41 replies to this topic

[Lose Remerswaal]

I know, I know, it's the Herald, and worse yet, it's the Inside Track. But do these results surprise you at all?

If you could only follow one Team:

Pats 44%
Sox 29%
B's 13%
C's 11%
Revs 3%

Favorite Team:

Pats 42%
Sox 32%
B's 11%
C's 10%
Revs 5%


4% of fans think the Sox are "changing for the better" (most of those are related to Nick Punto), while 70% think they are "changing for the worse" (this was before the McClure firing, no doubt).


Owner Most Admired:

Kraft 42%
Grousbeck 23%
Jacobs (yes, Jacobs) 19%
JWH, et al 12%


It goes on. Bobby V is 4th ranked coach, etc, etc


When was the last time the Sox weren't the number 1 team here? I'd say 2001/2, when the Pats were grabbing their first Superbowl, and the Sox were in the doldrums.

Pats are number 1. And they've gone the longest without a title of any of the local Big Four franchises.

Edited by Lose Remerswaal, 21 August 2012 - 07:51 AM.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

That whole "Pats have gone longest without a title" is such a worthless canard it's barely worth mentioning. They've gone 86-26 in the regular season since they won their last SB against the Eagles and have made 2 more SBs and 1 AFCCG while winning the AFC East 6 years out of 7 and making the playoffs 6 years out of 7. OF COURSE the Pats are going to be number 1, they've been stupidly successful over that period of time.

[Lose Remerswaal]

That whole "Pats have gone longest without a title" is such a worthless canard it's barely worth mentioning. They've gone 86-26 in the regular season since they won their last SB against the Eagles and have made 2 more SBs and 1 AFCCG while winning the AFC East 6 years out of 7 and making the playoffs 6 years out of 7. OF COURSE the Pats are going to be number 1, they've been stupidly successful over that period of time.

Agree with their success, but the Sox were number one as recently as last year, so it's not so obvious as OF COURSE.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

It's a Herald poll. It's worthless more or less by definition.

[brs3]

What's interesting is the Red Sox rank #2 despite not reaching the post season since 2009, whereas every other major team in Boston has. Toss in the B's winning it all, the C's reaching the finals twice in the last 5 years, the Pats returning to the Super Bowl last year,..how is this a surprise? Until last year's collapse, the Sox were a contender, so naturally they were still top dog. They've been in a spiral since, and this is what happens.

[NickEsasky]

When you are ranked below Jeremy Jacobs in this town it's probably time to sell. Ouch.

[Hendu's Gait]

It's a Herald poll. It's worthless more or less by definition.

There's also seasonal bias. You'd get a different response in March.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

When you are ranked below Jeremy Jacobs in this town it's probably time to sell. Ouch.

Jacobs has got hisself a shiny Stanley Cup to his name, which forgives a lot of sins.

[Lose Remerswaal]

There's also seasonal bias. You'd get a different response in March.

True. When the B's and C's are in the playoff hunt and the Sox are in ST and Crawford is "just a few weeks away", the numbers will be different

[SMU_Sox]

It's been a really frustrating and drama filled season. Two teams are in summer hibernation and the third is coming off a Super Bowl loss. This isn't surprising. Because of all these reports the organization looks dysfunctional. That and what SJH said.

To add more context: The Bruins are only a year past their cup, the Celtics took the Heat to 7 games and frankly, in my biased opinion, should have won in 5. The Pats got to the Super Bowl and were close to winning.

What exactly have the Sox done in the last three years? Fair or unfair, they have been disappointment after disappointment. Even if it isn't entirely their fault the results speak for themselves.

Edited by SMU_Sox, 21 August 2012 - 09:24 AM.

[TheoShmeo]

In addition to the Pats' stellar record since Jacksonville, the Pats are, in my view, the most likely of the four teams to win it all in the next 12 months. They've also had a terrific off season and have addressed many of their perceived needs.

Yes, the Sox have been traditionally first in the hearts of most Boston sports fans, but any result other than the Patriots being number one right now would have been shocking with all things considered.

[mikeford]

I'm more surprised the Revs got 5% of the vote.

[MentalDisabldLst]

I'm more surprised the Revs got 5% of the vote.

Ticket prices... $22-44, for the whole stadium.

[bankshot1]

What exactly have the Sox done in the last three years?

