@ballpeen said:

They have been the bridesmaid quite a few time. It just sucks that the one and only time they had to win was against us. Why couldn't they have lost to the Tribe, but beat the Yankees, or Blue Jays, or whoever else they had played.

@miktoxic said:

Bottom line: The "Champion" is the team that wins that last game....and carries off the final trophy.

@jafbf said:

They put Cleveland that low because this town did have quite a bit of success in the 40s/50s.

If you just go by the total history of a town, OK sure. But if you want to go by the memory of anyone under the age of 65-70, I think Cleveland has had the worst of it.

They talk about Houston/Atlanta/Seattle being worse...but they have had titles much more recently. Though, I understand that the losing of teams, like the Thrashers leaving and the Sonics leaving. Sure that hurts. But Phoenix? They just won a title in 2001, and were in the Super Bowl as well. And putting Denver ahead of Cleveland is definitely a fucking joke.

I can see Buffalo and San Diego as being right up there...but certainly not Denver.

@ballpeen said:

and they are the hottest team right now with 14 straight.

@hoorta said:

Well. it was just one. The one I couldn't root for them because I was rooting for the Indians. I couldn't even celebrate that.

Atlanta is 100 miles down the road. Over the last 35 years I have watched a lot of Braves games, on TV and in person. I will always be a Indian fan, but the Braves are a fairly close second. They are my National League team.

@the-gipper said:

don't want to banter on this much longer (because it is off topic) BUT IMHO i think there are different degrees or levels of the term champion in the world of sports. super bowl champion. afc champion. afc central champ.

sort like the world series champion. american league champion. american league central champ etc. when it comes down to it though i agree. it's sorta childish in a way. letting the kids feel good about something they achieved only to get their asses handed to them the next week. or the next day.

but then again when the world gets together and has the ultimate competition would you call an athlete from the USA who wins a bronze medal at the olympics a loser? and you can't call the super bowl winner 'world champions' because the people up north play the same game, albeit a little different. and the world series champion is kind of an impromptu name considering half the world could kick our teams' asses.

in the eye of the beholder type of thing.

@jafbf said:

Utterly disagree with Forbes- they can cram that list where the sun don't shine. Braves have won a couple World Series in the last 20 years, The Broncos a couple SBs. Sonics? How about the Browns on hiatus for a few years, and the #1 current player in the NBA (LeBum) giving Cleveland the finger on National TV? You'd probably have to be around 60 to remember the last Browns Championship, or (like my Mom) 80+ to remember Bob Feller & the Tribe winning the World Series.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/eddf45gdeg/the-most-miserable-sports-cities-2/#gallerycontent

I'm not sure how this works out, because there are some that have had SuperBowl appearances . . .

@miktoxic said:

Yea, my point.....you can call just winning your division a "championship'. There are only 4 teams in each division. You can have 8 champions per year? Nyet. One champion.

That being said....lets add a pile of those "Divsion Championships" to the Browns resume.

CLEVELAND BROWNS:

@badnewsbrowns said:

I personally don't care about the "hosting a Superbowl". It has never been a desire of mine to have Cleveland host a Super Bowl....but yea, lets win about 3-4 of them here sometime soon. They can be held in New Orleans, or Phoenix or wherever.

And yes, 2 outs away from a WS win.....pisses one off everytime you think about it.

(The only team that had worse luck were the Rangers a couple of years ago, being 1 strike away from winning it....only to blow it.)

@hoorta said:

Larry: add Eagles to that list: last title was in 1960. Plus Vikings, founded in 1960, Oilers/Tits last title in '61, Chargers, last title in '63 have waited longer....but I am not sure if you want to count them as "Old School NFL". I would as, along with the Lions and Cards, all of these have been around since I personally became a sports sceintient being and have not won titles in that time. (I do remember Browns '64, and Chargers '63...but not Eagles '60 title or Oilers AFL titles)

You are right about the 3-team town though. As I can gather it, the next town that has waited "the longest" since Cleveland that currently has a least 3 teams in the 4 major sports is Minneapolis/St. Paul. And they have only waited since 1991. (they would also be the longest wait for a 4 team town...as they have hockey too.).

I am not counting Seattle, as they have been reduced to 2 teams. ...1979 when the Sonics won was that town's last title.

Two town team with longest wait is San Diego...longer than Cleveland: 1963 when Charger won.

One team town: Vancouver: won a Stanley Cup in 1915, waiting ever since. That was pre-NHL. They had a 3 games to 2 lead in the NHL finals and blew it just a couple of years ago. (Ottawa right behind with last title in NHL in 1927).

@the-cysko-kid said:

Yea, I am an attorney. And I know style from substance. Yes, those are called championship games. But that is just a label.

But did you feel like the Indians had won the championship after they lost in extra innings of Game 7 of the World Series? I sure the fuck didn't.

It's a shame the Indians didn't win in the 90's, they were the cream of the crop for a good 5 years.. and when we think back on some of those teams they are legendary as if they were champs.

@listercat said:

It's well known among us oldsters- cities with at least 3 major professional sports teams, Cleveland has waited by FAR the longest to win a Championship in any sport. Of the Old School NFL teams, only the Lions and Cardinals have had a longer wait. Detroit had the Red Wings winning a slew of NHL Championships, and the Tigers and Pistons helping out. So Boo-hoo.

Those poor Red Sox fans had the Celtics, Patriots, and Bruins to ease their pain. Long suffering Cubs fans had the Bulls, Bears, & Blackhawks. Even one team wonders (Portland, San Antonio) have fared better recently.

