Just received my ESPN magazine

quote:

---

It has been a great ride.

---

the ride isnt over

quote:

---

Not commenting on the Saints directly, but that article was one of the most fricking retarded things I have ever read. They had 4 hockey teams in the top 12. I rediscovered hockey this year, and even I think thats insane. They had the Lakers in the 50s, Yankees in the 40s, and Red Sox (who have sold out 400+ home games in a row) in the 40/50s.

---

If you look at how they do the rankings it makes more since

Bang for the Buck 22.5%
Wins over the past 2 seasons per dollar contributed directly by fans
Fan Relations 18.5%
Openness and consideration toward fans on the part players, coaches and management
Players 17.4%
Effort on the field; likability off it
Affordability 12.6%
Price of tickets, parking and concessions
Ownership 10.3%
Honesty; loyalty to core players and local community
Stadium Experience 9.6%
Quality of arena and game-day promotions;fan-friendliness of environment
Title Track 5.7%
Championships already won or expected within lifetime of current fans
Coaching 3.4%
Strength of on-field leadership

Everybody keeps looking at this as who has won more championships and whos been a better team for how long. Friends of mine were like it should be the Stankees or the Fakers, its not all about that.

.....And by the way the Stankees were 62 and Red Sox were 74

quote:

---

the Stankees

---

Plenty of good $2000/game tickets available.....

quote:

---

or the Fakers,

---

frick You to the "real" Laker fans. You're not getting in if you're not a celebrity or don't have a 6-figure income.

I know the formula, I just think its dumb. If they were going to do "bang for the buck" they could at least have weighted it. Boston is more expensive than Louisiana, but cheaper than LA. Championships should be at least 30 percent of the formula. Those players don't bust their asses on the field, in the weight room, and in the playoffs for fan relations.

quote:

---

where did the Ho-nets rank?

---

54