Doesn't that just bite? I loved not liking the Dodgers. It fit right in with not liking the Lakers.Originally Posted by Cedric
Win, and other cities will start claiming you as their rival. Lose and no one cares.
The REDS do not have a rival. This NL Central thing screwed everything up. The CUBS and CARDS are each other's rivals. No one can step in between that. The Astros really don't have a rival. The Brewers don't have one. The Pirates were the Phillies, but I don't know now. The Mets and Phillies were rivals for a while and should continue to do so. The Marlins should be the Braves. The Padres have no one. The Rockies rivals are all pitchers.
If the REDS win, the rivalries will come.
I agree with Eric_Davis.
In order to determine the Reds' "biggest rival," the other team would have to consider the Reds their biggest rival. I don't think that scenario exists. It's like college football. Probably 4 teams claim OSU as their biggest rival: m!ch!gan, Penn State, Wisconsin and possibly Iowa. But only m!ch!gan is OSU's biggest rival. In baseball, as Reds fans we would love to be identified as the anti-Cubs or anti-Cardinals...but those franchises have a lengthy history with each other that we don't share thanks to our years spent in the National League West.
That's the Reds' rivalry problem - they switched divisions, leaving behind old rivals such as the Braves, Dodgers and Giants. The only team to remain in the Reds division is the Astros, which leads me to think of them as the Reds chief rival. They are in the same position - they lost their other rivals and only retained the Reds as a division foe. The distance and differences between Cincinnati and Houston don't really matter either. Look at NFL rivalries such as Cowboys/Redskins, Cowboys/49ers and Broncos/Raiders - not exactly next door neighbors.
Astros: Reds biggest rival; teams have always been in the same division
Cards: Reds will never be their No. 1 rival so they can't be ours
Cubs: See Cards
Pirates: Best possibility at new rivalry, if Pirates ever amount to anything; right now they don't deserve the honor of being the biggest rival of one of baseball's most stories franchises
Brewers: This team is the Reds' biggest nemesis and biggest pain in the neck, but not necessarily biggest rival
Indians: Don't play near enough games vs. each other to develop a meaningful rivalry; these teams' 6 games with each other are over by the All-star break every year, which means neither team can factor into the other's stretch drives with crushing losses or huge wins - the definition of a rivalry. If the main reason people use for the Dodgers no longer being a rival is because they only play 6 games, the same applies with the Tribe
Last edited by Reds/Flyers Fan; 06-24-2004 at 07:09 PM.
Brewers, they ruined the 99 season
I agree, that Houston has the greatest chance of becoming our rival. They don't have one, we don't have one. They show more success than Pittsburgh lately, and it only takes a beanball or two from Clemens to stir up a rivalry.Originally Posted by KronoRed
The Brewers are like that annoying fly in your car that just won't fly out the open windowsOriginally Posted by KronoRed
IMHO, it is the Pittsburgh Pirates.
These two teams have met in the NLCS five times. They played each other seven times in spring training, and they are very close in proximity and on the same body of water.
Agree with Hap. Since the Dodgers rivalry is dead the Pirates are the team we have faced the most and caused each other the most pain. Brewers are right up there.
Cubs new found arrogance is indeed annoying but my qualification for a rival is someone you hate because they ruined a season/dealt a crushing blow and you in turn have dealt them a blow on the way to a championship of some sort. This automatically eliminates the Cubs as anyones rivals.
This is what I don't get about the Card/Cubs, who have the Cubs ever beaten? When was the last time the Cubs beat a team in a game 7 or the last day of a season and just crushed some teams hopes? NEVER. Does Lucey view Charley Brown as a rival or just some pathetic loser who she enjoys tormenting?
The Cards are one of the winningst franchises in baseball, the Cubs are one of the worst. How can You be a Cubs fan and claim a rivalry with a team you have never beaten on a way to a championship? Same for those sad demented Red Sox fans. Are the Clippers rivals with the Lakers just because they are geographically close? NO!! You have to beat the other team to have a real rivalry, untill then its just a bad case of trophy envy and annoying fans.
The Cubbies are Charlie Brown and neither one will ever kick that bleeping ball.
First, I think the "biggest rival" has to be a division rival, like the Dodgers were in the 70's. So that eliminates the Indians immediately. (I live in an area where most people are Indians fans, and they are amazed that I don't get "fired up" for the Reds-Indians games or respond to their taunts before the games (and after, if the Tribe win). I just think of them as another team, and each game as just another game, and it ticks them off!
Unfortunately, the Dodgers are also out, since the Reds now play them only six times a season.
It would be nice to call the Cardinals and/or the Cubs our biggest rival, but they have so much history with each other that they don't view the Reds in that vein. So they are both out.
The Brewers are an intriguing possibility, but they are still rather new to the NL. (Frankly, I still find myself thinking of the Brew Crew as an AL team with Robin Yount, Paul Molitor, Cecil Cooper, and Gorman Thomas.) Also, due to their close proximity to Chicago (many people are not aware that Milwaukee is on Lake Michigan), they desperately want a rivalry with the Cubs. There's also the Busch-vs.-Miller thing with the Cardinals, as well as memories of the 1982 World Series.
The Astros are the only team in the Reds' division that has always been in the Reds' division. There is a lot of history there, and despite the distance problem, they are a team this is easy to "get up for" as a fan, since there are years of familiarity to them. However, even when the Reds and Astros were in the old NL West, I never saw them as a true rival, but just a divisional foe.
The Pirates would be a natural choice now that they are in the same division as the Reds. They have a lot of history with the Reds from the old days, even though they were in the opposite division, because of their epic NLCS battles. Also, their relatively close proximity would lend itself to fueling the flames of a true rivalry. I have seen the Pirates play more times than any team except the Reds. I will be at the game against the Bucs Friday night, and it will be the eleventh time I have seen the Reds and Pirates play each other, though only the fourth time in Cincinnati. I have seen them play in Pittsburgh seven times. To me, a rivalry gains significance when you become familiar with and feel comfortable in the other team's home ball park. Also, the Reds opened PNC Park, and the Pirates opened GAB. Of course, it would help if the Pirates would become more competitive, but they get my vote for "biggest rival", albeit a friendly one. ( I have said on more than one occasion that if I hadn't been a Reds fan, I would probably be a Pirates fan.)
Of course, any time the Reds compete with any of their divisional rivals for the NL Central crown, there will be an added taste of rivalry, and if they compete with the same team over and over again, year-in and year-out, then that team will become a big rival. Let's face it--the only reason the Dodgers were such a big rival in the 70's was because the Reds and Dodgers were butting heads every year for the NL West title. (And it didn't hurt that both teams were chock-full of great personalities.)
Last edited by Big Klu; 06-25-2004 at 01:15 AM.
Last edited by RedsRule30; 08-17-2004 at 12:43 AM.
Flip a coin....either St. Louis or Chicago IMO.
Go to a cubbies game and you will see why they should be on your list.
The rest of the Limiteds
Last edited by RedsRule30; 08-17-2004 at 12:43 AM.