web counter
 

The Rules of the Bandwagon

By C. Robert Dimitri | Posted Under Miscellaneous | Comments (40)

yankee_fan.jpg

Perhaps it is wise to avoid directly responding to those anonymous denizens of the internet that aim to rankle you in the comments section of a column that you wrote. Perhaps the word “perhaps” does not even apply to that statement. Perhaps the word “perhaps” should not apply to that second statement either. And perhaps … never mind. New rule: Never begin a column with a thought that can send your mind spiraling into an infinite loop.

Despite that prescribed caution, I must admit that this column was directly inspired by just such a comment. It was suggested that if I am a Dallas Cowboys fan that was neither born in Dallas nor lived a significant portion of his life in that city, then I am a person of significantly low repute. (The verbiage that this commenter chose to assign to Cowboys fans that are not from Dallas was considerably coarser.) I answered that I felt fully justified in my Cowboys fandom, for although I have never lived in Dallas, I did spend the vast majority of my youth in a nearby Texas town that had no more proximate NFL team.

Thus, the insult did not apply to me in this particular case, but I did ponder a question that I have considered several times before. What makes a fan? How do we choose our teams? Is one method empirically more valid than any other? In many cases (not solely in the world of sports) we consider the fierceness of our loyalty a virtue, but certainly loyalty must have a limit.

I told you about my woeful college friend who is a Cleveland fan in the last column. That first year at the university I gained another friend who was a 49ers fan. He was from Houston. When we skeptically asked him how and why he became a 49ers fan, he replied that he had liked them many years - since the mid 80s to be precise. Given that the 49ers won four Super Bowls over the course of the 80s, it probably comes as no surprise to you that we immediately assigned him the derisive nickname of “Bandwagon,” which is still referenced in our circle to this day. To my amusement, I would find out that the first time I went to San Francisco seven years later on a road trip up the California coast was also his first time in San Francisco.

We were yanking his chain, of course, but some sports fans do take this extremely seriously. I intend my weekly signoff on this column to be humorous, but there is something inherently repellant about fair weather fans. That said, could you truly blame a child for being inspired by the success of Joe Montana and his teams of that decade? I myself had sympathies for the Dolphins when I was extremely young, and I am not certain my justification went much further than the fact that I have always thought dolphins were just about the coolest animal there is. I have never been to Miami in my life.

I invite you to perform a thought exercise. Suppose someone you know has a favorite team. Now suppose one of the following items is true. Which is the most forgivable? Which is the least forgivable?

  • This person has no direct geographic ties to the team, but for whatever reason this team was the favorite of a parent, and this person would like to continue that support out of loyalty or honor.

  • The team was on television frequently when this person was a kid, and the kid acquired a liking for them. Perhaps the team was particularly successful, and it was fun to watch a winner. Again, there are no geographic ties.

  • This person might only have a passing interest in sports and might usually root for his or her original hometown. Suddenly, the local team achieves success. He or she would now seem to be the biggest fan around and speaks with the fervor of someone who suffered in watching the team through all the years of losing.

  • A team becomes successful, and this person with no geographic ties whatsoever adopts the team and cheers for them with near immeasurable enthusiasm.


    Perhaps your opinion differs, but by my own personal assessment only with the information given, those were written from least to most obnoxious.

    Consider this, however. What if the person described in D) adopted the New Orleans Saints during the 2009 season? What if the primary reason was that a Super Bowl victory would be a wonderful boon to the city in the devastating wake of Hurricane Katrina four years prior? Does that soften the extent of this bandwagon violation?

    In that spirit, it might not be my primary factor in choosing which team I prefer in any given game, but in the past I have based that decision on wanting to see the team win that would make someone I like happy. I also have been known to root against teams because I would like to see certain people unhappy. In the world of sports where the stakes for the fans are usually ultimately trivial, we can comfortably wish ill will upon those who are not our friends and not feel guilty about that very petty impulse.

    I find it difficult to believe that I am typing this, but just over the past couple months I have come to the realization that I would not be completely opposed to the prospect of the Philadelphia Eagles as Super Bowl winners. I should rephrase that: I am opposed to a championship for the Eagles, but a small part of me could be happy for the satisfaction that it would bestow to some of my newfound internet friends. That might be blasphemy against Cowboys nation, but in my old age I do find that enjoying and appreciating sports is about much more than exclusionary dichotomies.

    I have no plans to ever hop on the Los Angeles Lakers bandwagon, but by society’s unwritten bandwagon rules, at what point am I allowed to cheer for them? I have lived in Los Angeles for over five years. When can I back the Dodgers? Is that more permissible given their longer championship drought? What if I did not live in Los Angeles but wanted to cheer for the Dodgers simply because they were the team of Jackie Robinson over 50 years ago? What if I wanted to cheer against the Dodgers because they broke fictional Terence Mann’s (Field Of Dreams) heart when they moved away from Brooklyn? What if I told you that the real reason I am Cowboys fan was that I thought that James Caan was super cool in his Cowboys t-shirt in the movie Alien Nation?

    The Miami Heat probably gained several bandwagon fans this offseason when they signed their big three free agents. What if the Heat stumble into the playoffs as the seventh or eighth seed in the NBA Eastern Conference, though? Is someone then allowed to root for them as an underdog with empathy for their failed expectations?

