Could “Parks and Recreation predicted it” be the new Simpsons predicted it?
In the season seven episode “Ron & Jammy,” Andy and Tom travel to Chicago to visit Tom’s ex-girlfriend, Lucy. After taking a $830 cab ride, the trio walk around “The Big Apple,” as Andy calls it, and Lucy notes, “Yeah, I think you’re really gonna like it here. And obviously, everyone’s in a really great mood now because of the Cubs winning the series.” That episode takes place in summer 2017, which means the Chicago Cubs had to win the World Series in… 2016 (which actually happened in Game 7 on Wednesday night!).
“You’re welcome” — creator Michael Schur to Cubs fans right now.
Two years ago, in a season that took place in the summer of 2017: pic.twitter.com/p8jaYZNwcT
— Ken Tremendous (@KenTremendous) November 3, 2016
Schur — the Fire Joe Morgan co-founder who slipped scrappy baseball in-jokes, like the fictional law firm “Fwar, Dips, Winshares, Gritt, Babip, Pecota, Vorp, and Eckstein,” into Parks — told the Washington Post that “as soon as we decided to throw the last season of Parks and Rec into the future, into 2017, we sort of started calculating what the world might be like. We talked about… aspects of America that we could sort of casually mention that we thought would be funny.” He added, “I was the only person on the staff who cared about baseball enough to track the Cubs’ minor league system.”
Now, before demanding that Brooklyn Nine-Nine also time-jumps into a future where the Mets have won four World Series in a row, Schur wants you to know that “it’s not like I was only person who thought the Cubs were going to be good. Every baseball writer in America knew the Cubs were going to be good. I can’t emphasize enough how little credit I feel like I should take for that prediction. It’s a little like, if we had predicted that Hillary Clinton was the president in 2017… That would’ve also been a pretty easy call to make based on the information that we had at the time. We’re not like wizards.”
Schur should take some credit, though: his prediction was more accurate than Back to the Future Part II‘s, and he didn’t even need a time machine.
(Via the Washington Post)
