|
|
Post by Mike84 on Mar 12, 2019 19:36:45 GMT -8
This question could be asked on any board but since B-Ball is in full swing right now, I'll ask it here.
We all know that game threads for games in which the Beavers struggle to play well and/or meet expectations usually accumulate significantly more posts than those for games in which the Beavers pretty much just play well and win. Some fans seem to need(?) the message board to gather and vent or pontificate or observe or criticize poor play or poor decisions or even good play by the other team that gets turned around to be bad play by the Beavers.
Since the only sports message boards I usually monitor are Beaver boards, I sort of wondered if this phenomenon was a uniquely Beaver thing. Then, this past week, I was looking for live updates of a Trailblazer/Thunder game and found a Blazer board that was almost 100% just negative comments (during an incredible NBA game). The coach was stupid, the players were stupid, certain players were just bad at everything, and decisions were criticized even when they were the way the rules are written and there was no decision involved. Good play by the Thunder was blamed on the Blazer coach/players. Good plays by the Blazers were sarcastically noted.
It's a lost cause for me to try to analyze why some fans are this way. I don't understand the drive behind it and trying to figure it out just leads to more arguments. My real question is where fans like this, who seem to "enjoy" joining with others to complain and criticize during a game, used to gather before the Internet? I know from years and years and years of sitting in the stands at games that fans like this are at the games in person but are a small minority and are usually (strangely) with fans who are not like them. I wouldn't think that fan bars would be filled with fans like this, except maybe in a place like Philly. So, where did these fans gather to share their negativity prior to message boards?
|
|
bill82
Sophomore
OSU's 10,157th Best Donor
Posts: 1,000 
|
Post by bill82 on Mar 13, 2019 4:16:42 GMT -8
Water cooler. I remember many Monday morning bitch sessions at work.
The baseball board is pretty positive so the trick seems to be winning a national championship. Women’s basketball as well. Get to the final four helps.
You have to admit the men’s basketball team has been difficult to watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 13, 2019 5:56:17 GMT -8
Water cooler. I remember many Monday morning bitch sessions at work. The baseball board is pretty positive so the trick seems to be winning a national championship. Women’s basketball as well. Get to the final four helps. You have to admit the men’s basketball team has been difficult to watch. The baseball board was not positive last night. Ugly win, but we’re 13-1-1 and lots of talk about how bad we are. |
|
|
|
Post by OSUprof on Mar 13, 2019 8:14:26 GMT -8
I hate to break it to you but what you're observing is human nature.
The phenomenon that you observe is not restricted to sports and fandom. For an even better example, take a look at the field of politics or the comment section of a major newspaper. You'll see people write things that make absolutely no sense. Thought processes appear to be guided by emotion rather than logic and reason.
On social media, one can rant and get immediate confirmation that their world view is correct by millions of their closest friends.
I've grudgingly accepted that it is normal for people to talk and behave in a way that is neither logical or rational.
|
|
|
|
Post by bennysdentist on Mar 13, 2019 10:35:18 GMT -8
Mike--please keep posting here. You are a great source of positive influence. I almost always enjoy reading your posts.
GO BEAVERS!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by poohappens on Mar 13, 2019 12:19:26 GMT -8
Mike--please keep posting here. You are a great source of positive influence. I almost always enjoy reading your posts. GO BEAVERS!!! 100% agree! Keep posting and Go Beavs! |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Mar 13, 2019 13:03:55 GMT -8
This question could be asked on any board but since B-Ball is in full swing right now, I'll ask it here.
We all know that game threads for games in which the Beavers struggle to play well and/or meet expectations usually accumulate significantly more posts than those for games in which the Beavers pretty much just play well and win. Some fans seem to need(?) the message board to gather and vent or pontificate or observe or criticize poor play or poor decisions or even good play by the other team that gets turned around to be bad play by the Beavers.
Since the only sports message boards I usually monitor are Beaver boards, I sort of wondered if this phenomenon was a uniquely Beaver thing. Then, this past week, I was looking for live updates of a Trailblazer/Thunder game and found a Blazer board that was almost 100% just negative comments (during an incredible NBA game). The coach was stupid, the players were stupid, certain players were just bad at everything, and decisions were criticized even when they were the way the rules are written and there was no decision involved. Good play by the Thunder was blamed on the Blazer coach/players. Good plays by the Blazers were sarcastically noted.