    By the unwritten bandwagon rules, are we even allowed to root for underdogs? Isn’t that a form of bandwagon as well? Can someone become a Lions or a Browns fan in the name of masochism and a gloomy outlook on life? If I became a Cubs fan solely because I feel sorry for them, would I be allowed to enjoy it if they won a World Series? Full disclosure: the year that most solidified my Cowboys fandom was their 1-15 season. I have always considered watching those games a badge that earned me the right to enjoy their subsequent Super Bowl wins, but in a sense was I taking advantage of the system?

    Suppose Lord Voldemort purchases your favorite team, signs Hannibal Lecter as head coach, and puts Emperor Palpatine at quarterback. The halftime show consists of ritual puppy and kitten sacrifices and improvised entertainment courtesy of the reality television stars du jour. Meanwhile, Santa Claus (he’s real after all!) purchases your archrival team, hires Atticus Finch as the head coach, and assigns Batman to play the slot receiver. All of the team’s players speak only in the most humble, selfless sound bites and donate their free time and money to your favorite charities.

    Are you allowed to switch sides, or must you stick with those colors and that mascot that now represent pure evil out of the supposedly noble loyalty that bandwagon rules might demand?

    What if you do not want to root for the local team because you consider those who blindly follow the conventions of geographical proximity to be the ones who are joining the bandwagon? Have they ever stopped to consider the interconnectedness of our world in their sports fandom?

    What if you love to watch the NFL but live in Tokyo, Vancouver, or Timbuktu? How do you choose your favorite team in a valid way?

    I suppose if I have a serious point in all this, it is simply this. To paraphrase High Fidelity, we are not talking about Israel versus Palestine, folks. We are only talking about the diversion of cheering for a sports team. That can be an inspiring and fun endeavor, but we need not scrutinize our motivations behind it too intensely.

    My friend the 49ers fan now lives in New York and has taken advantage of his locality by adopting the worst imaginable team for this topic. He recently posited that I could be godfather to his future son. In the tragic happenstance that would see me taking up the mantle of raising that kid, my friend wanted to know what team would be most objectionable to encourage the kid to like. He was giving me one (and only one) out; whatever teams I did not name were fair game. Out of respect for my friend, I would be compelled to pass on all his other rooting interests to his son. That is a tough task, but a hypothetical dying wish by one of my best friends is not something that I would deny.

    Thinking about it further, perhaps I do not even need that out. Maybe I could stomach teaching his son to be a Yankees fan. In return for that concession, I would only ask that he allow me to share all my thoughts about bandwagons.

    C. Robert Dimitri is nothing more than your average American sports fan that has spent far too many hours in front of the television and has absolutely no further credentials. He reserves the right to change any opinions expressed here; unlike the practice of bandwagon sports loyalty, there is virtue in shifting a position when given new information.










    Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

    ← Pajiba Love 12/01/10 | The Dancing Dreidels Means It's Hanukkah! | What's Your Most Personal Movie? →









    Comments

    I think your mind exercise got the latter part of the piece to go off the rails. Voldemort as GM? Palpatine as head coach? Is this the new Raiders?

    I'll give an example from my own experiences: I grew up watching soccer and loving it. I remember vividly the '86 World Cup and the "Hand of God". I measure life by where I am every 4 years between that glorious one-month span of football. But I didn't follow a professional team.

    About a decade ago, Fox Sports started running late night replays of the English Premier League. So I'd catch them. Teams I didn't know about. Players I had rarely heard of. But I kept with it and kept with it until one of the teams took hold of my imagination: Arsenal. It wasn't that they were good or that they had great players; it was all about how they played. They were fast but precise. Brilliantly timed and executed to perfection.

    That was my hook and I got caught.

    I've never been to either Highbury or the Emirates Stadium. Never shaken hands with Bergkamp, Kanu, Vieira, Pires, Henry, Fabregas or any of the Arsenal players. Never stood in the bitter cold just to watch them pass a ball around.

    But I've woken up at 4:30 AM to catch a game. I've hunted down streams to see a choppy, Thai-language broadcast of a game. I've read up and studied on the club, its history and its players. I love Fever Pitch by Nick Hornsby. I've stuck with them and defended them through thick and thin.

    So am I a bandwagon fan?

    Posted by: Fredo at December 1, 2010 2:06 PM

    • We have a family friend who, despite never really being into sports, suddenly became a die-hard lady vols basketball fan rather late in life. She was born and raised in Alabama, had no real ties to the team. She just moved to knoxville, bought a house, and filled it up with orange memorabilia and signed pictures of Pat Summitt. Confuses the shit out of me to this day.

    Posted by: phaedawg at December 1, 2010 2:09 PM

    I think if you become a fan of a team during their big championship run(s), but continue to root for them through the hard times that follow, you can drop the bandwagon label. I've seen people refer to Steeler fans as bandwagoners because they started liking the team in the 70's when they won 4 Super Bowls (had to throw that one in there). Since they've been riding that bandwagon for 30-40 years now, I think it's ok to say they aren't fairweather anymore.

