The city of Boston has been around since 1630, founded by the Puritans. Since then it has acquired many titles. Titles, not as in sports championships, but as in names like "Bean Town" and "The City on a Hill." I believe there is one more than we can add; "The City of Exaggerators."
I'm from Massachusetts and I love Boston. I'm not trying to insult the city that I love, the home of the teams that I love and I mean no offense to Bostonians. Why do I propose this new name?
The Exaggerations of Boston go back a long way. The Boston Massacre is probably the best example for this. The Boston Massacre, one of the biggest moments in our country's history, sparked the colonists' revolution against the British. You're probably wondering what I'm talking about and how this is an exaggeration.
Who knows the real details of the Boston Massacre? I know some of them, and they are pretty surprising. Only five people died in this "massacre." Is five people really considered a massacre? On top of that, the colonists were provoking the British. They were insulting the soldiers, throwing snowballs at them and daring these soldiers with loaded muskets to fire. People like Paul Revere took advantage of this and exaggerated it.
Sticking with the colonial theme, have you heard of the Boston Tea Party? Of course you have, who hasn't? Well the better question would be; why did it even happen? I'm sure most of you are questioning my sanity right now and thinking "Umm ... The British were oppressing us and imposing strict laws and taxes." Just keep reading and you will see my reasoning.
The British imposed the Stamp Act, which was just plain stupid of them. They put taxes on dice and cards, things the rowdiest and most violent people in the colonies want, the drunks. When the colonists complained, the British immediately repealed it to get on their good side.
Now for the Tea Act which, for some strange reason, caused the Boston Tea Party. It didn't put taxes on tea, that would the Townshend Duties. The Tea Act actually LOWERED the price of tea in the colonies. How did the colonists thank the British? By dumping forty-five tons of that tea into the Atlantic Ocean.
Okay, I'm done with history. It's time for sports. Let's start with the Red Sox and their World Series drought. I'm not saying it wasn't a drought, it definitely was and I'm also saying it wasn't a hard time for fans because it had to be. However, there are much longer sports championship droughts and two in the MLB that are longer. The Cubs still haven't won since 1908 and the White Sox' drought was also longer, but there was a much bigger deal about the Red Sox winning than the White Sox.
Now for Big Papi's MVP "snubs." He finished in the top five for votes in 2003 all the way to 2007. Five straight seasons, that's impressive. He has been close many times, but has he deserved to win it? Frankly, noe he hasn't. He has had amazing hitting seasons, but what about fielding? How many previous winners were designated hitters?
The 2007 winner, A-Rod, DH-ed a total of four times that season. The previous year, Justin Morneau also played four games at DH. When Ortiz finished second in 2005, he had played at DH one hundred and fourty-eight times while the winner did just once. In '04, Vlad Guerrero DH-ed thirteen times. Then it was A-Rod again DH-ing just one time.
Yes, Ortiz' seasons were equal or better than the winners hitting-wise, but he just can't compete when he doesn't play defense. What do championship teams stress? Pitching and fielding. You have to field to be the MVP, that's the bottomline. These weren't snubs.
What about the Red Sox "dynasty"? Two World Series since 1918 and we're a dynasty all of a sudden? The Red Sox are competitive pretty much year-in and year-out, but that doesn't make them a dynasty, just a competitive team. "Dynasty" is a stretch at this juncture.
It isn't just the Red Sox, what about the Celtics? When the Celtics first acquired Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, they were already called the "Big Three". They hadn't even won a regular season game, let alone two championships. Bird's Big Three, the real Big Three, had one of the best teams ever in the NBA when they went 40-1 at home. It would be quite a stretch to call any of the new "Big Three" teams one of the best NBA teams ever.
So, is it safe to say that Boston is "The City of Exaggerators"? I think so.