It's a lost cause for me to try to analyze why some fans are this way. I don't understand the drive behind it and trying to figure it out just leads to more arguments. My real question is where fans like this, who seem to "enjoy" joining with others to complain and criticize during a game, used to gather before the Internet? I know from years and years and years of sitting in the stands at games that fans like this are at the games in person but are a small minority and are usually (strangely) with fans who are not like them. I wouldn't think that fan bars would be filled with fans like this, except maybe in a place like Philly. So, where did these fans gather to share their negativity prior to message boards?
My crack pot theory of the day: it is a defense mechanism. Sarcasm, cynicism and sardonic behavior is generally an emotional shield for most. I would know... we can smell our own! Vested fans have high emotional stakes in games. It is stressful, tough emotions. I am not sure a lot of people can actually deal with the stress. and people manifest this is their won way. When your team is normal (i.e not Alabama/Clemson) games are not blowouts more times than not. Games are tight. Wins are not assured. it is more stressful for fans of average and good teams that it is to be fans of elite teams. heck, even more than of straight up bad teams, because the expectations are gone then and you have lost hope (sad... but true). at any rate. it is how you cope with stress. For some it is the negative posting, which I think is how they lower their expectations and mentally prepare themselves for loss, so it doesn't hurt as much. Game it tight, outcome is not known... too stressful... ARGH can't take it, must get ready to be upset! For some it is pacing and fidgeting and what not. Some (my wife) literally just cover their eyes. Social media is just a visible place and a natural place for those that deal with their stress in the sarcastic or sardonic way. It is inherently negative, but I don't think that most of it comes from some place of real discontent or anger. (for some, there are just straight up assholes in the world...) I think it is just how some deal. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Mar 13, 2019 13:14:34 GMT -8
Forums are a social medium. When we win, we are happy and don't need to vent and reach out to our social support. When we lose, we have a desire to commiserate with those similarly emotionally invested. I see the negative posts as part of brings value to the community in general. People want to be talked off the ledge, encouraged to continue to make the emotional investment, etc. I'm much more concerned when a win or loss generates no discussions; that means apathy. You can get fans back that have been burned. It's really tough to get back those that no longer care. I'm in that category for the Blazers since the Jail Blazer era. The Beavs can still stink though, and I'll come back once a team shows signs of revival. So Mike84, keep your worrying posts going - they are part of what this community needs  |
|
|
|
Post by Mike84 on Mar 13, 2019 17:40:08 GMT -8
Thanks for all the replies. I was trying to avoid a discussion of WHY some fans veer consistently toward negative comments (DURING games) because I know it's part of human nature...just not a part that I can fully understand. That's why I tried to make my question more about WHERE these types of fans used to congregate during games before the Internet. I think the answer might be "wherever they happened to be" and "they were still in the minority wherever they were". So, some of them were at the games. Some of them were in the sports bars. Some were driving their spouse and dog crazy at home. But with the message boards providing a place to gather virtually, fans who most feel the need to express themselves during games have a place to be heard. And maybe those who most like to express the negative thoughts are also the ones who most want to be heard. I don't know. Just trying to solve the unsolvable questions as a way to avoid stressing about the games. Go Beavs! Mike '84 |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Mar 13, 2019 19:54:20 GMT -8
This question could be asked on any board but since B-Ball is in full swing right now, I'll ask it here.
We all know that game threads for games in which the Beavers struggle to play well and/or meet expectations usually accumulate significantly more posts than those for games in which the Beavers pretty much just play well and win. Some fans seem to need(?) the message board to gather and vent or pontificate or observe or criticize poor play or poor decisions or even good play by the other team that gets turned around to be bad play by the Beavers.
Since the only sports message boards I usually monitor are Beaver boards, I sort of wondered if this phenomenon was a uniquely Beaver thing. Then, this past week, I was looking for live updates of a Trailblazer/Thunder game and found a Blazer board that was almost 100% just negative comments (during an incredible NBA game). The coach was stupid, the players were stupid, certain players were just bad at everything, and decisions were criticized even when they were the way the rules are written and there was no decision involved. Good play by the Thunder was blamed on the Blazer coach/players. Good plays by the Blazers were sarcastically noted.
It's a lost cause for me to try to analyze why some fans are this way. I don't understand the drive behind it and trying to figure it out just leads to more arguments. My real question is where fans like this, who seem to "enjoy" joining with others to complain and criticize during a game, used to gather before the Internet? I know from years and years and years of sitting in the stands at games that fans like this are at the games in person but are a small minority and are usually (strangely) with fans who are not like them. I wouldn't think that fan bars would be filled with fans like this, except maybe in a place like Philly. So, where did these fans gather to share their negativity prior to message boards?