Are we really that entitled?
HEH

Given the embarassment that the Sox have become almost on a daily basis for the past year, versus the professionalism of the Pats, and the pride the Celts have exhibited, I think the poll results (and the above quote) is a realistic snapshot, if not a purely scientific take on where Boston sports fans, whether wearing pink hats or game approved gear, hearts reside.

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I would imagine these results match what you would find looking at TV ratings or general popularity nationwide.

Football
Baseball
Basketball
Hockey
Soccer

Not to say the Sox haven't lost some love, but add the Pats success, as mentioned seasonal bias, the sox struggles and the general success of each sport. Yeah it doesn't shock me. Probably were times when it might not have mattered but those days might be gone.

(null)

Edited by Papelbon's Poutine, 21 August 2012 - 10:42 AM.

[bakahump]

Jeremy Jacobs the golden Idol of down and out Owners. If one person epitomizes how "easy" it is to be a good owner its him. Stop sucking cash out of your team and Just win a championship.

I will be curious about the 2017 inside track survey when the Pats finish 3rd in the division under a Patricia/Jon Kraft management team, the Bruins finish 5th as JJ dismantles them and counts his receipts and the Celts enter the Lottery...again.

Friggin Pink hats.

[SMU_Sox]

Are we really that entitled?
HEH

I didn't mean it like that. I meant that compared to the other teams the Sox haven't done much. The way the seasons went were brutal too. But yes, I can see how pink hat fans (or w/e we want to call those fans) might be jumping off the bandwagon now if they have not already.

[terrisus]

I will be curious about the 2017 inside track survey when the Pats finish 3rd in the division under a Patricia/Jon Kraft management team, the Bruins finish 5th as JJ dismantles them and counts his receipts and the Celts enter the Lottery...again.

To continue off of this, I wonder, for how many people is it the case that "sports are sports" and they just follow whatever is going well/is interesting at the moment/is in season?

I guess, for most people, a sport is a sport, and if they follow "Boston-area Sports teams," that's what they're looking at, and it's more a matter of following "Boston" than a specific sport or team.

For me, though, Baseball is the only sport I've ever really been interested in. If the Red Sox aren't doing well, or it's the offseason, or whatever, it doesn't mean I just switch over to another sport. This is Baseball, this is what I follow, there isn't anything else.
Not to say there aren't people who feel that way about other sports as well, and "only follow the Celtics" or "only follow the Bruins" or whatever as well, that would be along a similar line. I guess I've just never really understood "Following all sports teams from a region just because they're sports teams from that region."

But then, I suppose I'm just kind of strange anyway.

[irinmike]

Of course the owner in any sports poll in any professional city that gets the least votes would be the one whose team is struggling the most in the past few years. John Henry has poured money into the Red Sox franchise and completely face lifted Fenway and the surrounding areas. He has done more then any other Red Sox owner to revitalize the franchise and the park they play in. I for one will give him a few more years to "right the ship" before calling for him to sell. It always seems to be about "what have you done for me lately". And yes I do believe that management will do what is necessary to get the Sox going in the right direction again.

[zenter]

Plus que ca change, eh? IIRC, around this time in 1997, Craig Mustard on WEEI told me "The era of the Red Sox is done. This is Patriots country" or some such thing. This of course coincided with Pats' training camp right after the SB appearance, and a new Red Sox manager who the media didn't much care for overseeing a middling team that was supposedly better on paper.

It goes without saying that people root for winners (but I'm saying it anyway). Given the way the Sox treated Theo and Tito, and the crappy way the 2012 has gone - with BobbyV (unintentionally?) stoking media flames - this has some not-so-vague similarities to that summer. Fans probably feel like it will be a while before Sox will be competitive again, just like 1997. Plus, there are at least two teams that look more hopeful, with the Pats and Celts in 97 (Carroll and Pitino!), and all three major alternatives now.

Edited by zenter, 21 August 2012 - 12:34 PM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

The Bruins are ahead of the C's? That's puzzling. Nevertheless, football is a lot more popular than baseball so I'm not sure this is very surprising, or meaningful, unless there comes a day when we are all rounded up and forcibly made to pick just one sport to follow.

The Sox problem is that people are following them with a hell of a lot less interest than they were even a year ago, and that interest is unlikely to increase any time soon.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 21 August 2012 - 12:38 PM.

[Hendu's Gait]

I would imagine these results match what you would find looking at TV ratings or general popularity nationwide.

