They was excellent post about a couple of weeks ago. The stories are great and many of them are heartbreak. I also was not alive in ’69 but have a read a lot about it. I loved these stories because they are from true fans and not sport writers.

Enjoy

at the link above I will not repeat it here but I will say that the feeling this time for me is much different. In 1969, I was 12 years old and having the Cubs finally look like they might make the WS had me really excited. Now being 51 years old and having gone through the agonies of ‘69, ’84, etc. I’m much more composed. I’m very happy that the Cubs are doing so well but at the same time I’m just taking it one day at a time. I really don’t like talking about magic numbers until it gets to at least 10 and so the other post on here saying that the number is now 39 does not make me very happy.

It goes deeper than merely 1969 for it goes to 1968 when they took first place for a few games against the Cardinals after twenty years being a cellar dweller. At this point the Cubs were up 9 games at the 120 game mark, 75-45 (30 over .500).

Here on out the Cubs won a mere 17 games…..17-25 where the Cubs wilted to the charging Amazing Mets….actually the went 10-8 over the next 18 games (84-52) up 5 games losing 4 games to the Mets in the standings during this time but appearing to have righted the ship…..then the bottom dropped out…..going 8-18 down the stretch….where even being 84-58 they had just lost 2 to NYM and up only a 1/2 game having lost 8 1/2 games in less than a month.

How painful do you think this was!

When they fell out of first place they were in a midst of a 8-game losing streak. In that span going 1-11 then the final weeks the Cubs played .500 ball while the Met wouldn’t lose and clinched the pennant with 5 games remaining.

As an 8th grader, it was the first time MY team was in a pennant race. The Bears were awful. The Bulls were new. Thankfully, the Black Hawks were the most exciting team in the NHL. (The Sox were in a race in 1967, and I followed that. But I never felt the hurt when they failed, even though my peer group followed ALL Chicago teams)

It was the first time I followed a team so closely. The drip, drip, drip of those steady losses…the Mets NEVER losing….just like that, a season of so much excitement was ash and dust.

Ivy Walls refers to 68, and for that matter, you could point to 1967. Both seasons, the team won. But I never expected that much out of those two years (perhaps it was because of my youth) but I bought it all in 1969 — hook, line and sinker. THIS was the year — 1969. I guess you never forget your…first time…. your first heartbreaker.

1984 was 1969 on warp speed. Instead of slowly losing, over a period of weeks….it just took three days. And, I witnessed the carnage in person. Can’t forget that, either.

The 69 cubs had a decent bench and a good pitching staff.

Leo Durocher just never used anyone other than his starting position players, and basically only used Jenkins/Hands/Holtzman with Regan to relieve. Dick Selma won a bunch of games early, then was virtually forgotten, as was Rich Nye.

The biggest difference between 1969 and 2008 is a manager who uses his entire roster.

As for magic numbers, it doesn’t matter if you track them or not. I don’t think either Lou or the players are going to get complacent from looking at them. They got tracked in 1984, 1989, 2003 and last year too.

I was 11 during the 1984 season, so I don’t remember 1969 (obviously). I remember 1984, though.

For those who remember 1984 and 2003, which one hurt worse?
The 84 team ended 39 years of not making the postseason and the 03 team ended 95 years of not winning a postseason series.

The 84 team faced an opponent that they were superior to and the 03 team lost to a better team.

Both were in similar positions. Less than 10 outs away.

For me, 2003 is worse in retrospect. The added 19 years and the fact that, despite the Marlins being better, the Cubs were in a stronger position. Needing to win 1 of 2 at home, with the two hottest pitchers in the NL going. I remember telling my dad after it was over, when you get that close, you’ve got to get it done, because you don’t know when you’ll be back.

You can’t win ONE game in three tries? Against a inferior opponent? (The 03 Fish, IMHO, were way better than the ‘84 Padres) I don’t care if it’s on the road. (And, of course — the so-called Home Field advantage didn’t even exist for the Cubs. 2 at home and 3 in SD? How is that an advantage?)

I found myself ten times angrier in 2003. My wife threatened to kick me out if I didn’t put down a beer bottle I was read to throw through the television screen.

It might have been that the Marlins were a better team anyway, having won 91 games to the Cubs’ 88. But in 1984 there wasn’t a facet of the Cubs’ game that wasn’t better than the Padres. To this day I cannot fathom how they let it slip away since their pitching, hitting, and fielding was superior.

Overconfidence? Not pitching Sutcliffe in Game 4? Mike Royko’s incendiary column that “woke up” the city of San Diego? A combination of all three? Someone explain it to me after 24 years!

who say that 1984 hurt worse than 2003 and that is why I’m not getting overly excited right now about 2008. We have such a good team yet we all know what can happen.

But nothing beats ‘69 for pain. Remember, at that point, we hadn’t been competitive late in the season since ‘45, and so for a young fan like me (I graduated high school in ’70), the thought that Cubs’ teams collapsed after tantalizing their fans had never occurred to me or anyone I knew. It had simply never happened before, so we didn’t know that yet (I won’t repeat my post of the previous thread, but I really lived and died with the ’69 team).

As for ’84 and ’03, ’84 was the more painful, especially after winning the first two games in Wrigley. I agree with the prior posters who said we were a better team than the Padres, and we just choked it away. It is the ’84 team, following the ’69 team, that really started that idea that the Cubs would get close every now and then, but find a way to lose in the end.

This idea is so ingrained in me that, today, someone asked me who I thought would be in the World Series. My answer was that, if I wasn’t emotionally involved, I’d say that it would be the Cubs and the Angels. That matchup just makes sense, given the makeup of the two leagues. But I still won’t believe it (Cubs in the Series) until I see it.

Having said all that, I also agree with the prior posters who have said this is probably the best team I’ve ever seen of the Cubs, better than ‘69 (deeper bench and manager), and better than ’84 (deeper bullpen and probably better bench – ’84 was essentially a bunch of players who all had the best year of their careers on the same team in the same year). ’89 and ’03 were teams that came out of nowhere to win their divisions unexpectedly, and I think this year’s team is far superior to those two (there wasn’t much of a bullpen in ‘03 with Borowski having his best year ever – that’s why Wood and Prior got run into the ground that year).

So, it’s nice to see the Cubs getting respect all around the league. They haven’t crept up on anyone the way they did in ’89 and ’03. The latest issue of Sporting News says it well when it says the Cubs have played at the level of expectations, which was pretty high. God, I pray they make it all the way, so we can get this monkey off our backs.

By the way, I went to the Rockies/Diamondbacks game today, and wore my “Bleed Cubbie Blue” shirt. It was great to see a number of other Cubs fans there, though I don’t think anyone of them have posted on here.

The Brewers lost today. Hope the Cubs can beat the Braves and kick the Brewers in the teeth.

Before this year, that was the most talented roster in ages. I fully expected them to finally go to the Series after the ’03 disappointment and they pissed it all away with all the whining and finger-pointing.