Mt. Rushmore: Favorite Teams

by jc25 on Jul 9, 2008 12:35 PM CDT

That's right sports fans, Mt. Rushmore is back. Inspired by UTHorns' fanpost, I'm wondering who's on your Mt. Rushmore of favorite teams (minus anything Longhorn, of course). I suppose I could just look at your profiles, but why not have a discussion instead? Plus, I feel like it helps whenever we reference our other favorites in comment threads.

Here's my 4:

Atlanta Braves - My first love growing up, I cheered for them because I loved rooting against my dad (a big Astros fan). The Braves happened to beat them every time we watched, and they had the players one loves to root for (the Big 3, Chipper, Crime Dog, TP, etc.). They're killing me right now with their mediocre play, but first or worst, I'll root, root, root for the team.
Kentucky Wildcats basketball - Another case of rooting against someone else, as my friend loved the Arizona Wildcats. So naturally, I picked the "other" Wildcat team, the big blue of Lexington. Despite the rocky start, I'm super-excited about the Billy Gillispie era.
Houston Rockets - It's a little disheartening to be the worst team of the NBA's Texas triangle, but treading water is a little better than the downhill trajectory of the Mavs. They've got to win a first-round series sometime soon, right? I'm not holding my breath, either.
Colorado Avalanche - A throwback to the Roy-Forsberg-Sakic days. Watching Ray Bourque hoist the Cup was one of the more memorable sports-viewing experiences in my lifetime. Not a big hockey fan at the moment, but I'll still check in to see how the Avs are doing.

And just for kicks, four teams I love to hate: Philadelphia Phillies (if UT:OU is Braves:Mets, then UT:A&M is Braves:Phillies), Louisville Cardinals basketball (suck it, Pitino), San Antonio Spurs (so good it makes me sick), and Detroit Red Wings (like the Spurs, only since the dawn of hockey).

Programming note: I realize I have no NFL represented on here, which I attribute to my rising interest in college football. For now, it's the Texans, the Titans, and whichever teams have the most Longhorn representation.

Thoughts? Lists?

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

0 recs | Comment 31 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

my list

Texas Rangers
Texas Longhorns-bball
Dallas Stars
Dallas Cowboys

I don’t really like the NBA.

by texasfan05 on Jul 9, 2008 2:17 PM CDT 0 recs

Excluding longhorns

Chicago Cubs
Houston Rockets
Virginia Cavaliers
Titans

by Texas Wahoo on Jul 9, 2008 4:03 PM CDT 0 recs

Excluding Texas

Dallas Cowboys
Dallas Stars
USA Soccer
Boston Red Sox
Chicago Cubs

by Horndogger on Jul 9, 2008 4:31 PM CDT 0 recs

for me

Boston Red Sox – no I’m not a bandwagoner. I have loved the Red Sox ever since I was a kid watching Jim Rice, Carlton Fisk, Dwight Evans, Luis Tiant, Carl Yastremski, Fred Lynn,etc.

NBA – who the hell cares? This is the biggest sport of the most babies crying for more money, playing selfishly, and playing very little defense. (Yea, I said it – you don’t have to agree. This is my opinion.)

NFL – no real favorite. I do like the Texans, Titans, and the Detroit Longhorns…..er, Lions. Da Bears were growing on me – if they would only wise up and get a QB that’s worth a damn.

I will not root for Bobby Stoops, I will not root for Mike Stoops, I do not like those Poops. I will not root for Neuter Dame, I do not think you could blame (me). I despise Ohio State…...who else will I hate? Let me see…...I cannot stand USC. Ha! Dr. Seuss got nothin’ on me. Hook ‘em!!!!

by UTHorns on Jul 9, 2008 9:32 PM CDT 0 recs

Detroit Longhorns

Shaun got traded to the Browns.

I think that now makes the Titans the team with the most Longhorns on it.

by BoddickerIsClutch on Jul 10, 2008 8:43 AM CDT up 0 recs

my turn

4 Up
Houston Texans, Astros, Rockets, Dynamo
(nothing wrong with being a homer; it balances out the success of UT a little)

4 Down
Dallas Cowboys, Dallas Mavericks, NY Yankees, Boston Red Sox

by BigTexBD on Jul 9, 2008 10:10 PM CDT 1 recs

my favs

NFL – houston texans

MLB – astros and yanks

NBA – rockets (and also ANY team that plays the san antonio SPERMS)

but i do watch and follow every longhorn in all major sports and what gets me by when the texans or titans arent playing and gives me a team to root for on sundays and mondays.