Football
Baseball
Basketball
Hockey
Soccer


(null)

Strongly disagree that it matches nationwide. If you take out the success of the teams, football would be fourth. I would say for New England/Boston, it's probably:

Baseball
Hockey
Basketball
Football


This isn't football country. (pre-BB/Brady, at the least not pre-Parcells). Pats are there because of Brady/BB, plus strong semi-recent success coupled with losing 2 tough SB's to NY after the success, plus hope for this year (TheoShmeo's point) plus the timing of the survey.

Those of you with vivid memories of 1985-6, what say you?

Edited by Hendu's Gait, 21 August 2012 - 12:44 PM.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Pro football is popular in New England, college football is not.

[bankshot1]

I didn't mean it like that. I meant that compared to the other teams the Sox haven't done much.

Not to belabor the issue, but thank you for making my point.
This is exactly the sense of entitlement I was talking about.

[SumnerH]

Pro football is popular in New England, college football is not.

Brady/Belichick are popular in New England. They may have made pro football popular--it remains to be seen what happens after they leave--but prior to them it was not. When I was growing up in Maine in the 1980s, the Pats were barely on the radar relative to the Bs/Cs/Sox. Even when they went to the Superbowl in 1985, they were largely ignored relative to the C's (who were in the process of going 40-1 at home en route to the title) and, of course, the Red Sox gut-wrenching World Series run later that year.

[Plympton91]

Football for me always was associated with things I didn't like. The start of football = end of summer = start of school = end of freedom = colder weather = getting light later / dark earlier = end of baseball and golf seasons, etc. All of that basically meant that whatever the good attributes football might have had, it had no chance of being associated with anything positive by me. The PGA is my least favorite golf major, the US Open is my least favorite tennis major, etc...

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Brady/Belichick are popular in New England. They may have made pro football popular--it remains to be seen what happens after they leave--but prior to them it was not. When I was growing up in Maine in the 1980s, the Pats were barely on the radar relative to the Bs/Cs/Sox. Even when they went to the Superbowl in 1985, they were largely ignored relative to the C's (who were in the process of going 40-1 at home en route to the title) and, of course, the Red Sox gut-wrenching World Series run later that year.

Your statement is incorrect. Every game has been sold out since Robert Kraft bought the team in 1994. That pre-dates BB and Brady by 7 years, making it 19 years of sellouts.

I would hazard a guess that the work of Robert Kraft is what's been popular in New England. And I would guess that pro football, being by far number 1 in every other part of the country, would naturally become extremely popular here given the unprecedented success of the local franchise over the last 11 years.

[Cellar-Door]

Not that surprising. The Red Sox are in a bad, and frustrating year and as such their owner is disliked because no one even knows/cares who owns the Bruins and Celtics since they are doing well. The results would be different if the Red Sox were a contender this year.
Hockey third doesn't surprise me, because it was a pick one poll, and Hockey has hardcore fans, where the Celtics fans are more mainstream fans of sports and a good number picked the Sox or Pats, while Hockey fans are much more insular and angry about the fact that no one watches their sport.

[JimD]

I find it amazing that the Sox are still the favorite team of 32% of respondents even after Beer-and-Chickengate and the departure of Tito and Theo.

That said - as bad as Sox management has been over the past 12 to 15 months, and as frustrated as I've been with LL's meddling and JWH's absenteeism - I would never, ever, ever vote for Jeremy Jacobs as a better owner. That is just a ridiculously short-sighted temper tantrum of an opinion.

[wutang112878]

The RedSox standings in the 'favorite' team and 'if you could only follow one' arent shocking considering the season they are going through and timing of the survey. But what deserves some attention is the ownership part.

The Celts were in the 10-11% range for favorite and follow one team categories, but jumped up to 23% in 'most admired owner'. Meanwhile, the RedSox were in the 29-32% range in team categories, but dropped to 12% in the owner category. That certainly demonstrates that the owners have built an amazing brand, but more importantly should demonstrate that there are some fans that are getting frustrated with ownership and are blaming them for some of the teams current problems.

I wonder if this, plus the drops in attendance and NESN ratings, might be enough for ownership to realize they have to right the ship.

[The Long Tater]

Srongly disagree that it matches nationwide. If you take out the success of the teams, football would be fourth. I would say for New England/Boston, it's probably:

Baseball
Hockey
Basketball
Football


This isn't football country. (pre-BB/Brady, at the least not pre-Parcells). Pats are there because of Brady/BB, plus strong semi-recent success coupled with losing 2 tough SB's to NY after the success, plus hope for this year (TheoShmeo's point) plus the timing of the survey.

Those of you with vivid memories of 1985-6, what say you?

