- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Fandom: Geography vs. choosing "your" team
Posted on 4/26/11 at 1:53 pm to BMW7SERIES
Posted on 4/26/11 at 1:53 pm to BMW7SERIES
I once had a professor explain to me why he cared passionately about his teams...in his opinion and i guess subsequentially mine, no where else can you follow a man's career from start to finish day in day out...is there nobility in this? I think so...
1
Posted on 4/26/11 at 1:54 pm to chalmetteowl
quote:
In college, where you went to undergrad and got a degree should trump all.
what if they don't play in a BCS conference?
My point has to do with choosing teams who are playing each other. If you want a BCS team to pull for, you go to my second list of criteria.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 1:56 pm to LSUCanFAN
quote:
I once had a professor explain to me why he cared passionately about his teams...in his opinion and i guess subsequentially mine, no where else can you follow a man's career from start to finish day in day out...is there nobility in this? I think so...
Depends on the context.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 1:58 pm to Y.A. Tittle
I grew up in Texas, but went to school at LSU, and now live in Louisiana permanently.
College sports I'm all-LSU. Pro sports I'm all Cowboys, Rangers, Mavericks.
Just because I live in Louisiana now, I do not feel obligated to root for the Saints and Hornets. I still root for my Texas pro sports teams, so for me it's all about who I grew up rooting for in my hometown in Texas.
I agree with the premise that it's kinda tacky/cheap IMO to root for pro teams in other geographical areas just because they are winners ... i.e. fans everywhere that root for the Yankees and Red Sox and Packers and Lakers, etc. Of course the Cowboys get a lot of this too.
College sports I'm all-LSU. Pro sports I'm all Cowboys, Rangers, Mavericks.
Just because I live in Louisiana now, I do not feel obligated to root for the Saints and Hornets. I still root for my Texas pro sports teams, so for me it's all about who I grew up rooting for in my hometown in Texas.
I agree with the premise that it's kinda tacky/cheap IMO to root for pro teams in other geographical areas just because they are winners ... i.e. fans everywhere that root for the Yankees and Red Sox and Packers and Lakers, etc. Of course the Cowboys get a lot of this too.
This post was edited on 4/26/11 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 4/26/11 at 1:58 pm to SPEEDY
Well it was directed at Dean... but to the OP... though Dean 
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:06 pm to BMW7SERIES
quote:Of course it's not "noble". Sports are inherently value-neutral. It doesn't matter who you root for, so long as you root.
Basically, there's much more to life than sports and to act as if its a noble endeavor when clearly the men and women running it are anything but noble does yourself a diservice.
Of course there's more to life than sports, but sports are one of the things that makes life more rewarding. Sports fnadom is an emtional investment, and then more you put in, the more you will get out. I think it allows has to have tribalism and nationalism in a healthy way (no one dies). It gives us a sense of belonging, and it helps out of towners assimilate to a new city when they move from far away. Fandom is passed on from fathers to sons to grnadsons. I think all of these things are positive goods.
Movies are made to make money. It doesn't mean some filmmakers can't aspire to make art. Same with sports. Approaching it in the most superficial "entertain me!" manner is a perfectly acceptable way to approach it, but I think that method misses out on a lot of the benefits of sports fandom.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:06 pm to tduecen
I'm a Red Sox fan in BR and get the bandwagon deal all the time even though I've been following them closely for years and my roommate even goes as far as to say that he is a bigger Asros fan since he is from Houston and lives closer to their stadium than I do.
Basically it's complete BS. So while geography can be important it's not the be all end all.
Basically it's complete BS. So while geography can be important it's not the be all end all.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:09 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
disagree
I can only speak for myself, but i was born in Baltimore and I haven't lived there since I was very young, but I'm still an Orioles/Ravens fan.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:09 pm to Y.A. Tittle
I have a friend that has the following favorite teams:
NFL - Steelers
NCAAB - UCONN
NCAAF - FSU
NBA - Lakers
He was born and raised in Alexandria. It pisses me off to no end.
NFL - Steelers
NCAAB - UCONN
NCAAF - FSU
NBA - Lakers
He was born and raised in Alexandria. It pisses me off to no end.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:10 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
for me it's all about who I grew up rooting for
IMO, that is a true fan
Regardless of the reason why you started rooting for a team, if you maintained it, then you are a fan.
I know plenty of people who grew up in the 90's who are huge Bulls fans now. That is because they started out as bandwagoners due to Jordan and the Bulls' success. At the time they seemed like bandwagon fans but they stayed fans post Jordan and through some very lean years, never wavering in their love for the Bulls.
I consider those people true fans
To me a fan is someone who never falters in their devotion to a team, regardless of their record or success. To me, that is more important than why they became a fan of a particular team.
Now the Hornets have been in New Orleans for what 10 years? Had that been the case when I was growing up or if I became a fan of NBA ball in the last 10 years, then I would be huge Hornets fan.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:10 pm to TheDiesel
i have and always will think that geography should be the most important thing in fandom. it is honestly hard for me to take you seriously if you like a team and have never actually lived in the state. i dont know why.
ETA: unless you are from a place like kansas city. i have never lived in missouri, but all the KC sports teams are my 2nd tier after atlanta teams. also exceptions for places without teams.
ETA: unless you are from a place like kansas city. i have never lived in missouri, but all the KC sports teams are my 2nd tier after atlanta teams. also exceptions for places without teams.
This post was edited on 4/26/11 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:16 pm to Baloo
quote:
Of course there's more to life than sports, but sports are one of the things that makes life more rewarding. Sports fnadom is an emtional investment, and then more you put in, the more you will get out.
