Ranking the Giants not only ahead of the Dodgers and Angels, but 2nd overall is placing a bit too much value on who won last year. Yes, they have a chance to be good for a few more years but baseball is frugal that way – you never know every year until they actually DO it. The bottom line, they have one ring in 50 years in California and they are ranked 2nd? Haha!

The Dodgers have to rank as the highest baseball team because they simply have more time in the state, more fans, more wins and more rings. Pretty easy to rank that all-time.

Next, the Chargers have never won anything, except the right to get beatdown by almost 40 points in the Super Bowl by the team you rank 11th in this very same system. The Niners have a hardcore fanbase in the most popular sports league in the nation and 5 Super Bowl Championships. In the 80’s and 90’s they had 16 seasons with 10 wins or more. That ranks them 11th? Huh?

The Kings are 181-183 the past 5 years. You say they were HORRIBLE the past decade, and if they are .500 the past 5 years how can that be? Again, your “tough-love L.A. fan” is showing here, the same as it is with your ranking of the Dodgers.

A soccer team 6th dude? Comon. COMON. Really? The San Francisco 49ers are slotted between the Oakland A’s and a soocer team called Chivas? MLS Soccer has been in the state only a fraction of the amount of time the other sports have. You have to take that into account as well as the amount of economic impact a few thousand fans going to a soccer game has on the area. Soccer is rivaling hockey as far as relevance, not the big three. To rank a soccer team in the top third is beyond highly questionable.

You also say you took into account popularity, yet you rate the most “popular” football team in the entire state 13th of 18? Huh?

If you are ranking on something subjective like recent success or “current state of,” than i guess it makes slightly a little more sense. But then again, what is that worth in the long run, what happens to be happening now? Absolutely nothing. What is trendy is frugal, and the words frugality and judgement are polar opposites.

I see you rate the Lakers all-time as well as note history either posatively or negatively for a lot of the other teams. So is it based on now or then? A lot of now and some of then? How far back does then go? As much as is convenient for the angle of a particular argument? I believe the only way to be accurate and objective is to rank them all-time.

If I were to rank California’s professional franchises based on all-time relevance and hardware, what they have done in the state and communities over time, as well as overall tenure and fan bases, it would have to look something like this:

1. Lakers
2. Niners
3. Yoyers
4. Raiderz
5. Giants
6. Bolts
7. Halos
8. Sharks
9. A’s
10. L.A. Kings
11. Padres
12. Ducks
13. Galaxy
14. Warriors
15. Sac Kings
16. Clippers
17. Chivas
18. Quakes

The top 7 I’m pretty confident with, but after that – who knows and most importantly who cares. Anyways, good topic 🙂

Re: LA Kings- they have been HORRIBLE over the past 10 seasons. They are a team with upside and in even a few months could be up higher than they were.

Re: Sac Kings- they have been and are still horrible. When you look season by season over the past 5-6 years, it’s bad news. If I had put together the list in 2003, they would have been top 2-4 probably. But they never got anything to show for it- not even a HOF player to remember it, and so those years have been lost into the Vlade-occupied abyss…

Re: Chargers – Part of their being number 3 is the NFL’s popularity and the vacuum left by the Niners and Raiders being so bad. The Chargers are good and unlike the Dodgers and like the Sharks, they have a realistic chance of winning it all each and every year.

I’m glad you have some specifics here. Look out for the next rankings in a month or two.
O

For instance, beer and ticket prices drops the Angels, a far more succesful team the last ten years then any other California MLB team? I understand the Giants have to rank above the Angels if this a current ranking structure. But the Dodgers? Dude I have respect for Dodger Blue, but the Angels have won more divisional titles and playoff games than any other California MLB squad in the last ten years.

If this is current, the L.A. Kings have to rank above 8-13. They have a young and exciting core that will be a staple in the postseason for the next five to six years, arguably a Stanley Cup finalist team, making us forget about the once great Mighty Ducks.

Chivas USA has to rank #18, simply because they have not done anything (literally).

The Sac Kings dominance from 99-03′? Where does that rank? I argue that places them way above the San Diego Tony Gwynn’s, oops, I mean Padres, and the underachieving 49ers.

And really the Chargers at #3? I mean who are we now, bandwagon.com? The Chargers are the best at busting franchise of all these in the last six to eight years. What have they done, but grow the most annoying fan-base in sports, bust in the playoffs, show the ineptitude of their ownership by clouding the character of LT, who was and still IS the face of their sorry NFL football team? Nada. And talk about ticket prices……ever been to San Diego? A Thrifty’s level ice cream cone is more expensive than a three day get-away in Mexico.

In the end, yes, people will disagree. But I had to give you my fifty cents. If this currently (last ten years), it goes like this: 1) Lakers 2) Giants 3) Angels 4) San Jose Sharks 5) Dodgers 6) L.A. Galaxy 7) Mighty Ducks 8) Chargers 9a) Oakland A’s 9b) L.A. Kings 10) Padres 11) Sac Kings 12) 49ers 13) Raiders 14) Earthquakes 15) Clippers 16) Warriors 17) Chivas