|
Post by blue on Feb 8, 2022 11:42:56 GMT
I'd say it's common for British kids to follow more than one team based on who their favourite footballers are, before siding with one team which is usually the side you've been immersed in via family/peers taking you to the games and talking about the most. In the UK you have provincial sides that have not won anything for decades that are still by far and away the biggest clubs in their regions, so often the side your dad supports and the 'local team' is the same. Growing up in a town with a traditionally small team, everyone tends to support Wigan (currently storming League One - which is the thrid division), and have a second or third team for armchair support. For instance, the only teams my son has seen in home games are Wigan Athletic, Liverpool, and Barcelona. So he supports all of them. And I'm fine with that. The only time it's shit is when you get a home game against someone like Man U or Liverpool, and most of the fans in the home stands are supporting the mega-corporation cunts. Again, that's common with kids in Sunderland but not at all for adults, although some of the smaller clubs in the North East have fans that side with one of the larger two (definitely the case with Gateshead fans & Newcastle). Fans of the 'top four' clubs tend to be on their own.
|
|
|
Post by fearlessfreap on Feb 8, 2022 13:49:24 GMT
I only follow the NY Mets and NY Giants. Neither have given me anything to root about in years. I used to follow the Knicks, but between the new style of playing (three point dominance and lack of inside banging around) and the advent of the "super teams," I have completely lost interest in the NBA. As far as college sports go, I didn't go to a football or basketball powerhouse, so I'll watch the major bowl games and the final four without a rooting interest. I'm from an older generation where you picked one team and stuck with them. You still see Miami Dolphins fans my age in central NY even though they last won a Superbowl over 45 years ago. Now days, people follow players rather than teams, which is foreign to me, because I figure that most individual players are spoiled narcissists, where as I just imagine them as gears in a machine while following my team. People change teams like underwear any more depending on how good they are. There was a guy in my development flying a Tampa Bay Buccaneers flag from his front porch all year. We're a two day drive from Florida. Dollars to donuts it wont come out of storage now that Brady's gone.
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnc on Feb 8, 2022 15:20:56 GMT
Free agency kinda killed traditional loyalty towards teams. As an SF Bay Area fan, it's a running joke that if you're an A's fan, don't invest in any jerseys with a player's name on it because they'll be gone after the rookie contract.
I get it, I think players should have a choice on where to play, but I think a lot of them take the short term approach re: their "brands" as they now call themselves, which is true, but pretty cynical. That stated, the duration of a pro career isn't that long unless you're a superstar and don't get a career-ending injury, so I get where they're coming from.
The NBA was really the first league who made it about the players rather than their teams for a variety of reasons - closer to the action so fans can relate more and more identifiable than any sport.
In the long run, it's served them well, but I wonder if guys like KD and LeBron will be looked at as mercenaries. Ring chasers, basically.
|
|