Tachii said: Toronto has 2 all-stars playing for them.. they are far from the worst team making the top8.Considering Toronto was like 3-4th last year, I'm sure Heat can make the playoff despite losing James still, lol. |
 |
| Looks like Melo's decided to resign with the Knicks after all. |
 |
| Pau Gasol is going to Chicago. |
| Paul Pierce to the Wizards apparently? Damn, all the dominos falling now. |
|
| I wish the Wizards would change their name back to the Bullets. I really don't wanna walk around with a Wizards fitted. |
-Riptide- said: j0x said: Lebron, Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love might become the big 3 on Cleveland, Andrew Wiggins will be traded to Minnesota, thats my guess Andrew Wiggins should be off limits. He's gonna be one of the best player in the league in a few years. If Cleveland is going to trade for K Love a package of Dion Waiters, Anthony Bennet and some first round picks would suffice. I disagree with this completely. I think Wiggins has a longggg way to go in terms of basketball skill to even be a "good" starter in the NBA. He makes up for it in athleticism, but I'd say he's 4-5 years away (which is fine... since he's only 19). I also don't think that he'll ever be considered one of the best players in the league, more along the lines of a Rudy Gay caliber player in the prime of his career -- which is good, but not great. Yuugen said: Verdale said: Not quite sure what to say, Pau is good but he's really just a somewhat upgraded, but slightly older Boozer. I agree, No clue why the Bulls would want him. I thought he'd be a much better fit in a team like the Spurs or Thunder. I actually really like Pau on the Bulls. He's one of the best shooting big men in the league, and he has one of the best passing big men, if not THE best, feeding him the ball in the post. Butler gets a bad rap, but he was never a scorer to begin with. If Rose can stay healthy, Butler won't have to put up points consistently, and can instead focus his athleticism on the defensive end. Everything regarding the Bulls simply hinges on that one phrase: "If Rose can stay healthy." |
Yuugen said: Legendre said: I actually really like Pau on the Bulls. He's one of the best shooting big men in the league, and he has one of the best passing big men, if not THE best, feeding him the ball in the post. Butler gets a bad rap, but he was never a scorer to begin with. If Rose can stay healthy, Butler won't have to put up points consistently, and can instead focus his athleticism on the defensive end. Everything regarding the Bulls simply hinges on that one phrase: "If Rose can stay healthy." I know that Pau is one very skillful big man, but I don't think he'd be that much better than Boozer on the offensive end. He's washed up and should not be relied on for scoring. Maybe he can redeem himself with the Bulls and go back at least a little bit to his great Lakers days but that's unlikely. I honestly think the Bulls would still struggle offensively even with Rose healthy, which is why the idea of 'Melo joining them was fitting so well. But we'll see. Although Pau isn't a huge upgrade over Boozer statistically, you have to remember the playoff and championship experience that Gasol brings to the team. Boozer was notorious for his disappearing acts during the playoffs, but I'm sure Gasol knows what needs to be done and will help this team get there like his last. But like everyone said, it all depends on Rose. If he comes back at least 50% of the player he was before and stays healthy... Who knows what will happen in this crazy Central division. |
|
| Pau Gasol even if he was 37 would be better than Boozer in the playoffs. Boozer tries to play SMALL forward when he's in the Playoffs. He doesn't use his body right, takes terrible shots, and rebounds worse than Steph Curry. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
| The Wolves would actually get better with Waiters, Thompson/Bennett, and the Heat pick than they would with Wiggins anyway. He has poor handles, no NBA 3 ball (yet?), and was incredibly inconsistent in college consider the supposed force he was made out to be. He'll get by with his athleticism and is actually better off being masked in Cleveland surrounded by better players than being the man in Minnesota imo. |
  |
hybreezy said: The Wolves would actually get better with Waiters, Thompson/Bennett, and the Heat pick than they would with Wiggins anyway. He has poor handles, no NBA 3 ball (yet?), and was incredibly inconsistent in college consider the supposed force he was made out to be. He'll get by with his athleticism and is actually better off being masked in Cleveland surrounded by better players than being the man in Minnesota imo. Kevin Love is the best power forward in the game and you think trading him for role players/fringe stars and a non-lottery pick is a good deal? Guy averages an efficient 26/13, would have carried his team to playoffs (probably 5th seed) in the East - would you trade him for a some busts + undersized SG? |
