Speaking of the Expos...

That was the greatest gift Len Bias gave people like me (now in my mid-30's). When I saw his covered body carried out of that Maryland dorm, I - at age 11 - instantly associated cocaine with instant death. Never had the desire to try the stuff.

I hope, over the next six years, sports has another case of a talented player who drops dead from coke. Will make the "don't do drugs" talk with my future teenagers easier. (kidding... I think).

 

Yes, the underachieving teams -- is this even about the Expos anymore?

My recent teams that SHOULD have won more than one title:
- 85 Bears
- 86 Mets
- 88 A's
- 96 Packers

Still miffed about the title-less:
- 98 Vikings

 

The Toronto Blue Jays should have won more than two World Series.

In 1983 they weren't quite ready, and faded late to finish fourth. In 1984 they settled for second place because nobody was going to touch the Tigers. But they could have and should have won it all in 1985, and were also a good bet for 1987 if they hadn't choked away the AL East down the stretch.

Between 1985 and 1993, they were consistently the best team in the sport, and could have remained among the best for years afterward. It's a shame that that team "only" won two titles, then immediately and mysteriously fell off the map.

 

It doesn't sound like it

I'll say this the Expos were good from serious contenders from 1979 to 1982 when it came to talent.

 

Undefeatable?

 

Also depends on the definition of underachieving. Some would put the 1950s Indians in there, but what can you do when the Yankees are there every year. Same thing with the late 1950s and early 60s Giants. Five title games in six years, but each time they lost to a better team.

In my opinion, the Expos, Mets, Jays, Bears et all fall into this category because they had the talent to win, but there was no clear better team than them year in year out.

 

Being I was still crawling around in diapers in 1982, I can't speak extensively on that season, but the Expos from '79-'82 definitely didn't live up to its on-paper potential.

For me, I've always been more curious about that horrendous 1973 NL East race. If the Expos win that, does being a Division champ in their fifth season help strengthen the franchise? Do they have the same magic those Mets did? Reality says they get curb-stomped by the Reds and we get our rematch of the '72 Series with a healthy Reggie Jackson.

Sorry to derail.

 

The Bucks of the 80s and the Brewers of 1978-83 should have done more.

The '83 Brewers were frustrating in that they led in late August of '83, only to fade very badly into fifth, albeit with their record well over .500 as the entire AL West, save the White Sox, sucked in '83.

As for the Bucks, I've always wondered what the Bucks would have done had they stayed in the Western Conference in the 80s, instead of being moved East when Dallas came in.

They played the Lakers pretty well went they went head-to-head throughout that era ... I think the Bucks would've slipped into the NBA Finals once or twice at the Lakers' expense, or, they surely would've taken the mantle in '81 and/or '86 when the Rockets slipped through.

Of course, the Bucks might have just lost to Boston or Philly in the Finals instead of the Eastern Conference playoffs. On the other hand, the Bucks occasionally beat Boston or Philly, only to be beaten by the other in the next round.

 

To be fair, also, the Mets' rotation in '87 was a bit of a mess, especially with Gooden spending time in rehab. Ojeda missed nearly the entire season, too. At one point, the Mets were relying on Terry Leach's career season, a young David Cone who ended up hurting himself by bunting, and a guy named John Mitchell who was supposed to be a top prospect, but never panned out.

 

Gooden's being in rehab is part of what went wrong and why the Mets didn't accomplish more. So is mis-evaluating guys who were supposed to be good prospects.

 

And they were also three of the best teams in the majors at that time.

Not sure what that says.

 

Also people tend to overlook that Carter and Hernandez declined quickly after 1986. That became two holes in the middle of the lineup.