2008 Great Miami River Days
Miami RedHawks football
OSU vs. OU
Home > Blogs > Upon Further Review > Archives > 2008 > July > 08 > Entry
Who’s more disappointing: Reds or Indians?
The headline on Bill Livingston’s column in the Cleveland Plain Dealer is “Blame for season starts at the top.”
C.C. Sabathia’s trade, to many, signals the Indians’ willingness to admit to their season is all but lost. Here are a few graphs from Livingston:
It remains unconvincing, after a deep playoff run, with the spike in season ticket sales that always follows postseason success, not to have shaken some money loose from the pockets of the Dolan family to get a veteran hitter. Shapiro says no one was good enough. (Clearly, Dellucci wasn’t.)
Of course, a season can only be disappointing if expectations exist of success. The season was metaphorically over by Memorial Day most of the years between 1960 and 1994, and in 1994 it was over for real before Labor Day because the owners and players squabbled over the slop buckets.
From 1995 until the turn of the millennium, the Indians faced great expectations and met all but the ultimate one of winning it all.
With the marked superiority of the American League over the National in recent years, last season’s collapse becomes all the more galling. In part, the Indians failed because Sabathia did not pitch in the postseason like the Cy Young winner he was, but Boston’s Josh Beckett did.
Good point on expectations, which is why I wonder which team has been the greater disappointment, the Reds or the Indians.
Cleveland clearly has the worse record, standing last in the AL Central at 37-51, 14 games behind the Chicago White Sox.
The Reds, by wins and losses, are better. They’re 43-47 and 10.5 games behind the Cubs in the NL Central.
Reds fans, though, didn’t face a general manager — as Livingston wrote about the Cleveland GM — who was in a “state of denial.” Cincinnati had a new manager, inspiring young pitching talent, Walt Jocketty in the organization (even if he wasn’t GM at the time) and a regular lineup most thought was very solid.
There were definitely expectations for these Reds they haven’t met.
Does not meeting previous success make it worse, or is it a failure to live up to strong hopes that drives fans crazy?
Permalink | Comments (8) | Post your comment | Categories: Cincinnati Reds
Comments
By DALE 78
July 9, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this
The Reds are the bigger disappointment.We have a general manager who is still trying to figure it out . This team cannot hit lefties and doesnot hit in the clutch . Idonot see any major trades coming because we donot have anything anybody wants . The Cleveland Browns will probably make the playoffs ,while the Bungles will be lucky to reach 500.Marvin Lewis should have been fired 2 yrs ago . For someone who is a defensive GURU ,Mr Lewis doesnt have a clue .By flyerspuds
July 9, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this
Indians of course. Reds fans are excpecting to have a .500 or below record every year. On the other hand the Indians were odds favorites to win the AL. It’s a shame CC left, but with LaPorta and a bunch of young talent, there will be another CC coming down the pike. I think it is hillarious how the Reds invested so much money into a closer, when they only have one quality starter (Volquez). Boo Reds, you have lost all fans. Bring back Bench, Morgan, Rose, and you may have a winning team!!!By in the biz
July 9, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this
After the storied history of the Reds one would think that the Reds are the bigger disappointment. But with the Marge Schott era we have come to expect lack luster play from big name players and much success from traded players with other teams. Cleavland has never really had long periods of winning so a bad season after a decient one should be of no suprise.By in the biz
July 9, 2008 12:14 PM | Link to this
After the storied history of the Reds one would think that the Reds are the bigger disappointment. But with the Marge Schott era we have come to expect lack luster play from big name players and much success from traded players with other teams. Cleavland has never really had long periods of winning so a bad season after a decient one should be of no suprise.By O
July 9, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
The reds … of course.By O
July 9, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this
The reds … of course.By Brian
July 9, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this
Indians, of course, but then again Cleveland fans should be used to disappointment. Get ready for more of it during the football season. Cleveland fans are unrealistic and obnoxious regardless of sport. Cincinnati fans are understandably disappointed about this season, but at least the Reds put the smack down on the Indians! In fact, when I think about it, the Reds probably started the Indians’ freefall.By Michael
July 9, 2008 6:48 AM | Link to this
Indians, without a doubt, are more disappointing. Reds fans would be happy with a .500 season. That wasn’t what Indians fans were expecting.