Apparently the Redskins don't need to be anywhere near a football field to continue their rich tradition of losing.
ESPN The Magazine's latest issue, due out tomorrow, ranked every MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL franchise from top to bottom, "based on a weighted average of scores in eight different categories ranging from the quantitative to the emotionally subjective: 'bang for the buck' (24.3%), players (16.6%), fan relations (16.5%), affordability (14.1%), stadium experience (9.1%), ownership (9.0%), title track (6.7%) and coaching (3.9%),"
ESPN MediaZone reported.
So it makes sense that the Green Bay Packers rank No. 1

overall among all franchises, with the New Orleans Saints checking in at No. 3. The San Antonio Spurs and Oklahoma City Thunder appear at No. 5 and No. 6.
And way, way, way down the list? The Washington Redskins, ranked 121st out of 122 teams, ahead of just the Cincinnati Bengals.
Sigh. Quite honestly, it's hard to figure out how the Redskins are any better, outside of the city they're located in.
It's not entirely clear
how everything is considered. But let's take a look, going from least weighted to most weighted.
Coaching -- Washington's got a legend in
Mike Shanahan, certainly an above-average finish here.
Title Track -- Playing in the NFC East is one of the toughest conferences in pro sports. And the fact that the Redskins have made the playoffs just twice since 1999 is terrible.
Ownership -- Owner
Daniel Snyder is suing a local news reporter for writing a negative article about him. He's been directly responsible for colossal failures like
Albert Haynesworth's $100 million-plus contract. Awful.
Stadium Experience -- Lousy, but improving, sort of. FedEx Field is in the process of updating its 13-year old JumboTron, which was embarrassing, especially after hanging out at Baltimore's M&T Bank Stadium. But the Skins are updating that and adding a Party Deck this year, so it's getting better. Slowly.
Affordability -- Not bad, actually. As of last year, Washington hadn't raised its ticket prices since 2006. Then again, the Skins ranked 117th last year in this category, so maybe they were too expensive to begin with.
Fan Relations -- I'm not entirely sure what this means, but I have a feeling an owner everyone hates doesn't help out the Redskins in the standings for this category.
Players -- Washington tied for 23rd in the NFL for Pro Bowlers on its roster last year. Yuck.
'Bang for the Buck' -- Not sure what this even means, but given that the Redskins haven't made the playoffs regularly for more than a decade and don't appear to be playoff-bound anytime soon, just charging admission is kind of a ripoff.
As for the rest of the D.C. and Baltimore-area teams? The Baltimore Ravens (No. 21) and Washington Capitals (No. 27) had good showings. The Baltimore Orioles (No. 67) and Washington Nationals (No. 78), not so much. But it's an improvement for the Nats, who were No. 94 last year.
The Wizards, sadly, were No. 110. That doesn't seem quite right, though team ownership is one of the lesser-weighted categories.