Non-Dorky Poll: Rooting for the Enemy

When my team is knocked out of the play-offs, I tend to root for whatever team beat them. My logic is, if my team lost to the eventual winner, then my team is second overall. Don't let actual logic dictate sports fanaticism, though.

The Angels made the playoffs but were swept right away. I've been rooting for the Red Sox ever since. Why? Because they seem to be the best team out there, and I like to see the best team win. It just seems right.

In the recently concluded Rugby World Cup (held every four years), I was generally rooting for (in this order):
⢠Ireland (who unexpectedly bombed);
⢠the various "minnows" (countries who are not traditional rugby powers, i.e. ones not in the Six Nations or Tri Nations yearly series, such as the USA, Tonga, Japan, Georgia, et al.);
⢠anyone but a Tri Nations country (i.e., anyone but New Zealand, Australia, and South Africa);
⢠neutral.
Why? Well, I liked living in Ireland; the minnows played some good rugby plus being underdogs; and I'm not sure why I took a dislike to the Tri Nations.

Ultimately, South Africa won (deservedly so), beating cup-holders England (who were expected to, and came very close to, bombing); whilst Argentina (a super-minnow who really should be in one of the major yearly competitions) was third, beating France (who were the hosts and one of the favourites). So I was supporting England and Argentina at the end.

For the NBA and the NCAA tournament, once my team has been eliminated, I'll always cheer for the underdog. Since I pick Carolina to win the NCAA tournament every year - regardless of their seed - and since I'm a Portland Trailblazers fan, this can happen a lot. I figure if my parade's been rained on, then every other favored team should similarly go down the tubes. And besides, everybody loves an underdog.

As for other sports, once my team has been eliminated, I just stop caring. Unless the Yankees are playing, in which case I always root AGAINST them.

I grew up a Yankee Fan in the Midwest. I didn't hate Boston - I pitied them. They were beaten regularly. Yes, I always feared Ted Williams at the bat, but so what? So, if Guilliani want to go Boston, so what?

The real fun this year is rooting against the Rockies. I want to see what they will say and do when it is clear that God hates them more than Boston.

Depends entirely too much on context. I basically only follow football. If we're talking college and OU is out, I root for any other Big 12 team. But I don't watch much college ball that doesn't involve OU. (Where the O is Oklahoma.)

In pro ball, I have a number of teams I root for. When the 49ers and the Cowboys met for the playoffs trying to decide was so painful I went shopping instead. And as you might guess from that I *never* root for the Redskins. Also the Oakland Raiders because everything about them, from their fans to their owner is obnoxious. I have fondnesses for the Packers, the Patriots, and the Broncos. I'm not very fond of the Dolphins, but for historical reasons that are really irrelevant today so I always feel a little silly about it.

For whatever reason, in pro ball I never pay any attention whatsoever to conferences or divisions. Most of them make no sense anyway.

MKK

To paraphrase Doug Stanhope, rooting against the underdog is like going to a casino, standing behind the dealer and cheering for the house to win.

Unless you have money on the favourite.

I tend to root for the team from my team's division, unless there's particular bad blood for that team. As a White Sox fan, for example, I was pulling for the Indians in the division series. For similar reasons I usually root for the A.L. over the N.L. in the World Series.

There are exceptions:

1) Underdog - An underdog is always rooted for unless there's specific hatred for that team. Teams that have never won a title almost always are rootable.

2) Rich team / poor team - The teams with the highest payrolls usually must be rooted against (e.g., Yankees, Red Sox, Braves). Conversely, downtrodden smaller-market teams such as the Nationals, Pirates, and Royals are especially rootworthy.

3) Lovable losers / overbearing winners - Until '04 the Red Sox' lovable loser-ness overrode their rich team-ness and were thus rooted for, especially against the Evil Empire. However, since winning the Series they've moved inexorably toward overbearing winner status (see also: Patriots, New England).

