Master Index of Archived Threads


Original 16 Teams vs. Expansion Eras

Valadius Oct 12 2005 01:20 PM

The argument has been made that one should root for one of the original 16 teams over the 14 expansion teams. But with expansion baseball in its 45th year, maybe it's time to broaden one's mind to accept some of the expansion teams. Here are the original teams as they are now: National League Atlanta Braves Chicago Cubs Cincinnati Reds Los Angeles Dodgers Philadelphia Phillies Pittsburgh Pirates St. Louis Cardinals San Francisco Giants American League Baltimore Orioles Boston Red Sox Chicago White Sox Cleveland Indians Detroit Tigers Minnesota Twins New York Yankees Oakland Athletics But since the expansion era began, the following teams have been added (as they are now): 1961 Los Angeles Angels Texas Rangers 1962 Houston Astros New York Mets 1969 Kansas City Royals Milwaukee Brewers San Diego Padres Washington Nationals 1977 Seattle Mariners Toronto Blue Jays 1993 Colorado Rockies Florida Marlins 1998 Arizona Diamondbacks Tampa Bay Devil Rays I think you could find a suitable cutoff date in there if you wished.

metirish Oct 12 2005 01:31 PM

]The argument has been made that one should root for one of the original 16 teams over the 14 expansion teams Val I know of no such argument, if the Mets were not here I would probably be a Dodgers or Giants fan I would hope..

Edgy DC Oct 12 2005 01:38 PM

Perhaps this post belonged in the thread where the argument was made.

sharpie Oct 12 2005 01:38 PM

Hard for a Mets fan to make that argument. 'Specially in '86.

Valadius Oct 12 2005 01:56 PM

Sorry... I tend to go off on a rant sometimes...

Yancy Street Gang Oct 12 2005 02:09 PM

From my perspective, there aren't 16 original teams remaining. I see the Boston Red Sox as an original team, but not the Atlanta Braves. Moving from Boston to Milwaukee gave them a new identity, even though they're still the same franchise. By my definition, these are the original teams: National League Chicago Cubs Cincinnati Reds Philadelphia Phillies Pittsburgh Pirates St. Louis Cardinals American League Boston Red Sox Chicago White Sox Cleveland Indians Detroit Tigers New York Yankees

TheOldMole Oct 12 2005 02:34 PM

I didn't say "one should," I just said that I did, in the absence of any other rooting interest. If you want a "one should," one should always root against the designated hitter.

SwitchHitter Oct 12 2005 04:41 PM

TheOldMole wrote: If you want a "one should," one should always root against the designated hitter. Indeed.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2005 04:43 PM

="Yancy Street Gang"] By my definition, these are the original teams: National League Chicago Cubs Cincinnati Reds Philadelphia Phillies Pittsburgh Pirates St. Louis Cardinals American League Boston Red Sox Chicago White Sox Cleveland Indians Detroit Tigers New York Yankees Yanx moved from Baltimore in 1904, ergo not original. Friggin' newbies!

Centerfield Oct 12 2005 05:39 PM

Holy crap. Never knew that. Thanks FK.

TheOldMole Oct 13 2005 10:48 PM

And after all that, I find myself rooting inexplicably for the Angels. Maybe because they have more Molinas behind the plate than any other team.

Frayed Knot Oct 13 2005 11:19 PM

Centerfield wrote: Holy crap. Never knew that. Thanks FK. That's because the MFYs like to pretend that their history didn't begin until 1921.

G-Fafif Oct 25 2005 04:08 PM

We're sending our love down the well to all the expansion teams, even the Astros. http://www.gothambaseball.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6765

MFS62 Oct 25 2005 06:20 PM

TheOldMole wrote: If you want a "one should," one should always root against the designated hitter. Amen! And can we get an Amen from the congregation? Later

Edgy DC Oct 25 2005 09:04 PM

I fear that may mean rooting against Piazza next season. But rooting against the idea of the DH (which is what is really meant here) means rooting against the rule that looks to be taking him away. So yeah. Boo, DH.

TheOldMole Oct 25 2005 11:45 PM

I'd never root against Mike.