Considering the list of teams that I am a fan of I can see how someone can consider me to be a bandwagon fan, but how much worse it to being a bandwagon fan than it is to be a homer. A homer (for those that don't know) is a fan who is a fan of every team from the place that they're from. So for example, a New York homer would be a fan of the Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Nets, Rangers, Giants, Jets, and even the Islanders yes that's a lot of teams, but that's New York for ya. So is it better to be a fan of 8 teams or being a die hard fan of a team that isn't in New York? That's the dilemma that I face on a regular basis. I've got to defend my fandom of all the teams that just so happen don't play in NY. I'd rather be a dedicated fan of one team that so happens to play outside of the city limits than in one night cheering for two different teams whose fans don't even like each other.
A bandwagon fan (to me at least) would be a fan who becomes a fan because said team is constantly winning and the fan would then hop to another team once the initial team starts to lose. If a fan becomes a fan and continues to be a fan even when the team starts to lose then how can that be a bandwagon fan? I've been a proud fan of these teams for 15 years plus, that beats the "bandwagon" label. But a homer is a homer. A homer will defend these local clubs because that's what makes sense to them so if they have to defend the Mets and the Yankees at the same time they will because that's what they feel like they have to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment