Girsch’s Law of Sports Fandom
Posted by
tgirsch
Law: You are only allowed to choose a sports team as your favorite team under the following circumstances:
- You were born or raised in the team’s home market. (This includes large expanded markets like the Cardinals and Braves have.)
- You currently live in the team’s home market, or lived there for a period of years.
- You would like to live in the team’s home market.
- If a college team, it’s your alma mater.
- Added: You adopted the team as a “lovable loser” squad when they sucked, and remained loyal to them through a lot of sucky years. e.g., Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
- Added: You live where the team has (or had) its minor league affiliate or training camp. e.g., Louisville residents could root for either the Cardinals or the Reds.
Under no circumstances may you choose a team from a city you hate to be your favorite. (Example: My brother roots for the Detroit Lions, but would never willingly live anywhere near Detroit. This is forbidden.)
You are allowed to make situational exceptions, like when two teams from cities you hate are playing, you’re allowed to pick one over the other. But in that circumstance, you’re really more rooting against one team than for the other.
Applying the rules to my favorite teams:
- Milwaukee Brewers: OK, because I was born and raised in Milwaukee.
- Green Bay Packers: OK, because I was born and raised in Wisconsin.
- Toronto Maple Leafs: OK, because I’d jump at a chance to live in Toronto if I could make the finances work out.
- Milwaukee Bucks: OK, because I was born and raised in Milwaukee.
- Wisconsin Badgers: OK, because I was born and raised in Wisconsin.
Teams I’m disallowed from rooting for:
- Any team from Texas
- Any team from Atlanta
- The Orlando Magic
- Any team from St. Louis
That is all.
Friend of mine now lives in NJ, but as he grew up on Long Island, he is a fan of the NY Fish Sticks and NOT of the NJ Devils. That’s OK. But, he grew up on LI, went to college in FLA, and is a Dolphins fan, not a Jets fan.
Me confused.
Comment 3/26/2007
Is it OK that I started rooting for the Ottawa Senators and the New Jersey Devils when the Minnesota North Stars left?
Comment 3/26/2007
You’re allowed to root for a team that you were once legitimately a fan of, but which moved out of its home market to another city. If you do so, you are required to hate the team’s owner. Apparently, you are even allowed to root for them if you were born in their prior home city after they moved, and have never actually seen the team play. (Cf. Dodgers, Brooklyn, Walter O’Malley, everybody in New York City)
Comment 3/26/2007
KTK:
I disagree. Once that team leaves your city, you’re obligated to hate them. (Cf. Atlanta Braves, Baltimore Ravens, Carolina Hurricanes, etc.)
Of course, on that rationale, my hatred of the Atlanta Braves is irrational in two ways: 1) They moved away from Milwaukee before I was even born; and 2) They moved to Milwaukee from Boston, and I detest franchise movement, except where fan support is abysmal.
Which brings us to a corollary:
Any team that changes cities MUST change its name. At least the Ravens and Hurricanes did this. When it doesn’t happen, you wind up having to explain to children why there should be such things as the “Los Angeles Lakers” or the “Utah Jazz” or (for a short period) the “Tennessee Oilers.”
Comment 3/26/2007
Growing up in the Toronto area, I was a Montreal Canadiens fan because the Loafs sucked and Dryden was the coolest goalie ever.
Comment 3/26/2007
Paul:
See, you represent all that is wrong with sports fandom!
You are not allowed to not root for your home team simply because they suck. You are especially not allowed to root for your home team’s most hated rival simply because that team is good. That’s what we in the business call a “fair-weather fan.”
It would be like KTK abandoning the Yankees and rooting for the Red Sox if the Sox became the better team. Big no-no.
Comment 3/26/2007
I never knew that we had moral obligations to sports commercialism… damn…
Comment 3/26/2007
But I still root for the Canadiens even though they suck. And I lived in Ottawa and went to Senators games in their first couple of seasons, so I know “suck”.
Comment 3/26/2007
Are you allowed to root for a nearby team when you don’t have an actual “home” team? How does that play out?
