ESPN Ultimate Standings - Vikes #119 of 122 pro sports franchises

ESPN Ultimate Standings - Vikes #119 of 122 pro sports franchises

Joined: July 23rd, 2002, 5:30 pm

March 29th, 2007, 6:08 pm #1

ESPN did an interesting <a href=http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnat ... s1>ranking of all 122 sports franchises</a>, based on 80,000+ online survey responses. They used eight categories to rank all 122 of them in one master list: Bang for the Buck, Fan Relations, Ownership, Affordability, Stadium Experience, Players, Coach/Manager, and Title Track. (See <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsna ... gy>here</a> for a full explanation of the methodology.)

The Vikes ranked #119 overall (only the Knicks, Raiders, and Lions worse) and #122, DEAD LAST, in stadium experience. (Even below the Twins, second to last at #120. They're at #14 overall, even in spite of the Dump. Perhaps in their new digs they'll be #1.) It's staggering to think that, according to these respondents, EVERY other pro sports franchise in America has a better stadium setup than the Vikes.

Having said that, the Vikes rank very low across the board, but it's hard to see how it could be otherwise given that the Dump actively repels any decent, competent, experienced ownership and financially straitjackets its tenants. There is only so high any of the other categories can go while that teflon albatross hangs around the Vikes' neck. And no amount of sucking up to the fans can possibly compensate for its shortcomings and the consequences/realities it forces upon us.

(BTW, the Packers rank #23, being below halfway only in coaching and bang-for-the-buck; in other words, in spite of having everything else going for them as a franchise, they still manage to totally suck on the field...congrats, Liquid/Bluto. )








--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 24th, 2002, 2:30 pm

March 29th, 2007, 6:22 pm #2

Frankly, I'm surprised there are 12 teams behind us in the title track category. I think we might be overrated.

Minnesta Vikings -- No O.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 21st, 2005, 5:32 pm

March 29th, 2007, 8:29 pm #3

ESPN did an interesting <a href=http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnat ... s1>ranking of all 122 sports franchises</a>, based on 80,000+ online survey responses. They used eight categories to rank all 122 of them in one master list: Bang for the Buck, Fan Relations, Ownership, Affordability, Stadium Experience, Players, Coach/Manager, and Title Track. (See <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsna ... gy>here</a> for a full explanation of the methodology.)

The Vikes ranked #119 overall (only the Knicks, Raiders, and Lions worse) and #122, DEAD LAST, in stadium experience. (Even below the Twins, second to last at #120. They're at #14 overall, even in spite of the Dump. Perhaps in their new digs they'll be #1.) It's staggering to think that, according to these respondents, EVERY other pro sports franchise in America has a better stadium setup than the Vikes.

Having said that, the Vikes rank very low across the board, but it's hard to see how it could be otherwise given that the Dump actively repels any decent, competent, experienced ownership and financially straitjackets its tenants. There is only so high any of the other categories can go while that teflon albatross hangs around the Vikes' neck. And no amount of sucking up to the fans can possibly compensate for its shortcomings and the consequences/realities it forces upon us.

(BTW, the Packers rank #23, being below halfway only in coaching and bang-for-the-buck; in other words, in spite of having everything else going for them as a franchise, they still manage to totally suck on the field...congrats, Liquid/Bluto. )








--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
Twins at #14.
Vikes at #119.
Playing in the same stadium.

Hmmmm.
Veeeeeery Interesting.
Can't be the bathrooms then, can it?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 24th, 2002, 2:30 pm

March 29th, 2007, 8:42 pm #4

ESPN did an interesting <a href=http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnat ... s1>ranking of all 122 sports franchises</a>, based on 80,000+ online survey responses. They used eight categories to rank all 122 of them in one master list: Bang for the Buck, Fan Relations, Ownership, Affordability, Stadium Experience, Players, Coach/Manager, and Title Track. (See <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsna ... gy>here</a> for a full explanation of the methodology.)

The Vikes ranked #119 overall (only the Knicks, Raiders, and Lions worse) and #122, DEAD LAST, in stadium experience. (Even below the Twins, second to last at #120. They're at #14 overall, even in spite of the Dump. Perhaps in their new digs they'll be #1.) It's staggering to think that, according to these respondents, EVERY other pro sports franchise in America has a better stadium setup than the Vikes.

Having said that, the Vikes rank very low across the board, but it's hard to see how it could be otherwise given that the Dump actively repels any decent, competent, experienced ownership and financially straitjackets its tenants. There is only so high any of the other categories can go while that teflon albatross hangs around the Vikes' neck. And no amount of sucking up to the fans can possibly compensate for its shortcomings and the consequences/realities it forces upon us.

