HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Using the term "WE" when referring to our team

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-20-2011, 02:00 PM
  #26
KBstyle
Registered User
 
KBstyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 470
vCash: 500
I use the ''we'' cause it's our team and because my blood is Bleu Blanc Rouge, that's why and there nothing to change about it!

On a financial note, at the price that we pay the ticket, we are owner of that club heheh.

KBstyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 02:19 PM
  #27
Forsead
Registered User
 
Forsead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Québec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,222
vCash: 500
Sound like the kind of guy I would invite to a party....

Come on, it's not because you don't like your life and you managed to get a journalist job that you need to use this has a mean to say everyone is ridiculous, it's not like the guy is better than others, or even smart to begin with.

With time, I loose more and more respect for journalism, I want facts not crappy opinions on subjects that they don't agree with. Perhaps, he's just a fan of a bad team, or just not a fan of a team and that's why he doesn't understand why peoples can relate to teams.

Funniest part of the article is when he is stating some situations that are exceptions in his opinion. Well I'm pretty sure we could find an exceptions for all teams and we could go back to case one.

Forsead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 02:43 PM
  #28
capnk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarjak View Post
This is like people trying to make rules for when you should or should not wear a jersey. Was the author of this article elected as the arbiter of all that is appropriate? Who the hell is he to say we can't use we?

Most of his arguments are terrible. Players for teams that have good fans often mention the energy they get from the "7th player". Fans certainly have an impact on the game.

He thinks that if you subsidize the team in some way, that gives you the right to use "we", but somehow, buying tickets and merchandise doesn't count? He tries to use a team without fans as an example to show fans are not needed, but fails to mention that team will never get anywhere as long as it doesn't have fans. And of course, that team needs at least some fans to function.

He says it's the only form of entertainment where we use "we", but it's clear he hasn't thought about it for more than ten seconds. Is it typical for people to buy tickets to a concert where a signer from their city competes with a singer from a rival city to outperform him? Is a competitive sport even anywhere close to being analogous to a movie? None of the other forms of entertainment he used as examples have a competitive aspect. The rivalry in sports is what makes people use "we". The team represents your city and it's trying to beat another city's team. This isn't remotely similar to any of the examples he gave.

And finally, he tells us that somehow, the notion that some fans have seen their teams relocate is proof that they can't use "we". Again, did he even think about this? The players themselves are completely powerless to stop a team from moving. Will anyone deny that they can use "we"? If we follow his logic, the only people who can use "we" are the owners of the team.

Just because he talked to one player who didn't care about his fans doesn't mean the sentiment is generalized either.

I'll be wearing my jersey and talking about how we will beat the leafs Saturday, old man yelling at clouds be damned.

And for the record, I don't see how we wouldn't have the right to nickname athletes. People nickname celebrities all the time, it's not just sport fans. I don't see why we should know them as friends before we can nickname them.

EDIT: I still use we when we lose. I should have cheered louder.
Wow, overwhelming support in favour of WE.
In fairness to the author, it was kind of written in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way. I've read his other stuff and I don't believe that this was supposed to be serious. He's just having fun.

Some of you seem angry over the article. It shows how passionate you are I suppose.

capnk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 02:50 PM
  #29
justsomeguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
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......

justsomeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 02:51 PM
  #30
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 17,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forsead View Post
Perhaps, he's just a fan of a bad team, or just not a fan of a team and that's why he doesn't understand why peoples can relate to teams.
I'm pretty sure he's from Toronto, enough said.

Et le But is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 03:09 PM
  #31
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
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......
We don't agree with you.

Protest the Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 03:49 PM
  #32
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
We don't agree with you.
Yeah he really came off sounding smug I have to say.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 04:11 PM
  #33
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,020
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CrAzYNiNe
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......
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)

CrAzYNiNe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 04:19 PM
  #34
HeShootsHeScores
Registered User
 
HeShootsHeScores's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,257
vCash: 500
If I argue with a bruins fan on these boards, I won't say "the bruins suck", I would say "your team sucks". It's "we" for me. And let's say the bruins beat the crap out of the habs, I'd tell the same fan "congrats, your team won".

HeShootsHeScores is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 06:06 PM
  #35
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capitaine Gionta View Post
I love when people use "we" when the Habs win as in "We won". Then, when the Habs lose, they say "They lost".

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.

Agnostic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 06:12 PM
  #36
Belso
Registered User
 
Belso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,698
vCash: 500
I always pay special attention to it. I usually use the Habs or the Canadiens. Never we or us.. But I understand why people do it. It's only normal when you feel an attachment to the team.

Belso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 07:56 PM
  #37
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,955
vCash: 13357
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.
That is a cute attempt at psychoanalysis but ultimately flawed because a large number of fans due in fact, reference to their team with a negative undertone. Likewise, you presume people associate a sports team to their self esteem. Perhaps a select few may however they would be an exception to the rule, not the definition. Does Montreal losing disappoint me? Of course, I wouldn't be a fan otherwise. That loss doesn't effect my life or somehow lower my self esteem. Likewise, should we (uh oh!) win the cup,. I would be elated but carry on with my normal routine afterward. A cup doesn't build my self esteem.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 08:07 PM
  #38
Carey Chant
Registered User
 
Carey Chant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 469
vCash: 500
I'll keep it simple..... We really suck this year.