Here in Knoxville, most baseball fans have kind of adopted Atlanta as our “home” team, but we don’t really live there, and most of us wouldn’t if we had the choice.
Comment 3/26/2007
Dan:
Relax, it’s mostly tongue-in-cheek.
Paul:
I don’t think it’s fair to say they suck. As Kevin what “suck” looks like in hockey.
Jonathan:
You’re off the hook. Rooting for a nearby team is okay in those circumstances. You could also be a Chicago Cubs fan or a Cincinnati Reds fan, thanks to the Tennessee Smokies and the Chattanooga Lookouts, respectively.
That reminds me of another rule. [Updating.]
Comment 3/26/2007
Can the team from our home market be our least favorite as well? I hate all the Philadelphia teams.
Comment 3/26/2007
Stormy:
Normally not, but for Philadelphia, I’m willing to make an exception.
Comment 3/26/2007
That’s what we in the business call a “fair-weather fan.” It would be like KTK abandoning the Yankees and rooting for the Red Sox
That’s what we in New York call “flirting with suicide”.
Comment 3/26/2007
FIEND! I was torn to shreds all day for my lack of loyalty!
Comment 3/26/2007
I believe that any NYC Yankees fan who decided to switch allegiance to the Red Sox in the Fall of ‘04 should be granted a one-time exemption and be allowed to do so. After all, can anyone remember the last time the Yankees actually generated excitement for their fans?
Comment 3/26/2007
Okay, my one rule of sports fandom:
- I’ll root for whatever team I damn well choose.
While I realize I’m showing my age, I’ll note that I actually came by some of my original preferences by being something of a contrarian. Growing up on the Jersey shore, I became a Brooklyn Dodgers fan because my mother’s family, real sports fanatics, were all NY Giants fans. I started rooting for the Baltimore Colts at the time of the NFL championship game in 1958 because everyone I knew was rooting for the Giants and I figured someone should root for the Colts.
On a different note, I became a fan of the Boston Celtics because the first NBA player whose name I knew was Bob Cousy.
I’ve drifted away from fandom over the years; I still enjoy watching sports - especially basketball - but other than a very vague hometown preference at the pro level I really don’t care who wins. I had a friend who couldn’t understand that; he couldn’t enjoy a game without a rooting interest, even if he had to arbitrarily choose one side to support in a particular game/match. For me, though, it has a real advantage in that I can appreciate good plays even if it’s “the other guys” who do it.
Comment 3/27/2007
LarryE, you sound like the type of fan who thinks “Field of Dreams” is good sports film
Comment 3/27/2007
Ted -
Is that because I prefer the, you know, the actual sports, the actual display of physical ability, over mere fandom, the sweating-bullets-over-who-wins stuff? How’s this for another fan rule: You’re not allowed to be a fan of an NBA team unless you can at minimum explain the 3-second rule and some aspect (beyond the banally obvious) of what constitutes an illegal zone.
As for Field of Dreams, it’s an okay movie. I never thought of it as a sports film in any way. That’s just the hook to hang the story on.
Comment 3/27/2007
LarryE:
You’re not allowed to be a fan of an NBA team…
Actually, if you just rephrase that to, “You’re not allowed to be a fan of the NBA,” I’d be okay with it.
And I’m also okay with your “root for whomever I damn well choose rule.” This entire post is basically a convoluted way of saying that I really hate people who (A) root for teams from cities they despise; and/or (B) are bandwagon fans who root for a team because they’re good at the time they picked ‘em.
Comment 3/27/2007
grew up in NYC when ethnic background was signifigant. Becoming a Celtic fan was a natural. Gave up baseball when da Dodgers split Bk’lyn.
Comment 3/27/2007
LarryE, which 3 second rule? Also, instead of explaining what constitutes a zone defense, how about explaining what the term “travel” means. Having played the game for many years, I thought I had a good handle on this, but now, in the NBA, I think the term is only meaningful when describing what a team does before playing an away game.
Comment 3/27/2007
Ted -
Re travel: I agree with you wholeheartedly. And if by “which 3 second rule” you mean the one that’s routinely ignored, yeah, that too. Pisses me off.