| You make it sound like the TWolves have any leverage in these trades. Doesn't matter how good Love is, teams know if he has a list of teams he'll only sign an extension with and the chips fall from there. Bennett is not a bust (yet), far too early for that considering how much was working against him last year. Thompson is an okay piece nothing special but a decent rotational big man who averages nearly a double double, Waiters is way underrated (but not a world beater). He had a great post AS break despite the small sample size and actually gave a damn last year. While Kyrie Irving gets ludicrously overrated for Pepsi commercials and playing no defense, Waiters gets crucified for having an ego. Despite being just as good as Beal who people love to go on about regarding potential. I made a mistake and meant to say Thompson and Bennett not one or the other but regardless. The point is, Waiters, Thompson, Bennett, and a Heat pick that could go either way isn't a bad offer for a guy who doesn't want to be there and has all the say. I'm not saying Wiggins won't be great I think he'll be good, but the TWolves have a chance to acquire legitimate team pieces not another superstar to squander with nothing around him like KG and Love before this. Team basketball just won the title, it probably will again in 2015 too. |
|
| Obnoxious Cav fans have returned.....-__- |
 |
hybreezy said: You make it sound like the TWolves have any leverage in these trades. Doesn't matter how good Love is, teams know if he has a list of teams he'll only sign an extension with and the chips fall from there. Bennett is not a bust (yet), far too early for that considering how much was working against him last year. Thompson is an okay piece nothing special but a decent rotational big man who averages nearly a double double, Waiters is way underrated (but not a world beater). He had a great post AS break despite the small sample size and actually gave a damn last year. While Kyrie Irving gets ludicrously overrated for Pepsi commercials and playing no defense, Waiters gets crucified for having an ego. Despite being just as good as Beal who people love to go on about regarding potential. I made a mistake and meant to say Thompson and Bennett not one or the other but regardless. The point is, Waiters, Thompson, Bennett, and a Heat pick that could go either way isn't a bad offer for a guy who doesn't want to be there and has all the say. I'm not saying Wiggins won't be great I think he'll be good, but the TWolves have a chance to acquire legitimate team pieces not another superstar to squander with nothing around him like KG and Love before this. Team basketball just won the title, it probably will again in 2015 too. The literally do have leverage. The front office needs to put its damn foot down. They should let him walk before they trade him for useless assets (only one I like is Waiters, really, and I dont think he's as good as Beal either - almost but not equal), ESPECIALLY if they are basically gifting Cleveland a super team. Why the hell would you help a team create a dynasty for practically nothing (Wolves will miss playoffs in the deep west with or without Waiters) Love can get the most money he can if he's traded (vs walking as a free agent). It's his in his best interest to be traded, meaning the Twolves can apply leverage if they dont blink at these nonsense offers. Like I said, that whole front office should be fired if they gift Love to Cleveland Dynasty for Waiters + low first round pick (i think it's top 10 protected anyway). Love is gone from there anyway. If I were the Wolves I'd rather him lose in LA next year than form dynasty in Cleveland (he's not going to Cleveland as a free agent due to salary cap) |
| Heat get Deng. Pretty good pick-up. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
Yondy375 said: Heat get Deng. Pretty good pick-up. funny thing is wasnt that the same salary the bulls offered him before he walked lol might be wrong though. bulls coulda used him if they had the space though |
| Yeah basically, Bulls offered 3yr/30 million. Hawks offered 3yr/33.5 million. I would've signed with Hawks, but the Heat aren't as bad as everyone believes without Lebron now. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