Here are my two strongest memories of the Pats "run" at that time: (1) seeing a guy get eloctrocuted after the Bengals game that got them into the playoffs [you can look it up] and (2) Len Berman insisting that he "really did" think that the Pats could beat the Bears the day before the game, although everyone watching knew that was preposterous. In terms of the game, well it was nice when the Pats had the lead for a moment.

As for the Sox run, well, I remember the whole thing.

[MoVaughnsTruck]

Football for me always was associated with things I didn't like. The start of football = end of summer = start of school = end of freedom = colder weather = getting light later / dark earlier = end of baseball and golf seasons, etc. All of that basically meant that whatever the good attributes football might have had, it had no chance of being associated with anything positive by me. The PGA is my least favorite golf major, the US Open is my least favorite tennis major, etc...

My glass is half full. More than anything, the Super Bowl means Spring Training is a few weeks away.

[jose melendez]

This poll needs proportional representation or else it just perpetuates the sports duopoly.

But seriously, if you did this on a ranking system, the Bruins probably slide and the Sox probably advance. Hockey is the #1 sport for a lot of people in New England, and it's the number 4 sport for a lot, fewer 2s and 3s.

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Strongly disagree that it matches nationwide. If you take out the success of the teams, football would be fourth. I would say for New England/Boston, it's probably:

Baseball
Hockey
Basketball
Football


This isn't football country. (pre-BB/Brady, at the least not pre-Parcells). Pats are there because of Brady/BB, plus strong semi-recent success coupled with losing 2 tough SB's to NY after the success, plus hope for this year (TheoShmeo's point) plus the timing of the survey.

Those of you with vivid memories of 1985-6, what say you?

Well are talking nationwide or Boston/NE? You're nt exactly clear there.

By all means you're welcome to disagree, but regardless of team success, my hierarchy is in fact accurate on a national level. You need look no further than the revenues and tv contracts of the individual sports to see that. Football is, by leaps and bounds, the most popular sport in this country. I find it difficult to find a basis to argue that point. A quick google search will tell you that the NFL clocks in around $9.5B, the MLB around $8b, the NBA around $4 and the NhL around $3.5.

As far as Boston area, no, football has never been the fever before the current run because there are no college powerhouses and the Pats sucked for so long. But right now, just like nationally, football is king.

At an absolute level of equality, I would probably say that Boston, historically, at heart is a hockey town. followed by baseball, then basketball then football, closer to your proclamations. But the key word there is historically. Things have changed and not just because of the success of the Pats or any oth team but because society and our lives have changed, as well as our teams. I may be wearing rose colored glasses but I don't ever see the Pats returning to stepchild even after BB and TB are gone. The culture has changed and the NFL has become too big a monster.

Regardless, as stated above, this thing is all about timing and whomever ordered the poll knew that and it's just anther cheap attempt to throw garbage. Of coure the sox have lost top billing.

[BigMike]

I find it amazing that the Sox are still the favorite team of 32% of respondents even after Beer-and-Chickengate and the departure of Tito and Theo.

That said - as bad as Sox management has been over the past 12 to 15 months, and as frustrated as I've been with LL's meddling and JWH's absenteeism - I would never, ever, ever vote for Jeremy Jacobs as a better owner. That is just a ridiculously short-sighted temper tantrum of an opinion.

Jeremy Jacobs has always been underrated in this town. He built a stadium on his own with his own money, he even had to paid the city/state Ransom in order to buy the air rights in order to build the arena, and this is in an era when the vast majority of teams, even the Sox are looking for handouts from local municipality

Jacobs was a hands off owner who hired a respected GM, and told him to run the business. We claim we want owners to let the Sports people run the business, and he did, yet he was hated for not meddling.

Honestly I don't know what the Celtics owners have done to rate ahead of Jacobs

[Papelbon's Poutine]

Jeremy Jacobs has always been underrated in this town. He built a stadium on his own with his own money, he even had to paid the city/state Ransom in order to buy the air rights in order to build the arena, and this is in an era when the vast majority of teams, even the Sox are looking for handouts from local municipality

Jacobs was a hands off owner who hired a respected GM, and told him to run the business. We claim we want owners to let the Sports people run the business, and he did, yet he was hated for not meddling.

Honestly I don't know what the Celtics owners have done to rate ahead of Jacobs

That's all true about JJ but he also has been known to be cheap with players and allowed a team that was consistently good (though never great) to drift into mediocrity before their recent resurgence. He also is routinely ripped by the papers adding to his reputation.