4) Annoying gimmicks and catch-phrases - Teams with nonsense such as the tomahawk chop are automatically rooted against. This overrides all other considerations. Teams other than the Red Sox that claim to have "nations" also are frowned upon (the Red Sox maybe get a pass because they had the first and original "nation").

5) Pure hatred - Certain teams are hated from birth and are rooted against in all circumstances. This creates complications when loathesome teams meet in a playoff. Such circumstances necessitate bizarre tiebreaker algorithms, the outcomes of which can change from series to series and game to game. For example, it may be necessary to root for the Yankees over the Dodgers in, say, a Game Six, in order to force a Game Seven and prolong the agony of both teams.

Like blf, my rooting preference is best expressed along a continuum:

1. My undergrad/ma school, my phd school, my hometown pro teams
2. Everyone else not listed, subject to variations
3. The big state school in my home state (which I did not attend), their fans and marching band (long story)
4. My undergrad/ma school's main rival, my phd school's main rival
5. the Yankees
6. the Baltimore Ravens

Re #2, I will always root against a city's teams when one of them has inflicted a painful and lasting loss on any of my hometown's teams, particularly on the way to a championship - if they've prolonged my misery, I figure their fans are due for some misery themselves. Regarding the WS, both Denver and Boston fall into this category, so I've quit paying attention.

I'm all for appreciating great performances...that's what the regular season is for. When it comes to the playoffs, I want my team to win or, like Harry, I quit caring (though rooting for the underdog is always fun, as long as it doesn't violate tenets 3 (yeah right), 4, 5 (yeah right), or 6.)

How is this not a dorky poll? I think it's just for dorks of a different stripe.

we're all about the happy Kate in Chateau Steelypips

A wise man. You'll go far.

And Giuliani is a pandering suck-up of epic proportions, second only to Romney.

In baseball, at least, it's a tribal thing for me. I'm a Yankees fan, ergo I hate the Mets and Red Sox. Thus, when the Yankees are not involved, I root for whoever is playing those teams, or I root for my backup team the Astros if they're involved.

(You may ask: What did I do during the 1986 World Series? Answer: Prayed for the world to end before the first pitch. I eventually decided to root for the visiting team in each game, on the theory that at least then the home fans would get no satisfaction. I know, I know, it's pathetic. But it's how it is.)

For other sports, I'm less didactic. If the Giants aren't involved, I'll root against the Cowboys, or just be neutral. If the Houston Rockets aren't involved, I'll root against the Lakers, or just be neutral. In college sports, I'll root for a team from my conference (C-USA) or against a team from the Big 12; if all else fails, I root for the underdog and/or non-BCS conference school.

Probably more than you wanted to know, and yes, very dorky.

Speaking of NHL, in order:

1. Ottawa - I was born there, and my mother grew up there.
2. Vancouver - My father grew up there.
3. Canadian Teams that are NOT Toronto (explained in #4)
4. Toronto (They used to be #3, until they took away Newfoundland's farm team)
5. Meh, Americans have no business playing hockey. Unless they're Vermont.

Hope that the Colorado Rockies get swept by the Red Sox. The 'Rox' are a Christian team, of 'character'. Witness: http://alternet.org/mediaculture/66067/

I found the Rams very annoying in '99 as well, despite not following basketball, and despite going to VCU. Actually, it's because of those two things: in '99 I went from student to staff and got, among many other responsibilities, to send out mass mails. And what did they want to tell the students about? Bah.

Today, as it happens, marks the official death of that mass mailing system. The very last mail (about athletics of some sort, of course) is queued to go out at 10:30pm eastern.

In the Champions League (the main European club football competition), I support Manchester United, and I want all of the other British teams to fail horribly. In football, its not enough for us to succeed, all of our rivals must fail - and if you can't get one, the other will have to do.

In baseball, at least, it's a tribal thing for me. I'm a Yankees fan, ergo I hate the Mets and Red Sox. Thus, when the Yankees are not involved, I root for whoever is playing those teams, or I root for my backup team the Astros if they're involved.

See, I'm not much of a baseball fan at all, though I do root for the Yankees when they're in it. I don't have very strong feelings about the Red Sox, though, because for most of the years that I've been aware of sports, they were more of a punch line than a real rivalry. And, of course, the Yankees were pretty bad for a lot of that time, so there was never much riding on the rivalry.

They do occupy sort of the same mental space as the Mets, that's true. I don't really care for the Mets mostly because I have some cousins who are really obnoxious Mets fans, and they kind of get on my nerves. I don't really care for the Red Sox, either, but it has more to do with the "Red Sox Nation" shoulder-chip than any intrinsic rivalry.

we're all about the happy Kate in Chateau Steelypips

I really wish you wouldn't do that.

I don't follow sports at all, could you please explain to me the interest in rooting for a particular team and establishing like/dislike relationships with the other teams? The reason it confuses me so is because it seems from year to year the players are traded like playing cards. Why do you hold an allegiance to a team that is willing to shuck its own players so easily (or the players them selves are so easily willing to leave the team)? The players are not even representative of the locale at this point so one can not even draw the conclusion that, for instance, the residents of Massachusetts have a more athletic community than New York. If the players themselves don't seem to care about the team as much as the fans then why do the fans care so much?

One can say it's simply harmless but in response I would have to direct them to when the Red Sox finally beat the Yankees. Parts of Boston was in flames, people were injured, one even killed, and property destroyed. Some cars merely showing New York license plates were set on fire (for all they knew they were a Red Sox fan who moved to New York and was back to support!)

When my teams are out of it (Cardinals and Yankees), I always root for the team that has gone the longest without winning it (pennant or World Series).

This, I must admit, is mostly because I get tired of hearing about curses and crap like that.

I am a diehard Yankee fan, and I always root against Boston.

What is despicable about Giuliani's behavior has nothing to do, however, with a Yankee fan rooting for Boston. What is despicable is that Giuliani has always crassly exploited his Yankee fandom for political gain with New Yorkers. Now he is trying to do the same thing with Boston.

After having lived in NYC for all of Giuliani's years of being mayor, it is clear that he cares for *nothing* except his own personal power and aggrandizement. *Nothing.* He has a complete and utter incapacity to empathize with any other human being. He couldn't care less whether the Yankees win or lose except to the extent that it directly impacts his desires for power and aggrandizement. I am convinced that he is not a real fan.

During (and after) his tenure as mayor, the Yankee organization--run as they are by highly partisan right-wingers--provided Giuliani with a very public platform to be a "Yankee fan". At one of the Yankee-Indians games that Giuliani attended, the fans booed him when they showed his face on the jumbo video screen.

The puzzling thing for me is that I don't really see the angle in it for Giuliani. I mean, what does he gain by fake-rooting for Boston? He's trying to run as a conservative Republican, and nobody in Massachusetts is going to vote for him, anyway. And it will piss off some of his core constituency of Neanderthal New Yorkers.

He'd gain more by fake-rooting for Colorado, I would think-- it's a Western state, they've got some hard-core Christian nutcases in their ownership, and it would keep the Yankee fans happy. Or, for that matter, by not talking about baseball at all, and developing a sudden intense interest in NASCAR.

The thing you have to realize about Giuliani is that he is totally delusional about how people perceive him. He actually thinks that if he pretends to root for Boston, Bostonian's will love him. He probably thinks that Barney Frank is now his BFF. He thought that having his wife call him on his cell phone during speeches and him taking the calls would "humanize" him. He is batshit insane.

"Neanderthal New Yorkers"

AKA: Staten Island.

The puzzling thing for me is that I don't really see the angle in it for Giuliani. I mean, what does he gain by fake-rooting for Boston?

New Hampshire is part of Red Sox Nation.

It is short-sighted, yes, but I'm not sure he thought through the long-term consequences. After all, the Red Sox could be in the World Series again next year, right before the election (yes, we still have that long to go). Surely his opponent will bring up his blatant pandering and flip-flopping again, at least in "jest".