Will the Pittsburgh Pirates own the worst losing streak in the world?
May 8, 2009 3:14 AM   Subscribe

If as expected the Pittsburgh Pirates lose more games than they win this season, it will mark their 17th consecutive losing season. This will set a record for Major League Baseball. It will also apparently be the longest streak of consecutive losing seasons for a team in any of the four major North American sports. But will this really set the record for all of professional sports? Has there ever been another professional sports team anywhere in all of recorded history with more than 17 consecutive losing seasons?
posted by Uncle Chaos to Sports, Hobbies, & Recreation (11 answers total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 
Given that professional sports haven't existed for much more than about two centuries, it's entirely possible that the Pirates may just have the record. The first pro baseball teams emerged in the 1850s. Basketball was first played in the 1890s and the first pro teams were founded in the 1920s. Much before the nineteenth century, society wasn't really affluent enough to support such a frivolous activity. Seriously, the idea that several thousand people could make their living (literally) chasing balls around would have been completely preposterous as recently as the eighteenth century. Sports have been an amateur pastime for most of recorded history.

All of that by way of saying that if reporters are saying that the Pirates are the worst professional team in history, they're probably right. We've got records of just about every pro team ever, as professional sports don't go back all that far.
posted by valkyryn at 3:37 AM on May 8, 2009


Has there ever been another professional sports team anywhere in all of recorded history with more than 17 consecutive losing seasons?

Do many sports have the concept of the losing season? I'd never heard of it before this post, it just isn't a signficant statistic in football, rugby, cricket etc, where the focus is on either knock out competitions or leagues with relegation/promotion as the key goal. The fact that most leagues operate on a relegation basis makes it much harder to run up this kind of record of course if the consequences of losing too much are relegation and thus later play against weaker opposition.
posted by biffa at 3:55 AM on May 8, 2009 [1 favorite]


If 17 is the record, who holds the record with the Bucs at 16? Although a Yankee fan, I believe in the Pirates this year. With Bey and Nady in the outfield, they will go...ooops.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 4:17 AM on May 8, 2009 [1 favorite]


Ironically, I think you might find something in cricket, baseball's distant cousin. It's very widely played and the first professionals appeared just after 1660, if Wikipedia can be believed. I don't know of anything specific, not being a fan, but there's bound to be something in its history.
posted by jwells at 4:37 AM on May 8, 2009


The famously bad Chudley Cannons haven't won the League Cup since 1892. Of course they aren't a real professional team.
posted by 6550 at 6:39 AM on May 8, 2009


The Washington Generals, maybe?
posted by nicepersonality at 6:49 AM on May 8, 2009


I think it makes a lot of sense; the only professional leagues with consistency in the US are the big four - MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL. Baseball has the longest run with the most teams, so it makes sense for the losing-ist team to come from MLB.

In less established leagues (pro soccer, women's basketball, etc.), either the league or team is going to fold before they get to 17.
posted by RajahKing at 7:07 AM on May 8, 2009


Johnny Gunn: the existing record is the 1933-1948 Philadelphia Phillies. (The Phillies also had a losing season every year from 1918 to 1931, so that's 30 losing seasons out of 31, and only went 78-76 in 1932.)

The Phillies became the first team to lose ten thousand games a couple years ago; I think this is when I learned about this, because people were trying to figure out when they managed to rack up that many losses.

On the flip side, the Yankees had 39 straight winning seasons from 1926 to 1964.
posted by madcaptenor at 7:59 AM on May 8, 2009


(slight thread highjack) - What I have trouble understanding is how Pittsburgh manages to have teams that are somewhat to very successful in the NFL and NHL, yet the Pirates have been horrible since the early 90's. It's obviously not just the economics / demographics of the city; some other factor must be at play, but what is it?
posted by ripple at 12:24 PM on May 8, 2009


I'm thinking that you need to be looking at leagues where there isn't promotion or relegation as a poor team will either fall out of the professional divisions or get to a low enough point where they become a winning team again.

First club that came to mind are the famously rubbish St Kilda of the AFL (Aussie Rules football). Since 1897 they have the worst record of any team currently in existence with 38% wins. You might want to look at their 70's & 80's period that was particularly bad. Ironically they are unbeaten this season and are top of the ladder.
posted by i_cola at 3:41 PM on May 8, 2009


ripple: Not sure about the Penguins, but the Steelers have excellent ownership (I say this sadly, as I'm a Cincinnati Bengals fan). The Pirates have horrid ownership, some of the worst in all of sports. They're also a small market team, which matters more in baseball than it does in football (with it's huge TV contract and salary cap), the Pirates margin of error is pretty small since they can't afford to go out and buy a bunch of talent.

The Pirates should turn it around somewhat soon though, their new GM seems to have a brain. Their last GM, Dave Littlefield, made lots of poor decisions from the get go, but the ownership gave him seven years before firing him anyway.
posted by imabanana at 1:39 AM on May 9, 2009


« Older People of note, but not in the US?   |   Sniff. Blow nose. Ouch! Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.