Jump to content

Franchised sport


DieselDaisy

Recommended Posts

Can any of you yanks tell me how you put up with this system? Take this example. Following the 2004 Baseball season, the Montreal Expos (f. 1969 quite) relocated to Washington DC and became the 'Washington Nationals'!  In other words, they did not just relocate to a different town; they did not just relocate to a different federal state; they relocated to an entirely different country!! What happened to all of those Montreal Expo supporters when their beloved team, born and bred from Canuck soil itself, sons of the maple leaf, instantly re-materialized in the capital of George Bush Jr? Did they continue to support it or just give up on the sport entirely - or, switch to an amateur club? This stuff happens all the time in North American sports. St Louis's American football team relocated across half of the continent, to Los Angeles - the Rams they are called! Various New York Teams (implausibly) play in New Jersey! What happens then? Do a load of New Yorkers get on a bus and troop over to New Jersey matchday or did New Jersey people adopt this team, replacing the New York fanbase?

Where is the blood and soil loyalty, the history, the regionalism, the derby matches? Can you imagine Newcastle United relocating to Sunderland or Yorkshire CCC relocating to Old Trafford? Surely the whole point of supporting a team is to identify with its regionalism and traditions - its local identity - and wish to challenge those with an opposing identity on a field of sporting contest (or smash their fans' faces in in the pubs at full time)?

One of the many implausible items I have on American culture - I simply cannot get my head around the concept of franchised sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Surely the whole point of supporting a team is to identify with its regionalism and traditions - its local identity - and wish to challenge those with an opposing identity on a field of sporting contest (or smash their fans' faces in in the pubs at full time)?

Apparently you are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the same tribal element don't apply over there, i dunno.  Perhaps they don't give a shit where a teams from, you just support whoever you like.  Perhaps thats why you don't have as much passion to American sports as you see in football today or on the terraces back in the day.  But then i suppose you don't have the attendant violence either. 

Really and truly speaking, we invented football and all the things that go along with it are kind of rooted in an English mentality, hence all the fuckin' island mentality, the tribal aspect, the hooliganism, all comes from over here.  I mean if you think about it it is quite ridiculous, I mean we hate the fuckin' Spuds...but like, why?  Cuz they live on the other end of the Seven Sisters Road, that must be difficult for other people to understand. 

But yeah, that sounds weird for over here, Arsenal moved from Woolwich to North London in the early 1900s and they still won't fuckin' let us forget it :lol:  1913 that fuckin' move was and they still go on about it.

Edited by Len B'stard
pendantry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Apparently you are wrong.

Well perhaps when applied to America. Not really a fair remark to make Soul as I myself am perplexed by it and wondering how the system works in regards to the fanbase.

But in England - in Europe in fact - tribalism is rampant. The idea of a club relocating to another part of the country is anathema to most sporting fans - witness the furor over MK Dons. Whether it be cricket, football or rugby, sporting teams are identified with the region of the country. This is still even true in the thoroughly corporate prawn sandwich FA premiership where the local passions for teams like Liverpool and Newcastle still prevail. Witness the recent walkout at Liverpool over ticket prices; this is the sort of passion fans have, i.e. the belief that the club is in some way owned by the region/fans. How ever fuzzy headed and romantic that notion is, it is still a belief which holds.

But you live in Denmark and support a team in Manchester so I do not expect you to understand this!

Returning to my original question, team A relocates to region B. So do the fans of team A become fans of Team B (and have to become itinerant fans or fans a million miles away) or does Team A cultivate fans from region B? Or is it a mixture?

Edited by DieselDaisy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Well perhaps when applied to America. Not really a fair remark to make Soul as I myself am perplexed by it and wondering how the system works in regards to the fanbase.

 I just found it funny how stubbornly you cling to your particular rules on why a fan should be a fan in a thread seemingly designed for a more objective discussion of the phenomenon.

Obviously, as observed, one can be a fan of a team because of shared aspects like region and culture, which I assume predominates, and obviously one can also be a fan of a team because of other things like inherited fandom (you like what your parents like, liking a team runs in the family), particular appreciation for certain aspects of a team's performance or trappings, seeing the team play in formative years (when kids look for someone to suport and then have their first joy watching a particular team play hence adopting that team as his favorite), etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SoulMonster said:

 I just found it funny how stubbornly you cling to your particular rules on why a fan should be a fan in a thread seemingly designed for a more objective discussion of the phenomenon.

