What is a DYNASTY?

[Steve_A]

The Nationals have won the world series and
here we sit thinking wasn't the Astros supposed to win this thing.

What I'm trying to get at here is for all the thing positive said about them, they've only got one ring so far.
But yet a lot of the media call them a Dynasty.

That brings me to the question of why people see the Cubs and Astros so differently.

They are the same from the perspective of having 3 or 4 playoff births and one ring, right?
(They have come hell of a lot closer to winning multiple rings then the Cubs did I'll give them that)

The Giants during Bouchy was a Dynasty no doubt. (Players weren't too flashy but they got the job done).

But wondering if you all would characterize the Joe Maddon era as a DYNASTY or not?

 

[Castor76]

I would say neither the Cubs nor the Astros achieved Dynasty status. The late 90s in the 2000s Yankees were a dynasty. Maybe the middle 00s Red Sox could be called one. The Giants probably qualify but they also missed the playoffs in those in between years. So that hurts it some, but I'd still call them one.

For me, a dynasty team has to win multiple titles with the same core and otherwise be competitive over a 4-6 year period. The Astros still have the makings of one. The Cubs might get back in there. And a core, imo, can be around 8 players.

 

[CSF77]

I believe dynasty means to the play offs every year. NYY ATL LAD STL SFG all had their runs at this.

The play offs are a crap shoot. Every team battled for 162 for the right to be there. To say 1 team won it all as a requirement is a bit unfair.

So I would say that the Cubs run was a mini dynasty. 2015-2018. 4 years went to play offs and won 1 ring.

But a full one would be ATL. Had a extended run making it to the WS on multiple occasions and winning 1 ring.

 

[Omeletpants]

The Astros are significantly more talented than the Cubs

 

[CSF77]

The Astros are significantly more talented than the Cubs

They are amazing in every aspect. Scouting and development. Reclaiming talent and getting it to supercede previous levels. It really is a incredible feat that they have achieved. They are the bar teams are aiming for.

 

[Steve_A]

The Astros are significantly more talented than the Cubs

They are amazing in every aspect. Scouting and development. Reclaiming talent and getting it to supercede previous levels. It really is a incredible feat that they have achieved. They are the bar teams are aiming for.

Well they're in a financial cram next year so, let's see how they are going to do going forward.

 

[Omeletpants]

Well they're in a financial cram next year so, let's see how they are going to do going forward.

They will still have 5 players better than anyone on the Cubs

 

[Steve_A]

They will still have 5 players better than anyone on the Cubs

You seem to be pointing towards an aging group of guys.
You can predict all you want but might not go as well next yea
with a lot of guys entering their late 30’s.

Also go mingle with your own kind of you’re not a Cubs fan loser.

 

[Omeletpants]

You seem to be pointing towards an aging group of guys. You can predict all you want but might not go as well next year with a lot of guys entering their late 30’s.

Also go mingle with your own kind of you’re not a Cubs fan loser.

Wow! You are very triggered over a simple discussion. Go back and plagerize more articles, asswipe

 

[Steve_A]

Wow! You are very triggered over a simple discussion. Go back and plagerize more articles, asswipe

Didn’t want to say this because I usually don’t deal with losers like you but THAT WAS MY WRITING!
Now quit fighting the stupid made up story in your head and make a logical explanation for once.

Also if you’re not going to answer the question then why the hell are you here?

 

[TezMaKai]

What the Bears could have been in the 80s if they had enen an average head coach.

 

[Omeletpants]

Didn’t want to say this because I usually don’t deal with losers like you but THAT WAS MY WRITING!
Now quit fighting the stupid made up story in your head and make a logical explanation for once.

Also if you’re not going to answer the question then why the hell are you here?

Your a liar. That article you plagiarized was from a national writer, then you passed it along as your own. You are too stupid to write that

 

[Steve_A]

Your a liar. That article you plagiarized was from a national writer, then you passed it along as your own. You are too stupid to write that

Um I quoted myself and the comment I made.
What is wrong with you?

 

[Steve_A]

What the Bears could have been in the 80s if they had enen an average head coach.

Guess you don’t like Ditka huh?

 

[TezMaKai]

Guess you don’t like Ditka huh?

He had a historically good team during the 80s and managed to get one superbowl to show for it. He wasn't even the best coach on that team.

Outside of 85, the Bears got exposed in the post season . In 84 the Bears lost to the 49ers 23-0 and then again in 88 lost to the 49ers 28-3.

A good coach would have kept these games competitive especially with that defense and running game during a time when those aspects of the game won championships.

The Bears threw their weight around in the regular season and beat the teams they were supposed to beat due to a huge talent gap. When the talent gap shrank in the playoffs and Ditka needed to coach, he always got outcoached.

 

[TezMaKai]

Your a liar. That article you plagiarized was from a national writer, then you passed it along as your own. You are too stupid to write that

You're*


You should probably check your grammar if you're gonna call someone stupid.

 

[SilenceS]

A dynasty is championships. There hasnt been a dynasty since the late 90's yankees in baseball. Giants werent exactly a dynasty because they would miss the playoffs every other year, but they are fringe for the 3 titles. The word Dynasty is thrown around loosely. Its multiple championships in a row.

 

[Steve_A]

He had a historically good team during the 80s and managed to get one superbowl to show for it. He wasn't even the best coach on that team.

Outside of 85, the Bears got exposed in the post season . In 84 the Bears lost to the 49ers 23-0 and then again in 88 lost to the 49ers 28-3.

A good coach would have kept these games competitive especially with that defense and running game during a time when those aspects of the game won championships.

The Bears threw their weight around in the regular season and beat the teams they were supposed to beat due to a huge talent gap. When the talent gap shrank in the playoffs and Ditka needed to coach, he always got outcoached.

You make a great point.
I was still fairly young back then and
didn’t really understand why
they always faltered in the playoffs.
But if the players weren’t bad
must have been Ditka’s bad coaching.

 

[fatbeard]

A dynasty is a silly thing fans worry about that means nothing, changes nothing, and mostly just keeps them from fully enjoying the current quality sports performance they're actually watching.

 

[anotheridiot]

well top vegas odds for the world series next year went to the astros. Cole said goodbye.

To me it is not really defined by winning. In my life, I can remember the buy title yankees being a dynasty and a team that did not win as many as they should have with the braves in the NL that I considered a baseball dynasty.