(BTW, the Packers rank #23, being below halfway only in coaching and bang-for-the-buck; in other words, in spite of having everything else going for them as a franchise, they still manage to totally suck on the field...congrats, Liquid/Bluto. )








--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
The Wild have the #1 stadium experience while the Vikings have the worst. (And how the Twins slipped in at 120 instead of 121, I can't figure.)

Minnesta Vikings -- No O.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 23rd, 2002, 5:30 pm

March 29th, 2007, 9:55 pm #5

Twins at #14.
Vikes at #119.
Playing in the same stadium.

Hmmmm.
Veeeeeery Interesting.
Can't be the bathrooms then, can it?
...the Twins are at #77, well down in the pack. So it's not that the ownership is all that great, it's that the farm system and GM Terry Ryan make the Twins far better than they really ought to be. By all rights, they should be down there with the Royals and Pirates in perennial suckitude. (And Pohlad should get more credit than he does - i.e. none - for being willing to lose money to keep a good team together, even as he should and does get blamed for his ham-handed attempts to cajole a new stadium out of MN.)

That the Twins overachieve does not absolve the Dump of being the main culprit of both franchises' problems. Certainly the Vikes' ownership has been lacking (Gang of Ten, Pink McCheap, Zygi), but let's not allow that to obscure the issue. As the Twins demonstrate, even an excellent front office has to be a near miracle-worker on a regular basis to contend in that mausoleum...




--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 8th, 2002, 8:33 pm

March 29th, 2007, 11:39 pm #6

ESPN did an interesting <a href=http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnat ... s1>ranking of all 122 sports franchises</a>, based on 80,000+ online survey responses. They used eight categories to rank all 122 of them in one master list: Bang for the Buck, Fan Relations, Ownership, Affordability, Stadium Experience, Players, Coach/Manager, and Title Track. (See <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsna ... gy>here</a> for a full explanation of the methodology.)

The Vikes ranked #119 overall (only the Knicks, Raiders, and Lions worse) and #122, DEAD LAST, in stadium experience. (Even below the Twins, second to last at #120. They're at #14 overall, even in spite of the Dump. Perhaps in their new digs they'll be #1.) It's staggering to think that, according to these respondents, EVERY other pro sports franchise in America has a better stadium setup than the Vikes.

Having said that, the Vikes rank very low across the board, but it's hard to see how it could be otherwise given that the Dump actively repels any decent, competent, experienced ownership and financially straitjackets its tenants. There is only so high any of the other categories can go while that teflon albatross hangs around the Vikes' neck. And no amount of sucking up to the fans can possibly compensate for its shortcomings and the consequences/realities it forces upon us.

(BTW, the Packers rank #23, being below halfway only in coaching and bang-for-the-buck; in other words, in spite of having everything else going for them as a franchise, they still manage to totally suck on the field...congrats, Liquid/Bluto. )








--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
I was having lunch in North San Diego County yesterday as I read the local sports page. They had an article on how the Cardinals got their stadium built - mostly tourist revenue.

Has that been explored with the Vikes? I know Phoenix is more of a tourist draw than Minny, but how many people come to the MOA to shop? To camp? To hunt? To fish? To escape Wisconsin?

I wouldn't think the locals who bitch about the new stadium costs would complain if visitors foot the bill.

I am not a local, so I don't know much about the situation. Despite some posters giving you a hard time, I appreciate your updates on our stadium mess.

Peace.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 21st, 2005, 5:32 pm

March 29th, 2007, 11:54 pm #7

...the Twins are at #77, well down in the pack. So it's not that the ownership is all that great, it's that the farm system and GM Terry Ryan make the Twins far better than they really ought to be. By all rights, they should be down there with the Royals and Pirates in perennial suckitude. (And Pohlad should get more credit than he does - i.e. none - for being willing to lose money to keep a good team together, even as he should and does get blamed for his ham-handed attempts to cajole a new stadium out of MN.)

That the Twins overachieve does not absolve the Dump of being the main culprit of both franchises' problems. Certainly the Vikes' ownership has been lacking (Gang of Ten, Pink McCheap, Zygi), but let's not allow that to obscure the issue. As the Twins demonstrate, even an excellent front office has to be a near miracle-worker on a regular basis to contend in that mausoleum...




--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
in the dump!!

I like the dome, dave. when I drive to minny for a game...it happens.

I just never shit there.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 8th, 2002, 3:46 am

March 30th, 2007, 6:06 am #8

...the Twins are at #77, well down in the pack. So it's not that the ownership is all that great, it's that the farm system and GM Terry Ryan make the Twins far better than they really ought to be. By all rights, they should be down there with the Royals and Pirates in perennial suckitude. (And Pohlad should get more credit than he does - i.e. none - for being willing to lose money to keep a good team together, even as he should and does get blamed for his ham-handed attempts to cajole a new stadium out of MN.)

