Franchise Rankings: Warriors Bottom Gay, Giants Mostly Top Gay, Niners Utility Gay - So Says the Four Letter

I'm a little late to the party on this, but ESPN the Mag. ran a feature earlier in the month ranking all 122 major pro sports franchises based on 15 or so different factors, from "Title Tracking" to "Fan Experience" and everything in between. The Angels somehow got the number 1 spot, while the Clippers occupy the bottom-most position at 122.

Where do our beloved Bay Area teams fall?

We'll start with the Dubs, who scored an overall ranking of 109, just out of reach of the Atlanta Thrashers – a franchise I can honestly tell you I've never heard of – but still 10 spots better than the likes of the Detroit Lions. While their Overall Ranking is abysmal, the Warriors managed to take home the title of Professional Sports Franchise Least Likely to Win A Championship In the Lifetime of Its Current Fanbase! Fucking fantastic. As John Ryan of the San Jose Merc. points out, "The Warriors have now succeeded in eliminating all expectations." Good for them.

The Niners score an overall ranking of 87, which is still plenty shitty, if not abysmal. In terms of affordability, player personnel, and "Title Tracking" the Niners score mostly in the 25th percentile range, which all sounds about right given their current lack of direction. Also not surprisingly, the Niners score a ranking of 114th for Stadium Experience. Candlestick is no treat, but why for instance would Dodger Stadium be ranked 22nd? I can at least go to a Niner game and not worry about dying, which I think should probably be taken into consideration for future rankings.

The Giants score just 3 spots higher than the Niners at 84th overall. Again, in terms of personnel, title tracking, ownership, winning, etc. the Giants, like the Niners, are firmly in the lower quadrant. However, unlike the Niners, the Giants score a whopping 7th overall for Stadium Experience, including the #2 spot for Stadium Quality, behind only the Minnesota Wild.*

*This is really fucking confusing to me because the Wild, unless I'm mistaken, play their games indoors. Just in general, how could the quality of an indoor stadium ever compare to that of an outdoor stadium? Are the seats at the Xcel Energy Center made of chocolate or something? Do naked chicks walk around letting you touch their boobs? Do Wild fans get to actually participate in the games? How could looking across the ice at a group of ugly Minnesotans be better than looking out across AT&T at the Bay?

• Some weird inconsistencies from these rankings that raise questions about the validity of the entire project:

- The Red Wings are ranked 1st overall in Ownership. The Tigers are ranked 20th. Mike Illitch owns both teams.

- The Jets are ranked 109th in Stadium Quality. The New York Football Giants are ranked 97th. The A's are ranked 121st in Stadium Quality. The Raiders are ranked 115th.

Your thoughts...