The World Series era began in 1903 by modern convention, but this convention is narrowly parochial. There were World Series from 1884 to 1890. These are largely ignored today because they often involved teams we haven't heard of, or something. In the early 20th century the old WS were generally accepted without question, with the 20th WS seen as a continuation of the tradition.

There are various argument to be made for why we should count the 19th century WS, but these arguments largely apply to the 1903 WS as well, which no one wants to discount. There are three candidates for the status of first World Series: 1884, 1903, and 1905. 1903 is conventionally accepted, but the argument for it is the weakest of the bunch.

Oh, and the Phillies didn't make it into any of those 19th century series either.

I made a comment last week about being giddy at the Phillies' 4th pennant in my lifetime, and even as I wrote it I thought that that's quite a lot compared to other people during the same period (like, say, the Giants).

But more is at play than just the number of pennants a team wins. I remember one of the years John Kruk won selection to the All Star game his uniform disappeared in transit. So he went up to the concession stand in the stadium and asked if they had any Phillies jerseys in stock. The clerk looked at him and blithely said, "Who would want a Phillies jersey?"

The whole "Meh" factor does weigh on a fan's psyche. One reason Philadelphia fans developed such a psychopathic hatred of the Cowboys and Celtics is that those teams' fans did not reciprocate in kind.

And then there's the pariah aspect. Viewers of Ken Burns'19.5 hour documentary on the Boston Red Sox will note that at the heart of every negative development in baseball's history one will find the Philadelphia Phillies. I'm not going to defend the Phillies' loathsome treatment of Jackie Robinson, but Burns even describes the 1980 championship in terms of Pete Rose abandoning Cincinnati for Philadelphia(According to tampabay.com, Burns is pulling for the Rays this year. Big surprise).

Thanks for indulging me

It's close between the Expos/Nationals and Senators/Rangers for the most pathetic MLB franchise but I've got to give it to the Texas Rangers. Three playoff appearances in 38 years and one playoff game win. At least the Expos won a playoff series, had cool hats (to a kid) and had players with names like Coco Laboy, Boots Day and John Boccabella.

The Texas Rangers are the oldest (1961) franchise of the four major sports to have never played for the championship of their league or sport. All of this futility is compounded by the fact that Dallas/Fort Worth is the 7th largest TV market and they were once partially owned by George W. Bush. Plus, Arlington sucks.

So the Washington Nationals (nee Montreal Expos) have played 39 seasons and only have 1 playoff appearance. I'm guessing they're going to be close to the top of the list of teams that are behind on their playoff and World Series appearances.

Just out of curiosity, how are you handling 1994, when there was no playoffs or World Series? That'll throw the numbers off just a bit.

... but you just made this Indians fan feel even more luckless. And then you had to bring up citywide championship droughts.

The voice of reason in the howling wilderness of sports commentary.

I, and I think most Phillies fans, do "mark down" the martyrdom of Cubs fans because of the Bulls. If the Phillies win this World Series, I'll cut the Eagles, Flyers and Sixers a break too.