    The fans that annoy me are the ones that jump on a popular team and act as if they've been huge fans of the team all along. It's ok by me to be fairweather fan or bandwagon jumper as long as you recognize yourself as such. Don't say "I've always loved the Penguins!" when you clearly haven't. Just say "Well I didn't watch a lot of hockey before, but that Sid Crosby is awesome, and it's a lot of fun to watch the team win." I won't think any less of you. In fact, I'll admire your self awareness.

    Posted by: L4NkYb at December 1, 2010 2:17 PM

    Excellent subject to hit on. I'm a Denver Broncos fan. I've liked them for longer than I can remember so most likely I became a fan due to something trivial and unrelated like I liked the color or maybe I liked horses a lot when I was small.

    My son isn't much into sports but since everyone else in the house is cheering one NFL team or another he decided he would become a Bengals fan. Because he likes animals and a tiger was the most appealing to him. While I did warn him that the Bengals wouldn't be the best choice wins-wise he didn't care and if he ever gets really into football in later years I won't fault him for his team picking strategy.

    Posted by: Paultera at December 1, 2010 2:20 PM

    "I also have been known to root against teams
    because I would like to see certain people unhappy.    "

    If somebody's day is ruined because of a fucking football game, there's a pretty good chance that the person in question wasn't very happy to begin with. There's a handful of people I know that I stay away from during football season because... well because they're fucking lunatics. Moping around because your team lost? That's like crying over American Idol.

    I'm sorry but that's just the way I see it.

    Nicely written, Mr. Dimitri.

    Posted by: Skitz at December 1, 2010 2:21 PM

    I was and always will be a Raiders fan. The fact that I'll admit it after the last few years proves without doubt that I band no wagon.

    Posted by: admin at December 1, 2010 2:22 PM

    In my days as a toddler, there were no baseball teams in Texas and my grandfather was a great fan of Ted Williams and The Boston Red Sox. When they were on television, he would sit me in his lap and regale me with tales of "The Splendid Splinter" and his exploits not only as a baseball player but as a hunter/fisherman and war hero. He also taught the intricacies of the game, so that by the time I was six years old, I could explain the infield fly rule and when to make a double switch.
    I am a lifelong Red Sox fan for that reason.
    When the Texas Rangers came to Arlington, I did not shift my allegiance but did build a place in my heart for the team and was thrilled when their long suffering fans made it to the World Series.
    In either case, I don't consider it jumping on bandwagons.
    My love for the Cowboys comes naturally. I also lived in that small North Texas town and watched the very first Cowboys game. Been a fan ever since.

    Posted by: Spender at December 1, 2010 2:27 PM

    I am not a baseball fan, but growing up in the northern NJ (NYC) area, I followed (loosely) the Yankees. But I was able to cheer for the Phillies while watching games with my Philly boyfriend, and even felt sad when they lost the Turnpike Series last year (I'd even given him a Turnpike pennant).

    Conversely, in the very early 90s, I developed an interest in ice hockey and the NY Rangers. I followed the team all the madness of a fan, doing homework in front of the tv when games were on, going to see them when the played the Meadowlands because a) it was hella cheap compared to MSG and b) it was fun to taunt the Devils fans. The zenith of this fandom was when the Rangers finally won the Stanley Cup (I was, of all things, at the Opryland hotel for a h.s. quiz bowl national championship when it happened. We were not remotely as triumphant as the Rangers).

    When I got to college, it was harder to watch the games without access to MSG network. But my love for the team took a gigantic nosedive when they acquired Jaromir Jagr AND Ulf Samuelsson. Frickin' Ulf Samuelsson. I had cheered AGAINST him so hard for the past 4 years, cursing him as a goon...and I just couldn't reconcile myself to the fact that (aside from how stupid it was to pick up an old thug) I was now supposed to cheer for every pounding he administered.

    The Rangers haven't recaptured my allegiance since, not in a serious way.

    But I've stayed true to my NY Giants through all their ups and downs. :)

    Posted by: Sara Tonin at December 1, 2010 2:28 PM

    I grew up 5 minutes from Shea Stadium, and, as such, I'm still a Mets fan, despite my better judgment. Also, I've been a Manchester United fan for nearly 20 years. I've never been to Old Trafford to see them play. But I root hard for them.

    The point being, root for whoever the fuck you want to root for, but be prepared to justify who you root for and why.

    Posted by: Gus at December 1, 2010 2:35 PM

    AWESOME column. This especially hits home for me because of my Blackhawks arc. I get a LOT of crap for my rabid Blackhawks fandom after their Stanley Cup win. And in the vein of this article, I'm going to give a real and (I hope) convincing example about why "bandwagon" fans can be real fans too:

    When I was a little kid growing up in the Chicago suburbs, my dad used to take us to a lot of Blackhawks and Bulls games. This was golden era Bulls, so of course I loved that, but I always preferred hockey in and of itself (but I WAS about 9 years old, so I think my being starstruck into following basketball more can be forgiven.) I went through an unfortunate and lengthy "I am a girl and none of my friends like sports and therefore shouldn't like sports" phase as a teenager, but started getting back into sports in and after college. When the Hawks games finally started getting broadcast, I would catch a game here and there at a bar, and started keeping my ears open about how they were doing during the seaseons, and watched several of the 2009 playoff games. Last year, I started watching more games, occasionally went to a game with my older brother, but still wasn't rabid/religious about it. But I watched every single game of the postseason. And now this season, I watch every game, bleed red and white, and have, on occasion, actually cried over our more embarrassing losses.

