Rivalries

by SoxRoxFan on Sep 12, 2009 11:11 AM MDT

Growing up in the Boston area, there has always been a rivalry between the Yankees and Red Sox. Depending on your proximity to Boston or New York more or less predicted where your loyalties lay. Geography is only one factor. More importantly, history between the two teams has a more profound impact on the strength of the rivalry. 1918, 1978, 2004. Ring a bell?

Rivalries are important to baseball (and sports in general). They fuel our passion for the game, win or lose. They give meaning to a season, even when your team is far from contention. Beat your rival, and the season wasn't for naught. Rivalries are mutual. Each side passionately wants the other side to lose. And depending on the strength and length of the rivalry, the desire for the other side to lose turns into a need for complete, unmitigated devastation.

Rivalries develop over time. Given that the Rockies are a relatively young franchise without a strong tradition of winning, and with few teams in close proximity to us geographically, I submit that we have few strong rivalries.

Naturally, the Rockies have a bit of a rivalry with the D-Backs, given their geographic proximity. Eric Byrnes aside, our rivalry is very friendly, in part because of the how many Colorado transplants live in the Phoenix area, and vice-versa. Additionally, with the exception of Rocktober, neither team has competed for (or in) the playoffs at the same time. I think there's a bit of a rivalry with the Cubs, simply because of the number of Midwest transplants who now live in Denver. However, it's more of a one-way rivalry. We think Cubs fans are generally obnoxious, while I'm not sure Chicagoans really feel strongly one way or the other about the Rox.

Now with Rocktober, and Thongtember as touchpoints, we're beginning to see strong polarizing effects of our winning ways. To wit: look at the number of vitriolic comments about the Rockies at McCovey Chronicles. To me this sounds like the beginning of a beautiful rivalry. Of course, history tells us that their closest rivals are the Dodgers. That won't change. However, additional rivalries can emerge.

The Rockies are beginning to position themselves to be perennial contenders. We've all read the Pebble Reports. We know that we have strong potential in the farm where it counts. And now we're beginning to debate which team has the better prospects. These things seem to indicate the start of a rivalry.

The best part of this season, for me, has been watching how fans of both the Giants and Rockies rally around their respective teams and develop a sense of "our team is better". Winning teams do that. Here's to continuing that tradition, and here's to hope that the D-Backs will rebound (a little) to light a bigger competitive fire with us. It's the stuff that makes baseball great in September and October.

Eat. Drink. Be Merry. But the above FanPost does not necessarily reflect the attitudes, opinions, or views of Purple Row's staff (unless, of course, it's written by the staff [and even then, it still might not]).

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: Colorado Rockies, Chicago Cubs

Comments

I never really bought into the D'Backs "rivalry"

MLB has been trying to artificially create one for years now – there’s a reason we’ve been starting our seasons against each other pretty much every recent year. Byrnes added fuel to the fire, but since Colorado fell flat last year and Arizona rolled over this year, the animosity just isn’t there.

We’ll have to see if the Giants can continue to be successful at this pace next year to really cement any feelings of “rivalry”. To me (and most PR-ers, I’d assume), they’re a pesky overachieving lineup right now, not really a legitimate rival.

"Admirably obsessive." - Uni Watch, March 24th, 2009
NA34 | HK | RMN

by oo_nrb on Sep 12, 2009 4:19 PM MDT reply actions

a rivalry is created by consistent competition over a period of time

and the rockies haven’t competed with anyone consistently. the broncos and raiders became rivals as they duked it out during the elway years and the avs-red wings became rivals as perennial favorites and postseason opponents from 1996-2004 or so. But the rockies need to be contenders every year, for at least several years, battling with one (1) other team (that probably won’t be la or sf since they already have a long-established rivalry) to establish something like that. Anything about dbacks or giants or dodgers just based on this season or 2007 is far premature

by nugg on Sep 12, 2009 5:08 PM MDT reply actions

couldn't have said it better myself

I suppose the best candidate in the future would be the diamondbacks because they are geographically closer. But I completely agree that whomever it may end up being will have to be good with the Rockies for years to come.

Also, it will never be the Giants or Dodgers. The two cities treasure that rivalry too much for there to be any other rivalry to spring up.

I'm nobody's fool, least of all yours

by BoulderDodger on Sep 13, 2009 2:53 AM MDT up reply actions