Skip to content

Twins > Vikings

Dec 27, 2010, 8:48 AM EDT

target-field-100407

I know it’s not their fault — and that this week it’s not even their city — but I find it somewhat hilarious that the Minnesota Vikings have now had three football games postponed by weather this year.  In contrast the Twins, who everyone thought were morons for building an open-air stadium, had (I think) only one home game postponed by weather last season, on May 7th. I may be missing one, but I don’t think there were three.

In other news, I could change this blog to “AllOfTheReasonsBaseballIsBetterThanFootball Talk” and I’d have twice as many things to write about than I do now.

This time of year is for sitting in your house, sipping nice beverages and thinking about spring training. Not playing some inferior game.

  1. cusoman - Dec 27, 2010 at 9:17 AM

    Last week’s game at TCF Bank Stadium wasn’t PPD, FYI, it just changed locations. It was played on time.

  2. uyf1950 - Dec 27, 2010 at 9:20 AM

    Well possibly the reason the Twins lucked out was that they didn’t play their 1st home game in 2010 until April 12th and their last home game was Oct. 7th. They probably missed what could have been the bulk of the bad weather in Minnesota both before and after their season ended.

  3. Old Gator - Dec 27, 2010 at 9:34 AM

    Yep, it was a pure stroke of luck that they happened to play all of their games in the early spring, summer and early fall. If they play their games in November and December next season, we’ll see what happens. On the other hand, what were the average temperatures of those April and October games? I know the Feesh played in around 72-75 degrees those months. But the Twinkies? Got fresh air. Got frostbite. Let’s play two!

  4. sportsdrenched - Dec 27, 2010 at 10:05 AM

    The fact that the Vikings supposed play inside, and play 90% fewer games than the Twins make this story interesting.

    However, no need to knock football. I fight this fight on PFT too. Baseball is a my favorite sport, but football is a close second. Enjoying both are not mutually exclusive.

  5. elmaquino - Dec 27, 2010 at 10:46 AM

    you can always knock football. heck, baseball gets slammed everywhere else.

  6. heyzeus143 - Dec 27, 2010 at 10:56 AM

    yes baseball is an inferior, too slow, old man’s game that is no different than college football in the respect that all you need is the dollar bills to buy a contender, see Pittsburgh, two sports teams with a cap system = contenders every year, the one without = 18+ losing seasons here we come, it is pretty safe to say that in this era of billionaire ball the Pirates will NEVER be a contender, I hope yous guys are having fun watching your inferior game, we’re just fine with Troy, Big Ben, Sid and Geno = unselfish superstars

    • Craig Calcaterra - Dec 27, 2010 at 10:58 AM

      Call me next fall when your unselfish stars are locked out.

      • Old Gator - Dec 27, 2010 at 11:07 AM

        >giggle<

    • bigxrob - Dec 27, 2010 at 11:23 AM

      Yeah, Big Ben is a class act, especially w/ the ladies

      • Old Gator - Dec 27, 2010 at 8:32 PM

        I hear he was out tomming around with John Edwards the last time they played the Panthers….

    • twinsfn343 - Dec 27, 2010 at 11:23 AM

      contenders ever year? Detroit Lions?

    • Adam - Dec 27, 2010 at 11:43 AM

      Because NOBODY in football takes as much money as they can get. They love the team too much.

      Oh, and the team can always just cut them if they make too much money.

    • cjvirnig - Dec 27, 2010 at 11:46 AM

      heyzeus143:

      Of all the arguments to make about why football is better than baseball, yours is easily the worst. Yes the Royals and Pirates are the two biggest black eyes for MLB right now, but keep in mind that even with the Yankees astronomical payroll, they’ve only won one World Series in the last decade. Additionally, even with no salary cap, MLB has had more franchises win a title over the last decade than any of the other three major pro sports.

      Since 2001, MLB has had 9 different teams win a title. During that time, the Red Sox are the only team to win more than 1 championship. In contrast, the NFL has had 7 different champions since 2001, along with 5 in the NBA and 8 in the NHL.

      So, while can all agree that the Pirates and Royals need to get better, the lack of a salary cap doesn’t simply mean that the Yankees can buy a title every year. In my opinion, the NHL is the only other league in which a true Cinderella can come from nowhere to win a championship. The ’01 Diamondbacks, ’03 Marlins, ’06 Cardinals, and ’10 Giants were all amazing stories. With the exception of the Cards, none of those teams were even expected to make the playoffs, much less contend for a title. And I didn’t even mention the ’08 Rays that went from being one of the worst franchises in the history of sports to all of a sudden winning a pennant, or the ’07 Rockies who came from nowhere to win the NL Pennant.

      You just don’t see those kinds of things in the NFL. Yes the underdog Giants can upset the mighty undefeated Patriots, but it’s the Giants. They play in New York, a major market. It’s not that shocking. I haven’t been shocked by an NFL team winning a Super Bowl in a very, very long time.

    • uyf1950 - Dec 27, 2010 at 12:07 PM

      The Pirates haven’t been a contender because they are a “CHEAP” organization. From 1993 through 1998 the first 6 years of their 18 year losing streak they were in the bottom 5 of MLB Team Payrolls (according to USA Today Salary DataBase). In 2 of those year 1997 their team payroll was $7M dead last of all the teams and in 1998 their team payroll was $13M 2nd to last. That is not a receipt for success. Even in 2010 they were last in team payroll with $35M in all MLB. In a division that includes the Red, Cardinals, Brewers, Astros and Cubs the Pirates spent less then 1/2 on payroll compared to the Reds. The Pirates don’t need a salary cap they need to relocate, get new ownership or be contracted.

    • citifieldurinal - Dec 27, 2010 at 7:47 PM

      So tell me how Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin both make more than anyone on the Pirates and are both among the top 5 in NHL salaries and they’re unselfish? You
      don’t have to play ‘billionaire ball’ to be competitive but you cannot be frugal to the extent that it is an unwillingness to allocate resources to even have a semblance of competitiveness.

      Also, the Steelers payroll is 3 times that of the Pirates and have owners who give a damn about the team. You are clueless, my friend.

  7. Andrew - Dec 27, 2010 at 6:42 PM

    Craig, one game was postponed due to rain (the May 7th one) but they also had a suspended game against the Yankees on May 25th that had to be finished the next day.

    Also, there may have been a shortened game against the White Sox on July 17th, but Carl Pavano and Mark Buerhle managed to finish the game in 1 hour and 52 minutes. About 15 minutes after the game ended, the stadium was hit by a heavy rainstorm that easily would have caused a rain delay.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

This was 'the perfect baseball game'
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. S. Kazmir (5219)
  2. G. Springer (3791)
  3. K. Uehara (3422)
  4. M. Machado (3274)
  5. D. Pedroia (2921)
  1. J. Reyes (2852)
  2. J. Chavez (2766)
  3. H. Ramirez (2746)
  4. T. Walker (2667)
  5. C. Granderson (2568)