Spurs Fall to #2 in Franchise Rankings

[FromWayDowntown]

ESPN Franchise Rankings (http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/sportsnation/franchiseRanks?sport=null)

ESPN's annual franchise rankings are out and the Spurs have fallen from #1 last year to #2 this year, behind only . . . . the Detroit Pistons.

Isn't it ironic that Detroit is ranked #1 in the "Bang for the Buck" category?

[Clandestino]

so, bs... detroit! hahah

[RobinsontoDuncan]

yeah how can they be 15th in fan relations? That should be dead last.

[Dex]

Ha. Pacers are 57th in fan relations. :lol Looks like Artest's player/fan interactions didn't do much for the organization.

Meanwhile, the Spurs are sittin pretty at number 1. :smokin

[GoSpurs21]

I dont know how they calculate the rankings but the Spurs have: all but one (7 - 8)catagory in the top 10 while pistons have only have 5 out of 8. Spurs have 5 out of 8 top 5 while pistons have 4. The Spurs also have 2 #1 rankings while pistons have only one.

[exstatic]

Simple. SA won it last year.

[GoSpurs21]

I finally got around to the math. Using the formula (.178 X Bang for the Buck) + (.142 X Ownership) + (.142 X Fan Relations) + (.139 X Players) + (.135 X Affordability) + (.112 X Stadium Experience) + (.096 X Coaching) + (.056 X Championships) = Ultimate Standing.

According to the formula the team with the lowest score is best and Championships mean the most, right? The I guess they got their math real wrong. Whom ever calculated the scores needs to learn basic math. According to excel spread sheet I created with formula above, Spurs standing is 5.2 and pistons standing is 8.68. If I lower the band for buck of Spurs from 13 to 12 the Spurs are 5.02 (example of how lower scores are better).

Once again this goes to show my original statement the Spurs have more lower scores overall, they should be ranked #1 again.

[Tek_XX]

Something tells me that we'll get a chance to show Detroit who's number #1