Author Topic: Bandwagoners: How many do we have now? (Read 6501 times)

Ray D · « **Reply #100:** February 04, 2013, 10:21:07 AM »

Quote from: tomterp on February 03, 2013, 04:10:16 PM

Oh, you know Ray. Ever since he got quoted on Baseball Prospectus ...

Was I? Anyway, back to Lombardi. (Even though it's way off topic, I suppose I owe an explanation.)

Lombardi was here one season. Poor guy got cancer and died, so I don't like to pile on him. But I do. He came here spouting the same old "rebuilding" program that every coach before him spouted. He is cited as having the first "winning" season since (whenever), but the fact is, that was only one more win that Otto Graham led them too a couple years earlier. Graham was taking them in the right direction but he was dealing with lots of problems his last two years (including, I think, some personal problems possibly related to alcohol) and it was certainly time for a change. And the 1969 Skins were certainly an improvement over the previous two years but not much if any better than the 1966 team. But most important, i didn't think at the time that he was building anything like a future winning team, and all that talk you hear about how Sonny Jurgensen learned more about football talking 15 minutes to Lombardi than he had learned his entire life before, it's all a silly myth.

And when Lombardi announced that he could not return for the 1970 season, he anointed Bill Austin as coach - a horrible coach, a terrible choice, but there was nothing to FO could do, because Lombardi was boss. So 1970 was a total waste.

But by the end of 1970 Lombardi was dead (bless his soul) so he wasn't boss anymore, and EBW could do as he pleased. And what he pleased to do was hire George Allen, who came here without any of that rebuilding nonsense, said we're going to win now, and that's what he did, which to me, proved that Lombardi was a fraud.

There.

Gleason2 · « **Reply #101:** February 04, 2013, 01:32:50 PM »

I can understand that you think that Lombardi may get more credit than he deserves for the Redskins' record in 1969 but I fail to see what made him a fraud. I don't think that your description/interpretation of events justifies the use of that term at all.

Quote from: Ray D on February 04, 2013, 10:21:07 AM

Was I? Anyway, back to Lombardi. (Even though it's way off topic, I suppose I owe an explanation.)

Lombardi was here one season. Poor guy got cancer and died, so I don't like to pile on him. But I do. He came here spouting the same old "rebuilding" program that every coach before him spouted. He is cited as having the first "winning" season since (whenever), but the fact is, that was only one more win that Otto Graham led them too a couple years earlier. Graham was taking them in the right direction but he was dealing with lots of problems his last two years (including, I think, some personal problems possibly related to alcohol) and it was certainly time for a change. And the 1969 Skins were certainly an improvement over the previous two years but not much if any better than the 1966 team. But most important, i didn't think at the time that he was building anything like a future winning team, and all that talk you hear about how Sonny Jurgensen learned more about football talking 15 minutes to Lombardi than he had learned his entire life before, it's all a silly myth.

And when Lombardi announced that he could not return for the 1970 season, he anointed Bill Austin as coach - a horrible coach, a terrible choice, but there was nothing to FO could do, because Lombardi was boss. So 1970 was a total waste.

But by the end of 1970 Lombardi was dead (bless his soul) so he wasn't boss anymore, and EBW could do as he pleased. And what he pleased to do was hire George Allen, who came here without any of that rebuilding nonsense, said we're going to win now, and that's what he did, which to me, proved that Lombardi was a fraud.

There.

Rick · « **Reply #102:** February 05, 2013, 05:08:29 PM »

Dont know how many bw fans there are, but today there is one more: me.

mitlen · « **Reply #103:** February 05, 2013, 05:13:16 PM »

Quote from: Rick on February 05, 2013, 05:08:29 PM

Dont know how many bw fans there are, but today there is one more: me.

You ain't a bandwagoneer. You're converted son.

Rick · « **Reply #104:** February 05, 2013, 05:16:24 PM »

Quote from: mitlen on February 05, 2013, 05:13:16 PM

You ain't a bandwagoneer. You're converted son.

spidernat · « **Reply #105:** February 05, 2013, 05:28:31 PM »

Quote from: mitlen on February 05, 2013, 05:13:16 PM

You ain't a bandwagoneer. You're converted son.

I knew this dude who moved to DC from NY and told me he switched from the Giants to the Redskins. He moved to Baltimore a couple of years ago so maybe he's "converted" to the Ravens by now.

mitlen · « **Reply #106:** February 05, 2013, 05:32:23 PM »

Quote from: spidernat on February 05, 2013, 05:28:31 PM

I knew this dude who moved to DC from NY and told me he switched from the Giants to the Redskins. He moved to Baltimore a couple of years ago so maybe he's "converted" to the Ravens by now.

... but Rick came over from the dark side (Phillies) and brought his children. He's gotta be legit. He couldn't be an infiltrator (in-phillies-trator) could he? We'll find out after hell week.

spidernat · « **Reply #107:** February 05, 2013, 05:41:51 PM »

Quote from: mitlen on February 05, 2013, 05:32:23 PM

... but Rick came over from the dark side (Phillies) and brought his children. He's gotta be legit. He couldn't be an infiltrator (in-phillies-trator) could he? We'll find out after hell week.

It's all good. I imagine it has to be a bit difficult though to suddenly change teams (especially to a division foe

). It would be impossible for me to think of becoming a phillies fan and all of a sudden root against the Nats and root for the phillies.

I wonder if he'll do the same for the other sports. I hope he gets an amazing job offer making amazing money in Houston.

Rick · « **Reply #108:** February 05, 2013, 05:50:19 PM »

I switched over because Denard Span told me to. I tweeted him when he was traded to the Nats and told him my situation. I asked him if I should start rooting for him now that i was moving to DC and he responded "no brainer." That was enough for me.

But--yes, i am taking my children with me. I already took them to Natsfest. (We washed our hands in the bathroom next to Tyler Clippard so that should give me some street cred with you guys. lol) I've been buying the kiddos Nats stuff on ebay and I kid you not, I boxed up all my Phillies stuff (37 years worth) and I am donating it to a Philly charity. Out with the old in with the new. Raising the kids as Nats fans... just someone please tell me why President bobblheads and screech stuffed animals cost so damn much. lol

Rick · « **Reply #109:** February 05, 2013, 05:53:42 PM »

Quote from: spidernat on February 05, 2013, 05:41:51 PM

It's all good. I imagine it has to be a bit difficult though to suddenly change teams (especially to a division foe ). It would be impossible for me to think of becoming a phillies fan and all of a sudden root against the Nats and root for the phillies. (Image removed from quote.) I wonder if he'll do the same for the other sports. I hope he gets an amazing job offer making amazing money in Houston.

Yeah, rooting from within the same division is making this transition more difficult. I was one of those philly fans taking over nationals park and now i have to protect my park.

Yes, I switched all sports. Eagles to Redskins. Ouch! (I went to the wildcard game and rooted for the skins.) 76ers to wizards. flyers to capitals. Im doing it all.

JCA-CrystalCity · « **Reply #110:** February 05, 2013, 06:03:23 PM »

The folks I know who have converted loyalties successfully have always done it for / with the kids. It's tougher without them, but with them, it becomes tough to have them root against the guys they see the most. If it were an AFC team, or an AL team, you could go with dual loyalties, but you can't maintain dual loyalties in a division.

mitlen · « **Reply #111:** February 05, 2013, 06:04:07 PM »

Quote from: Rick on February 05, 2013, 05:53:42 PM

Yeah, rooting from within the same division is making this transition more difficult. I was one of those philly fans taking over nationals park and now i have to protect my park. Yes, I switched all sports. Eagles to Redskins. Ouch! (I went to the wildcard game and rooted for the skins.) 76ers to wizards. flyers to capitals. Im doing it all.

All in !

KnorrForYourMoney · « **Reply #112:** February 05, 2013, 06:07:20 PM »

Quote from: Ray D on February 04, 2013, 10:21:07 AM

Was I? Anyway, back to Lombardi. (Even though it's way off topic, I suppose I owe an explanation.)

Lombardi was here one season. Poor guy got cancer and died, so I don't like to pile on him. But I do. He came here spouting the same old "rebuilding" program that every coach before him spouted. He is cited as having the first "winning" season since (whenever), but the fact is, that was only one more win that Otto Graham led them too a couple years earlier. Graham was taking them in the right direction but he was dealing with lots of problems his last two years (including, I think, some personal problems possibly related to alcohol) and it was certainly time for a change. And the 1969 Skins were certainly an improvement over the previous two years but not much if any better than the 1966 team. But most important, i didn't think at the time that he was building anything like a future winning team, and all that talk you hear about how Sonny Jurgensen learned more about football talking 15 minutes to Lombardi than he had learned his entire life before, it's all a silly myth.

And when Lombardi announced that he could not return for the 1970 season, he anointed Bill Austin as coach - a horrible coach, a terrible choice, but there was nothing to FO could do, because Lombardi was boss. So 1970 was a total waste.

But by the end of 1970 Lombardi was dead (bless his soul) so he wasn't boss anymore, and EBW could do as he pleased. And what he pleased to do was hire George Allen, who came here without any of that rebuilding nonsense, said we're going to win now, and that's what he did, which to me, proved that Lombardi was a fraud.

There.

Your argument is basically: "he's overrated because I think he's overrated."

zimm_da_kid · « **Reply #113:** February 05, 2013, 06:10:19 PM »

Welcome Rick! The more the merrier.

Rick · « **Reply #114:** February 05, 2013, 06:24:55 PM »

Quote from: JCA-CrystalCity on February 05, 2013, 06:03:23 PM

The folks I know who have converted loyalties successfully have always done it for / with the kids. It's tougher without them, but with them, it becomes tough to have them root against the guys they see the most. If it were an AFC team, or an AL team, you could go with dual loyalties, but you can't maintain dual loyalties in a division.

yeah, my dad switched from Mets to Phillies back in the day so I was raised on the Phils. Now my kids will be raised on Nats. At least we stay loyal to the NL East, right? lol

Rick · « **Reply #115:** February 05, 2013, 06:25:17 PM »

Quote from: zimm_da_kid on February 05, 2013, 06:10:19 PM

Welcome Rick! The more the merrier.

Thanks, Zimm

spidernat · « **Reply #116:** February 05, 2013, 06:30:49 PM »

Quote from: Rick on February 05, 2013, 05:53:42 PM

Yeah, rooting from within the same division is making this transition more difficult. I was one of those philly fans taking over nationals park and now i have to protect my park. Yes, I switched all sports. Eagles to Redskins. Ouch! (I went to the wildcard game and rooted for the skins.) 76ers to wizards. flyers to capitals. Im doing it all.

I'm sure it doesn't hurt that the Nats and Skins both won their respective divisions and philly teams seem to be trending downwards.

I hear you though. On Sunday this chick asked me if I grew up watching Redskins games with my father and it brought back good memories of gathering around the living room with my pops and my brothers for Redskins games.

Quote from: JCA-CrystalCity on February 05, 2013, 06:03:23 PM

If it were an AFC team, or an AL team, you could go with dual loyalties, but you can't maintain dual loyalties in a division.

spidernat · « **Reply #117:** February 05, 2013, 06:31:41 PM »

Quote from: Rick on February 05, 2013, 06:24:55 PM

yeah, my dad switched from Mets to Phillies back in the day so I was raised on the Phils. Now my kids will be raised on Nats. At least we stay loyal to the NL East, right? lol

You're working your way south.

Rick · « **Reply #118:** February 05, 2013, 06:39:22 PM »

Quote from: spidernat on February 05, 2013, 06:30:49 PM

I'm sure it doesn't hurt that the Nats and Skins both won their respective divisions and philly teams seem to be trending downwards.

I hear you though. On Sunday this chick asked me if I grew up watching Redskins games with my father and it brought back good memories of gathering around the living room with my pops and my brothers for Redskins games.

well, yeah, of course winning doesn't hurt. But I am a wizards fan too now so that should cancel out any winning by the other washington teams.

mitlen · « **Reply #119:** February 05, 2013, 07:00:43 PM »

Quote from: Rick on February 05, 2013, 06:39:22 PM

well, yeah, of course winning doesn't hurt. But I am a wizards fan too now so that should cancel out any winning by the other washington teams.

It's the Caps you have to worry about now.

Rick · « **Reply #120:** February 05, 2013, 08:14:18 PM »

Quote from: mitlen on February 05, 2013, 07:00:43 PM

It's the Caps you have to worry about now.

true, but at least they can beat the flyers. lol

Rick · « **Reply #121:** February 05, 2013, 08:15:15 PM »

Quote from: spidernat on February 05, 2013, 06:31:41 PM

You're working your way south.

yeah, if things continue my grandkids should be Braves fans and my great grandkids should be Miami fans-- poor things. haha

codedandunited · « **Reply #122:** February 06, 2013, 01:02:52 AM »

I guess you could call me a bandwagon fan, I've been a Diamondbacks fan since the team was first announced in 1995 but recent ownership and front office problems have forced me to rethink things for the time being; basically until new ownership is established. I chose the Washington Nationals not just because they have been successful the past season, but because I've always been interested in them since the team was first established in Washington D.C. For whatever reason I would always use the Nats when I'd play my video games growing up, it was fun to play the Owner Mode in MVP Baseball 2005 and develop the team from from the floor up, and constructing a custom stadium for them so they'd have a true ballpark of their own.

To me the Nationals were a team that I thought I could root for from the very start, they are Washington D.C's team, the nation's capitol, so I always thought it appropriate that any baseball fan should root for the team in their back pocket. It has always been fun to see the Nationals draft high and they always showed promise of being "almost ready" to compete, which we all have seen has finally happened. One of my first experiences with the Washington Nationals was when I visited the city in 2005 and the team was visiting the Korean War and Vietnam War memorials and I happened to be there, I also went home with my first Non-Dbacks cap that trip when I purchased a New Era Nationals cap at some shop in Metro Center.

Bryce Harper also went to my high school, and his brother is a friend to my sister so it was always interesting to see him get drafted and called up so quickly, I also got to see him play at the 2011 Future's Game in Phoenix and his general hype from baseball drew some specific interest from me.

Although it's sort of cheesey, another reason I like the Nationals are because of their uniforms. I believe that the Nationals have one of the classiest uniforms on the baseball diamond, I'm glad that they ditched the "Nationals" script from the front too. These are a huge improvement over what the Diamondbacks think are good uniforms, who honestly thinks it's cool to have D-backs written on the front of the jersey? Plus the red caps they wear look terribly minor league.

Whether I am considered to be a bandwagoner is up for debate, I've always had my eye on the Nationals from 3000 miles away, and I'm looking forward to watching them in 2013 since watching them in 2012 was the most fun I had watching a team in years.

OldChelsea · « **Reply #123:** February 06, 2013, 08:27:31 AM »

It was easy to become a Nats supporter when they arrived here in 2005...because (1) despite 28 years' prior residence here I never supported the Orioles (had no real favourite team during that period), and (2) my first-ever baseball match was a Senators match, exactly 50 years ago this coming August.