It's a debate that ABF, DJ, and I are running through. DJ doesn't understand why people like one team and hate others. ABF and myself say that it relates to pride in your regional team, but DJ says that you shouldn't feel pride in the team because you are not physically part of the team. DJ states that you should applaud good plays and boo bad plays no matter the team.
I though it might be more interesting to have the debate here instead on MSN. Much easier that way.
You live in canada you support canada.
But instances were you have a certain loss, you go for the best of the pack of rivals.
DJ just is weird. That's what GR and I agreed on. I mean... sure, you should think things over and not just believe something because everyone else does, that is certainly true... but to never support one group over any other? Do you support one group over another when one is clearly wrong, DJ? How about the Taliban? Or is sports so different because it's just a game and "it doesn't matter"? Well it matters a lot to the people who are fans! And as I said with the Yankees, it's not like it's all fair... or balanced... and it's not like some people don't do bad things...
Where a senator represents one's state, a sports team represents one's region. I.e. Boston Red Sox. It makes total sense.
DJ seems to think having pride in anything is bad or something...
I do feel I am a part of the teams I support. I've been following the teams longer than most of the players on the team and have invested so much time in them that I don't see anything wrong with thinking I'm a part of the team. The fact that almost everyone I know refers to teams as "us" or "we" kind of drives home that point.
No, you don't own the team, so you aren't a part of it and can't say "my team". Also, supporting one side against another is bad. You have to just say "yay" when someone makes a good play. Supporting one side over another is bad because when you do you dislike the other team and the supporters of the other team and disliking people just because of which sports team they support makes no sense.
DJ said stuff like that...
Now DJ, how about my comparisons to nations? How about when one is truly being bad? Or exploiting their position in ways that are blatantly unfair? How is that okay? How can you just say 'capitalism at work' and be fine with it? Do you extend that to nations? So it's fine for the US to throw its weight around as much as it wants and ignore everyone else because we are the winners so you should say "yay" for the things we do? Or if we lose you should say "yay" about the other people? Did you not mind when you heard that the North Vietnamese Communists beat us?
Now you will probably say 'but it's just a game' and you'd be right. It is just a game. But the comparisons are still valid! And I mean more than just the fact that people take sports team likes very far... I mean that you yourself said that you extend this policy of yours to all fields...
Oh, GR's analogy to supporting Nintendo is good too. You REALLY wouldn't care if Nintendo closed its hardware division and just made PlayStation games? That's insane for a Nintendo fan to say!
I don't own the United States and yet I call it "my country." I don't own Chicago and I call it "my city." Why can't I call the Cubs, Bears, etc, "my team?"
I have no idea, ask DJ. Or if she won't comment, I'll just post the whole lengthy chat transcript...
I don't like when people are talking about their favourite team, and they are saying, "...and then we took a ball downfield, kicked a field goal, and then we totally regained an onside kick". C'mon, that's kinda dumb. Calling a team 'your team' is all fine and good, but when you replace players with 'we', I dunno, isn't that kind of insulting to the players? It's not like you or anybody else kicked the field goal, except the kicker.
As for liking teams and hating others, I don't know, that's just kind of a fan thing. You usually like a team that lives close to you, but for people like me who don't live at all close to any pro teams (except for Calgary and Edmonton), you usually pick a team because of players you like. I really like Daniel Alfreddson, Marian Hossa, Radek Bonk and Patrick Lalime of the Ottawa Senators more than any other four players in the NHL, therefore the Sens are my favourite NHL team. My other favourite team is the Edmonton Oilers, but that goes more with the regional thing. I live almost exactly between Edmonton and Calgary, and I could go to one of their games any time I want, no hassle. That's one thing you just gotta choose, where I'm from you're either an Oilers or a Flames fan, there's no such thing as neutral, and you absolutely hate one team or the other. I chose Edmonton because Edmonton is a better city. A huge ass mall, better stadiums, yeah. Fuck you Calgary.
And fuck you New England, too.
I also use 'we' when I refer to the Steelers, and I think I'm entitled to that. Why? I give that team my support. I give it my attention, my favor and my money. Without fans, a team is nothing (ask the Arizona Cardinals). Therefore, as a fan, as a lifelong, die-hard fan of the Pittsburgh Steelers, I will refer to them as 'we'. 'They' are for teams I don't like or don't give a damn about.
Ph. Don't be taking credit for something you had nothing a part of. Players don't need the fans (well...yeah I guess they do if they want to play at a pro league), but the team could be just as good without your support. As far as I care, you didn't contribute anything to the pitiful season by the Steeler's, just as I contributed nothing to the Sens extremely awesome season this year. Nothing except from my support, and when it comes to professional athletes, meh. They can do just as well without it. I don't give myself credit if one of my favourtie teams does well, because, well, am I a player on that team? A coach, trainer etc. of that team? Nope, but I'll continue to support them just because I like them, and not give myself credit I don't deserve.
I usually don't use 'we'... I think it's a little innapropriate. Still, I don't really mind when people use it... I can certainly see how people could think it's fine...
Oh, and go Patriots! :)
Of course pro athletes need our support. Would they be making millions of dollars if nobody paid to go to the games?
They dont' need support to be as talented as they are.
Edit- I realize that that is not true, athletes need support from parents/coaches/friends etc. along the way to help them excel, but not from Joe Shmoe, Red Sox fan. Um, well most athletes I'm guessing. I can't really speak for any of them...
Huh? Fan support is definitely important to players! Just ask ones who play in places where no one cares, like Montreal...
I'm not saying that it's not important, but that the best players in the world in their respective sports could play just as good in a stadium with nobody there.
I'm not saying they wouldn't be as talented without fan support, I'm saying they wouldn't have a job without fan support.
Yeah but I never said they didn't need fans to be millionares though. :)
Yeah, they'd still play well, but not many people would know or care and they cartainly wouldn't be rich.
Meh. Play for the love of the game.