As we were lazily searching the Internet for clips from the Super Boob, eh, I mean Bowl, Josh, Arvind and I stumbled across ESPN's list of every sports franchise from best to worst. As Josh began furiously ranting about how the Packers were a better franchise than the Dallas Mavericks, it dawned on me. Who would care about this moronic list? In fact, who the hell cares about any list compiled by ESPN? So here's my list of why lists by ESPN or anyone else for that matter, are outdated and unnecessary (and yes, I understand the irony of writing a top 10 list against top 10 lists).
10. It's no longer 1999-These ESPN lists were cute back then. Part of the nostalgia kick that we all experienced back then. But now, there is no need to list the top 10 moments of last Saturday between 4 p.m. and 4:13 p.m.
9. What about #11?-The moments, the triumphs and the tragedies that helped shape a sports psyche are suddenly insignificant if they don't make someone's top whatever list. Are Jim Kelly or Fran Tarkenton any less as QBs if they don't make the \Most Clutch QBs"" list?
8. Top 10's belong to Letterman-He's a funnier guy than anyone on ESPN's page 2 to 200,000. Granted, ESPN's are more truthfully based, but when they try to be funny (i.e. ""Worst football moves of all time"") a little piece of me dies from sadness.
7. They're too bloody stupid! -Let me ask you a question. Do you really want to argue about which was the best Super Bowl halftime show? Does that excite you? Do you spend hours on end at your desk pondering these things? While you could be using the Internet for important things, like advancing political thought on a webboard, doing research for a future job or masturbating furiously to pornography, you are, alas, debating internally if ""The Fish that Saved Pittsburgh"" was the worst sports movie of all time.
6. Umm ... they're arbitrary- Take a good look at what makes a certain play, movie, etc. superior to the others. They're judged by guys like me: boisterous, self-righteous sportswriters. And let me tell you something about guys like me. If I were you, I wouldn't trust me to build a salad at a salad bar, much less create a top 10 list.
5. Everyone does them-Exactly.
4. ESPN once did a top ten list of top ten lists-This is like Lewis Black's ""End of the Universe"" joke. He once stood between a Starbucks across the street from another Starbucks, and time stood still. Well, the same principle works here. When you're doing a top 10 list of the best top 10 lists, the game is over. You can do no more.
3. Idiots actually use them for arguments-I can't tell you how many arguments (sober and not-so-sober) where the guy I've argued with brings up the fact that an athlete made ESPN's list. Like ESPN is some sort of legal brief. ""Sir, I'd like to cite top 10 hot chicks in sports by ESPN, where Anna Kournikova was No.1.""
2. Eight are sincere, two are filler-You can usually spot them when they sneak in a player from the 50s or 60s with the argument, ""Well, he/she was great in their time."" Like context was ever relevant in sports arguments.
1. This is the filler one...see?
Michael Jones can be contacted at michaeljones@wisc.edu.