If your forum was The Oregonian, I’m sorry to inform you that you just lost 10 IQ points. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 13, 2019 20:19:39 GMT -8
Thanks for all the replies. I was trying to avoid a discussion of WHY some fans veer consistently toward negative comments (DURING games) because I know it's part of human nature...just not a part that I can fully understand. That's why I tried to make my question more about WHERE these types of fans used to congregate during games before the Internet. I think the answer might be "wherever they happened to be" and "they were still in the minority wherever they were". So, some of them were at the games. Some of them were in the sports bars. Some were driving their spouse and dog crazy at home. But with the message boards providing a place to gather virtually, fans who most feel the need to express themselves during games have a place to be heard. And maybe those who most like to express the negative thoughts are also the ones who most want to be heard. I don't know. Just trying to solve the unsolvable questions as a way to avoid stressing about the games. Go Beavs! Mike '84 These "type"? I'm not sure what stadiums or bars you frequent, but overall those fans are typically the majority. fans of the winning team analyze and complain how it could have been better, and the losing team more so. Fans cheer good play. Poor play leads to a collection of excuses or reasoning of how and why it could be better. It's naturally a longer and more comprehensive discussion. Some parts of stadiums are more mellow than others, but the "type" of fan hasn't change for decades, it's just more visible because of the social media. Funny... how analyzing how fans can root for their team, and questioning where it comes from seems to be similar to your initial post. Why do some fans think they know how others should or shouldn't root for their teams? Aren't they actually in the minority? As most fans really don't spend a lot of time caring so much about other fans and their style of rooting for their team, unless some go far overboard of course. Do "negative" fans care about their teams less? Hmmm... |
|
|
|
Post by Mike84 on Mar 13, 2019 21:23:37 GMT -8
Thanks for all the replies. I was trying to avoid a discussion of WHY some fans veer consistently toward negative comments (DURING games) because I know it's part of human nature...just not a part that I can fully understand. That's why I tried to make my question more about WHERE these types of fans used to congregate during games before the Internet. I think the answer might be "wherever they happened to be" and "they were still in the minority wherever they were". So, some of them were at the games. Some of them were in the sports bars. Some were driving their spouse and dog crazy at home. But with the message boards providing a place to gather virtually, fans who most feel the need to express themselves during games have a place to be heard. And maybe those who most like to express the negative thoughts are also the ones who most want to be heard. I don't know. Just trying to solve the unsolvable questions as a way to avoid stressing about the games. Go Beavs! Mike '84 These "type"? I'm not sure what stadiums or bars you frequent, but overall those fans are typically the majority. fans of the winning team analyze and complain how it could have been better, and the losing team more so. Fans cheer good play. Poor play leads to a collection of excuses or reasoning of how and why it could be better. It's naturally a longer and more comprehensive discussion. Some parts of stadiums are more mellow than others, but the "type" of fan hasn't change for decades, it's just more visible because of the social media. Funny... how analyzing how fans can root for their team, and questioning where it comes from seems to be similar to your initial post. Why do some fans think they know how others should or shouldn't root for their teams? Aren't they actually in the minority? As most fans really don't spend a lot of time caring so much about other fans and their style of rooting for their team, unless some go far overboard of course. Do "negative" fans care about their teams less? Hmmm...
I used "type" in the way I think most people use it: To group things by a common characteristic. There are the type of fans who go to games in person and the type of fans who prefer to watch on TV. There are the type of fans who go to games early in order to tailgate and the type of fans who leave early to beat traffic. There are the type of fans who mostly make negative comments during a game and the type of fans who mostly make positive comments. Saying "these types" is just shorthand for whatever group characteristic is being discussed at the time.
In my 40 years of experience in attending multiple sporting events for multiple teams, both college and pro, the majority of fans in every section I've ever sat in cheered more than they complained and didn't make a point of sharing their most negative thoughts with all within earshot. But, regardless, I said nothing in my posts about which types of fans care more. I purposely avoided analyzing why some fans tend toward negative comments while others tend toward positive comments. I purposely avoided saying that fans should root a certain way. I was just curious to know where fans who tend toward negative comments congregated before social media.
Perhaps fans who care about how other fans root for the team are the vast minority. Maybe somebody should start a thread about why these types of fans are like they are or where they gather. Or maybe a thread about the types of posters who care a whole lot about what other posters care about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike84 on Mar 13, 2019 21:54:55 GMT -8
This question could be asked on any board but since B-Ball is in full swing right now, I'll ask it here.
