Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Bandwagoners



With the recent sweep of our beloved Utah Jazz an epidemic has once again reared its ugly head. I speak of course of that disease that infects even the best of us at times, Bandwagonism. Out of the wood work has come a plethora of suddenly loud and proud Lakers fans, and I submit that something needs to be done. These “fans” have no right whatsoever to be fans. Now I don't necessarily have a problem with the Lakers, Yankees, Cowboys, or any of the other “storied” franchises themselves (although I will always root for their demise and failure) but I do, however, have a problem with those cowardly and spineless souls that we call “bandwagoners”. Bandwagoner is defined as “A person who suddenly elects to become a fan, and outwardly displays that fanhood, of a team that has only recently enjoyed success for the selfish reasons of gloating or seeming cooler than they really are to their friends and acquaintances.”


My attention was once again drawn to this topic when I happened to stumble upon my good friend AJ's recent Facebook status which read, and I quote (hence the quotation marks) “Austin Joseph Palmer Lake Show Sweep. Goodbye Jazz.” In response to this I wrote “You would. I can't believe there was enough room left on the bandwagon for you to get on this late. I literally have never heard you utter a single word regarding your fanhood of the Lakers in my life. And I have probably spent more time with you over the last three years than anyone, minus you know who of course (Becky). This is just like you telling everyone you're from the OC and are pre-med.” If you ask AJ he will more than likely refute the aforementioned charges but I'm here to tell you that I speak the truth. He, along with countless others, were conveniently quiet during the Lakers-Jazz series but once the Lakers secured the sweep, here comes the trash talk.


On a side note I feel it should be required of all Utah citizens to at least like the Jazz. I don't consider myself a die hard, but I do pledge my allegiance to Utah's only major professional team (I clarify “major” because I guess Real SL, the Bees, the Grizzlies, and the Owls are considered professional too). It's all we in Utah have, and we should unite and stick together. Have some beehive pride for crying out loud. Nothing is more annoying then a born and raised Utahn that likes the Lakers, Spurs, or Nuggets. The only reason they would do such a thing is because they think it separates themselves from rest of us or somehow it makes them original or unique. It doesn't, it makes you a sell-out.


This brings me to my next, and perhaps most important, point; fanhood qualifications. In order to be a legitimate fan of a team I feel you have to meet one of five qualifications. If you can meet at least one of these qualifications, then by all means paint your face, buy a bumper sticker, and root for your team. The qualifications are as follows:


      1. You must have a geographical tie to the supposed team. Either the team is in your actual geographical region or it is the closest in proximity to your location. An exception here is if you used to live in a city with a supposed favorite team, then you are, by all means, legally allowed like that team.

      2. You must have a tie to said team through family or friends. It is allowed to like a team that you have some sort of relative or close friend that is a part of it somehow. For example, a friend of mine's brother was drafted by the Orioles, and he is now entitled to like that team regardless of geographic location or any other matter.

      3. If a parent is a lifelong fan of a team through some sort of a previous allowable and legal tie to that team, then the children may also legally claim that team. For example, a coach of mine is a die hard Pirates fan because he was raised in Pittsburgh as a child, which is an acceptable reason to like such a downtrodden franchise (see qualification #1), and therefore his children, if they should make such a poor and unwise choice, are indeed allowed to like the Pirates even though they have no other acceptable ties to the team. (run-on sentence?)

      4. I also submit that it is allowable to move from bandwagon fan to legitimate fan if you have paid your dues. If you started out, for selfish reasons, as a bandwagon fan, but managed to stay on that bandwagon for 6+ years, then the law allows for you to politely exit the bandwagon and climb on with the normal and acceptable fans. For example, I know many such people that love the Bulls. When asked why, they respond with “because I loved MJ when I was a kid”. So, if they were converted to Bulls in the Michael Jordan days and they are still committed and have met the 6 year rule, then they may no more be ridiculed for being “bandwagoners”.

      5. The final qualification to become a legitimate fan is to declare your fanhood for a team that is utterly terrible. In that case, no one cares if you are a bandwagon fan. If you, out of nowhere, wake up one morning and decide that you are now a New Jersey Nets fan, then by all means go for it, they need you. The reason the board has approved such a measure is that you gain nothing from joining a team like this' bandwagon. No bragging rights or trash talking opportunities will become yours because of this recent conversion. An example of this would be Mr. Frei's semi-recent conversion to the Pirates. The Pirates have had 17 straight losing seasons and haven't won a playoff game since Clemente was hitting in the 3 hole, and so no one cares if he, for reasons completely unknown to any of us, wants to subject himself to that sort of torment and humiliation.


