Our nightmarish descent into July has commenced. The Twins blew a 4-1 lead last night. We have three more days of work, then a couple weeks of vacation. What do these things have in common? They are all reasons why we are starting up a “Great Debates” series right here — and giving you, the gentle yet charismatic reader, a chance to help. The idea: pick a topic, perhaps of local focus but not necessarily, that can be bandied about in a meaningful sports conversation. For instance: what is the worst loss in Vikings history? Or: could Stu eat 100 hard-boiled eggs if he knew it would make Tommy Kramer 22 years old and QB of the Vikings again? We’ll get the ball rolling this week; but we are accepting word donations now through Sunday (and possibly beyond) featuring your Great Debates post. As an aside, we were originally going to call this “Barstool Debates,” but we know that few people debate on barstools anymore. There’s far less chance of a physical confrontation, actual spittle or learning of real names in the anonymous debating playpen setting of the Interwebs. But anyway: e-mail us your Great Debate. And now, subject No. 1:

Let’s go back in time a couple of years to when the Twins had not yet been granted a new outdoor stadium. The Vikings were in the same boat (and continue to be). Both teams are threatening to leave Minnesota if they cannot get a new deal in place. But one — and only one — is going to leave for sure. Which would be the more devastating loss to Minnesota and the region: Twins or Vikings?

Defend your answer.

Fasola-link! Pol-ka?

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008 at 8:18 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.