Saints not the worst sports franchise (1 Viewer)

[Jonesy77]

says Maxim magazine. That dubious title went to the Arizona Cardinals. Personally I think that is debatable as they actually won a title back in '47. Maxim argues that since moving west in 1987, they've "been a Katrina-size disaster", posting only one winning season in those years (9-7 in 1998), averaging basically a 5-11 season over that span.

Guys, let's enjoy the now. We could be Cards fans!

 

[boxerharley]

AHHH yeah.........and I just happened to catch a game that year ..on their home turf... and we had our jerseys torn off us on the way out by about 12 BIG MO FOES.. and we LOST... those fans are nuts when they show up for the games. I met an older couple at that game that traveled to EVery single away game , since they were retired, they were very cool, then we saw them in Seattle about 4 years later..... Thats love..

 

[apjung]

says Maxim magazine. That dubious title went to the Arizona Cardinals. Personally I think that is debatable as they actually won a title back in '47. Maxim argues that since moving west in 1987, they've "been a Katrina-size disaster", posting only one winning season in those years (9-7 in 1998), averaging basically a 5-11 season over that span.

Guys, let's enjoy the now. We could be Cards fans!

Yeah, but they got this brand new retractable roof stadium.

 

[St. Pike]

I did a statistical analysis of all NFL teams about 3 years ago.
I analyze the number of "winning" seasons to their overall number of playing years. (Analysis took into account their NFL, AFL, and All- American Football League, if applicable).

The Saints and Falcons were the bottom of pile. The Cardinals, if memories serves, were the worse of teams who started play prior to 1950.

I, unfortunately, lost my data with the move to Africa, so I would have to start from scratch. Its also a subjective analysis, because simply having a "winning" season isn't enough, or a .500 season may be considered "successful."