Post Number: 13
|Posted on Wednesday, December 19, 2007 - 2:35 pm: || |
Are the Detroit Lions actually a microcosm of their city? The idea came up in the thread about a New York Times article that compares the team's 2007 season to the city's ongoing struggles (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/business/19detroit.html?ref=business).
Here are some of the comparisions I came up with:
-The Lions, like the city, have not had real success (i.e. a championship or even a deep playoff run) since the 1950s.
-The Lions left the city in the '70s and returned in the 2000s (parallel to the residents and businesses who fled to the suburbs and the current jump in incoming residents/businesses).
-Like the city, the Lions have had so many problems over the years because their success is too directly tied to the auto industry (i.e. team owner Bill Ford, Sr.).
-Any action that you think will finally be a catalyst for a major turnaround for the Lions (or the city) will inevitably fail, even if it sounds great at first. The list here goes on and on (bear in mind, some cynicism and facetiousness here): the RenCen; Barry Sanders; the People Mover; Matt Millen; new stadiums downtown; too many first-round drafted wide receivers to mention; the casinos; Marty Morningweg/Steve Mariucci/Rod Marinelli; the Super Bowl; Joey Harrington...
How else are the Lions like Detroit? Or, if you disagree, why are they not?
(Message edited by waymooreland on December 19, 2007)
Post Number: 16
|Posted on Wednesday, December 19, 2007 - 3:48 pm: || |
That was a real interesting article to read from the NYTimes. One of the less biased (for or against us) articles I've read about our city. Very nice.
Post Number: 1157
|Posted on Wednesday, December 19, 2007 - 7:33 pm: || |
-They are both hated on nationally.