The Celtics owners, IMHO, came in, handed Ainge a blank checkbook and allowed him to operate as he best saw fit, which resulted in a trophy and repeated contention. They routinely forked over luxury tax payments in order to bring a contender back to Boston and are otherwise rarely seen or heard from. I can easily see them over JJ.

And in fact, I think that might be the answer right there about the whole local hierarchy, or at least a factor in it. The owners willing to spend get lauded, while the ones that don't get panned, and as the Sox have tried to spend more wisely, the cries of "Cheap!" have started out. (Before anyone tells me Kraft doesn't spend, the Pats are routinely in the top tier of payroll.)

Edited by Papelbon's Poutine, 22 August 2012 - 11:36 AM.

[zenter]

Honestly I don't know what the Celtics owners have done to rate ahead of Jacobs

Fans want owners who are big fans of the team they own, not simply businessmen. This is (part of) why the Grousbecks, who show passion for the Celtics, are getting more credit than JWH, who's a robot. The Grousbecks have done a couple things right, though, including hiring a competent Team President (Rich Gotham) and intelligent basketball President (Ainge), giving them reasonable budgets, and getting out of the way. Of course, it took five years of this ownership to get out from under Chris Wallace.

Honestly, fans simply reward success, and it's nothing more than that. How did they feel about Doc Rivers when the Celts sucked? How about now?

Edited by zenter, 22 August 2012 - 11:35 AM.

[wutang112878]

Honestly I don't know what the Celtics owners have done to rate ahead of Jacobs

Jacobs has been pretty hands off lately, has provided the team with a significant budget to work with and a competent GM. However, he still has the stench of being 'cheap' because of the many years before Chiarelli came to town.

Compare that to the Wych and his hiring of Danny. Dannys first few years were very difficult and a lot of folks were trying to run him out of town, but after a few 'rebuilding' years he delivered a title, and since 08 the Celts have been anything but cheap and consistently have been luxury tax payers. I also remember Wyc saying something to the effect of 'we are willing to pay the luxury tax, but we will only do it for a championship caliber team', which has been consistent with their actions and I think the fan-base understood.

Wyc had 5 years of crappy rebuilding on his hands, but has delivered on his luxury tax promises. Jacobs has many years of stink [at least in the eyes of the fans] to get rid of.

[Fred not Lynn]

Jacobs has been pretty hands off lately, has provided the team with a significant budget to work with and a competent GM. However, he still has the stench of being 'cheap' because of the many years before Chiarelli came to town.

Jacobs was one of the main puppeteers pulling Bettman's strings through the whole lockout a few years back. Jacobs' spending habits are different in a salary cap league. He can be hands off now, seeing as he was a big part of creating the system in the first place. It isn't like Jacobs went and started spending a whole pile more, he just figured out a way to make the other guys pay less.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Jacobs was one of the main puppeteers pulling Bettman's strings through the whole lockout a few years back. Jacobs' spending habits are different in a salary cap league. He can be hands off now, seeing as he was a big part of creating the system in the first place. It isn't like Jacobs went and started spending a whole pile more, he just figured out a way to make the other guys pay less.

This is true, but since the cap has been instituted he's spent to it every year. He also spent extra money, like allowing Chia to fire Dave Lewis after one year despite having 3 years left on his deal, or allowing Scheafer (I think?) to play in the minors for several years despite having to pay him a full NHL salary because he wasn't good enough for the big club and didn't force Chia to carry him on the NHL roster merely to justify his salary.

Yes he put the current system in place. He deserves credit for using it wisely.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Here are my two strongest memories of the Pats "run" at that time: (1) seeing a guy get eloctrocuted after the Bengals game that got them into the playoffs [you can look it up] and (2) Len Berman insisting that he "really did" think that the Pats could beat the Bears the day before the game, although everyone watching knew that was preposterous. In terms of the game, well it was nice when the Pats had the lead for a moment.

As for the Sox run, well, I remember the whole thing.

You don't remember beating the Jets in NY? Oakland in their barn, with Matt Millen punching Pat Sullivan after the game? Squishing the Fish (the first time the Pats had EVER won in Miami IIRC)? Really?

I can't imagine looking at that season and only coming away with those two negative memories you mention. Beating the Dolphins in the AFCCG was the biggest win in their history to that point.

[Remagellan]

You don't remember beating the Jets in NY?

That was in New Jersey. The first team to win a NFL playoff game in Giants Stadium was the New England Patriots.