Yes! Baseball season is almost upon us. We all know what that means here in Chicago.
It means going to the ballpark on a hot summer day, watching game after game with friends on a daily basis and, oh yeah, countless arguments over which team is the better team, the White Sox or the Cubs.
Anyone who is a fan of either team knows how fun these arguments are, but also how heated they could get. I guess that's what makes baseball so exciting here in Chicago.
Throughout my many years of being a White Sox fan and participating in these arguments, I have heard six arguments made by Cubs fans on a consistent basis that I believe have no relevance. I have found ways to refute all those arguments. With no further ado, here they are:
Seriously, any team that hasn't won a World Series in 102 years should not be talking any trash to another team's fan base. That's absolutely pathetic!
Sure, the Cubs are a storied franchise...based on losing.
I could see it being justifiable if they at least made the playoffs on a consistent basis or were contenders for a World Series title regularly. However, this has not been the case for the Cubs since 1945.
Sure, they have had some good teams recently, and yes, one was a serious contender for a championship. But one great team does not justify the last 65 years of constant mediocrity.
This is not to say that the White Sox are absolute studs every year. However, they have won two World Series titles since 1908 and, technically, could have won two more if it weren't for certain circumstances.
Had they not decided to throw the World Series back in 1919, although not a guarantee, they probably would have won the World Series that year. In 1994, if not due to the strike that ended the season, the White Sox would have had a great chance to be crowned champions at the end of the season.
If not for these two circumstances, the White Sox could have potentially added two more World Series rings to their resume. In addition, they have been fielding good teams on a constant basis over the last decade and are legitimate contenders to win their division this year, and maybe even do some more damage if and when they get to the postseason.
I'm sorry to break this to any Cubs fans, but attendance does not show up in the standings at the end of the year. The fact that Cubs fans try to make the argument that their team is better than the White Sox because more people attend their games and they sell out more is beyond my belief.
Who honestly cares?
Does passing three million fans in attendance every year add an extra 10 wins to your record? Does a sellout automatically put five runs on the scoreboard every game? No, it doesn't! Not to my knowledge at least.
I know that the Cubs averaged about 10,000 more fans attending their games last year than the White Sox, but somehow, the White Sox still won 13 more games. I guess the fans were sleeping last year during those Cubs games!
Just like the attendance, a stadium does not help a team win any games. Just because a team has been playing in the same stadium for 84 seasons, and counting, does not make them perform better on the field on a day-to-day basis.
Sure, I do respect the fact that the Cubs pride themselves on being an old fashioned team in this regard and still using the hand-operated scoreboard. I do respect the Cubs for not selling their field's naming rights to another company.
However, this isn't helping the team that's playing on the field.
If anything, it's hurting them a bit, as they could be making a bit more money every year (by selling the field's naming rights) and fielding a better baseball team.
All this is beyond the point, as I am tired of hearing "at least we have the ivy-covered walls." I don't disagree with the fact that they have the ivy-covered walls, but if someone is to make this point, they have to explain how this makes them a better team on the field, or the point is irrelevant.
A curse on the Cubs does not exist and is not a legitimate excuse for not making the World Series at all since 1945.
Do I think it's ironic that the Cubs haven't made the World Series since the exact year that the curse was placed on them? Yes. But I will never justify the curse as an excuse.
Thankfully, this excuse is not used too often anymore, as I think Cubs fans themselves don't believe in it. However, I still hear it once in a while, and it really makes me laugh.
Although it makes me laugh, it also makes me feel sympathy for a fan that uses it, because it's sad that they have to stoop down to that level in an effort to try and win an argument.
I remember this game and this fight very vividly.
I also remember that night, and the following few days, how Cubs fans were so proud that a member of their team had sucker punched a member of the White Sox.
Really? What's there to be proud of?
First of all, he's lucky AJ Pierzynski didn't fight back. I'll just leave that part of the story alone with that point.
Second of all, the truly sad part of this fight was watching John Mabry get destroyed by Brian Anderson during the ensuing brawl.
Finally, and most importantly, the fact that the fight was almost immediately followed by a grand slam by Tadahito Iguchi, which led to a victory for the White Sox, was probably a little more important than the fight.
Sorry Cubs fans, that the sucker punch didn't win you that game or a championship that season, just like the attendance and your stadium.
In addition, It's very ignorant to believe that the punch was such an amazing punch. Yes, he landed a clear right hook, but any person could throw a fist at another person and strike him when they are not expecting it.
At least make sure the guy falls down to the ground next time you hit him!
This question is asked a lot every time I bring up the fact that the White Sox did recently win a World Series.
My answer is simple: We have won more games than the Cubs have.
In the last five seasons, the White Sox have won 418 games in comparison to the Cubs' 406 victories.
Although there has been some division titles from both sides since that point, both of these teams have not been able to reach the second round of the postseason. Therefore, both teams have not been very successful since 2005.
However, when I'm strictly involved in a Cubs/White Sox argument, and this question is brought up, I'm allowed to make this point, because it proves that the White Sox have been better than the Cubs since then.
If the Cubs had won a World Series in the last five years, then, regardless of the amount of wins both teams had accumulated, they would be considered the more successful team in my book, as championships are the primary way to measure the success of a team.
Since both these teams do not have a championship in that time span, the secondary way to measure success is the win/loss records, in which the White Sox hold the advantage.
Therefore, the Cubs fans' argument has no relevance, as they have accomplished even less since 2005 than the White Sox.