View Single Post
Old
10-22-2011, 04:36 AM
  #52
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 24stanleycups View Post
We are as much a part of the team as the players. Without us there is no team. We give them the money they need to play. If you say "we are on a ten game losing streak", than ofcoarse you deserve to say "WE WON THE CUP!!"
I understand the writer's point, he's clever. But I have no problem with using 'we', it's emotional. Though I usually use Habs. And I use nicknames because they're fun, and I don't have to type Paciaortetty. See, I blew it! Max or Patches is fine, and he probably does not mind either. He probably likes it.

However: I draw the line at interest in player's personal lives, and I would never ever bother a player in public, for any reason. It is not appropriate, and it's creepy if you're over 12 years old.

Lastly, the NHL is a club of teams that play hockey. It is a league, and it's origin was to play the game, not to have fans and sell merchandise. You need to have a sense of history. Great hockey players would still form teams and play even if no one at all watched them. Never forget this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justsomeguy View Post
One of my pet peeves too. Agree with both the author and with Agnostic.

Particularly ticks me off to hear parents use the first person plural when referring to their kids' teams. Figure they ought to put a number on their own backs and get down to it themselves rather than trying to live through eight-year-olds.

Same holds true for folks using "we" and "us" when referring to favorite teams for which they do not play, work or in which they do not hold an equity stake.

Must also admit to being baffled as to why anyone beyond grade school age would want to wear a team sweater to a game. The guy with Aveuglette on the back of his Canadiens sweater gets marks for creativity though.

As to those that wear gear from teams not even playing in the game they're attending......
Hee hee. I can't stand this either, and I suspect you were at the Forum with me in 1975, watching the Habs destroy some sad team, while our dads wore suits, and not just in the reds.

It you're an adult, dress like one. I see 45 year old tourists in Beijing, Paris, wearing shorts, sneakers and baseball caps, and smile as they wonder why they don't get treated well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrAzYNiNe View Post
Do you buy tickets? Do you buy merchandise? Does your heart stop when they are in overtime and you see a masterful play about the be completed?

If you don't take pride in being a habs fan, fine. But don't think we (uh oh) should think we aren't a part of the organization. (no fans, you got no team)
Smack on you. Don't assume that because we don't say we, and that we don't wear team jerseys to the game, that we're not as loyal as you. I'd say it might be the other way around. Most of you are newbies. E-mail me when you've been a loyal Habs fan for 43 years. Yeah you love them as much as me, but not more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
You've struck at the very heart of Identity Theory and why people use these terms.

Individuals associate themselves with groups who they believe to be in higher social standing (in the case of hockey players superior physically, wealthier, alphas with the opposite sex) . They do it out of needs for their own prestige and self esteem.

It follows that individuals will tighten that association ("we" won) when the team increases in standing, and are willing to cut that association ("they" lost) as it suits their needs to increase the appraisal of their personal value.

Great article to get people thinking.
I like your thinking, and my work requires the same level of thought, but damn dude I just love the HABS! I even use smileys about them! And exclamation marks!!! Don't add complication where none is required!


Last edited by Mike8: 10-22-2011 at 05:44 AM.
bsl is offline   Reply With Quote