RandomChampion said: The literally do have leverage. The front office needs to put its damn foot down. They should let him walk before they trade him for useless assets (only one I like is Waiters, really, and I dont think he's as good as Beal either - almost but not equal), ESPECIALLY if they are basically gifting Cleveland a super team. Why the hell would you help a team create a dynasty for practically nothing (Wolves will miss playoffs in the deep west with or without Waiters) Love can get the most money he can if he's traded (vs walking as a free agent). It's his in his best interest to be traded, meaning the Twolves can apply leverage if they dont blink at these nonsense offers. Like I said, that whole front office should be fired if they gift Love to Cleveland Dynasty for Waiters + low first round pick (i think it's top 10 protected anyway). Love is gone from there anyway. If I were the Wolves I'd rather him lose in LA next year than form dynasty in Cleveland (he's not going to Cleveland as a free agent due to salary cap) They literally have zero leverage, they either keep him for another year, miss the playoffs, and lose him for nothing or they trade him and get something back. Hell, considering the perceived value of the pieces the Magic got for Dwight when that went down it's amazing the Wolves are even being offered what's been reported from various teams. Also I don't see why they should care how they "help" Cleveland. They're playing right into the Lakers hands if they let Love walk who are a much bigger annoyance than the Cavs to the Wolves. Not to mention a trade involving Waiters, Bennett, and Thompson absolutely guts the Cavs depth. |
|
| Just thought this fake text convo between Bosh and Lebron was hilarious: http://elitedaily.com/sports/this-text-conversation-between-lebron-james-and-chris-bosh-is-absolutely-hilarious-photos/664232/ |
| Rockets decline to match the Mavs offer to Parsons. Rockets get Ariza in sign & trade. |
|
hybreezy said: RandomChampion said: The literally do have leverage. The front office needs to put its damn foot down. They should let him walk before they trade him for useless assets (only one I like is Waiters, really, and I dont think he's as good as Beal either - almost but not equal), ESPECIALLY if they are basically gifting Cleveland a super team. Why the hell would you help a team create a dynasty for practically nothing (Wolves will miss playoffs in the deep west with or without Waiters) Love can get the most money he can if he's traded (vs walking as a free agent). It's his in his best interest to be traded, meaning the Twolves can apply leverage if they dont blink at these nonsense offers. Like I said, that whole front office should be fired if they gift Love to Cleveland Dynasty for Waiters + low first round pick (i think it's top 10 protected anyway). Love is gone from there anyway. If I were the Wolves I'd rather him lose in LA next year than form dynasty in Cleveland (he's not going to Cleveland as a free agent due to salary cap) They literally have zero leverage, they either keep him for another year, miss the playoffs, and lose him for nothing or they trade him and get something back. Hell, considering the perceived value of the pieces the Magic got for Dwight when that went down it's amazing the Wolves are even being offered what's been reported from various teams. Also I don't see why they should care how they "help" Cleveland. They're playing right into the Lakers hands if they let Love walk who are a much bigger annoyance than the Cavs to the Wolves. Not to mention a trade involving Waiters, Bennett, and Thompson absolutely guts the Cavs depth. Dude, getting waiters back vs getting nothing back is almost like the same thing. At that price, you stand your ground in a game of chicken. It's all or nothing, since waiters is almost like nothing anyway. Not to mention the fact that if you wait for free agency, you have Love for one more year (less salary than Waiters, Thompson, and Bennet combined) to maybe sneak you into the playoffs for more revenue (also, superstar = revenue) Wolves have plenty of leverage, because they have the power to deny other teams (and the player itself) what they want. They have the power to deny Cleveland a super team. They have the power to deny Warriors a contender. They have the power to deny Love his fat contract in many cases. and the only price they pay for denying all of this is losing out on top 11+ draft pick, and waiters. |
| Everything considered, I'm happy the Heat did NOT give up on themselves and wallow in the misery of losing Lebron....unlike some Heat fans and pathetic Lebron bandwagon "Heat fans". I'm personally already looking towards the future and very optimistic that we could have a team that at the very least competes in this weak Eastern conference. In no way are we a Championship team, but that is something I very much believe that eventually we can become once more in the upcoming years. Overall, I think next season will be exciting and interesting. I'm thankful that I don't have to deal with fake as shit bandwagon fans anymore and I'm also thankful that I'll be able to go to more than 2 games this year because I know we probably won't sell out every single game the way we have the past 4 years. A true fan never abondons their team, they never root for players, they root for the TEAM. To all Lebron fans...you people are pathetic, you worship a man and have zero loyalty to teams, you are worst than bandwagoners and winner pickers....you are the bottom of the barrel. |