Obviously, as observed, one can be a fan of a team because of shared aspects like region and culture, which I assume predominates, and obviously one can also be a fan of a team because of other things like inherited fandom (you like what your parents like, liking a team runs in the family), particular appreciation for certain aspects of a team's performance or trappings, seeing the team play in formative years (when kids look for someone to suport and then have their first joy watching a particular team play hence adopting that team as his favorite), etc.

Soul, all this criteria for fandom is equally as affected if a team moves miles away. It does not matter whether you were a fan of a Montreal based team (for example) based on geographical proximity, inheritance or youthful adoption, you are still going to be affected by that Montreal based team relocating to - lo and behold - Washington DC!

(I'm using the Montreal Expos example because it is an extreme example, but it by no means is exclusive, cf. the St Louis Rams who upped sticks to Los Angeles).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a weird thing happened here in Winnipeg. We had an NHL team, the Winnipeg Jets from the 70s until the 90s.

When the economic situation declined in the mid 90s people stopped going to the games in the numbers needed to sustain an NHL size team so the league moved them to Phoenix, where they became the Phoenix Coyotes.
People never forgot the team, you'd see the team jerseys all over the place, in bars, on TV, in special events. Eventually when the NHL expanded into new markets to expand the brand, and every time they talked about a new team going to a city, there would be a petition to bring a team back to Winnipeg. They put this one team in Atlanta that just bombed. They couldn't give tickets away to those games, so in a familiar move, the NHL decided to move the team, and Winnipeg got a team again. Then they asked the city to vote for what to name the team. They chose the Winnipeg Jets. Which I get because of nostalgia reasons. But the original Winnipeg Jets team is still in Phoenix.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, moreblack said:

There was a weird thing happened here in Winnipeg. We had an NHL team, the Winnipeg Jets from the 70s until the 90s.

When the economic situation declined in the mid 90s people stopped going to the games in the numbers needed to sustain an NHL size team so the league moved them to Phoenix, where they became the Phoenix Coyotes.
People never forgot the team, you'd see the team jerseys all over the place, in bars, on TV, in special events. Eventually when the NHL expanded into new markets to expand the brand, and every time they talked about a new team going to a city, there would be a petition to bring a team back to Winnipeg. They put this one team in Atlanta that just bombed. They couldn't give tickets away to those games, so in a familiar move, the NHL decided to move the team, and Winnipeg got a team again. Then they asked the city to vote for what to name the team. They chose the Winnipeg Jets. Which I get because of nostalgia reasons. But the original Winnipeg Jets team is still in Phoenix.

...and the records and history are retained by Phoenix. It is a slightly similar situation to Wimbledon's, with MK Dons cast in the role of the Coyotes and AFC Wimbledon in the role of the (new) Winnipeg Jets. Technically MK Dons have the lineage but fan pressure and sentiment led to the creation of AFC Wimbledon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Soul, all this criteria for fandom is equally as affected if a team moves miles away. It does not matter whether you were a fan of a Montreal based team (for example) based on geographical proximity, inheritance or youthful adoption, you are still going to be affected by that Montreal based team relocating to - lo and behold - Washington DC!

(I'm using the Montreal Expos example because it is an extreme example, but it by no means is exclusive, cf. the St Louis Rams who upped sticks to Los Angeles).

We can't even build new stadiums in the same location without people going mad.  To this day people are still kinda like...meh about The Emirates.  I mean they love it in it's own way but you always hear like 'it'll never be our spiritual home like Highbury' and 'It's not the same' and 'a part of me died when Highbury closed'.  And it's literally like gobbing distance from the site of Highbury, Shoaib Akhtar could chuck a ball from the cite of Highbury to Emirates.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Len B'stard said:

We can't even build new stadiums in the same location without people going mad.  To this day people are still kinda like...meh about The Emirates.  I mean they love it in it's own way but you always hear like 'it'll never be our spiritual home like Highbury' and 'It's not the same' and 'a part of me died when Highbury closed'.  And it's literally like gobbing distance from the site of Highbury, Shoaib Akhtar could chuck a ball from the cite of Highbury to Emirates.

Witness the public protest about St James' Park being re-titled Sports Direct Arena. It did not help that the Emirates received instantly a shit corporate name. If it was re-titled Highbury or New Highbury - it would have gotten New Wembley regardless - it would have went up in more people's credentials I suspect. Is there not a similar feeling about the new Wembley? I've never been to the new Wembley but it does look depressingly soulless, especially with all of those empty seats during the opening minutes of the second half , England qualifiers, the corporates loading up on Prawn sandwiches haha.