@the-gipper said:

Yea, but, do you think the Indians were THE Champions in 1995 an 97?

Let's face it, Cleveland teams have competed in THE Championship Game....or Championship Series only 5 times since 1960 (long before most of you were probably born), which is about the time of my consciousness about sports began:

1964 Browns win NFL Championship game over Colts

1965 Browns lose NFL Championship game vs. Packers

1995 Indians lose World Series to Braves

1997 Indian lose World Series to Marlins

2007 Cavs lose NBA Finals to Spurs

Compare that to that pisspot town to the east in the same period:

1960 Won WS

1968 Won ABA

1971 Won WS

1974 Won SB

1974 Won SB

1978 Won SB

1979 Won WS

1979 Won SB

1991 Won NHL

1992 Won NHL

1995 Lost SB

2005 Won SB

2008 Lost NHL

2008 Won SB

2009 Won NHL

2010 Lost SB

16 appearances compared to our 5. Like one of them said, it is the town of good fortune, i.e. dumbass luck.

Even those yippers down in SW Ohio have had more "Championship appearances" than Cleveland:

1961 Lost WS

1970 Lost WS

1972 Lost WS

1975 Won WS

1976 Won WS

1981 Lost SB

1988 Lost SB

1990 Won WS

And the fuckfaces from crab city had these:

1964 Lost NFL (had won in 1959)

1966 Won WS

1968 Lost SB

1969 Lost WS

1970 Won WS

1970 Won SB

1971 Lost NBA

1971 Lost WS

1979 Lost WS

1983 Won WS

2000 Won SB

2012 Won SB

So, yes, these other towns, which are all similar in size and in the number of teams that play there have all had much better fortune than Cleveland has had.

Symantics. I thought you were a lawyer or something. You're now saying THE championship game. But the other games are championship games or they wouldn't call them that would they? Is there a trophy for winning the AFC championship game? I think there is. I wouldnt know though. Despite our having played in three afc championship games since I've been around we lost all of them.

@listercat said:

Yea, how about in the next 10 years, this city averages about 1 Finals appearance per year, that is only 3.3 for each team. Why not?

@the-cysko-kid said:

Yea, but, do you think the Indians were THE Champions in 1995 an 97?

Let's face it, Cleveland teams have competed in THE Championship Game....or Championship Series only 5 times since 1960 (long before most of you were probably born), which is about the time of my consciousness about sports began:

1964 Browns win NFL Championship game over Colts

1965 Browns lose NFL Championship game vs. Packers

1995 Indians lose World Series to Braves

1997 Indian lose World Series to Marlins

2007 Cavs lose NBA Finals to Spurs

Compare that to that pisspot town to the east in the same period:

1960 Won WS

1968 Won ABA

1971 Won WS

1974 Won SB

1974 Won SB

1978 Won SB

1979 Won WS

1979 Won SB

1991 Won NHL

1992 Won NHL

1995 Lost SB

2005 Won SB

2008 Lost NHL

2008 Won SB

2009 Won NHL

2010 Lost SB

16 appearances compared to our 5. Like one of them said, it is the town of good fortune, i.e. dumbass luck.

Even those yippers down in SW Ohio have had more "Championship appearances" than Cleveland:

1961 Lost WS

1970 Lost WS

1972 Lost WS

1975 Won WS

1976 Won WS

1981 Lost SB

1988 Lost SB

1990 Won WS

And the fuckfaces from crab city had these:

1964 Lost NFL (had won in 1959)

1966 Won WS

1968 Lost SB

1969 Lost WS

1970 Won WS

1970 Won SB

1971 Lost NBA

1971 Lost WS

1979 Lost WS

1983 Won WS

2000 Won SB

2012 Won SB

So, yes, these other towns, which are all similar in size and in the number of teams that play there have all had much better fortune than Cleveland has had.

@the-gipper said:

Well, I guess maybe we throw the word championship game around a little too liberally. Maybe we can call the first round the Wildcard championship game and the second round the Division Championship game.

While yes, I use that terminology too, in reality, the Championship Game is the Final Game. If you have to go on to play and try to win another game before getting your ring...then you haven't played in a real Championship Game.

You would not call the winner, say of the American League Pennant the "Champion" until and unless that team goes on to win the World Series.

The Indians were the American League champions in 95 and 97. Says so right on the pennant.

@the-cysko-kid said:

Well, I guess maybe we throw the word championship game around a little too liberally. Maybe we can call the first round the Wildcard championship game and the second round the Division Championship game.

While yes, I use that terminology too, in reality, the Championship Game is the Final Game. If you have to go on to play and try to win another game before getting your ring...then you haven't played in a real Championship Game.

You would not call the winner, say of the American League Pennant the "Champion" until and unless that team goes on to win the World Series.

@browns57 said:

Then I guess they are not dumb are they?

@clevelandwantsplayoffs said:

Idiot protocol. If guys are that fucking frasgile to get hurt in teh 4 game preseason, they why the fuck ever play them at all? Play the hit players until they all get hurt, and then bring the first team in around game 13. That way they won't have such a high probability of getting hurt.

Dumbest fucking philosophy ever.

Teams with guys like Brady, Ben, AJ Gren, James Harrison, that is to say, proven, superstars don't need to be played, but not for injury concerns, they can it back and let the young guys get seasoning.

But our team blows Honey Boo Boo ass. Play em!

Cinci looked great. All three offnsive units and QBs were banging on all cylinders.