since waiters is almost like nothing anyway. I'm not sure why you're acting as if Waiters is a bum. |
|
Gunbladewarrior said: since waiters is almost like nothing anyway. I'm not sure why you're acting as if Waiters is a bum. He's not a bum and I wish the Knicks went through and traded shumpert for him last year (we coulda had farried or lowry for him too....). would love to have him on the knicks Waiters is not going to change the playoff status of Wolves w/o Love though. Basically, he will practically make no difference. I'd rather stand my ground in that case, hoping a team wanting Love, or Love himself, will cave. |
MC-Money said: That was so tryhard I couldn't finish reading them all.Just thought this fake text convo between Bosh and Lebron was hilarious: http://elitedaily.com/sports/this-text-conversation-between-lebron-james-and-chris-bosh-is-absolutely-hilarious-photos/664232/ |
| I bet Deng wishes he would have accepted that 3yr extension when he had the chance.. Well the Pistons scoop up DJ for 2yr/6M like the Nuggets and Spurs did last year with Nate and Marco. Tsk tsk tsk. At least Captain Kirk is back in a Bulls jersey. And the Bulls are looking like one of the deeper teams in the league once again; Thibs better take advantage. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
SharifEbeefE said: And the Bulls are looking like one of the deeper teams in the league once again; Thibs better take advantage. If Rose stays healthy (Which seems impossible, but stay optimistic, I guess), they really do have one hell of a team. And IMHO they could get out of the East. |
| Now that the dust has mostly settled about the Lebron thing....I wanted to talk about the issue of sports fandom, because it is probably the one thing that still very much intrigues me as much as it leaves me dumbfounded. Let's get one thing very clear....the majority of "fans" in the United States are NOT what many would define as "True fans" or "die hard fans". They just aren't. They are mostly fans that live in the moment, that want to be part of something fun while it's fun....if you want to define this as "Bandwagon" you are free to do so, but it is my opinion that that's what the majority are. Let's look at what happened to the Cleveland Cavaliers when Lebron left in 2010. In 2011 the fans wanted to make clear of one thing....they are going to support this team no matter what. And for the most part, this was true, in 2011 the Cavs were ranked #3 in home attendance....they averaged more than 20,000 every game: http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/year/2011 However, as reality set in, so does the basic truth of sports fandom.... Fans (all types) do not like wasting their hard earned money to go see a loser, that's just the way it is. In 2012 they were down to #19 and averaged 15,900... In 2013 they continued sliding downwards to #22... They DID go up in 2014 to #16, and this is probably because many believed they were going to be a playoff team. And of course, the same could be said about the Heat, in 2010 a year before Lebron arrived, the average attendance was 17,700 and they were ranked #15. Of course in the 4 years that Lebron has been here, the Heat have sold out basically every single home game and been in the Top 5 in attendance each year. And let me tell you something, this can be seen for just about EVERY team and their fanbase. Here are some examples... The 76ers who play in Philadelphia which is supposedly a very strong sports city was ranked #29 (nearly dead last) in attendance this year, averaging only 13,800 fans per game. In fact if one sees the attendance of teams one doesn't need to be shocked to see that the teams that do best or are traditionally strong (such as Lakers, Knicks, Bulls) are always on top. Whereas the teams that stink or are not traditionally strong, are at the basement. This is just the way it is. |
| Spurs are a consistently championship caliber team and they barely crack the top 10 in attendance, except for in 2001 and 2002 where they were Number 1 somehow. Even in their two championship appearance years in 2013 and 2014 have them at 11 and 9 respectively. Shouldn't they have the most attendance based on your logic? Or are you just dealing in extremes like bottom 5 and top 5? Also, what's the problem with being a fan of a player and not a team? My favorite player in football was Randy Moss, and I cheered for whatever team he was on, albeit I'm always rooting for the Cowboys no matter what. I don't think being a fan of your favorite player's team is a bad thing, and that's why I don't hate the Lebron fans. |
 |