    So I get a lot of crap about my timing. My defense is this: I've ALWAYS felt an affinity for this sport and this team. I was already headed towards obsessive fandom, but it would have taken longer without an exciting playoff series. On the other hand, even if we hadn't won the Stanley Cup, after realizing how awesome my life is when I'm watching hockey every other night, I would STILL be watching all the games.

    So am I a bandwagon fan because I've only become obsessive after a great season and Stanley Cup win? Is it just poor timing? How long will it take before I get credit for being a "real" fan? Can I claim that now, since I've loved this sport and Chicago teams in general since I was little?

    I like to think it's possible to have a little of both, and hope I don't incur anyone's wrath by admitting this.

    Posted by: GwenBear at December 1, 2010 2:39 PM

    I support my local NHL team, DALLAS STARS, and have ever since discovering hockey. I'm convinced that hockey is the game cats would play because of its fast pace--no whistles, no huddles, and ice, ice baby. Anyway, I like the Stars pretty much no matter how well they do just because I like hockey and these guys give so much to the community.

    Last year, however, I found myself becoming a fan of the Phoenix Coyotes because they were beating the Red Wings in the playoffs. [Disclosure: I hate the Red Wings (though less now 'cause they had Modano until he became too injured to play).] I liked their plucky style of playing and felt sympathy for their management/ownership woes. I liked them so well I bought a couple of t-shirts and am following their exploits this season.

    I did live in Phoenix as a child, but really have no connections now. So, I'm both a rabid local fan and a non-connected geographical fan.

    btw, I never did go gaga over the Texas Rangers this year. I tried to like them for a decade when I first moved to Texas, but they sucked for so long, I just couldn't get emotional about their adventures this year.

    Posted by: mamasez at December 1, 2010 2:42 PM

    The only pro team I cheer for with geographical ties is the St. Louis Cardinals. A lot of my family lives there. Band wagon jumping, at least in my opinion, is that jackass that claims "I've loved this team FOREVER!!!", can't name ANYTHING relevant beyond the previous 10 years about the team/franchise/coaching staff, has no knowledge of rivalries, and jumps off the ship when it starts sinking, claiming "Oh, I never liked that team". If you do any of the previously listed things, the actual fans of this team should get to beat you with a foam finger. My NFL team will always be the Bears. I like them for reasons I can't actually explain. It's often painful, hard to watch, and I still do. This year is pretty frickin' awesome though.

    Posted by: Melody at December 1, 2010 2:43 PM

    I've never really understood why that insult was supposed to mean anything, or why people were so eager to discredit the arbitrary or capricious support someone has for a sports team.

    Look, you can make a perfectly legitimate argument that the Cubs suck because they are poorly managed and riddled with bad contracts for diminishing returns of over-hyped free agents. But what does it matter that they sell a lot of tickets to casual fans who go to games to drink and enjoy themselves, win or lose? What does it matter if millions of people wear Cubs gear and don't really know much about the team? I grew up watching the Cubs with my Dad, day baseball with Harry Carry on WGN every summer. I'm sure there are millions of casual fans who endure year after year of mediocrity and then perk up when things are going well.

    Who decided it is such a crime to follow a team that is doing well? I respect the die-hard, bury-me-in-my-Steelers-sweatshirt superfan as much as the next guy, but at some point you have to stand back and admit it is a little ridiculous. As Jerry Seinfeld points out, you're rooting for clothes. Players and coaches change, so does upper management, and owners are usually assholes. Why can't I, as a fan, jump around and follow teams that are interesting and competitive?

    I enjoy watching the NFL but I really am not tied to any specific team. I like the Bears because my Dad was a Bears fan, but most years the Bears aren't very interesting. When I was a kid in the 80's I followed the 49ers because they were good and I liked Montana, Rice, and Young. Now I enjoy following the Patriots. They are well-run, fun to watch, and interesting in November (and January).

    I'm closest to Chicago, but for some reason I have an affinity for Boston and Philadelphia teams as well. I tend to dislike teams from New York, LA, Florida, and Texas. I perk up and follow whoever is doing good at the time (Red Sox and Phillies, Celtics and Bulls, Eagles and Patriots). Last season when the Blackhawks won the Stanley Cup I jumped right on that bandwagon, too. (And discovered that playoff hockey is the shit.) I was a textbook bandwagon fan. So what? It was a great run and a lot of fun to watch? I'm not thumping my chest or calling sports talk radio, but I'll watch the games and talk about it at the office.

    And I can't tell you how many times I have heard people try to insult Notre Dame because of the fans. Why? There's too many of them, they only like the school because they are Irish and/or Catholic, and they only jump on the bandwagon when the team is doing good. So what? What does it matter? At least they aren't burning couches and spitting on visiting fans.

    Why is being a casual sports fan and following a successful (read: interesting) team such a bad thing?

