Here this will make you feel better.

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

...and a happy Boxing Day.

And to you too Sky King

 

[weeds]

As Ronald Reagan said, "Weeeellllll... there he goes again..."

 

[Half Empty]

All I'll say is IF the Packers do catch fire and end up in the SB anyone that's been doom n gloom please do not cheer for the team. It might seem harsh but I dispise bandwagon jumpers

I did read through the rest of the thread, but I feel that once again, we need definitions. I long ago gave up being riled by the bandwagon tag. That came after I realized that most people using it apply it to people who just can't get on board with the team's performance or expectations. I would use the term for those who either switch allegiance from a team on the downswing to one on the rise or just stop supporting a team when it's down. Given that, I pretty much agree with your second sentence.

The first one, however, is where the conflict arises - I have obviously been as much of a "yes, but" Negative Nellie as anyone, but I'll feel entirely justified in rooting for the Pack until they win it all or are eliminated. It is precisely because I'm a lifelong Packer fan (well, at least since pre-Lombardi times) that I feel it's entirely appropriate to complain about players, coaches, drafts, performance or anything else that I feel can/should be better. I am a fan of many important things, but I see no reason that suggesting that things could be done better by my daughter, church, VFW, wife (well, I'm smart enough not to go there ), et. al. means I no longer love/respect them.

 

[Half Empty]

Good catch, Poppa; that's gotta be it.

Sorry, I thought that part was apparent. What I meant was that using the "there are 32 teams, so each one should win a Super Bowl every 32 years" concept is seriously flawed.

 

[PackerDNA]

Sorry, I thought that part was apparent. What I meant was that using the "there are 32 teams, so each one should win a Super Bowl every 32 years" concept is seriously flawed.

 

[Half Empty]

fps-for pity sake, as opposed to my true feeling ffs ! for **** sake. And no, the idea of the forum is constructive conversation without the implication that somebody is an idiot because the don`t share the same opinion. Discussion is good, rudeness isn`t.

Thanks for the update on the term.

Your response, however, gets me back to definitions. You said there should be attitude, a pretty general term, then specifically identified rudeness. I agree that rudeness is inappropriate, but someone with a passionate conviction about a Packer topic, who presents it without personal attack, is fine by me.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Thanks for the update on the term.

Your response, however, gets me back to definitions. You said there should be attitude, a pretty general term, then specifically identified rudeness. I agree that rudeness is inappropriate, but someone with a passionate conviction about a Packer topic, who presents it without personal attack, is fine by me.

feel free to report me for MY attitude.

 

[weeds]

Bill, I refuse to give a flying **** about your attitude.

 

[TJV]

I agree with Half Empty’s second definition of a bandwagon fan. The starkest example I’ve come across is an acquaintance who was a Milwaukee Bucks fan until it became apparent how good Michael Jordon and the Bulls were. He bought all kinds of Bulls gear and acted like a lifelong fan. I’d needle him a bit during the Bulls fantastic run and a couple of years after Jordon left the Bulls for good I asked him how the Bulls were doing – he had no idea. I asked him how many starters he could name and of course he couldn’t name one. That’s a bandwagon fan.

For me any Packers fan that consistently remains a Packers fan isn’t a bandwagoner no matter how negative his/her attitude. As a fan throughout the dark ages, if I had the consistently sunny attitude of some here my friends would have had me committed. Don’t get me wrong, a mostly sunny attitude is justified nowadays, but as long as there’s not another agenda at play, IMO you can call such fans negative, spoiled, etc. but they are true Packers fans in my book.

Check out news accounts of the 1966 and 1967 Green Bay Packers seasons. If you can find footage of those seasons ... check it out. Then imagine the national media, the local media and an internet mixed in…

Just imagine how good that piker Lombardi would have been with our help! No way we would have put up with no-names like Chuck Mercein.

 

[Half Empty]

Just imagine how good that piker Lombardi would have been with our help! No way we would have put up with no-names like Chuck Mercein.

And, if we'd been there to help, we wouldn't have had endure that '63-'64 drought between the championship runs.

 

[Carl]

Well when you can obviously tell your leader of the team doesn't feel good about it, as a fan its hard too as well. Just thought some of us could use a pick me up seeing that our offense is struggling.

The main difference is

It's disappointing because we've witnessed the defense take a step forward and the offense take two steps backwards this year. And we have seen the same offensive struggles each week, and it seems any corner in the league can shut down any one of our receivers and that group really hasn't shown any signs of improvement.

Yes, the offense has struggled, but we are still in position for a good seed and still have a shot to win it all. Recent history shows anything can happen once in. I'm looking forward to watching at least 3 more good games rather than being disappointed.

 

[AmishMafia]

Sorry, I thought that part was apparent. What I meant was that using the "there are 32 teams, so each one should win a Super Bowl every 32 years" concept is seriously flawed.

Seriously flawed? How to compute averages is something covered in 9th grade math.

If you do the math you will discover, that on average, each team will win the SB once every 32 years.

 

[AmishMafia]

These forums are full of funny people. I don't understand why some people complain incessantly over anything and everything, demanding perfection. Despite the amazing success the Packers have enjoyed in the last few years. Success better than nearly 28 or so other teams.

I have a close family member of this mind set. When the Pack won the SB in 2010 I finally expected him to enjoy it - but his only response to me: "Yeah, but they almost pi$$ed it away at the end"

I kind of feel sorry for him and these posters of his ilk. They are missing a great season with all the negativity. Sports are for enjoyment and it matters only as much to you personally as you want to make it. But some people are just wired to complain. And then try to come off all self righteous as if they immune to homerisms or better fans because they expect more.

 

[JP Doyal]

Yes, the offense has struggled, but we are still in position for a good seed and still have a shot to win it all. Recent history shows anything can happen once in. I'm looking forward to watching at least 3 more good games rather than being disappointed.

I agree 100% and don't think we are in a terrible position just thought I'd share it after that cringe worthy press conference.

 

[longtimefan]

These forums are full of funny people. I don't understand why some people complain incessantly over anything and everything, demanding perfection.

But some people are just wired to complain. And then try to come off all self righteous as if they immune to homerisms or better fans because they expect more.

Or how some dont post in chat when the game is going good...Then when the Pack dont get a TD but get a FG, the posters come to *****

 

[RRyder]

I did read through the rest of the thread, but I feel that once again, we need definitions. I long ago gave up being riled by the bandwagon tag. That came after I realized that most people using it apply it to people who just can't get on board with the team's performance or expectations. I would use the term for those who either switch allegiance from a team on the downswing to one on the rise or just stop supporting a team when it's down. Given that, I pretty much agree with your second sentence.

The first one, however, is where the conflict arises - I have obviously been as much of a "yes, but" Negative Nellie as anyone, but I'll feel entirely justified in rooting for the Pack until they win it all or are eliminated. It is precisely because I'm a lifelong Packer fan (well, at least since pre-Lombardi times) that I feel it's entirely appropriate to complain about players, coaches, drafts, performance or anything else that I feel can/should be better. I am a fan of many important things, but I see no reason that suggesting that things could be done better by my daughter, church, VFW, wife (well, I'm smart enough not to go there ), et. al. means I no longer love/respect them.

My post was not directed at you in the least. At least your consistent in your views. More or less I'm talking about people who will and do complain about every single dropped pass or missed block but then come up with excuses for the other team on every sack or INT we force. Those are the fans I want zero association with and even less if the Packers were to make a run.

I'd also add that pointing out every flaw on the Packers while simultaneously pretending that every other top team is flawless is also annoying but I digress.

I do agree that the definition is always a little off as we all have different opinions on the matter and have discussed this with you in the past.

 

[Half Empty]

Seriously flawed? How to compute averages is something covered in 9th grade math.

If you do the math you will discover, that on average, each team will win the SB once every 32 years.

Not even close. Math doesn't pay any attention to quality. If one has 32 equal entities, then you're certainly correct. Or, if we're talking about the next couple of hundred years - over a human lifespan, not so much. To take the example to the extreme, if the Packers played in a high school league, their odds would be 32/32, and some NFL franchises look like they're run that way.

If you believe that all 32 teams begin the year with a 1/32 chance of winning the SB, I'd be happy to place an even-money bet with you - as long as I can take the top 16 teams in the Vegas odds, and you take the others. Or, without even looking, I'll be you that each team didn't win once over the last 32 years.