Oldest Rivalry

[CubbyCubs]

I got into a drunken debate with a buddy of mine that's a Giants fan about which of the two rivalries is older, Cubs/Cards or Giants/Dodgers.

I'm pretty sure the Cubs are one of the oldest two franchises in baseball, along with the Braves, but I'm not entirely sure when the team that would eventually become the Cardinals got started.

Anyway, if you could help me settle this once and for all (and provide me with some kind of links other than wikipedia to use to back it up), that would be great.


Thanks.

[Dodgerfan1]

Hi, Cubby Cubs. Welcome to BFF!! Stick around. This forum is the last word in baseball. Period!

I'm sure someone with more knowledge about 19th century baseball history could sort it out much better than I, but from what I know (or at least I'm fairly certain...), here's the scoop on the beginnings of these teams:

The Chicago Cubs, while not originally called the 'Cubs', were a fledgling NL franchise in 1876, when the league began. They have been there ever since.

At that time, there was a team in St. Louis in the NL, however they were not related to the modern Cardinals, as that team folded after the 1877 season. St. Louis next fielded a team in 1881, however it was as a member of the new American Association, so this team was also not a 'rival' of the Cubs. The AA disbanded following the 1891 season, and St. Louis picked up a team in the NL for the first time the following season (1892), however this was not the team which had been in the AA, as the new NL team had a completely different roster. This, then, would appear to be the first year that teams from Chicago and St. Louis (post-1877) faced each other in the NL.

New York was a charter member of the NL when it was first conceived in 1876, however they played a sporadic schedule and folded after playing just 55 games. The city of NY did not field another team in the NL until 1883, when the NY Gothams (who would later become the Giants) became part of the league.

As for Brooklyn, the Atlantics fielded a team in the AA in 1884, however it wasn't until 1890 that the NL adopted a new team in Brooklyn (called the Bridegrooms) mostly because the upstart Players League placed a team in Brooklyn. This was the only time there were three teams in Brooklyn at the same time, as the AA still featured a team there, as well.

So, it appears as though the 'oldest' rivalry would be the Giants/Dodgers (1890). The teams who were to become known as the Cardinals and Cubs could not have faced each other until 1892.

Now, the debate can begin as to when, exactly, games between two teams can be 'officially' called a rivalry. Just because the Giants/Dodgers faced each other before the Cubs/Cards did, doesn't necessarily mean it was the first 'rivalry', I suppose. I will leave that up to others to establish....

EDIT: As to the references you seek, all this information is easily available on websites or books about this subject. Check a Baseball Encyclopedia or a good baseball history website such as Retrosheet, etc.

[Brian McKenna]

The Dodgers actually came from the American Association as well in 1890. That's why they were strong enough to win the pennant.

The actual oldest rivalry would be the Cubs v. Braves - both teams date back into the National Association (1871-75) and have continued in the NL since its existence.

[Dodgerfan1]

Thanks. I should have said Giants/Dodgers is the older of the two rivalries the poster asked about. I didn't research any others.

[Dodgerfan1]

The Dodgers actually came from the American Association as well in 1890. That's why they were strong enough to win the pennant.

Upon further review, as they say in the NFL, I do see that the NL Brooklyn team of 1890 is virtually the same team as the AA Brooklyn team of 1889. Obviously, the AA slapped together a brand new Brooklyn team for the 1890 season. One that finished a distance last! That, of course, doesn't change the fact that the Giants/Dodgers series began in 1890.

[frehleyscomet]

I believe the red(legs) and the Pirates are the two oldest franchises in sports.

[EdTarbusz]

During the deadball era the Cubs and Giants were bigger rivals that Giants/Dodgers or Cubs/Cardinals. My guess is that Giants/Dodgers is the older of the two since they were in the same city. The Cubs and Cardinals weren't good at the same time until around 1930 and probably not much of a rivalry before that.

[Victory Faust]

EdTarbusz is right. The Cubs/Giants rivalry was by far the biggest of the 1900s. I don't think the Cards/Cubs even became a rivalry until the 1930s and 40s -- but during the 40s, the Cards' biggest rival was the Dodgers, not the Cubs.