    Posted by: Yossarian at December 1, 2010 2:48 PM

    There is another loyalty wrinkle to consider - postseason-play loyalty. I primarily follow collegiate sports (and within that subset, mostly American football), and find myself in an unusual set of circumstances come bowl season.

    Now, I love my Florida Gators through thick and thin (thin this year) because I spent almost all of my college career there. (Left before graduating, finished my degree at the local college 15 years later, long story.) I hate quite a few of the other SEC teams with an almost religious fervor. However, once postseason games start, I am SEC all the way. Although I cannot stand the University of Tennessee, I will cheer for and defend them in their bowl game as if they were my alma mater.

    As for the bandwagoneers, it's times like these (7-4 season) that we get to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    Posted by: Kati at December 1, 2010 2:49 PM

    Excellent article Sir. Very interesting

    Posted by: "luker" the barbarian at December 1, 2010 2:51 PM

    I think that the only way to "jump on" another team is when they are down, and the more they suck at that time, the better. For example, I became a Seattle Mariner fan when they lost something like 100 games. The next season, they won the play in game with the Angels and I had no problem with that at all.
    I hate band-wangoners who have no pain in the game. As an Oregon Alumni who remembers when Oregon and Oregon State played the last scoreless tie in College football history, I know the pain, the suffering, inside and out. I still cringe when I see Dennis Dixon slump to the Arizona turf in 2007. The thought of Bill Musgrave cracking his collar bone in 1988 still sends me reeling.
    Look, if you can't point to a painful moment in your fandom than you are not legit. In fact, the pain is required to savor the victory, IMHO. And if you never felt the pain, than you are actually missing out on some of the most joyful elements of sports, because it makes the high of victory that much higher. I'm telling you, watching Kenny Wheaton intercept Damon Huard in 1995 and sending the Ducks to the Rose Bowl was so much more intense than I can imagine, so much more intense than seeing *yet another* championship banner hung up. Is the 26th banner still as sweet as the 25th?
    Lastly, that smug jackhole you have on the cover for this article embodies all I hate about Yankee Fan.

    Posted by: Rob Hartsock at December 1, 2010 2:52 PM

    I grew up in Northern New Jersey, but my father grew up in one of the boroughs and is a Yankees fan. My grandfather was also a Yankees fan, as was my great grandfather. I am consistently accused of being a Bandwagon fan because of my deep and unending love for the Yankees, despite the fact that I now live in the South, but for me it is familial and it is very important to my father (in fact, he once told me he would rather I marry an axe-murderer than a Red Sox fan. I like to hope he was kidding.) It's something we've always shared and I am thankful to have had the Yankees in my life.

    Then again, I understand the hatred for Bandwagon fans. I cannot tell you how many Patriots fans I've met down here that love them because they're REAL GOOD, Y'ALL.

    Posted by: Kaylasn at December 1, 2010 2:55 PM

    Kati, excellent point about college and cheering for your whole conference. I have and will cheer for any other SEC team, except for Kentucky because my hatred of them surpasses any other feelings about conference loyalty.

    Yossarian, I have no issue with the casual fan and yes, there is a marked difference between a casual fan and a band wagon jumper. Casual fans are just there to have fun and enjoy the experience. Band wagon fans act completely different. As far as disliking Notre Dame, there are a number of different reasons that people do. I will give Notre Dame fans one thing, I've met far fewer band wagon jumpers for ND than some other universities (Texas comes to mind).

    On your point of just cheering for clothes, that can be true in some cases. However, there are people that will cheer for an individual player or players instead of a whole team. That's not being a band wagon jumper or a casual fan. It's a completely different form of fandom. Myself, I like Jeter and Rivera from the Yankees. Do I cheer for the whole team? Eh, sometimes, but more often than not I'm annoyed as hell by decisions made by the front office. It doesn't change the way I feel about those players though.

    Posted by: Melody at December 1, 2010 3:01 PM

    I live nowhere near any major sports franchise. I would hate to think that because I have a fondness for a certain team that I would be a bandwagoner, but I don't worry too much about the label because most of the teams I follow tend to do rather poorly. I guess that makes me an underdog lover, which is not a form of bandwagoning.

    To use your 2009 NO Saints example, I think there is a difference between getting excited about a cinderella story, and getting excited about a team just because everyone else is getting excited about them.

    Posted by: grizzle at December 1, 2010 3:02 PM

    I'm in the UK. During the 80s, American Football started to get quite popular over here. I was 8 in 1987 when me and my school friends got into it. We all decided that we'd each have a team to support but that no-one else in our circle of friends could support the same team (I think there was about 8 or 10 of us). So naturally the Cowboys are amongst the first to be picked, as are the 49ers. The Raiders played in black which made them cool so they were amongst the favourites. And someone goes for Denver, and Washington etc. But I didn't care because I had my heart set on one team, because I had a reason to support my team.

    I was an Aries.

    I wanted to support the Rams.

    My choice would lead to YEARS of laughter, abuse, ridicule (especially after moving from La-La, as being based there was a saving grace in some friend's eyes), and comments like "I can't believe you STILL support them" or questions as simple as "Why?" but I didn't care, they were my team.

    And it was all worth it for that one Superbowl season years later :)

    Warner's pass to Bruce, 'The Tackle'; it was like lining up the last 12 years and flipping it the bird.

