Talk:Cinderella (sports)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Boston Red Sox

Can you really call the 2004 Boston Red Sox a Cinderella team? After all, they did have Curt Schilling, Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, Keith Foulke and Pedro Martinez all on the team, and they were the best team offensively in baseball. It's not as though they came out of nowhere or were not expected to go anywhere. The 1986 Boston Red Sox, however, were a Cinderella team. Kntrabssi 23:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Answering your question, Kntrabssi, no. The Red Sox were expected to go anywhere, but they had to go through the New York Yankees to erase the Curse of the Bambino. -- SNIYer12, SNIyer12, 17:34, 16 September 2010, (UTC)

Which teams are real Cinderella/Cinder-fella (U.S.) teams?

In baseball, I wouldn't count the 2005 White Sox or 2004 Red Sox, because both teams were not really considered long shots. The Chicago White Sox steamrolled their way throughout the postseason, while the Red Sox had great expectations once Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke joined the team. The 2003 Marlins, 2002 Angels, and the 2001 Diamondbacks, however, are perfect examples of teams exceeding postseason expectations. We should remove the former two mentioned.

The 2004 Red Sox were certainly longshots by Game 4 of the ALCS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.94.128.75 (talk) 20:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

DaDoc540 07:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Likewise - I'd hardly count the 2006 Steelers a "Cinderella" team. At lot of the teams listed here are subjective and perhaps not overly suitable in an encyolpedic article like this. --Rehnn83 Talk 14:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I Propose to drastically cut the list of teams here - maybe to three or four form each sport - but to also include a reason why there were classed as a "Cinderella" team. -- Rehnn83 ^Talk 14:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I've drastically cut down the list of cinderella teams. It's not worth going into details for everyone but some example include:

• Italy - World Cup 2006 (they're hardly a cinderella team - it's a bit liek like Michael Schumacher winning the World Championship was a cinderella story)
• France - World Cup 2006 - Eh?? They didn't even win it??

Pittsburgh Steelers - SuperBowl 2006 - eh?? - Maybe a fairytale ending for Bettis but not a Cinderella story. -- Rehnn83 ^Talk 20:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Georgia Tech

I wouldn't call the 2004 Georgia Tech team a Cinderella, especially when compared with some of the other teams on the list. They were seeded third in their region and didn't upset anyone of note (the top 2 seeds in the region both went out in the Round of 32). They didn't even play a team seeded higher than them until the Final Four. Moreover, this was a team that began the season 12-0 and was ranked as high as third in the country, going on to finish tied for third in ACC, the top conference in the country the season, so it's not as if they snuck up on anybody. Nevada, the team that Tech played in the Sweet Sixteen that year, would probably be a better example.

-- Apathyjunkie 19:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I would argue that GT was a Cinderella team in that Chris Bosh had just left for the NBA and Ed Nelson transfered to UConn. Most experts picked GT to finish 7-9th in the ACC. Another Cinderella aspect of GT was the apparent lack of stars on the team. Only one of that team is playing the NBA and he was a backup point guard this year for Portland. GT, betting lines-wise, was an underdog in all of its last three games against Kansas, OK State, and UConn. That's Cinderella to me for their season and their tournament run.

-- Excaliburhorn 18:13, 16 Oct 2006 (UTC)

Indiana State in 1979?!?!?!?!

By no means do they count as a Cinderella. Sure, they were a small school that hadn't done anything pre-Larry Bird, but let's not overlook the fact that they were a 1 seed, meaning that they were (in theory) projected to get to at least the Final Four. --fuzzy510 22:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Recent?

Why are we listing "Recent Examples of (US-style) 'Cinderellas'"? 1914 (Boston Braves) is not recent! Zé da Silva 21:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Adding new teams/sportsmen

Before adding a new team/sportsman please discuss it here. As the term "Cinderella" is a judgmental term, and the list in this article is purely an examples of a team/player needs to clearly be a "Cinderella" - not just they did better than expected and reached the semi's/finals. It has to be along the lines of there were a huge underdog - expected to crash out straight away, instead they went all the way and won it. At one point there was an Ice Hockey and Basketball team listed for pretty much every season. -- Rehnn83 ^Talk 12:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Baseball pennants

Should winning an ALCS or NLCS be considered under the section of having won the sport's championship, or does only winning the World Series count as that? You wouldn't consider winning the Eastern or Western conference, or the AFC or NFC as having won the championship in basketball, hockey, or hockey. Should we move the examples of Tampa and Detroit down to the lower section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.129.77 (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Winning the World Series is the only one considered winning the sport's championship in baseball. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 04:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

2008 Arizona Cardinals as a failed Cinderella?

They were called the worst team in playoff history, expected to lose to every team in the playoffs by wide margins and were 2 minutes away from winning the Super Bowl. I think that's the definition of a Cinderella Team. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.89.202 (talk) 00:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

They were certainly a Cinderella team, but they turned into a pumpkin in the last 2 minutes. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver Canucks

Should there be two separate paragraphs for the Vancouver Canucks, one from 1982, and another from 1994, or should they both be in the same paragraph? The Canucks were a Cinderella team both times. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 03:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I would not classify their 1994 team in the Cinderella category. Though they were the #7 seed, they had a very talented team and had won their division title the two previous years. It was more a case of under-achieving in the 1993-94 regular season. None of their victories in the first three rounds were really surprising.Djob (talk) 01:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