Reverb_Shock said: Also, what's the problem with being a fan of a player and not a team? My favorite player in football was Randy Moss, and I cheered for whatever team he was on, albeit I'm always rooting for the Cowboys no matter what. I don't think being a fan of your favorite player's team is a bad thing, and that's why I don't hate the Lebron fans. Its a problem if you're from a city where they already have a team. If you're from Toronto, then its unacceptable to be a Heat fan unless you've lived there for years or some shit. You can root for Lebron, but don't claim to be a fan of every team he joins - especially if you have obligations to a team of your own. But if you're from a foreign country or non nba affiliated city then you can wagon the team a player joins all you want I guess |
[right] |
Reverb_Shock said: Spurs are a consistently championship caliber team and they barely crack the top 10 in attendance, except for in 2001 and 2002 where they were Number 1 somehow. Even in their two championship appearance years in 2013 and 2014 have them at 11 and 9 respectively. Shouldn't they have the most attendance based on your logic? Or are you just dealing in extremes like bottom 5 and top 5? I also said that being a traditionally strong (and I should've added POPULAR team) also plays a factor. Spurs are one of the most successful organizations in all of sports.....but they have NEVER been a very popular team because they play in a city which is not known or popular for much. Also, it IS noteworthy to say that the ONLY reason they are not higher on the list is because their arena is smaller compared to others.....in reality they are selling out almost every single game, this season they had 99.1% attendance. Do you really believe they would still be that high if they were truly bad....and I mean 76er bad? Reverb_Shock said: Also, what's the problem with being a fan of a player and not a team? My favorite player in football was Randy Moss, and I cheered for whatever team he was on, albeit I'm always rooting for the Cowboys no matter what. I don't think being a fan of your favorite player's team is a bad thing, and that's why I don't hate the Lebron fans. Nothing.....on the surface. It's just that to people like me (A TRUE, Loyal fan of ONE and ONLY ONE team) I don't understand the concept of rooting for multiple teams or jumping from one team to another just because of one player. You have zero loyalty to the team, you're only interest is the player, and in a sport where the most important thing is the concept of "WE", I simply just can't wrap my head on why people would throw that out and instead embrace the concept of "I". A true fan stays with only ONE team....this shows loyalty and trust, it also allows the fan to truly appreciate when a team wins something significant because he was with them the whole time. I can somewhat understand bandwagoners, they are usually casual fans, they really don't care for sports only when it's put in the limelight. A good example of bandwagoners is what we just saw right now....the World Cup. How many of the millions watching in the U.S and rooting for the U.S actually saw soccer before the WC? Probably very few. Bandwagoners are called the way they are because they hop on and off the wagon when it's convenient. To them it's not about true and real passion and love for the sport or team....it's about living in the moment. As for Player fans....they annoy me the most, because at the very least a bandwagoner usually sticks to one team which they will usually only root for when everything is going good. But a player fan doesn't care for the team at all, whether they're doing good or not....they're only investment is in the player. |
| You are calling American fans of the US soccer team bandwagoners/ Bandwagonning would be if they rooted for Germany or something. Rooting for the team that represents you is not bandwagonning (at least in the same light as bandwagonning when it refers to team hopping )....it's just that theyre more casual fans. You dont understand the concept of rooting for a player vs a team because you live in a city that has a team. Someone living in Alaska probably has no attachment to the locality a team plays for. I'd wager that he does have a lot of attachment to certain players, ranging from how they play to how they act. I dont care much about "bandwagoners", "casual fans" , etc. But I do differentiate between a guy who follows a player because his locality has no team, vs a guy whose city has a team but just follows the best player in the league around or something. |