Well, I'm a multi-generational fan of NY sports teams and while I understand what you're say, I do not agree. When one puts 'in' too much emotion into his fandom then he begins to let his fandom define who he is as a person ('I'm an AUBURN MAN','I'm a BAMA NATIONAL THIRTEEN MEMBER', 'I'm a RED SOX GUY'). Once that happens you no longer have the healthy emotional aspect that you claim to have because humans are inherently geared toward something greater than self which is why nationalism/ethnicism/fanism can gain such favor. And ultimately, since sport is leuisure and entertainment it should not require an emotional attachment.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 2:27 pm to SPEEDY
quote:
IMO, that is a true fan
Regardless of the reason why you started rooting for a team, if you maintained it, then you are a fan.
I agree with this. Once again, people are overlooking the facts that where their family is from is important or their parents' teams and also the fact that they could have became a fan of the team at such a young age where hometown ties did not matter.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 3:03 pm to BMW7SERIES
quote:I think we both agree that someone who hates another person based on who they root for is just an a-hole. That is completely wrong.
When one puts 'in' too much emotion into his fandom then he begins to let his fandom define who he is as a person ('I'm an AUBURN MAN','I'm a BAMA NATIONAL THIRTEEN MEMBER', 'I'm a RED SOX GUY'). Once that happens you no longer have the healthy emotional aspect that you claim to have because humans are inherently geared toward something greater than self which is why nationalism/ethnicism/fanism can gain such favor.
But I disagree that's what fandom does. I've met far more people in my life based on sports fandom than had relationships cut off. Usuaully it's because we root for different teams. I'll be drinking at a bar, wearing an O's cap, and a guy in a Yankees cap will tell me Cal Ripken sucks, which causes us to stike up a frinedly converation. I think that stuff is great. Sports reduces the barriers between us more than it increases them.
And I think people being a part of something greater than themselves is generally a good thing. The tribalism of sports is healthy and voluntary. It gives us connections with others.
quote:It doesn't require it, but I think it's better with one. Just like art is better if it makes an emotional impact. We have limited leisure time, why not spend it doing something that resonates emotionally?
And ultimately, since sport is leuisure and entertainment it should not require an emotional attachment.
BTW - I'm really enjoying this discussion. I'm not trying to convince you to change your ways, per se. I think this is really just a neat exercise in what motivates fandom.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 3:06 pm to Y.A. Tittle
I was born in New Orleans and grew up near the city. I'm a lifelong LSU and Saints fan.
But, in basketball, I am a Celtics fan because that was my team as a kid in the 80's. I've never changed.
Then, New Orleans gets an NBA team and I live in Alabama. I follow the Hornets and pull for them only because they are New Orleans' team. But, I'm still primarily a Celtics fan. If I lived in New Orleans now or if the Hornets had been in New Orleans when I did live there, then I think I would be disloyal. But, I don't think that I am being disloyal to New Orleans because I follow the Celtics more closely.
But, in basketball, I am a Celtics fan because that was my team as a kid in the 80's. I've never changed.
Then, New Orleans gets an NBA team and I live in Alabama. I follow the Hornets and pull for them only because they are New Orleans' team. But, I'm still primarily a Celtics fan. If I lived in New Orleans now or if the Hornets had been in New Orleans when I did live there, then I think I would be disloyal. But, I don't think that I am being disloyal to New Orleans because I follow the Celtics more closely.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 4:15 pm to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
IMO, that is a true fan
Regardless of the reason why you started rooting for a team, if you maintained it, then you are a fan.
This. Both my parents were in the Air Force, so geography couldn't play a huge factor in choosing my teams since we moved a lot. It doesn't matter who your team is as long as you remain loyal to them.
BTW, an honest question for all you who said you are Cubs fans because of WGN: why did you pick the Cubs over the White Sox? I've personally never understood this, considering the Sox play as many national games on WGN as the Cubs do, including a few years in the late 90s and early 2000s when they actually played MORE games on WGN than the Cubs. The Sox have traditionally been more competitive, too. Just curious, because I've always found the WGN reasoning alone to be a little peculiar.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 4:31 pm to nvasil1
quote:
BTW, an honest question for all you who said you are Cubs fans because of WGN: why did you pick the Cubs over the White Sox? I've personally never understood this, considering the Sox play as many national games on WGN as the Cubs do, including a few years in the late 90s and early 2000s when they actually played MORE games on WGN than the Cubs. The Sox have traditionally been more competitive, too. Just curious, because I've always found the WGN reasoning alone to be a little peculiar.
They used to only show the Cubs. I think many of the folks citing this as the reason, grew up during that era. They didn't start showing the Sox until the late 90s, I think.
This post was edited on 4/26/11 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 4/26/11 at 4:36 pm to Y.A. Tittle
Other than the Saints (and really only my mom), my parents don't really care about professional sports, only LSU. I was left to my own devices to find teams to fall in love with.
Saints & Hornets - Geographical
Flames - Moved to MT almost 6 years and wanted to be a hockey fan. Had heard about Jarome Iginla and how good he was.
Padres - spent a couple weeks in SD a few summers ago and fell in love with the team.
Saints & Hornets - Geographical
Flames - Moved to MT almost 6 years and wanted to be a hockey fan. Had heard about Jarome Iginla and how good he was.
Padres - spent a couple weeks in SD a few summers ago and fell in love with the team.
Posted on 4/26/11 at 4:36 pm to BMW7SERIES
quote:
I just don't get why people have all these 'rules' as to who you can or cannot root for. Sports is for entertainment and some players/teams entertain better than others.
Spoken like a true New Yorker. Is that why allegiance shifts so quickly from mets to Yankees and Jets to Giants?
Posted on 4/26/11 at 4:40 pm to Moustache
quote:
mets to Yankees and Jets to Giants
I must say, my whole family is from New York, I've spent copious amounts of time there.
I've never met a person that switched alliegances from either of those franchises to the other.
Page 3 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News