... 1964. Ouch.
In your face Cleveland! Dan will patronize you with how much success "his" teams have had compared to yours.
Why should we have so much when some have so little?
Why did this article get written? What purpose did it serve?
Congratulations Dan Shaughnessy! You have written the least substantive article for the year 2011 so far...and that's saying a lot.
completing Boston's Grand Slam of North American sports. In seven years.
ReplyDeleteNew York. '68 Jets,'73 Knicks, '80-'83 Islanders, '77 and '78 Yankees, '86 Mets, '86 and '90 Giants, '94 Rangers.
Four major sports: 12 years, 12 championships (Every team that "plays" there) in 26 years. Kiss my ass Boston.
Overall, it's seven championships since February 2002.
HAHAHA. Nine years, 7 championships. 1977 - 1986 New York had 8 fucking championships. Fucking moron.
From Brady to Big Papi to the Big Ticket to Big Z. We are the champions.
Fuck you San Francisco, Green Bay and Dallas! Boston are the champions, so please ship your respective trophies to Boston.
But Rivers went to the Garden, conceded he knows little about hockey, then said he was impressed by the beer consumption of the Hub Hockey Krishnas.
They support one another by not having a damn clue about their sports! Even the championship coaches are damn front runners.
The Sox hadn't won in 86 years, the Bruins 39 years.
And we all know those were the two longest droughts by a team in their sport! Fuck you Cub snd Maple Leafs fans!
Not to rub it in, but things are looking pretty good for the future, too.
::looks at Celtics, Bruins and Red Sox rosters:: AHAHAHAHA ya... I'm sure at 40 Tim Thomas (who Boston tried to get rid of) has another record setting year in him.
Also, two of the four sports are locked out right now, so how the fuck can the future be looking good if there might not be a season?
The Bruins have a young roster
They have young players, they do not have a young roster. Also their most valuable player is 37...
Today it's all sellouts, balloons and parades.
Did Dan just call his own readers front runners? I think he did!
Why should we have so much when some have so little?
Because 10 years ago, you had absolutely jack shit and someday, you'll go back to having that.
This is like somebody going from being broke to have a six figure income and instead of acting like they deserve it, they feel the need to make sure every notices it.
This is why Boston sucks.
Also Rich you suck. I've seen 2 WS, 1 NBA 3 SB's and 1 SC since 2001. Why the eff should I apoligize. Eff the rest of the country
ReplyDeleteAgain though Shank is not cheerleading he's tweaking
You don't live here. You have no clue what that hack is all about
ReplyDeleteFour major sports: 12 years, 12 championships (Every team that "plays" there) in 26 years. Kiss my ass Boston.
ReplyDeleteto be fair, winning seven in ten years is a little more impressive than 12 in 26.
I am WAY too lazy to determine if this is the most champagne sprayed in so few seasons, but I am going out on a limb and say this is not true, though I have no proof.
LA in the 1980's: Lakers (1980, 1982, 1985, 1987-88), Dodgers (1981, 1988), Raiders (1983). eight times in nine years.
Also Rich you suck. I've seen 2 WS, 1 NBA 3 SB's and 1 SC since 2001. Why the eff should I apoligize. Eff the rest of the country
ah, Boston fans. born on third base but they think they've hit a triple.
although actually, it's 13 in 26 for New York. rich forgot about the 1969 Mets.
ReplyDeleteSure Ivn.
ReplyDeleteUnless you count me sitting through losing season after lsoing season with the C's B's Pats and Sox.
I remember Pats games being blacked out. I also remember the ML Carr era of the C's
That's cool though because I know anytime a team has sucess people immediatly call all their fans front runners.
I guess if your team starts winning you better start following losers. Otherwise people will call you a front runner.
ReplyDeleteIn short I hope to one day call you a front runner out of sheer jealousy. Whatever your team (Unless it's the Yanks or Jets in which case **** you) :)
ReplyDeleteI apologize, then. Boston fans are the New Money of the sports world, unable to handle success without becoming completely obnoxious.
ReplyDeletealso, "countless losing seasons"? the Red Sox have probably had four or five losing seasons in the past 25 years and the Patriots have been better than most since they hired Parcells. didn't the Bruins go like 30 years without missing the playoffs? I guess the Celtics were kind of shitty for ten years or so (after dominating the NBA for the better part of three decades), so that makes up for it. then again I root for Seattle teams, so what do I know about following crappy teams?
dear dan shaughnessy,
ReplyDeleteyou make me hate boston sports; i grew up hating the lakers and rooted for boston in the 2008 and 2010 finals but guess what? i will never root for a boston team again because i am so sick of your blatant homerism and stuffy, elitist attitude towards non-boston sports. every time i manage to convince myself that not all boston sports fans (and let's be honest, you are not a sportswriter, you are a fan who happens to have a national column that allows you to vent your thoughts as a fan) are all that bad, i read one of your columns and stop thinking that. you are the figurehead for, the epitome of every single person who has ever given boston sports a bad name. you are the real-life incarnation of every negative stereotype about boston sports fans.
you are a terrible sportswriter, period. it's bad enough that you are so blatantly unprofessional in your columns, and that you don't even pretend to try to be impartial; you also happen to have the writing ability of a fifth grader (check that, a second grader; any fifth grader would be insulted to have his/her writing ability compared to yours) and you couldn't string together an insightful paragraph if you spent a year taking classes from mark twain and voltaire.
from 2000 to 2009 the state of florida has seen 3 college football national championships (1 from miami, 2 from florida), 2 college basketball national championships (florida again), an nfl and an nhl championship in tampa bay, as well as a world series victory by the marlins. the heat also won a championship for the state in 2006, and i hear the heatles have a few good players going forward. but how many florida columnists do you see penning columns like yours? zero. because its douchey, it's tacky, it's tasteless, and its wildly unprofessional.
go away; please have the dignity to resign if sports illustrated and the boston herald dont have the backbone to fire you. you are a pathetic excuse for a sportswriter; grantland rice tosses and turns in his grave every time you come out with an article; bob ryan and jackie macmullan are ashamed to be associated with your newspaper; bill simmons is embarrassed by your homerism and haughty "boston is the center of the sports universe" attitude.
sincerely,
Arjun Chandrasekhar
ivn,
ReplyDeleteThe point of the 13 (thank you for the correction) in 26 is that every team that plays in NY had won a championship in that time spread. Considering that's 7 teams (SEVEN!), I think it's more impressive than 4 different teams winning in ten.
The other was to point out that Boston is not the first city to have this kind of dominance.
Murray,
First, I have lived in Boston and I do know what Dan is all about. This doesn't change the fact that this entitled attitude does exist in the Boston sports world now. It's insufferable.
Second, who ask for an apology? You won a bunch of championships, congrats. Is it impressive? Yes. Should you be happy? Yes. Should you take every opportunity to rub people's noses in it? No.
Your posts even go to prove the fact that Dan isn't the only won with this attitude. Yes, your teams sucked for a while, guess what Most teams go through stretches like that. Look at NY: Knicks suck, Jets sucked for a long time, Giants were miserable to watch in the Danny Kannel/Dave Brown/Kerry Collins era (and yes, the made the SB, but so did the Patriots during their stretch).
Rangers haven't done anything in 20 years, Islanders are one of the worst run franchises in sports and the Yankees had a few really bad years.
Philadelphia went the longest time between championships of any city with the four major sports. Eagles have never won, Flyers haven't won since the mid 70's and the Sixers haven't won since the '80s.
You're not special because you suffered through your teams being bad. It doesn't mean you should crown yourselves the greatest city on earth when you start to win them, because as ivn and I have pointed out, you're not the first city to have this kind of success.
