But it was the best in 2007. People act like it’s been in the doldrums for years.

Let’s face it, the division still isn’t very good. The Diamondbacks and Padres are rotting it, and so were we when we were below both of them. But in 2007, it had four teams above .500.

When Major League Baseball gives ESPN permission to hand-pick the eight playoff participants every season, then I’ll care about ESPN’s perception of the Rockies. Until then, I won’t.

It’s still just his opinion. Do we know that they took a vote? Just because the Rockies might not be getting the coverage, doesn’t mean that all the analysts feel the same way Kruk does. They don’t necessarily have a say in what stories they do.

I really don’t get this. Until they take a poll on this issue specifically (not whether the Rockies will get into the playoffs, but whether they can be a legitimate contender), we can’t presume to know how they all think.

I’m not necessarily disagreeing with the lack of overall coverage, but that doesn’t automatically reflect the opinions of the analysts. There are producers that have a large say in what stories they do. Blame them.

And as I speak, the Rockies are getting discussed on ESPNRadio (though they’re mostly talking about the manager change, currently, in terms of a change of attitude).

Want legitimate baseball analysis. We have an “inferiority complex” because we want to hear legitimate baseball analysis.

1. Milwaukee 37 – 32
2. San Francisco 37 – 32
3. Colorado 37 – 33
4. METS 35 – 33
5. CUBS 34 – 32
6. Cincinnati 34 – 34

Which of these teams is winning the Wild Card? Which of these teams won the Wild Card last year? Which teams are they talking about? Are they the same If not, they’re not doing their job. The Mets and Cubs are not the wild card favorites right now, arguably the Giants are, because as we all know, the NL West sucks, so the Giants will get more games against bad teams than the Mets will against the Nationals. I want objective baseball analysis. If I wanted to hear how the Mets will win the wild card because of how awesome they are, I would watch SNY. If I wanted to hear how the Yankees are going 162 – 0, I’ll watch YES. If I wanted to know how much more the Red Sox fans DESERVE another title, I’d watch NESN. I don’t need ESPN giving me overkill for what I already have in a more convenient form.

FWIW, I like the Yankees’ broadcasters and when faced with the choice of watching the same game on YES or ESPN (which happens twice a week at least), I watch YES.

Tell me this, if the METS were to win 17 of 18, would it be a little streak, or would they be THE HOTTEST TEAM IN THE MAJORS? Would it be placed in the same part of sportscenter that the Rockies are or would it lead? THINK ABOUT WHAT THE METS HAVE EARNED WITH THEIR PLAY THIS DECADE.

Also, is it really to garner ratings that they put the Mets up? Nobody in Connecticut or New York likes the Mets. They’re the Nets/Islanders of their sport.

And I think this is a much more level-headed way to look at it than just “ESPN HATES US”. But really, when you start to talk about perception leading to smaller brand presence and revenue, that starts on the home front, doesn’t it? For example, anybody who read Kiszla’s drivel in the Post this morning will now see the Rockies as ‘not serious’ about making a playoff run if they don’t make a trade for an ‘ace’ (like Jarrod Washburn!). In reality, the emergence of this starting rotation may be the biggest key of this hot stretch, as the top three men in our rotation are pitching like the kind of pitcher Kiszla seems to think we still lack. Right now, even Roy Oswalt would be no better than our fourth-best starter.

But the casual fan – and make no mistake, the casual fan is the overwhelming majority in the Rockies fan contingency – will read that crap and it will further any perception that the Rox are just fluking these wins out because ‘they don’t have a real ace’. Now, if down the line both Hammel and de la Rosa become serious drags on the rotation, I could understand the desire to bring in another arm to add a fourth reliable starter. But the perception from the Kiszla column is ‘Yeah, the Rockies are winning now, but it won’t last… unless the owners prove they aren’t cheap bastards. Which they totally are. So, you do the math.’ That type of perception being given to casual baseball fans and Rockies fans is more harmful than a thousand John Kruks.

Sure, I wish ESPN would cover teams more fairly. I just don’t see why I should expect why it would ever happen. Do the Rockies even get good ratings and good coverage in Colorado?

As for Joe Fan, “mediocre” is a pretty fair description of the Rockies overall. They’ve been a losing franchise. They had to win 13 of 14 and play 163 games to set the franchise record of 90 wins. The last 18 games have been stupendous, but the previous 52 still count. I don’t see how any sane person pimps the Mets at this point (sheesh, Beltran just went on the DL with knee problems!), but I can definitely understand why no one’s crowning the Rockies yet.

I tend to really roll my eyes at the rampant ESPN-bashing on blogs, especially the various versions of “Everyone at ESPN hates my team and thinks we’re a fluke!” Even when I agree that there are problems (they’ll admit themselves that they’re not perfect—I think it’s harder than people think to balance the business/ratings aspect with the sports coverage aspect, especially when you’re virtually the only game in town), it tends to go overboard, in my opinion.

However, I do agree with you on the broader picture (not ESPN-specific). I think much of it has to do with being a smaller market (there are other teams that would face the same type of thing in our situation), and a lot has to do with our history. I think the national media (and out-of-town local media) are also slow to pick up on things like this.

It’s the only explanation for the Rockies losing to a team in Los Angeles

does everybody get the participation trophy at the end of the season?

/no, they just make league minimum which is nuthin’ to sneeze at :)