homegame

Notes About Some Fans

By and large, to probably well over 95 percent, Patriots' fans and Red Sox fans are the same people. Sure, some like baseball much more than football and vice versa, but New Englanders who follow sports have no problem rooting equally hard for both regional franchises.

Considering they reside in the same human beings, it's continually fascinating how different Pats and Sox fans can be. Nowhere are they more different than in the matter of pregame predictions. Sox followers barely notice them, Pats' fans scan them with the neurotic intensity of a Broadway producer reading his play's review in the Times.

Here are a few concrete examples from my own predicting past. In 2003 and 2004, the Herald sports staff was required to call the outcome of the Yankee-Sox ALCS's, backed by a one-sentence rationale.

In 2003, mine read "Yanks in 7. Two words, Mariano Rivera." The Yanks won in seven, and it's generally thought the opposing managers' faith or lack thereof in their bullpens played a significant role in the outcome. Not one Sox fan took the opportunity to verbally shoot this messenger. That's laudable self-control after the most galling defeat ever for a franchise known for the same.

In 2004, my prediction read "Yanks in 7. I won't believe differently until I see it." Lo and behold, I DID see a different outcome. Feedback on my snarky and inaccurate call was nil. Not one Sox fan took the trouble to gloat, not by email, phone, or in person. By resisting a justified "nyah-nyah, na, nyah-nyah!" Sox fans showed even more laudable self-control.

Once baseball season ends, these same people become Pats fans and take a completely different attitude towards public predictions. The opinion of the commentator is thought to reflect deep-seated prejudices towards New England's team. As if we cared. As if the NFL writer of, say, the San Francisco Chronicle spent more than 15 seconds making his prediction for today's AFC title game.

In 2003, yours truly wrote a piece saying the Pats had better lose a game down the stretch of the regular season, because there was no way in the modern NFL any team could win 15 straight games, which is what a Pats' streak needed to be to carry it all the way to the Lombardi Trophy. From the minute said column hit the stands, yours truly was subjected to abuse and ridicule from an angry fan base, much more than I ever got for once writing the Celtics should trade aging and injuured Larry Bird. (I must note the abuse and ridicule was wholly good-natured with the exception of Glenn Ordway and Pete Sheppard. Those two, I want as enemies.)

The Pats proved me wrong, delighting me in the process. Seeing history made was what I liked best about newspaper work. The team itself by the way didn't make the offending article bulletin board material. They joked about it. The Pats themselves were acutely aware how illogical that particular championship season was.

Yet another Super Bowl later, Pats fans are STILL angry about pregame predictions. Local sports media critic Bruce Allen, ordinarily as sane, fair, and balanced as fans get, listed 26 predictions for the Colts-Pats game from national NFL reporters . Nineteen picked the Colts, a fact cited as justification for New England feeling disrespected by the football world.

The 19-7 split could be fairly criticized as the usual sportswriting groupthink. Confronted with an even matchup, the experts took the line of least resistance and picked the home team. '
Twas ever thus.

Disrespect? No. The absurdity of that notion becomes apparent by reversing the two teams' circumstances. Suppose the Pats and Colts still possessed 14-4 records, but their regular season meeting had been Indianapolis, the Pats had won it, and as a result, today's game was at Gillette Stadium. Does anyone think the picks would still be 19-7 in Indy's favor? I daresay three "experts" at most would have selected Dungy, Manning, and Co. to advance to Super Bowl XLI.

Going over the top in thought, word, and deed is the entire point of rooting for any sports team. Fans, however, must share time and space with the rest of us. They should learn the difference between acceptable and unacceptable irritating behavior.

Example: Yankee fans are allowed to be smug, arrogant, and condescending. It makes them unpleasant companions sometimes (OK, always), but history says they're entitled. Yankee fans are NOT, however, allowed to feel sorry for themselves when things go wrong. That merits a hearty STFU from the rest of us.

After many weird years in the wilderness, Patriots' fans are rooting for one of the great teams in NFL history. On the eve of a playoff game against a foe that team has hoodooed like no other, those fans are absolutely allowed to be supremely confident, smug, and downright arrogant in their expectations. A bunch of them will be doing just that watching the game at my house tonight.

No follower of any team, however, is allowed to be overconfident, smug, arrogant AND insecure to the point of paranoia simultaneously. That behavior doesn't make you a fan, it makes you someone working out significant personal issues in the context of professional football.

As a matter of fact, it makes you Terrell Owens.

posted by Michael Gee @ 9:05 AM