So please, continue to enjoy your championships, but please STFU about how great your city is.
Murray,
ReplyDeleteRegarding the front runner fans: yes, every successful sports organization has them.
The point is that when teams like the Bruins have been competitive (but not great) for years and don't really have great attendance (in 2007-2008 the Bruins made the playoffs, but were 26th in attendance, 21st in attendance percentage).
Then magically, they make the ECF and the next year they're selling out every game?
Trust me, I get that fans don't want to spend money to watch shit teams, but when you have a playoff team and are 21st in the league in attendance percentage? That's pretty sad.
Just like if the Sixers ever win a championship, I'll have to deal with the front-runner talk. It happens. It's not you we're talking about, it's the average person and the journalists talking shit on certain teams (Dan on all Boston teams, Simmons on the Bruins) and then celebrating their success.
Bill Simmons has on numerous occasions said he was not following the Bruins until they got new ownership. Oh wait, they started winning again, so he cares about the team now.
The Red Sox and Celtics have had a good fanbase, even in the down years, but even you have to admit that the number of "fans" that exist for both of those teams are now inflated because of the success.
I was listening to one of Adam Corolla's podcasts this week and he had a fun rant about this general topic. And he took a nice shot at Boston and by default, Bill Simmons.
ReplyDeletePoint is, how did we get to the point where we are so emotionally involved in the successes and failures of a bunch of strangers who happen to have been paid millions of dollars to play sports for a for-profit business in the general area we live in or used to live in?
I don't like seeing commenter fights. It makes me so upset. I'm not sure I can contribute anything to it other than to say four championships in four major sports in 20 years isn't a bad feat for a city. I don't know if anyone of you are front runner fans and don't doubt you have put in your time with your favorite teams.
ReplyDeleteWhat's irritating about Dan's column is he makes good fans who have been around for a while sound bad because many times I feel like it is the front running fans who are the loudest and say the exact type of shit that Dan said in this column. I think all fan bases can be obnoxious when their teams are doing well, but Dan's column didn't have any real merit to it.
Murray, I didn't know Dan was tweaking the Red Sox fans. I didn't get that at all. I guess I don't understand his dislike for fan boys. It comes off to me like a cheerleading article and just overall bragging. You also don't have to apologize for being a Red Sox fan and seeing championships. See, I think that is part of the problem with articles like this. It makes fans of a team put in a defensive position where they have to defend their team b/c the article is just screaming for someone to criticize it. So you as a Boston fan feel like you are apologizing for the success, which you shouldn't have to do, because Dan is getting his rocks off making it seem like everyone is as pompous as he comes off to be.
Jack, that last sentence is a perfect summation of what causes this great dislike of sports teams, in this case the Boston sports teams. It is the inherent superiority he slipped into that sentence that 5% of the fans believe, but reflects on 100% of the fans.
Arjun, I have nothing to add to that. You said it very well. I hated this article with a passion. Maybe he was just tweaking me and I didn't get it. I don't know if Bill Simmons is embarrassed by the homerism, this is a guy who refused to cheer for the Bruins under the pretense the previous owner sucked (which may have been true), but what he really seem to mean in retrospect was "the Bruins aren't good."
The Braves owners, Liberty Media, absolutely suck. They have stuck them at the same payroll for a few years now. Sure, they will let them go spend money, but they won't extend the budget. In fact, the Braves can't make a trade (reportedly) this year unless the other team takes on a lot of the salary of that player, which means the Braves have to give better players from their farm system if they want to upgrade at the trade deadline. I know this isn't a terrible, horrible situation, but teams have owners that irritate fans. You can't just give up on those teams.
Anon, we got emotionally involved like this once sports became as big of a business as it is. That's my theory. Fans have always loved their teams, they just have bigger forums and easier ways of expressing it now. Being emotionally involved isn't a bad thing, it is becoming overly emotionally involved. I need to listen to Bill's podcasts sometime. I keep saying that I know....