No fans are more sentimental than cricket fans; many cricket grounds have club museums where one can go and have a mooch at W.G. Grace's paraphernalia and moth eaten copies of Wisden - besides the trophy cabinet. There is a sort of hallowed quality, a mythology, about various grounds - the famed Lords' slope for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highburys proper name was Arsenal Stadium or The Arsenal Stadium, Emirates proper name, before sponsorship, was Ashburton Grove, now whats wrong with that, it's a wonderful name! 

St James Park to Sports Direct is just actually a fuckin' abomination.  St James Park, just say it out loud, it sounds like something, there's a majesty and prestige to it, Sports Direct, it's not even vaguely related to a location or a place or...anything, it's literally like slapping a fuckin' like...name of some firm on there.  And they never fuckin' last either, the fuckin' 02 arena, it just sounds fuckin' horrible and plastic and soulless.  The yanks do a bit of it too, which is a shame cuz they had some pretty cool named places too, Barclays Arena, Nokia fuckin' whatever, all manner of corporate bollocks. 

St James Park is particularly grating though cuz it was a wonderful name, though Emirates does piss me off too.  Ashburton Grove though, thats what it was.  Don't exactly roll of your tongue but I'd have it over The Emirates Stadium.  Particularly cuz it's foreign.  Not being racist but fuckin' hell, it is England.  Ethihad Stadium too, thats a fuckin' arabic word, it means 'unity', it's The Unity Stadium in arabic...in fuckin' Manchester :lol:

Edited by Len B'stard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If English football ever becomes like that I've had it.  Stranger fuckin' shits happened though, i can just imagine lobbys in Japan or China or America going, 'we've been fans for 40 years, we deserve a chance to Arsenal Stadium next to us!'.  Stoke fly to Calcutta for an away fixture :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

If English football ever becomes like that I've had it.  Stranger fuckin' shits happened though, i can just imagine lobbys in Japan or China or America going, 'we've been fans for 40 years, we deserve a chance to Arsenal Stadium next to us!'.  Stoke fly to Calcutta for an away fixture :lol:

Stan Kroenke owns Arsenal.  He's the guy who just moved the St. Louis Rams to Los Angeles.  He is a greedy fuck, you never know what he'll do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JONEZY said:

Stan Kroenke owns Arsenal.  He's the guy who just moved the St. Louis Rams to Los Angeles.  He is a greedy fuck, you never know what he'll do.

Stan Kroenke does not own Arsenal.  North London owns Arsenal.

Edited by Len B'stard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Can any of you yanks tell me how you put up with this system? Take this example. Following the 2004 Baseball season, the Montreal Expos (f. 1969 quite) relocated to Washington DC and became the 'Washington Nationals'!  In other words, they did not just relocate to a different town; they did not just relocate to a different federal state; they relocated to an entirely different country!! What happened to all of those Montreal Expo supporters when their beloved team, born and bred from Canuck soil itself, sons of the maple leaf, instantly re-materialized in the capital of George Bush Jr? Did they continue to support it or just give up on the sport entirely - or, switch to an amateur club? This stuff happens all the time in North American sports. St Louis's American football team relocated across half of the continent, to Los Angeles - the Rams they are called! Various New York Teams (implausibly) play in New Jersey! What happens then? Do a load of New Yorkers get on a bus and troop over to New Jersey matchday or did New Jersey people adopt this team, replacing the New York fanbase?

Where is the blood and soil loyalty, the history, the regionalism, the derby matches? Can you imagine Newcastle United relocating to Sunderland or Yorkshire CCC relocating to Old Trafford? Surely the whole point of supporting a team is to identify with its regionalism and traditions - its local identity - and wish to challenge those with an opposing identity on a field of sporting contest (or smash their fans' faces in in the pubs at full time)?