I hope the previous paragraphs make you step back and take a look at yourself. Ask yourself the hard questions and determine where you sit with your fanhood. If you have made the mistake of being a bandwagoner, then you should know that the first step of repentance is recognition. It's not too late for you.


(P.s. I know that AJ does meet a qualification or two, I have to give him that, but it was just his choice to keep his fanhood a secret for the last 3 years until yesterday that threw me for a loop. Let it also be made public that I hereby challenge Mr. Frei and Mr. Nielson to explain their fanhood of the Nuggets and the Cowboys to the people of this court, if they can.)


9 comments:

  1. Love the criteria and I promise to live within the parameters. As I say,,"go Colts"

    ReplyDelete
  2. May I also challenge Blair to explain his embarrasing allegiance to the Utes...though he's a current BYU student. I wouldn't call it bandwaggon though...since it's not like they're actually good at anything anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with all that. What about little league? For example, if I'm from Utah and my little league team was the Red Sox, could I claim to be a Red Sox fan as long as I claimed fanhood loyalty since those little league days?

    What about name association? As a kid I started cheering for the Colts because my name is Colton. I would add that this is a silly reason for an adult to like a team but for a kid it is legit.

    So here's my observation about Lakers fans. How come you don't see as many Clippers fans here in Utah as much as Lakers fans? How come most people from So Cal like USC football but not UCLA football? Why do they cheer for the LA Galaxy but not Chivas? How does one from LA determine whether to like the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (most ridiculous sports name ever) or the LA Dodgers? Basically, if you're from LA you get to pick and choose which team is most convenient to cheer for so why not pick the team that wins?

    ReplyDelete
  4. @colton and cedar: It does present quite a dilemma when a city such as LA has multiple professional teams in the same sports (Clippers vs. Lakers, Angels vs. Dodgers, etc.). I would imagine for the baseball fans it depends on proximity. Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium are at least a good hour away from each other, so whatever place is easiest to go to is probably where fans of that team are born. As for Lakers vs. Clippers, that's a little more difficult since they play in the same arena. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say more people like the Lakers since they have a history of winning whereas the Clippers have a long, long history of not winning.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I love the little league idea, as I feel there are thousands of fans out there that owe their fanhood to the simple fact that they were on the Indians as a 9 year old. The similar name thing is a bit more of a stretch. However, both circumstances meet minimum specifications for fanhood under qualification #4 of the Fanhood Manifesto (aka the 6+ year rule). And it's true that there is most definitely way more USC and Lakers fans (I'd say Angels vs. Dodgers is closer but there are still more Angels fans). So if I ever meet a die hard Clips, Bruins, and Dodgers fan, then I will tip my cap and shake their hand.

    ReplyDelete
  6. what if a fan (i won't mention any names) didn't know anything about a sport, was asked by a number of boys what team she wanted to win and made a bet...only to have that team win the superbowl and she earned lots of money and embarrasing acts they had to do under her direction. Then she became a fan- not knowing it was a so called "bandwagon" team? it was just random... then what is she badly named a bandwagoner?

    ReplyDelete
  7. After reviewing the facts of the case I cast my all-powerful vote and say no fanhood. Being a legal and legitimate fan implies some sort of loyalty or sacrifice on behalf on that team, and a lucky guess a few months ago does not imply such an act. She must called a bandwagoner until she meets the 6+ year rule. Although i will say you can call me a bandwagon fan all you want if I picked the Super Bowl correctly and won a ton on money...

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm a Lakers fan since age 5, but not through any of your qualifications....might I suggest qualification #6?

    6. Your father never proclaimed to be a fan of any particular team in said sport. You happened to watch a game for the first time and ended up a fan by default of the team that won. (Bonus points for not being born in the USA so you have no legitimate hometown team)

    Or is that grandfathered in under the 6+ year rule since I was probably bandwagoning at the time even though I only knew of the existence of 2 NBA teams?

    Saw the Lakers play the Pistons when I was 5 years old and living in Texas. The Lakers won and Magic was fun to watch. I also thought he and Isaiah were brothers since they hugged after the game and I thought guys only hugged if they were brothers.

    I also proclaim to be a Dolphins fan through qualifications 2 and 5 (2 years ago).

    Finally...you say citizens of Utah must at least like the Jazz, I disagree. You later refer to born and raised Utahns...that's ok, but it can't be required of transplants.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yeah call me what you want but I still got the $$! Thanks!!

    ReplyDelete