In my years as a Mets fan, I have been constantly scrutinized by members of the Evil Empire a.k.a. Yankees' fans. The "27-to-2" comparison of World Series titles is always flaunted around in claims that the Yankees are much better than the Mets.
While as a baseball fan I cannot argue that the Yankees are not a storied franchise, I can defend the "27-2" comparison as a Mets' fan, and here is why:
The New York Yankees, formerly known as the Baltimore Orioles and New York Highlanders, joined the American League in 1903. They won their first World Series Championship in 1923. They have gone on to win 27 championships, more than any other sports franchise in history. However, let's take a look at these titles in comparison to the Mets.
The Mets joined the National League in 1962 as an expansion team. Naturally, their first few years in the league were terrible as they continued to build their identity. In 1969, the Mets stunned the baseball world by winning their first World Series, only seven years after their inception.
Instead of accepting the "27-2" comparison for what it's worth, let it be known that 19 of the 27 Yankees' championships occurred before the Mets were even a team. Also, the Yankees won the World Series in 1962 (the Mets' first year) so even that one can be disregarded. If that's the case, the comparison all of a sudden becomes 7-2.
Another factor to consider is the number of teams in the league at the time of the Yankees' dominance. From 1920-1960, there were only 16 teams in the sport, eight in each league. When the Mets entered the league, there were 20 teams with 10 in each league. Although only two more teams per league existed, the odds of winning a pennant are further increased by this margin.
Those are the mere facts. Now let's take a look at a few "What-if" scenarios:
What if the Yankees' hadn't caught fire in the late 1990s and had won only two instead of four World Series? Comparison: 5-2 Yankees.
What if the Mets had played to their full potential in 1988 and 2006? Both teams were destined for World Series titles but fell short due to a combination of clutch hitting by their opponents and poor fortune. Comparison: 5-4 Yankees.
The greatest "What-if" of all: What if the Mets were able to defeat the Yankees in Game 1 of the 2000 World Series? You remember that game: A 12-inning thriller in which former Met and unlikely hero Luis Vizcaino dribbled an RBI single up the middle to win the game. If the Mets had prevailed in that game, who knows what would've happened the rest of that series? Maybe the Mets would have won, leading the comparison to become 5-4 in favor of the Mets.
So when it's all said and done, Mets 5, Yankees 4. Mets are better, right?
Well, no. This is a hypothetical compiling of what could have been for the Mets. However, I do believe the "27-2" comparison is still unfair. Assuming everything else stays the same and those "What-if" scenarios never occurred, the real comparison is 8-2 Yankees.
While this is still lob-sided towards the Yankees, it is not as a great a deficit as the "27-2" margin that Yankees' fans throw around.
So, Yankee fans, cut it out with the "27-2" heckling. If you want to berate me and my fellow Met fans with insults, at least say "8-2." It is more valid, and as a Met fan, I will accept it.
Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com
- Login to post comments