One of the many implausible items I have on American culture - I simply cannot get my head around the concept of franchised sport.

you also have to remember like 99% of teams stay in their respective cities most of the time, and usually when one team moves from a place where the fans love their team they always try and bring them back. this happened to the cleveland browns when they moved to baltimore and became the ravens. 4 or 5 years later the browns returned to cleveland. as for the giants/jets playing in new jersey, the stadium is right across the river from manhattan so its not like its a huge deal. the jets and giants are very much a new york backed teaml, plus they get some new jersey support(some of jersey goes for the eagles) the rams are kind of another story, the owner is greedy asshole, the rams fans are hardcore and showed up. it is sad what happened to the rams since the raiders were more than willing to go back to LA. when a franchise moves its always hard, growing up as a kid i was a hartford whalers fan :lol: when they moved to north carolina and became the hurricanes, i started to follow the rangers. it must be hard for someone like jonezy since he is a rams fan, they are still the rams just in another city but if you are in st louis and they get a team back, it must be hard to choose.

you still have your hardcore rivalries like you do in england. the yankees/red sox, bears/packers, jets/patriots, bills/dolphins, cardinals/cubs, ravens/steelers, flyers/rangers dodgers/giants etc. you always have fights, and sometimes stabbings etc at these games, the fans are brutal to one another. thats not even getting into college sports which can be even worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

...and the records and history are retained by Phoenix. It is a slightly similar situation to Wimbledon's, with MK Dons cast in the role of the Coyotes and AFC Wimbledon in the role of the (new) Winnipeg Jets. Technically MK Dons have the lineage but fan pressure and sentiment led to the creation of AFC Wimbledon.

I believe that MK Dons agreed that the history/past achievements of the old Wibledon FC should be held by AFC Wimbledon and not MK Dons

56 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

We can't even build new stadiums in the same location without people going mad.  To this day people are still kinda like...meh about The Emirates.  I mean they love it in it's own way but you always hear like 'it'll never be our spiritual home like Highbury' and 'It's not the same' and 'a part of me died when Highbury closed'.  And it's literally like gobbing distance from the site of Highbury, Shoaib Akhtar could chuck a ball from the cite of Highbury to Emirates.

I love it that you managed to bring Shoaib Akhtar into this discussion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Can any of you yanks tell me how you put up with this system? Take this example. Following the 2004 Baseball season, the Montreal Expos (f. 1969 quite) relocated to Washington DC and became the 'Washington Nationals'!  In other words, they did not just relocate to a different town; they did not just relocate to a different federal state; they relocated to an entirely different country!! What happened to all of those Montreal Expo supporters when their beloved team, born and bred from Canuck soil itself, sons of the maple leaf, instantly re-materialized in the capital of George Bush Jr? Did they continue to support it or just give up on the sport entirely - or, switch to an amateur club? This stuff happens all the time in North American sports. St Louis's American football team relocated across half of the continent, to Los Angeles - the Rams they are called! Various New York Teams (implausibly) play in New Jersey! What happens then? Do a load of New Yorkers get on a bus and troop over to New Jersey matchday or did New Jersey people adopt this team, replacing the New York fanbase?

Where is the blood and soil loyalty, the history, the regionalism, the derby matches? Can you imagine Newcastle United relocating to Sunderland or Yorkshire CCC relocating to Old Trafford? Surely the whole point of supporting a team is to identify with its regionalism and traditions - its local identity - and wish to challenge those with an opposing identity on a field of sporting contest (or smash their fans' faces in in the pubs at full time)?

One of the many implausible items I have on American culture - I simply cannot get my head around the concept of franchised sport.

 

I get the impression that the national leagues have always been more business oriented, whereas in European football they started out at amateur level based on shared identity. I also get the impression that regionalism and traditions - its local identity as you put it can be found in supporting local high school and college teams, which is something unheard of in Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GivenToFly said:

 

I get the impression that the national leagues have always been more business oriented, whereas in European football they started out at amateur level based on shared identity. I also get the impression that regionalism and traditions - its local identity as you put it can be found in supporting local high school and college teams, which is something unheard of in Europe.

That is quite a good point. In American films they, quite old teenagers/early twenty somethings, always play ''college football' to cheering crowds. It is as if they are rock stars yet they're just kids. There are youth and local teams in Britain of course but nothing quite like that. (One possible exception is the Oxford-Cambridge boat race.) I do not think there are as many people continuing with sports to that age group unless they are actually intending on a career relating to fitness and sport. It is more middle school level (approx.12-15) where you participate in local sports and then everybody sort of gives it up.

 

Edited by DieselDaisy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JONEZY said:

Sorry I thought he did.  He is a part owner right?

He was a part owner(minority owner) of the Rams for years, then took over 6 years ago and has now moved them.

(he is majority shareholder, i'm just being a dickhead :lol:)

4 hours ago, sturginho said:

I believe that MK Dons agreed that the history/past achievements of the old Wibledon FC should be held by AFC Wimbledon and not MK Dons

I love it that you managed to bring Shoaib Akhtar into this discussion

I was tryna think of someone who could chuck a ball a fair distance :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...