I suppose there's always been a bit of a Giants/Dodgers rivalry because of their geographical proximity...but not the knock-down, drag-out rivalry we saw in later years

[EdTarbusz]

EdTarbusz is right. The Cubs/Giants rivalry was by far the biggest of the 1900s. I don't think the Cards/Cubs even became a rivalry until the 1930s and 40s -- but during the 40s, the Cards' biggest rival was the Dodgers, not the Cubs.

I suppose there's always been a bit of a Giants/Dodgers rivalry because of their geographical proximity...but not the knock-down, drag-out rivalry we saw in later years

To me it has always seemed like the Giants/Dodgers rivalry became most intense after Leo Durocher left the Dodgers and became manager of the Giants. I agree that the Dodgers biggest rival during Durocher's tenure was the Cardinals.

[Dodgerfan1]

To me it has always seemed like the Giants/Dodgers rivalry became most intense after Leo Durocher left the Dodgers and became manager of the Giants. I agree that the Dodgers biggest rival during Durocher's tenure was the Cardinals.

Living in the Bay Area as I do, I honestly believe that the current Giants/Dodgers rivalry is more one-sided on the Giants' end. Many fans here hate the Dodgers with a passion ('Beat LA. Beat LA'), while in LA they don't nearly hate the Giants as much. Oh, they intensely dislike them, but they don't have nearly the level of visceral hate that Giants fans have for them. In fact, the Dodger and Padre fans have developed quite an animosity toward each others' teams to the point of it almost being more of a 'rivalry' in their eyes than the Giants/Dodgers are. Obviously, with the history of the Giants and Dodgers, there will be people who disagree with this assessment, and I, personally, prefer to dislike the Giants among all other teams (except the Yankees), but I'm just saying....

[AC7]

Roots of Cubs/Cards rivalry is older

I believe that in the 1880's there was a "World Series" that took place a couple of years between the NL Champion White Stockings (Cubs) and Chris von der Ahe's AA Champion St.Louis Browns. The St.Louis Browns were absorbed into the
NL after the AA colapsed in 1891. If you look in the 19th century topics, William
Burgess has a group photo taken in 1897 showing the NL owners and one of them is Chris von der Ahe owner of the Stl. franchise.

[Dodgerfan1]

I believe that in the 1880's there was a "World Series" that took place a couple of years between the NL Champion White Stockings (Cubs) and Chris von der Ahe's AA Champion St.Louis Browns. The St.Louis Browns were absorbed into the
NL after the AA colapsed in 1891. If you look in the 19th century topics, William
Burgess has a group photo taken in 1897 showing the NL owners and one of them is Chris von der Ahe owner of the Stl. franchise.

Yes, but the Browns were a completely different team than the Cardinals. How does this contribute to the Cards/Cubs argument?

[AC7]

Not a completly different team.
Same bloodline. Just like the Cubs and Braves were first in the National Association.

Go here:http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/STL/

[ringo-dog]

AC7 is correct. The von der Ahe Browns of the 1880's were the same team that later became the Cardinals. He owned the team until forced to sell in 1898 after financial trouble. The new owners changed the name and team colors. (The 1902-1953 American League Browns had NO connection to the pre 1900 Browns) An explaination of the player situation can be found in the 19th Century Baseball forum under the thread - "Wha'happen?: The four teams from '91 AA to move to NL". The "championship" games of 1885 and 1886 were pretty bitter affairs from what I have read. The two cities have been intense rivals in nearly every field since Chicago's rise as a great city. It seems the rivalry cooled (as far as sports is concerned) for a while, but stayed heated up in most everything else. The 1893 Chicago World's Fair was considered a "slap in the face" by many in St. Louis and so the St. Louis World's Fair of 1904 was alledgedly planned to be greater and grander than Chicago's fair for example. By the way - as a Cards fan it would just about kill me to see the Cubbies win the Series, but enough is enough! Best of luck to the Cubbies in 2008!