| >Not real passion or love for the sport, lmao. It's real passion to watch a bad team keep losing over and over again just because they happen to be the same city you live in? Watching sports are for entertainment purposes. People watch something they can genuinely enjoy for. If you like watching your home team keep losing, go ahead. But don't remotely say the people who prefer other teams have no passion for the sport, or whatever is the point of even keeping up with the sport every year? The whole idea of loyal fans sounds utterly stupid in my opinion. Sounds like something a masochist would do, unless you find pleasure in seeing your own team consistently. When I watch sports, I only pay attention to teams that are actually good. The only sports I watch consistently is basketball, tennis, and football world cups (Euro/Fifa). In all three sports, I have no affiliation to my country or home city. I find little purpose in watching mediocrity, and only find enjoyment when players are at the top of their skill level. |
TachiiJul 15, 2014 6:55 AM
| @Random, to be fair there are various types of bandwagon ers. The most popular is the type that roots for teams that are successful or are very popular....this type is called "Winner Picker". Another type is the one that only shows interest when a certain team they have some association with starts to be successful but loses interest when they are not successful....these are called "Fair Weather fans". Then you have "Casual Fans", these fans usually live in the moment....they're not very big on sports, they only watch or root or whatever because it's what everyone else is doing. I would apply many U.S Soccer fans as casual fans... And, again on the surface there is nothing wrong with any of this....it's just not the type of stuff I view in a positive manner. @Tachii, we obviously have a very different outlook on sports. I root for the teams I like because I feel I have a connection with them, whether it's the fact I grew up rooting for these teams or simply just rooting for the home team....I honesty feel that connection, that's why I feel it would be almost betrayal to abandon any of them. What I personally consider to be a "True Fan" is someone is loyal and sticks through the bad and good. |
| Yea, that's what I said lol. there are different types of bandwagons. What I was saying is that there is a difference between bandwagonning a team because it's merely good, and bandwagonning a team because your favourite player is on it. Regardint US soccer fans - that's also what I said - they are mor casual fans, but they arent really winner pickers. Regarding Tachii's comment - he was addressing the comment regarding passion for sports, not passion for teams. He is a true fan of the sport, while people like you and I are big fans of teams. He is pretty right too - me and you have been suckered into becoming attached to the accomplishments of others who really have nothing to do with you. Meaning, we get sad when these people lose, and happy when these people win. This is the money-making nature of sports. The get us invested, and make us have constant hopes that theyll win lol. Genius |
RandomChampion said: Yea, that's what I said lol. there are different types of bandwagons. What I was saying is that there is a difference between bandwagonning a team because it's merely good, and bandwagonning a team because your favourite player is on it. Regardint US soccer fans - that's also what I said - they are mor casual fans, but they arent really winner pickers. Regarding Tachii's comment - he was addressing the comment regarding passion for sports, not passion for teams. He is a true fan of the sport, while people like you and I are big fans of teams. He is pretty right too - me and you have been suckered into becoming attached to the accomplishments of others who really have nothing to do with you. Meaning, we get sad when these people lose, and happy when these people win. This is the money-making nature of sports. The get us invested, and make us have constant hopes that theyll win lol. Genius Yes, I agree. And I understand what Tachii is saying, although like I said, I believe we view sports differently because he said he finds the idea of loyal fans utterly stupid, and yet without those very fans, sports would not and COULD NOT function the way it does. Every team needs a fanbase, every team needs fans that will be there year after year......a team can't play in a literal empty arena. |
Tachii said: >Not real passion or love for the sport, lmao. It's real passion to watch a bad team keep losing over and over again just because they happen to be the same city you live in? Watching sports are for entertainment purposes. People watch something they can genuinely enjoy for. If you like watching your home team keep losing, go ahead. But don't remotely say the people who prefer other teams have no passion for the sport, or whatever is the point of even keeping up with the sport every year? The whole idea of loyal fans sounds utterly stupid in my opinion. Sounds like something a masochist would do, unless you find pleasure in seeing your own team consistently. When I watch sports, I only pay attention to teams that are actually good. The only sports I watch consistently is basketball, tennis, and football world cups (Euro/Fifa). In all three sports, I have no affiliation to my country or home city. I find little purpose in watching mediocrity, and only find enjoyment when players are at the top of their skill level. Lol what? You think it's "utterly stupid" when a fan stays loyal to a team even if they are struggling? I don't know about you, but I was raised as a Bulls/Bears/White Sox fan and will forever be a fan of those teams. I was raised to, with a level respect, hate the Packers, Lions, Tigers, Pistons, etc. (haha sorry Detroit) and always will. After cheering for these teams for over a decade there is NO way I could root for another team against mine just because the other team has better players; it just wouldn't feel right. Also, I think one of the best thing in sports are rivalries which is impossible to experience if all you do is go hopping from team to team. Anyways I'm in the same boat as you in respect to wanting to see higher skilled players/teams play against each other (as most people are) and tend to pay more attention to those teams, but the home team is an exception. I also want to comment that seeing your home team-that you've followed through good and bad for years-win the finals/world series/superbowl is a lot different than just seeing a team you hopped to a year or two prior win it all. It's a whole different feeling. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
JustALEX said: I wouldn't go as far as saying loyal fans dictate the essence of the sport. Look at tennis for example. It has no affiliation to some random arbitrary location, and it still consistently have tournaments and players and people who will watch the players play. You can then argue how some tennis players have their fanbase, but their fanbase are completely insignificant to their performance and the financial side of tournaments and players.And I understand what Tachii is saying, although like I said, I believe we view sports differently because he said he finds the idea of loyal fans utterly stupid, and yet without those very fans, sports would not and COULD NOT function the way it does. Every team needs a fanbase, every team needs fans that will be there year after year......a team can't play in a literal empty arena. I call it stupid because I see little joy in seeing your team lose over and over again. Now if your team has an overall winning record (more than 50% win-rate), then I wouldn't call you stupid. Because you can be underdogs in a playoff and make it far. And seeing that happen, however rare, is truly a great feeling for the fanbase. But if they're just bottom-tier, being loyal does very little to your team. Unless you actually, like, donate a large sum of money or something, staying loyal does nothing to the team. It's nice if you feel you're somehow important, but in the grand scheme of things, like RC said, they arbitrarily got you invested while you watch them consistently lose. If I hadn't make it clear, I find loyal fans who root for teams that consistently lose stupid. Do not take it as a insult. As I'm pretty stupid myself when it comes to other things. And I will openly admit it so. Take it instead as a clash of different view points. I'm not trying to win in some Internet debate or something, just interested in hearing different view points with valid reasons (if possible). |
TachiiJul 15, 2014 8:40 PM
Tachii said: I wouldn't go as far as saying loyal fans dictate the essence of the sport. Look at tennis for example. It has no affiliation to some random arbitrary location, and it still consistently have tournaments and players and people who will watch the players play. You can then argue how some tennis players have their fanbase, but their fanbase are completely insignificant to their performance and the financial side of tournaments and players. Well, obviously all of my commentary has been on the subject of team sports. I for one have never seen the point of being a fan of individual sports in terms of being a player fan, since I don't like the worship of individual people....I find that kinda creepy. Tachii said: I call it stupid because I see little joy in seeing your team lose over and over again. Now if your team has an overall winning record (more than 50% win-rate), then I wouldn't call you stupid. Because you can be underdogs in a playoff and make it far. And seeing that happen, however rare, is truly a great feeling for the fanbase. But if they're just bottom-tier, being loyal does very little to your team. Unless you actually, like, donate a large sum of money or something, staying loyal does nothing to the team. It's nice if you feel you're somehow important, but in the grand scheme of things, like RC said, they arbitrarily got you invested while you watch them consistently lose. Well obviously there ISN'T any joy.... The whole concept of being a fan is to cheer something on... In team sports, fans cheer for the team to succeed, if they're losing it's not joyful, but one continues to believe