We all know that game threads for games in which the Beavers struggle to play well and/or meet expectations usually accumulate significantly more posts than those for games in which the Beavers pretty much just play well and win. Some fans seem to need(?) the message board to gather and vent or pontificate or observe or criticize poor play or poor decisions or even good play by the other team that gets turned around to be bad play by the Beavers.
Since the only sports message boards I usually monitor are Beaver boards, I sort of wondered if this phenomenon was a uniquely Beaver thing. Then, this past week, I was looking for live updates of a Trailblazer/Thunder game and found a Blazer board that was almost 100% just negative comments (during an incredible NBA game). The coach was stupid, the players were stupid, certain players were just bad at everything, and decisions were criticized even when they were the way the rules are written and there was no decision involved. Good play by the Thunder was blamed on the Blazer coach/players. Good plays by the Blazers were sarcastically noted.
It's a lost cause for me to try to analyze why some fans are this way. I don't understand the drive behind it and trying to figure it out just leads to more arguments. My real question is where fans like this, who seem to "enjoy" joining with others to complain and criticize during a game, used to gather before the Internet? I know from years and years and years of sitting in the stands at games that fans like this are at the games in person but are a small minority and are usually (strangely) with fans who are not like them. I wouldn't think that fan bars would be filled with fans like this, except maybe in a place like Philly. So, where did these fans gather to share their negativity prior to message boards?
If your forum was The Oregonian, I’m sorry to inform you that you just lost 10 IQ points. It wasn't the Oregonian (I leaned long ago to avoid the fan discussions there) but I think it did lower my IQ reading it. I was trying to get the details on some things I had missed in the game a little earlier and mostly I just learned that everybody sucked. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Mar 14, 2019 9:57:03 GMT -8
I noticed that during the baseball game, you replied to my post in which I complained that the team isn't gelling. So perhaps I am one of those whom you are addressing with your question. OK, I'll bite.
I posted that remark because I am concerned about playing UCLA to start our conference games. In my opinion (and I stress that this is just an opinion), I don't know that we are ready for a full test like that. Of course, I hope I'm wrong. And there is wisdom to letting a lot of guys get playing time. I post perhaps because I'm hoping some wise voice will say "Look, irimi, these are the reasons Bailey is doing what he's doing and you don't have to worry because it will all come together in the end." Instead, someone pipes up and says our record is all that matters, which is patently not true. It's the record at the end of the year that matters, and even then, not as much as winning at the right time. Pretty much this is true in all sports.
If there were no internet, I wouldn't bother expressing my concerns about the baseball team. No one else around me watches Beaver Baseball as passionately as I do. So what would be the point?
I'm here to cheer on the Beavs and to learn. So when I post something out of line, correct me. That's cool. I know that there are a lot of people here who have more experience and a keener eye than I have.
|
|
|
|
Post by zeroposter on Mar 14, 2019 10:58:21 GMT -8
I noticed that during the baseball game, you replied to my post in which I complained that the team isn't gelling. So perhaps I am one of those whom you are addressing with your question. OK, I'll bite. I posted that remark because I am concerned about playing UCLA to start our conference games. In my opinion (and I stress that this is just an opinion), I don't know that we are ready for a full test like that. Of course, I hope I'm wrong. And there is wisdom to letting a lot of guys get playing time. I post perhaps because I'm hoping some wise voice will say "Look, irimi, these are the reasons Bailey is doing what he's doing and you don't have to worry because it will all come together in the end." Instead, someone pipes up and says our record is all that matters, which is patently not true. It's the record at the end of the year that matters, and even then, not as much as winning at the right time. Pretty much this is true in all sports. If there were no internet, I wouldn't bother expressing my concerns about the baseball team. No one else around me watches Beaver Baseball as passionately as I do. So what would be the point? I'm here to cheer on the Beavs and to learn. So when I post something out of line, correct me. That's cool. I know that there are a lot of people here who have more experience and a keener eye than I have. But you answered your own questions. UCLA is a fine team, and this is a huge issue with the Beaver bats. I doubt that many fans aren't concerned. Bailey can put a fine defense on the field, but the bats of some of those good gloves have been nonexistent. Put the guys that have had some success with the bats out there, and the fielding gets a little shakier. Plus those bats haven't been reliable. I don't think your analysis is wrong, but I am amazed and pleased with the record. Given that, the bats have to start producing something at the bottom of the order. With the guys that departed, a drop was going to happen. Period. Still, guys hovering above .100 should be in the .250 to .260 range and that hurts going into UCLA. My prediction is that ZT and AA show life even against a whole lot tougher pitching. I hope. I hope. I hope. |
|