    If Sam Bradford turns out to be the biggest let-down in sporting history, if the team does move and become the Arkansas Chuggerbugs, if they all start playing in pink lace hotpants, it won't matter one bit :)

    Posted by: Bronson at December 1, 2010 3:09 PM

    I was born and raised in Minnesota, so I'm a fan of every Minnesota sports team. I think it's safe to say that no fan of any Minnesota sports team could ever be called a bandwagon jumper. We've just never had enough success to get people on to the bandwagon.

    However, I'm also, like one of the previous posters, a dedicated fan of Arsenal. I could be called a bandwagon jumper, since I wasn't raised a soccer fan, and didn't get into the team until '05, although I had always vaguely supported them since on a trip to England when I was ten years old, my dad bought an Arsenal hat for me at a sporting goods store in London, which I picked out because I thought the gun was cool. I remembered that when I revisited England in '04, and started following them again in '04-'05. Unfortunately, I appear to have brought the curse of the Minnesota sports fan on Arsenal, since we haven't won anything of substance since then. On the plus side, it establishes my credentials as a non-bandwagon fan.

    Because you're right, there's nothing sports fans hate more than bandwagon fans. I have friends who cheer for the Niners, Manchester United, the Yankees, and the Lakers, for no other reason than that those were the successful teams when they were growing up. Even though they make have stuck by them through thick and thin, I can't help thinking a bit less of their sports fandom. Especially since bandwagon fans rarely pick the cool teams. The Yanks, the Mancs, the Lakers,these are the behemoths. The only people who should be allowed to root for these teams are the ones who grew up in the area. If a kid from SoDak wants to start pulling for the Buffalo Bills for some reason, that's fine with me.

    I suppose my real problem with bandwagon fans, is that they often seem to be trying to avoid the experiences that all sports fans, to some extent, share. Most sports fans know the pain of going for years without a title, of having a team that has no chance to succeed, to be a doormat, and thus, have the shared joy of unexpectedly having success. Yankee fans almost never have failure. So if a non-New Yorker picks the Yanks, they're probably trying to avoid having to cheer for a team that will stink. And for some people, it's a way to avoid taking teasing about the failures of their team. That's the worst kind of fan. Anyway, good post. Interesting thoughts.

    Posted by: jmag at December 1, 2010 3:11 PM

    Anyone who jumps from winner to winner within the same sport is a fucking disgrace. I had a friend in elementary school who would proclaim the Super Bowl winner as his favorite team the following year. One year my favorite team was blown out by a bunch of assholes in the big game and he sauntered into school the next day talking shit to me about how his new team embarrassed mine. I kicked his ass on the spot and got 3 days of in-school suspension. Totally worth it because he was a huge sportsdouche.

    Any other form of fandom is mostly excusable compared to this team-jumping philosophy, including rooting for a team based on love (your spouse/parent/child/friend loves them and it's fun to root together). Any new fans just need to prepare for a lot of suspicion from the established fans because they get to enjoy the team's success with a clean slate, and that feels unfair.

    The 2004 Red Sox are the ideal example of an established, tortured organization getting bandwagoned to death after their long-awaited World Series win. It's bad enough that new fans latched onto that team, but then they got spoiled again by the '07 title. They didn't endure the agony of so many years of coming up short. They weren't endlessly tortured by Babe Ruth's mystique. They just waltzed in and rolled around in our hard-earned glory*. I cried after both championships this decade because I knew how precious those titles were**. 1986 was my second taste of sports devastation (see aforementioned Super Bowl story for my first), and I was absolutely inconsolable for 2 weeks after Boone's home run in '03. Mrs. Kballs still marvels at how depressed I was, but it also served notice early in our marriage that my passion for sports was absolute.

    And I guess that's my definition of a true fan: If your team suffers an agonizing loss, and that loss affects you far beyond its immediate aftermath, then I consider you to be a "true" fan. It's not so much the "when" of your allegiances, it's the "how much." Unfortunately, that "how much" gets taken to unneccessary and unacceptable extremes, but that's a discussion for another day.

    *I know how ridiculous this sounds, but that's what sports does to me. I can't stand fringe or bandwagon fans who suddenly become Superfans the second they win a championship. So I guess that's 2 examples of sportsdouchery.
    **And no, I've never been to Boston. I desperately want to see a game at Fenway, but it hasn't happened yet. I became a fan because I was entranced with the video of Fisk's homerun in '75. I wasn't born when it happened, but it sucked me in nonetheless.

    Posted by: Kballs at December 1, 2010 3:16 PM

    It's ok by me to be fairweather fan or bandwagon jumper as long as you recognize yourself as such.

    I live in Los Angeles and I proudly admit that I am a Suns bandwagoner. Watching Steve Nash play makes me smile. I was giddy when Nash won those back to back MVPs. I was even giddier when they went to the Western Conference Finals last season against the fucking Lakers. And I have always hated the Lakers. I root for them to lose. I'd even root for the Spurs (whom I hate with a passion) to beat the Lakers. And there are not enough words on this planet, in this universe, in any language that expresses my hatred for the Lakers.

