After spending the weekend in Chicago watching the aftermath of the Cubs winning the National League pennant, I can see the benefits of both potential World Series outcomes.
If the Indians top the Cubs, it’ll preserve the last bragging rights White Sox fans really have. But while a Cubs win would render the White Sox even closer to irrelevance, the Cubs are poised to contend for a title over the next several years, and every subsequent run is going to feature the same suffocating coverage. There’s an argument for ripping off the bandage and getting it over with so their loserdom is no longer a marketing point.
Besides, based on the way three national media outlets approached the start of the World Series on Monday, it’s hard to imagine how the White Sox could be even more overlooked.
First, CBS screwed up, not once ...
Wrigley Field is prepping this morning for an event Chicago hasn't seen in 71 years: the World Series. pic.twitter.com/MordBAiILj— CBS This Morning (@CBSThisMorning) October 24, 2016
... but twice, since 1959 would’ve counted even if 2005 didn’t happen:
And apparently, the Washington Post doesn’t think much of 2005, either:
Only one group of people know what these Cubs or Indians will mean to their cities: the 2004 Red Sox.https://t.co/pl3AtXMGbI— Barry Svrluga (@barrysvrluga) October 24, 2016
The White Sox went 88 years without a World Series title, or two years longer than the Red Sox’ drought, but Boston marketed its failures better.
And to cap it off, here’s ESPN, which, unlike the CBS or Post, probably had some dedicated sports research team behind its presentation:
This is what I feared would happen to the White Sox if the Cubs ever won it all. I guess there’s nothing to be afraid of anymore.