In Hockey Night in Canada: My Greatest Day, Scott Morrison said that the Canucks in 1994 were a Cinderella team. Even the Canadian correspondents said the same. Roger Smith of CTV said the same the night the Rangers won the Stanley Cup and the day after on their newscasts. This is because of the realignment of the conferences before the 1993–94 season. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 18:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

If they had made the Finals in '92 or 93, nobody would have called them a Cinderella team, but they were upset by a lower seed in the 2nd round both years. In '94 they were mostly the same team but made some changes, especially close to the trade deadline, to make them a better playoff team, and they were. None of their victories in the first three rounds were really surprising, nor was the fact that they almost knocked off the Rangers. The Rangers didn't have a significant edge over them as far as talent.88.102.5.247 (talk) 13:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Also keep in mind that 27 points separated both the Rangers and the Canucks during the regular season. The Rangers had 112, Canucks had 85. This is the second largest point differential between two teams in a Stanley Cup Final, behind 41 in 1982 when the Islanders had 118 and the Canucks had 77. You also need to understand that 1994 was the first year of the new conference-based playoff format. These are the reasons. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 20:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Rocky predates Caddyshack

The term 'Cinderalla Story' was mentioned in the first Rocky movie, released in 1976, by the ring announcer referring to Rocky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.248.176 (talk) 06:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

2010 Philadelphia Flyers

Please wait until after the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals is over to add anything about the Philadelphia Flyers. -- SNIyer12, (talk), 02:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Should we add info about Flyers not winning championship, now that the Stanley Cup Finals are over? -- SNIyer12, (talk), 17:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

2002 Santos FC Brazilian Champions

In the soccer examples the 2002 Santos could be included for its surprising brazilian national championship that year, after having qualified for quarter finals only in the last round, and at last place (8th), with the same number of points as the 9th place (Cruzeiro). Even though the term "Cinderella Story" isn't used here in Brazil, most brazilians would agree that championship fits the description perfectly.

Santos had never been national champions before (back in the Pelé golden years the national championship was stil yet to be created), so they were a huge underdog. Despite having some promising young talent (including now-superstars like Robinho, Diego and Elano), they still weren't considered mature players then. Most bets were on São Paulo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.104.199.164 (talk) 09:00, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Green bay Packers

In superbowl 2011 packer against steelers, packer entered playoff with a victory on theyr last game against chicago, then went to be a wild card in the superbowl against the eagles who were #1 and won by a mistake from a eagle player, won against falcon won agaisnt chicago again and went to win against steelers. if it isnt cinderella, tell me what it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.208.29.122 (talk) 00:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

European Football championship

1992 Denmark (who originally didn't qualify for the tournament, earned place after Yugoslavia was suspended) and 2004 Greece were both very surprising champions. Should they be added?

Lots of original research

The lists of teams that are considered "cinderella" teams are full of original research. What is the criteria for teams to be included in the list? I can't find any. I'd like to delete those entire sections. — X96lee15 (talk) 03:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll be working on deleting the sections where I feel there's original research. I'll be cleaning up this page. – SNIyer12, (talk), 14:10, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

1995 Rockets?

How can the 1995 Rockets be considered a cinderella team when they were the defending champions? A better argument would be the 1994 Rockets winning their first championship ever. It seems like the only criteria is to win a championship following a mediocre season.Captainspirou (talk) 11:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Reducing Number of Teams?

I'm proposing to go through this page and significantly reduce the number of teams down to just one or two examples in each sport. I would only list a team where multiple sources refer to the team/season as a "Cinderalla" team. Thoughts?? Rehnn83 ^Talk 15:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I definitely agree with reducing the listings to only those examples that have been called "Cinderella" by multiple reliable sources. It should not be the job of Wikipedia to define who is and isn't a Cinderella.

However, I don't agree with an artificial limit of "one or two examples in each sport." For example, far more than one or two notable examples of the term can be cited from the NCAA basketball tournament.

This stems from what seems to be some misunderstanding of what "Cinderella" means. It is not just doing well after a period of doing poorly. It is advancing to deep rounds in a tournament (the "party") when no one expected you to do so. Powerhouse teams like the 2004 Boston Red Sox are never Cinderella, because no one ever is surprised that they had the ability to compete at the level they did. The 1969 New York Mets are a better example, and "mid-major" NCAA basketball teams like Gonzaga, Butler, and VCU are even better examples. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 16:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I've re-written/re-formated the artcile. I've removed team without references (or where I couldn't find any). I've cut down on the excess number of teams, as the artciles states these are only examples. Rehnn83 ^Talk 23:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

2001 New England Patriots

How can the '01 Pats not be listed as a Cinderella team? In 2000 the Patriots went 5-11. Only the 1999 Rams have had a bigger turnaround in NFL history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.24.98 (talk) 21:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The list isn;t an exhaustive list of ALL teams that could possibly be considered as "Cinderella Teams". As such a topic is subjective, a total list of Cinderella teams could be never ending, so this pasge on lists Examples of Cinderella Teams - Rehnn83 ^Talk 09:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Boxing

WOuld it be worthwhile to add a section on boxing? Fairly notable movie called cinderella man about James Braddock.23.16.255.95 (talk) 06:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

If there's an example with multiple sources describing the boxer's title win as a Cinderella story then I think it would be justifiable. However I think the existing list could do with cutting down first. Rehnn83 ^Talk 09:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Archive 1