Is it just more, or...

Great, so public opinion was with the Yankees. But this isn't American Idol, and as such public opinion doesn't mean a wine bottle of hobo cum when they actually get to playing. It qualifies as a surprise to those who thought the Yankees would win, sure, but if you broke it down, you'd realize this was a pretty good matchup, and neither team winning should be a shock at all. Upset implies that the team with the worse talent or circumstances win, not the worse press.

 

Meat, if you don't know by now that media sets the table for the public's perception of events, then we're going to have to agree to disagree from here on out. I didn't hear or see anyone -- including two friends who are huge Tigers fans -- who thought the Tigers could win the series before it began. Did you?

Now, after Game 2, some people like me held out hope that it was no fluke, that the Yankees could be in trouble.

And MCEchan36, I will gracefully accept my prize. I always wanted to see Yankee Stadium.

 

Ozzy, Yankee Stadium is beautiful at night. Especially when the lights are off.

 

Anyone else wanna take a stab at the possible Motor City madness that would ensue following a Tigers WS victory? Yanks ALCS tickets are up for grabs!

 

You're missing the point. I never said that the Tigers were the favorite in the eyes of the people watching it. But 95 out of 100 people could say that Duke will beat Florida State next week, and that doesn't make FSU winning an "upset." See what I mean? The reason this is considered an upset was in large part because people didn't take the Tigers seriously. They were ignored at first, considered a fluke as they racked up the wins, then proved as such in those eyes when the Twins caught them. What they failed to take into account was that the Tigers had strong pitching, the young arms didn't explode down the stretch, and the offense rounded into shape.

This was not a weakshit team, some 16-seed fed to the Yankees on their way to inevitable victory. But since it was perceived that way, we automatically assume that had to be true. So when they, miracle of miracles, actually WON, well, clearly it was an upset. Couldn't be that the lot of us who were making predictions might have been wrong, oh no. Leyland must had sprinkled magic fairy dust on Kenny Rogers' old arm and the Tigers had a Disney-worthy shocker over the evil villans.

This is a surprise (because people expected a Yankees sweep or 4-gamer), but not an upset (because Detroit was and is a very good team). See?

 

oh hahaha. [/bitteryankeefan]

 

So in other words, Mystery Meat, any time one team beats another in the MLB playoffs, it's never an upset because they are likely very good teams and deserved to be there. Never any upsets. Got it.

 

'55 Dodgers was nowhere near the upset this was. That series was considered even when it started.
The Dodgers that year had a better record than the Yankees, and had a lineup that included Campanella, Hodges, Snider, Robinson, Reese, etc. and a pitching staff led by Newcombe and Podres. They were perceived as underdogs only because they had lost to the Yanks in '47, '49, '52 and '53.

'69 Mets were a 100-win team that played .700 ball from mid-August through the end of the season. Despite their brief and ignominious history to that point, that was only a mild upset.

 

Don't argue with spnited on this one. He went to high school with Pee Wee Reese.

 

not exactly, doc. but I did see my first game at Ebbets Field in the summer of '55 ;D

 

Oops, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that a 95-win team beating a 97-win team in the playoffs was a galactic upset. Serves me right for looking at the teams they fielded this year instead of comparing what they did in 1999 or what people's perceptions about them were.

 

I've only seen pictures/old film. How was the atmosphere there? (honest question)