by kcc28 on Jul 10, 2008 8:23 AM CDT 0 recs

I would say

NFL – Pittsburgh Steelers (Dad was a huge fan growing up, just kinda rubbed off.)
Tennessee Titans
NBA- don’t really care. Mostly I just keep up with the former Horns in the league
MLB- Bo Sox
NHL- I live in West Tx it’s never been to big around here.
Other NCAA – Other than Texas, I would say that I root for Florida State (mostly because of Papa Bowden)

by LonghorninRaiderland on Jul 10, 2008 8:46 AM CDT 0 recs

Faves and Hated

FAVES
Texans
Cowboys
Spurs
(L)astros

HATED
Titans
Ravens
Lakers
Red Pox

Brown Control to Major Applewhite...

by BFAUT86 on Jul 10, 2008 1:26 PM CDT 0 recs

lastros...lol

Faves- Spurs, Da Boys, Astros, The Vinces, and other teams w/ Longhorns on them

Hated- Mavs, Rockets, Lakers, Redskins, Eagles, Reggie Bush, Yankees, and Red Sox

by vy til i die on Jul 10, 2008 1:40 PM CDT up 0 recs

Favorite teams outside of Austin

NFL-Da Boys
NBA- SA Spurs
MLB-Texas Rangers

Least Faves:
NFL- Washington Redskins
NBA-Utah Jazz
MLB-New York Yankees, although Red Sox Nation is making a strong case to be the most hated.

by heeltuckitandrun on Jul 10, 2008 2:31 PM CDT 0 recs

here's mine

NFL – Saints, and other than UT, this is my biggest rooting interest by far. They fill my life with enough crushing disappointment to make up for the other sports.
NBA – Hornets now, but Celtics growing up
MLB – I find this mostly a waste of time, but I do follow the astros after living in Houston.

I generally root against all teams from NY and LA. Growing up I always hated the cowboys, and that hasn’t faded too much

by SaintBevo on Jul 10, 2008 4:07 PM CDT 0 recs

Why is MLB a waste of time?

Just curious.

by Meekrob on Jul 10, 2008 4:17 PM CDT up 0 recs

Lets get a list going...

Steroids
HGH
162 games
Texas (not UT, stros and rangers) are mediocre at best
No Clemens

...and I was a baseball player…

by tvr'11 on Jul 11, 2008 8:18 AM CDT up 0 recs

What?

You didn’t enjoy watching the Astros lose to Atlanta in the bottom of the 17th inning in a battle of the 41-48 teams? A gripping five and-a-half hours, I tell you!

by horndude on Jul 11, 2008 11:19 AM CDT up 0 recs

I missed it

I was busy reading the mitchell report for the 4th time…that was gripping

by tvr'11 on Jul 11, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

Rebuttal

The steroids era is over
More baseball is a bad thing?
So you’re a bandwagon fan?
So you hate steroids but only want to watch baseball if a roided up pitcher is playing?

by Meekrob on Jul 11, 2008 3:12 PM CDT up 0 recs

Soft Spot?

The steroids era is not over, they have just moved on to more advanced undetectable drugs. The steroids era will never be over, by the time MLB found out that players were taking HGH it was already a thing of the past. Chemists around the world are always going to be one step ahead of professional sports drug tests.

Yes more baseball is a bad thing because it is just a reminder that CFB season is still not here yet, or is still over depending on which way you wanna look at it.

Bandwagon fan? In a way, just that Ranger have never really had much of a bandwagon to jump on. I’m from Dallas and hate the Astros, so when that Rangers bandwagon come calling I might jump on. I have always followed the Cardinals, not a bandwagon thing at all though. More a case of keeping my Dad from killing me or taking me out of his will (yes, he’s from St. Louis).

Who said only? Nobody can deny that Clemens is/was fun to watch. Who else would throw the head of a bat at somebody(possibly out of roid rage). He is one of the most intimidating pitchers of our time juiced up or not. Above all else he led UT to a National championship and is a longhorn (unless the suspicions of his pedafile style affair are confirmed, then we ll let Texas State have him)

Any other questions?

by tvr'11 on Jul 11, 2008 3:47 PM CDT up 0 recs

my main issue

is the utter lack of any semblance of parity. Basically, about half the teams in the league have absolutely no shot of winning anything and most of the remaining teams don’t really either, but they might hang around if they’re lucky. Boston, New York and a few others have so many built advantages because of the financial structure.

by SaintBevo on Jul 11, 2008 10:18 PM CDT up 0 recs

That's a popular myth

But it’s not true. In the 8 seasons since 2000, about when the spending gap really accelerated, there have been 7 different champions. Compare that to 6 in the NFL and 5 in the NBA. Since 2000, 22 out of 30 teams have made the playoffs (73 %). This is even more impressive considering a baseball only allows 8 teams into the playoffs each year.