Comment 3/27/2007
I had no idea there even WAS a three-second rule. I had to look it up. In any case, I don’t like the rule. The problem with the NBA is too little defense, not too much. Your opponent is camping a big man under the basket, defending no one? That leaves an offensive player open on the perimeter. Shoot from there. If he tries to block that (on the down arc), it’s called “goaltending,” and you’ll get the points.
Sorry, but I’m just not a fan of “illegal defense” rules. Just as in football, zone defenses can be picked apart.
Comment 3/27/2007
Tgirsch -
Offensive 3 seconds is the one I meant gets ignored. Defensive 3 seconds hardly ever gets called because it hardly ever happens, partly for the reason you bring up: It leaves the defense playing 4 on 5 outside the lane.
I think the rule is a remnant of the NBA’s opposition to zone defenses - which, oddly enough, I should not have mentioned because playing a zone ceased to be a violation a few years ago. I’d actually forgotten that for a good, well, perhaps understandable, reason: The change came because everybody knew damn well every team had some modified zone it would play at times and officials got sick and tired of trying to enforce borderline cases. After the change, teams kept on doing what they already had been, just openly. Which means the change had very little effect on play, which it why I forgot it had happened!
True zone defenses are rare in the NBA for the reason you cite: They can be picked apart, especially by good passing - of which I am a major fan.
Oh, and yeah, I do know what goaltending is.
Comment 3/28/2007
OK, so ’splain the offensive 3-second-rule. If an offensive player drops his snack on the floor, it’s still safe to eat if he picks it up within three seconds?
Comment 3/28/2007
TGirsch, yikes. Offensive 3 seconds has been around since George Mikan. Every kid taught to play inside is taught how to straddle the lane.. Defensive 3 seconds was motivated by offensive considerations (ie not wanting the elimination of the illegal defense rules to all of a sudden cause offenses to be shut down), but in reality it seems to be more about establishing position for rebounds than playing defense. Especially with the current emphasis on the three point shot.
I think history has shown that the illegal defense rules turned out to have unintended consequences that pretty much aligned with the motivation for their implementation (hope no libertarians are reading along
). In an effort to open up the game and increase movement, the illegal defense rules had the exact opposite effect, leading to the ultra boring positional game that surely killed my little remaining enthusiasm for the NBA. I can’t really say how much the game has improved since the rules have been eliminated, because I flat out stopped watching about six years ago. Memories of Russell and Cousy and Bird can carry a person for only so long…
Comment 3/28/2007
Ted:
As you’ve probably guessed, apart from a few college games during March Madness, I never watch basketball. I’ve never been a fan. Never played the game, either, as my “altitude challenged” status makes me useless anywhere near a basketball court.
Comment 3/28/2007
Tgirsch, in my younger days I was a big fan, and played alot up until a few years ago. It is a fun game to play and doesn’t require a specific number of players for a good pickup game (2 on 2, 3 on 3, etc).
I think watching basketball is a visceral experience. Other than the center position, top players as a group are probably the strongest, fastest, most athletic of any sport. It is the ultimate dominance of the physical over the cerebral. Baseball, on the other hand, is skill and tactics. Watching a game is an intellectual experience. Football is in the middle somewhere. At least in my opinion.
Comment 3/28/2007
I am a NYC transplant here in Miami. Moved here in ‘89 when I was only 10, but I didn’t move here alone. I brought my hometeams with me. Die Hard Yankees, Jets, Rangers, and Knicks. I hate the Bosox, Pats, and more importantly the Fins because I live here in South Florida, and have had to defensively put up with trash talk from dolfans because I am a die hard jet fan for 28 years. The only team that I root for that is from Miami, and not from New York is the UM hurricanes, because in the area of NY where I am from college wasn’t very big, and I started getting into it down here. My question is this: If my kids who are born in Miami decide to become fans of the teams that I root for, because they want to follow the footsteps of there dad, could that be another acception to the rule? Is there such a thing of becoming a generational fan?
Comment 1/4/2008
JP:
Yeah, I’ll allow that.
Comment 1/4/2008