    And to further GwenBear's argument, I grew up in NY (and was a child growing up in the 90's.) I am a Yankees fan. I grew up as a Yankees fan and I root for them to this day. They won 3 championships in the late 90's and 4 championships in 5 years. So am I a wagoner? When I hear people defend their fandom by saying "I was a fan of so-and-so since 1975 and have loved so-and-so team through all its ups and downs," and I haven't experienced those downs, is it my fault that my childhood coincided with those ups? Is it my fault that I can't defend myself of my fandom because I was still in diapers when the Yankees sucked in the 80's? Is it my fault I'm young?

    Posted by: noonoo at December 1, 2010 3:25 PM

    Fandom of a particular club is galvanized during a formative period or when associated with an alarmingly positive experience.

    My grandfather had season tickets to the Cowboys during their first season. My entire family (both sets of grandparents) watched the Cowboys religiously. I almost had no choice in the matter. I was and am a Cowboys fan. Being born and raised in Dallas helps too.

    Conversely, I fall prey to the trap of choosing the front-runner when I have no dog in the fight. I swear my allegiance to Arsenal (English Soccer) only because I loved playing them on FIFA 2005. I had no knowledge of the "Invincibles" from 2001. And, I knew that Man U was the NY Yankees of the EPL--which was enough of a deterrent to steer clear.

    Posted by: gunnertec at December 1, 2010 3:36 PM

    This is sort of in line with a philisophical discussion I heard (okay started) a couple of days ago. Would the Nazis have been more or less successful if, instead of the swaztika, they used as their symbol the Miami Dolphins' logo? Conquest and genocide ... but look at his little helmet! He's sooooo adorable!

    I'm not saying that all dolphins are Nazis, but the aryian ones ... you gotta keep an eye on them!

    Posted by: Leftylad at December 1, 2010 3:42 PM

    Thanks for the fantastic feedback and stories, everyone! This is my favorite comments section yet on one of these columns.

    Posted by: C. Robert Dimitri at December 1, 2010 4:02 PM

    CRD, it's just fun to be able to have a more philosophical discussion about sports than one can typically have with a fan. It's hard to get most people to go beyond, "The Pirates suck, the Steelers need to run the ball more, and the Pens are winning the next 5 Stanley Cups." I never understood why all forms of intellectual discussion have to be completely ignored when it comes to sports.

    Posted by: L4NkYb at December 1, 2010 4:14 PM

    Oh dear, oh dear. Gunnertec, the Invincibles were in the 2003-2004 season, when TH14 was reigning supreme. Of course, I'm not one to talk, because, as I've said, I really started following the Gooners rabidly during the 04-05 season, although in my defense, they haven't won anything since.

    Posted by: jmag at December 1, 2010 6:25 PM

    Great column and great posts.noonoo :It's no fault to be young.You're very lucky,so enjoy it.phaedawg:Several women in my Texas Sunday school class had a similar reaction to the Lady Vols during their undefeated year.Perhaps some hypnotic reaction to Pat's stare ?Gwenbear:Excellent introspective comments....This whole discussion is worthy of consideration by a group of psychologists interested in the subject of sports as related to our psyches.

    Posted by: TexasVol at December 1, 2010 6:44 PM

    I was born a Redskins fan.
    Other than the fact that I was born in Virginia Beach (the only member of my family to be born in Virginia [Navy brat]), I really don't know why (especially after our recent embarrassing MNF loss to Philly).
    My father has always been a die-hard Oakland fan, my mother and sister, Dallas fans, so it's not like I was nudged in that direction.
    It's just the way I'm wired; hard-wired, so I will die a Redskins fan.

    Posted by: Rykker at December 1, 2010 7:05 PM

    I've lived in Pennsylvania my whole life. I was born and raised (and subsequently moved back to) a small town in the northeastern part of the state. I live about 15 miles from the NY state border. I'm roughly equidistant to Philly and NYC. I've been a Yankees fan and a Giants fan since 1982. Not because I live close to NY state - I had no concept of geography when I was seven. My reasons were pure (and awesome).

    In the early 80s, Dave Winfield played for the Yankees. To my seven-year-old mind, Winfield (I thought it was Windfield) was similar to Skywalker. Decision made. I pictured the Yankees taking the field with lightsabers.

    Also in the 80s, we'd receive a catalog for Christmas each year called the Wishbook. It was full of toys. That year, they had a section of stuffed animal mascots for all the football teams. I went through the mascots and tried to decide which one would win in a fight. The dolphin was cool, but not much good in a fight. The eagle was pretty badass, but would be no match for the jet. Then I saw the giant. Giants were pretty cool. And there really was no stipulation for how big the giant had to be. Goliath was eight feet tall, but the giant in Mickey and the Beanstalk was enormous. My giant would be big enough to squish any of the other mascots in his hand. The other teams never stood a chance.

    Posted by: Brigs at December 1, 2010 7:54 PM

    That was very long but worth reading. I've had this debate before only to reach this conclusion: it's just sports. Root for whoever the hell you want, but don't presume to tell others who they can or can't root for.