The problem with baseball has nothing to do with the teams that spend money, it’s the teams that don’t spend money. You can get away with spending as little as possible, and then making a profit off the luxury tax. The system rewards futility, and a few teams take advantage. The majority of the league, however, is highly competitive.

Also, I probably could have replied with simply, “Tampa Bay Rays.”

by Meekrob on Jul 12, 2008 8:39 PM CDT up 0 recs

a rod makes more than the entire florida marlins

or some other team, i’m not positive but i’m pretty sure it’s the marlins.

i don’t like baseball because, to quote UThorns’ NBA sentiments, “This is the biggest sport of the most babies crying for more money, playing selfishly, and playing very little … (Yea, I said it – you don’t have to agree. This is my opinion.)”

by buitx on Jul 13, 2008 9:55 AM CDT up 0 recs

So two different people

Make the same subjective statement about completely different sports without providing any facts to back it up whatsoever, and that constitutes sound arguments?

If you don’t like baseball, then that’s fine, but don’t insult the league with unsubstantiated claims.

by Meekrob on Jul 13, 2008 10:17 AM CDT up 0 recs

who says you need facts

to not like something? last time i checked not liking something could be based on someone’s opinion. my opinions on baseball that make me not like it are that it’s boring, the players are overpaid for what they do, and for about 3 months out of the year i have nothing else to watch on sportscenter.

and i think your rebuttal to tvr’11 post is a prime example of “[not] providing any facts to back it up whatsoever.” so i pose the question “that constitutes sound arguments?”

by buitx on Jul 13, 2008 6:43 PM CDT up 1 recs

Actually, you said

“"This is the biggest sport of the most babies crying for more money, playing selfishly, and playing very little”

I don’t care that you don’t like baseball. I care that you made that statement.

I didn’t make any claims in my response to tvr’11, other than that the steroids era is over. Is that what you want me to back up?

If baseball players are overpaid, does that mean you also can’t enjoy the NBA or NFL?

by Meekrob on Jul 14, 2008 12:09 AM CDT up 0 recs

my last post on this topic.

this is getting a little out of hand so i’ll just explain what i meant.

yes that’s what i want you to back up. as you can assume, i don’t follow baseball that well and even i know people are still getting caught. it’s just not news anymore because so many people have already been caught.

i said “overpaid for what they do” meaning, compared to NBA or NFL players, MLB players have easier jobs and are out of shape. plus i think both the NBA and NFL are much more enjoyable to watch.

by buitx on Jul 14, 2008 4:14 AM CDT up 0 recs

Easier jobs?

They play 162 game seasons, not counting Spring Training. Those games happen predominantly during the summer, predominantly outdoors. And to say they’re out of shape is ludicrous. I have no way of proving that since it’s subjective, but outside of a few exceptional cases, the players are in exceptional shape. But you have a few out of shape players in every sport: see Shaq, Daunte Culpepper.

by Meekrob on Jul 14, 2008 8:32 AM CDT up 0 recs

Jared Lorenzen..nt whills

by vy til i die on Jul 14, 2008 12:26 PM CDT up 0 recs

he's not fat, he's big-boned. nt whills

by jc25 on Jul 14, 2008 1:03 PM CDT up 0 recs

There are some 'big boned' pitchers and 1bs

But considering that the motion and transfer of torque is the key to pitching, that is not necessarily a bad thing, so they can get by with it. And you do have the other end of the spectrum for the in-shape model (Nolan Ryan, for example).

First base is where old sluggers commonly come to rest and there’s some heft seen there, too. Where else would you put a Moose?

There are different degrees of conditioning in collision sports, contact sports and baseball. Each has different dangers. Batting requires a reaction time in ten-thousandths of a second; you can’t be out of shape and achieve that level of timing, much less bat over .300.

Isn’t it odd no one ever says the owners are making too much money. Perhaps buitx would prefer the pre-Curt Flood era of sports and the neo-plantation model for baseball.

I certainly wish pro sports salaries and contracts were more directly tied to production in the year they are active, but there are lag factors involved and you can get some shitty performances, especially the year after signing a hefty contract, but that’s a different can of worms.

Baseball, like all pro sports, have gone Hollywood and is generally less enjoyable than the days when TV was merely a spectator like the fans. And you rarely have a Dizzy Dean to start shooting the shit and singing the Wabash Cannonball when things got slow in the game. Baseball is a game with naturally open spaces and in the commercial era, advertising and features don’t fill the spaces like ole Diz did.

by whills on Jul 14, 2008 2:35 PM CDT up 0 recs