Carey Chant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 08:10 PM
  #39
Masao
Registered User
 
Masao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,853
vCash: 500
Why does he care?

Masao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:01 AM
  #40
Bouchard61
Registered User
 
Bouchard61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Singapore
Country: Singapore
Posts: 18
vCash: 500
I use 'WE' all the time when talking about sport teams I follow and I only realized when a friend of mine told me the other day, I guess most people do it because they feel that giving support to a team makes them part of that organization, in Montreal, the HABS are a religion, an organization of the people!!

Bouchard61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:35 AM
  #41
justsomeguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
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)
Neofury - Didn't mean to sound smug. Was trying for glib. Read your posts regularly and think we'd probably get on well in real life.

Tickets - Buy em occasionally. Usually up in the rafters thanks to the resale market

Merch - Rarely and when I do it tends to be from teams that no longer exist or minor-league outfits.

OT- Love it, regardless of the teams involved. Doesn't stop my heart but does on occasion cause a rapid intake of breath and/or involuntary muscle contractions.

Pride in being a fan - You got me there. Can't admit to being a fan of any team any longer although I'm definitely more familiar with the Habs than any other team thanks to geography and history.

As to what you think I feel about how you feel about being a part of the organization - Don't apologise for using the word "we" properly. You can hold any opinion you want about pretty much any subject. It's one of the glories of free speech. Unfortunately many folks confuse fact with fantasy and sometimes the most strongly-held opinions are not reality-based.

No fans, you got no team - Or in wider terms, No customers, you got no business. Absolutely right but no matter how many hot dogs you buy, Lafleur's or La Belle Province isn't going to consider you part of their organization unless you are a franchise holder or management employee.

Same holds for the Canadiens, Canadian Tire, Air Canada or any other business.

Do not interpret this as being anti-fan or anti-fandom. Some of my best friends are fans.

justsomeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:50 AM
  #42
McSorleyStick
DECIMA-TING
 
McSorleyStick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Algeria
Posts: 14,070
vCash: 500
We suck

McSorleyStick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:55 AM
  #43
Hero
Raptors 13/14
 
Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,874
vCash: 50
I do it too in referring to the leafs.

Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 11:27 AM
  #44
sheed36
Registered User
 
sheed36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McSorleyStick View Post
We suck
We do

sheed36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:52 PM
  #45
Joe Cole
Registered User
 
Joe Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,185
vCash: 500
I try not to.

Everyone who's opinion I disagree with say "we" all the time.

It's like saying "we" when talking about McDonald's....

Joe Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 09:15 PM
  #46
Lshap
Moderator
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,473
vCash: 500
The team is called the "Montreal" Canadiens, not the "Mercenary" Canadiens. They're not named after a corporation, they planted themselves in our city a century ago, cemented themselves within our culture and went out of their way to cultivate a relationship with us, its fanbase. The team is named after us Montrealers, so screw you, I'm using the collective pronoun.

Lshap is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 09:20 PM
  #47
Ollie Williams
Registered User
 
Ollie Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,943
vCash: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
The team is called the "Montreal" Canadiens, not the "Mercenary" Canadiens. They're not named after a corporation, they planted themselves in our city a century ago, cemented themselves within our culture and went out of their way to cultivate a relationship with us, its fanbase. The team is named after us Montrealers, so screw you, I'm using the collective pronoun.
If we all read this post, I think we would all approve. We... I mean Oui.

Ollie Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 09:48 PM
  #48
Newhabfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,044
vCash: 500
It's called in-group / out group in social psychology. A good (yet minimal) read here :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-grou...out-group_bias

Basically we tend to identify to groups that will raise our self esteem and help us create a positive identity.

It's natural and it works like this since society exists. Every citizen of ancient Rome (or any other country) would have said "we won the battle" not "they (the soldiers) did it".

On the other hand - when the group in question does not help us mantain a positive identity - it becomes a "they" issue. See Cialdini's study on college football. Some people will say "we are going to Afghanistan to support democracy" others will say "they (the government) sent our children to Afghanistan to please the USA".

If you would compare the we/they ratio in the Bruins board vs the Oilers board last season there might be some differences.

If the bad streak continues I expect a lot of "they" in this board too - we are only humans after all. It already happened in the media and it will help separate true fans (they get a positive identity even when "we" lose) from those who only get the positiveness when we are winning.

Newhabfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:05 PM
  #49
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
The team is called the "Montreal" Canadiens, not the "Mercenary" Canadiens. They're not named after a corporation, they planted themselves in our city a century ago, cemented themselves within our culture and went out of their way to cultivate a relationship with us, its fanbase. The team is named after us Montrealers, so screw you, I'm using the collective pronoun.
An interesting sentiment but from strictly a numbers standpoint there are probably as many fans of the team outside Montreal as inside.

Thinking that "we" are Montrealers is as incorrect as thinking that "we" are playing the Leafs tomorrow.

Agnostic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:22 PM
  #50
MasterD
Registered User
 
MasterD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,544
vCash: 500
That's one of the worst trash papers I've ever read. Way to NOT make a point and just stake your opinion...

MasterD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.