That the Twins overachieve does not absolve the Dump of being the main culprit of both franchises' problems. Certainly the Vikes' ownership has been lacking (Gang of Ten, Pink McCheap, Zygi), but let's not allow that to obscure the issue. As the Twins demonstrate, even an excellent front office has to be a near miracle-worker on a regular basis to contend in that mausoleum...




--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
Pohlad has kept the Twins together? Uh, there are very few players left from the team that got the state excited about the Twins. Only great trades from Ryan and huge player development have saved this team from mediocrity! Depite their challenges, the Twins are perennial contenders and that's why I love them! Now that we have a new stadium, what will Pohlad's excuse be when he doesn't resign Santana and Morneau? Nothing. It will be a rip off and we should take the stadium back.

- David Ortiz gone (DUMB CHEAP MOVE)
- Mienkeivitz gone
- Jones gone
- Koskie gone
- Eddie Guardado gone
- Eric Milton gone
- Brad Radke gone
- LaTroy Hawkins gone
- Rick Reed gone
- JC Romero gone
- AJ Pierzynski gone
- Guzman gone
- Rivas gone
- Bobby Kielty gone (and so is Shannon Stewart who we traded him for)
- Matt Lawton gone

The Metrodome sucks but the ranking has nothing to do with the stadium. It has to do with having a horrible boring team with no franchise players. From 1998-2005 the team was ranked high and the dome had electricity no other stadium had.

The team has been awful now for most of the decade. When the team wins the dome is fun and the atmosphere is great.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 25th, 2002, 3:20 am

March 30th, 2007, 12:19 pm #9

ESPN did an interesting <a href=http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnat ... s1>ranking of all 122 sports franchises</a>, based on 80,000+ online survey responses. They used eight categories to rank all 122 of them in one master list: Bang for the Buck, Fan Relations, Ownership, Affordability, Stadium Experience, Players, Coach/Manager, and Title Track. (See <a href=http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsna ... gy>here</a> for a full explanation of the methodology.)

The Vikes ranked #119 overall (only the Knicks, Raiders, and Lions worse) and #122, DEAD LAST, in stadium experience. (Even below the Twins, second to last at #120. They're at #14 overall, even in spite of the Dump. Perhaps in their new digs they'll be #1.) It's staggering to think that, according to these respondents, EVERY other pro sports franchise in America has a better stadium setup than the Vikes.

Having said that, the Vikes rank very low across the board, but it's hard to see how it could be otherwise given that the Dump actively repels any decent, competent, experienced ownership and financially straitjackets its tenants. There is only so high any of the other categories can go while that teflon albatross hangs around the Vikes' neck. And no amount of sucking up to the fans can possibly compensate for its shortcomings and the consequences/realities it forces upon us.

(BTW, the Packers rank #23, being below halfway only in coaching and bang-for-the-buck; in other words, in spite of having everything else going for them as a franchise, they still manage to totally suck on the field...congrats, Liquid/Bluto. )








--Dave
GO VIKINGS!!!
("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson)
.... to finally figure out that Joe Theisman is NOT a good football commentator.

The Metrodome still has very good sightlines, and last I checked, actually watching the game should be the major part of the experience. Having said that, the Dome's bathrooms, concourses, suites and tailgating spaces are all undeniably substandard compared to the rest of the league. It is my hope that the first three characteristics are given a world class upgrade with the new stadium. As far as tailgating is concerned, I fear it will remain precarious as long as the Vikings opt to try and build a new stadium in downtown Minneapolis.

Wilf's recent comments about building a "winter garden" around the site of the proposed new stadium are fascinating; it's just that I doubt if we will ever achieve the lofty tailgating experience of Arrowhead Stadium. Considering how corporatized tailgating has become at blue-chip locations like Arrowhead, Joe Robbie, et cetera, that may not be such a horrible loss.

On the other hand, the Vikings need to be in a situation where their cash flow puts them on par with the best facilities in the league. A new stadium with world-class suites and club seating, all with a generous percentage of parking/concession/advertising revenue guaranteed, is more important than perception by a sports magazine.

PEACE
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 21st, 2005, 5:32 pm

March 30th, 2007, 3:55 pm #10

Yes, there are some people who need to wear their colostomy bags to the games as the stalls are set up for prolific, blood spewing voluminous fire-hose sprays of mostly digested dome dogs, but for the most part, those people are in the minority.
Quote
Like
Share