ESPN ran its annual ranking of the top pro franchises in each of the 3 major leagues: MLB, NBA and NFL (no NHL because... well, you know why). Rankings were based on a number of fan criteria, including fan relations, ownership, price, etc. And the #1 team for 2005?
1. Detroit Pistons 2. San Antonio Spurs 3. Indianapolis Colts 4. New England Patriots 5. Anaheim Angels 6. Philadelphia Eagles 7. Atlanta Falcons 8. Green Bay Packers 9. Pittsburgh Steelers 10. Indiana Pacers 11. St. Louis Cardinals 12. Carolina Panthers 13. Dallas Mavericks 14. Minnesota Timberwolves 15. Buffalo Bills
For those who will INEVITABLY cry "foul" on this, you can learn about how they formulated the rankings here.
I don't know if I should talk about this here or not, since I'm not really talking about basketball. Still, it seems a waste to start another topic in the football forum.
Indianapolis is ahead of New England, even though Indy only ranks higher than New England in 2 of the 7 categories. Apparently either Bang for your Buck or Affordability must be very important. Especially with NE having a 7 to 70 edge in Stadium Experience.
Also, how can the Packers not have the #1 spot in Ownership? The whole freaking state (more like the whole Midwest, actually) owns them! One of you basketball guys better be able to have something really good to say about Peter M. Holt, the Spurs owner.
NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Colts are #3 and Pacers are #10-- not much complaining I can do about the former, since I'd also rate the Pistons and Spurs over the Colts. But no way should the Anaheim Angels (or, should I say, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim *snicker*) be ranked five spots higher than the Pacers. And the Atlanta Falcons? Ha!
“The price is wrong, bitch!”
--Happy Gilmore to Bob Barker, Happy Gilmore
Four-Time Wiener of the Day (5/27/02; 7/3/02; 7/30/04; 8/28/04)
Certified RFMC Member-- Ask To See My Credentials!
Thanks for a great season, Pick of the Week fans...see you next year at Planet Magic in Denmark, WI!
Originally posted by Mr. BoffoAlso, how can the Packers not have the #1 spot in Ownership? The whole freaking state (more like the whole Midwest, actually) owns them! One of you basketball guys better be able to have something really good to say about Peter M. Holt, the Spurs owner.
Might be because we don't have a big-pockets owner who can just go buy the pieces needed for a title...but on the other hand, that's just too Steinbrenner-esque.
And it's not just the Midwest...Cheesehead Nation is worldwide, yo.
Originally posted by the stocks page on Packers.comShares of stock were purchased by citizens from all 50 states, in addition to fans in Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Over half (or roughly 64,300) of the new shares during the 1997-98 offering were bought by Wisconsin residents, followed by inhabitants of Illinois (9,600), Minnesota (4,300), California (3,700), Florida (2,900), Michigan (2,800), Texas (2,500) and Ohio (2,000).
Ironically, I'm not a shareholder. Didn't really have the $300 to spare back then in the college years...but I almost did anyway. Kinda wish I would've.
Star wipe, and...we're out. Thrillin' ain't easy.
THE THRILL ACW-NWA Wisconsin Home Video Technical Director...& A2NWO 4 Life! (Click the big G to hear the Packers Fight Song in RealAudio...or try .MP3, .AU, or .WAV!)
Should clarify that the rankings are for the Ultimate franchise, not just team. They are based on all around arena experience and fan relations, etc. After the "Malice at the Palace" I was surprised to see Detroit get the #1 spot over San Antonio, but I'm happy.
This team is a mess. They are over the luxury tax, are thin on the bench and have little scoring punch. They aren't going to spend anymore money. They're actually the team that should have went to OKC.