    Posted by: Mick J at December 1, 2010 10:16 PM

    I used to be a Sonics fan but anybody who has followed the NBA knows what happened there. I started rooting for the Celtics because they acquired Ray Allen (one of my all-time favorite Sonics); the first year he was on the team they won the NBA title so I understand it looks pretty strange. I don't consider it bandwagoning; even though the Thunder retained basically the same roster and front office and such but hell, even the Sonics' name, logo, and history stayed in Seattle so OKC may as well be an expansion team for all I care. and considering how egregiously the ownership fucked the city over I feel like I can start being the fan of whoever the hell I damn well please in terms of pro basketball.

    Posted by: ivn at December 1, 2010 10:35 PM

    All I know is I want to punch the motherfucker in the header pic right in the face.

    Posted by: Sonny Corleone at December 1, 2010 10:39 PM

    My friend (we live in North Jersey) is a Boston Celtics fan. Not only do I hate this because I hate Boston, as all New Yorkers/North Jersey sports fans do, but because he became fans their Championship Season in 2008. He tries to claim he's not a bandwagon jumper because he's now been a fan for 2 years, which is the lamest excuse ever.

    But it really burns me up because I am a Nets fan. And the Nets are an awful basketball team with no real hope for the future. I wish I could be a bandwagon jumper with no shame. I can't though. My only solace is that because I was born in New York and the first baseball game I ever went to was a Yankees game, I can be a Yankees fan without being a "bandwagon".

    Also, while the NFL has clear bandwagons (Patriots, Steelers) a lot of other bandwagons (Broncos, Cowboys) aren't always good teams. Simply because the NFL has a sports league is the most volatile. This season is a perfect example of that. The Colts are 6-5 while the Falcons are 9-2. The Vikings, Bengals, and Cardinals, all playoff teams last year, aren't even in the HUNT this year. Gotta love the NFL.

    Posted by: Littlejon2001 at December 2, 2010 1:09 AM

    Thanks for these thought exercises, C. Robert.

    As a Pittsburgh Pirates fan, I am about as far to the opposite of a bandwagon fan as it's possible to be. I grew up in a Pittsburgh suburb and became entranced by the pennant race (with the Dodgers and Giants) of 1965, when I was 8. I have had to endure huge swaths of suck (the mid-1980s, the past two decades) with a few scattered rewards (1971, 1979) and at least one gigantic disappointment (1992). We remaining Pirates fans console ourselves with the knowledge that when (if) the team is ever good again, we will enjoy the twin pleasures of rooting for a winning team AND ruthlessly ridiculing the bandwagon fans who "always rooted for the Pirates, even when they were bad."

    Yeah, sure you did. We know who the REAL fans are. Like old Joe McCarthy, we have a list ...

    *holds up and shakes random sheets of paper from my desk*

    ... and you're not on it, Bucco.

    So we have the reverse-snob thing going for us.

    Steelers fans are obnoxious, and so are several Steelers (but not Polamalu, who walks on water). I have no truck with Steelers fans who aren't immediate relatives.

    Penguins fans are cool, because the Penguins are cool. Besides being good, they do PR like you wouldn't believe. One of the best-run community organizations I've ever heard of, re: treating fans like they're important.

    On a side note:

    "in my old age I do find that enjoying and appreciating sports is about much more than exclusionary dichotomies."

    Agree with this. The longer I live, the less I find reasons to hate anybody (though there are people I don't mind seeing lose -- I'm looking at you, Rich Rod -- I don't actively root for it anymore). I've been asking a question among my working acquaintances, who watch ballgames for a living:

    How long does Notre Dame football have to suck before people stop hating Notre Dame?

    One guy I work with says, "Never, I will always hate Notre Dame." And I suppose at one time I may have disliked the disproportionate attention paid to a team that mostly hasn't been very good for a couple decades. And I can still dislike the institutional arrogance of a school that thinks its football team is above belonging to a conference, but someday the world will quit bowing to Notre Dame and the gig will be up on that.

    But really, once you've lost to Navy three or four straight times, what pleasure can I derive from your next loss to Navy?

    Thank goodness for the Yankees, I do so enjoy when they get bounced from the playoffs.

    Posted by: , at December 2, 2010 10:23 AM

    *--Oops, should be "pennant race of 1966, when I was 9."

    Posted by: , at December 2, 2010 10:43 AM

    Isn't it odd that when our favorite indie cult band or actor is suddenly involved with a hit song or movie that attracts millions of new fans, we often criticize ... the new fans?

    No.

    The band sold out, went commercial.

    The actor was slumming for a paycheck.

    Why don't we blame our favorite team for attracting the bandwagon fans by getting good? Curse you, Andrew McCutchen, my Pirates are supposed to SUCK and STAY SUCKY forever so only I, a true connosse ... conasss ... fan of wretched baseball can enjoy them!

    Posted by: , at December 2, 2010 11:20 AM

    The key factor in a bandwagon is loyalty. "Adopting" a team is perfectly ok and acceptable, even in a long distance fandom, if you remain loyal to them in good times and in bad. The true definition of bandwagoning is adopting a team when and only when they become good and abandoning them as soon as the team hits hard times.

    Posted by: Jeff at December 2, 2010 12:53 PM

    Being from Philly-ish, I have the following to say: bandwagon or not, you're still a douchebag for liking the Cowboys.

    I kid, I kid. :) Kind of.

    Posted by: Adrienne Saia at December 4, 2010 11:28 PM