that eventually your team can pull through...maybe next year, maybe in 10 years....maybe never! But one still has that hope. Let's go to American football for a second....I'm a fan of the Miami Dolphins....I've been a fan since I first watched football as a kid. In all that time....the Dolphins have never won the Super Bowl or even appeared in the Super Bowl, one can honestly say that they haven't been close to winning a title since 1992 (I was too small to be a fan of anything in 1992). So why do I continue rooting for them? Well, admittedly it is a bit complicated if I stop and think about it in a rationalistic manner. But it comes down to the subject I've brought up already. Loyalty, a sense of connection, and staying hopeful. I really do believe that one day they WILL win the Super Bowl....and when that happens, it will make it so much sweeter knowing that I stood with them through the bad and tough times. Look at Red Sox fans....they've been waiting DECADES to see their team win. Before 2004, the last time they won the World Series was 1918....86 years! Many that were Red Sox fans before 2004 went through heartbreak after heartbreak.....and that made winning the 2004, 2007, and now 2013 titles that much better. Hell even I as a Heat fan saw my team lose year after year, until they broke through in 2006..... On June 20, 2006 I felt like the happiest Heat fan in America.....and I'm sure all loyal Heat fans felt the same. Maybe all of this is irrational....but I simply don't see it that way. |
--ALEX--Jul 15, 2014 8:54 PM
| But from what you mentioned, there's nothing logical or rational about being loyal. Having hope doesn't mean it isn't stupid to be hopeful, especially for a team that consistently loses. Under a strictly logical standpoint, an outside observer of humanity would've called it "stupid", because it fits the definition of stupidity. Being hopeful is a key feature of humanity, and many would call it a positive thing. Indeed, I'd also say it's definitely good if you have hope. But like people who are brave and courageous, they're often labelled as stupid as well. Because being brave and courageous is often stupid. There is no sugarcoating here. Just because something is morally or emotionally good doesn't mean it isn't stupid. I think admitting that something positive can be stupid is a trait that many people lacks.I'll summarize in that, again, I'm not trying to be personally rude to you or something of that sort. This is just my observation and it matters very little in the grand scheme of things. |
| People(fans) like players at the end of the day, if the guy you liked played for a College and there was no professional sports teams you would root for that college and people do. Teams are just that, technically and typically it's a NEW TEAM each year. You love the jerseys, or where your from, but the players make the team and not the other way around except maybe for the Celtics. Baseball utilizes 9 guys, football 11, but Basketball is only 5. It shows WHO'S really better and who's not. In baseball and football you CAN HIDE guys until they get uncovered. It's really easy to spot the weakest of 5 guys, that's why basketball is way more INDIVIDUALISTIC. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
| Lance "Wild Guy" Stephenson just signed with the Hornets (not the Pelicans) for 3-years. So, what does this mean for the Pacers, who now face LeBron's Cavs and a retooled Bulls with, hopefully (no jinxing), a healthy Rose. Do you think they still have a chance at winning the division? My guess is probably not, but they will still make the playoffs, maybe at a mid-seed. I wonder what other roster changes they will experience before the season starts. Both Paul and Roy are gonna have to step up, both on-court and in the locker rooms. The east is still wide open, so it's anyone's call, but they'll have some rough division opponents this year. |
VerdaleJul 16, 2014 7:14 AM
|
| The east is become more and more interesting with each signing. LeBron to Cavs, Gasol to Bulls and then Stephenson to Hornets. The Pacers better sign another impact player though. Especially someone who is an offensive threat. If they don't they'll never get out of the east. |
 |
| All these Kevin Love talks made me re-watch his highlights over the years. He is GOOD, but not GREAT. He WAS Minnesota's all-star and he failed them. Lucky for him he's semi-young and highly wanted, I just don't see him worth the value teams and Espn articles are declaring. Not taking anything away from him, but if you watch just because he can shoot the 3 doesn't mean he should take 7 a game. His rebounding outbreaks have always been on weak inside teams, he has struggled against: "The Brow", Andrew Bogut, David Lee, Ibaka, and EVEN Perkins. #EDIT Michael Jordan went personally to hire Lance he knows something we don't know. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |