Conference hbahba::cam_sports

    
    a true fan is someone who changes the radio station when some hip new
    happening mtv artist of the week covers one of the master's tunes for
    a quick buck.......
    
    mike

    a smart true fan would have had his jacket rolled up inside out
    until he felt it safe to put on.  When exactly was that iceman???
    
    I have witnesses
    
    Jimbo

  What happens of the radio doesn't carry the games in your area, does that
mean you can't be a fan? What if someone isn't married and has no wife to gripe
about them listening to static on a radio? Does that mean they can't be a fan? 

  And what if someone's Rotisserie team has been based on a team for 5 years
starting back when the team was losing? And what if they read about their minor
league teams in Baseball Weekly, and they fight with their girlfriend for the
TV clicker so they can watch them on TBS? And what if their friends complain
that they are more fans of that team than the home team? And what if they go
stand around their old ballpark talking to ghosts who played there before the
team left, why isn't that a fan? 

  So who says your rules are anything more than opinion? Sounds to me as if
your rules are just a form of Political Correctness. What sense does it make
to create rules for something which by definition is an irrational form of
madness?

  George

RE         <<< Note 247.188 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>       You could change "most people in the US" to "most people in Boston"
>       and be on very safe ground. George's little stance is clearly a
>       case of consider the source.

  And what if I'm the only Braves fan left in Boston, so what? What rule of
Political Correctness am I breaking by being a Braves fan because the team
once played here?

  Spill it out Tommy, at least Groner is willing to publish his rules on what
is and what is not a fan. Although I don't agree, at least I admire his courage
for putting them in print. If you have rules that we are all suppose to follow
for what is and what is not a fan, let's hear them along with some reason as to
why your rules should be any better or worse than anyone else's rules. 

  George 

RE    <<< Note 247.189 by MIMS::ROLLINS_R "Northwestern Wildcats Bandwagon" >>>

> No one says you can't do that.  

  Well that's not really true. Groner and Tommy seem to be making a case that
I can't be a fan. They feel there are hard core rules as to what is and what
is not a fan and if you don't follow their rules you are a "bandwagon" fan.

>But, you should recognize that just because
> you feel it is a valid reason (and it may be valid for you), it is possible
> that everyone else in the entire world thinks it is a crazy reason, and that
> it is without any reason.  Doesn't mean you can't hold that opinion.

  Fine. In fact I agree with them, it is a crazy reason to be a fan. Likewise,
anyone who is a fan of a team made up of people who they don't know personally
just because they grew up in the burbs of the city where the team plays is
equally crazy, that's what being a fan is all about, being crazy. 

  George

	My rules for being a fan (I believe they are considering these in the
	S.C. state legislature) :

	1.  A fan is one who goes to the games when the stadium is 100% full,
	    and no room in the parking lot, as well as when it is 6% full, the
	    team really stinks, and the "in" crowd thinks going to the game is
	    not the "in" thing to do.  [Part (b) is kinda like bowling.]  Fans
	    do not sit in the "brie-eaters only" section of the stadium, with
	    all the johnny-come-latelies, who don't even notice the game has
	    started until after the wine tasting contest is over.  Fans will
	    remain with the team when the downturn starts.

	2.  A fan may have no objective reason for being a fan of a particular
	    team - it may be they like a single individual player (my wife
	    admires Orel Hershiser, and has cheered his team on); they may have
	    grown up in that town as a child and have a personal attachment
	    from that era; they may know individuals on that team; they may
	    have none of the reasons.  However, they are cheering the team on.
	    Someone whose sole reason for cheering a team on is to benefit
	    themselves probably isn't a fan; i.e., an employee who cheers on the
	    team SOLELY to earn more money isn't a fan, nor is someone whose
	    SOLE interest is to benefit his rotisserie team.

	3.  Fans usually don't care very much what about people think about
	    his fandom.  Often there isn't a rational reason, so there isn't
	    much you can explain to a person who isn't a sports fan at all, and
	    for those that are, they also don't have very good reasons (often).

	4.  One poor reason for being a fan is that the franchise used to
	    exist in your locale before you were ever born.  For example,
	    cheering for the Orioles because you grew up in the 1960's in
	    St.Louis is a poor reason.  Similarly, cheering for Britain in the
	    Olympics just because the U.S. was once a part of that country is
	    also a poor reason.  [Perhaps others can think of additional
	    examples which escape my mind at the moment.]  There may be good
	    reasons why the St.Louis child is an Orioles fan, but this isn't
	    a good reason, though I can see how it would suffice for a child.

	5.  People can be the fan of more than one team; although, those fans
	    who openly declare their allegiance only when the team is winning
	    should expect to be called a bandwagon jumper (deservedly so).

>> No one says you can't do that.  
>
>  Well that's not really true. Groner and Tommy seem to be making a case that
>I can't be a fan. They feel there are hard core rules as to what is and what
>is not a fan and if you don't follow their rules you are a "bandwagon" fan.

 Well, a bandwagon fan may be a fan, but not as a loyal a fan.

>>But, you should recognize that just because
>> you feel it is a valid reason (and it may be valid for you), it is possible
>> that everyone else in the entire world thinks it is a crazy reason, and that
>> it is without any reason.  Doesn't mean you can't hold that opinion.
>
>  Fine. In fact I agree with them, it is a crazy reason to be a fan. Likewise,
>anyone who is a fan of a team made up of people who they don't know personally
>just because they grew up in the burbs of the city where the team plays is
>equally crazy, that's what being a fan is all about, being crazy. 

 Can't agree here, since I see the term "crazy" as being far from the societal
 norm.  If that's the case, than those factors that most are often lead to an
 attachment as a fan are not crazy, but normal..  Bizarre reasons that have led
 only one person, or one person and perhaps a serial killer, to develop an
 attachment to a team can be considered crazy or irrational reasons.

  >> Spill it out Tommy,
    
     Not a chnace. You can sucker the rest of these guys into gving you
     the attention that you crave by pretending to be a Braves fan but I 
     haven't got time for your nonsense.

    What if people cann't afford the ridiculous prices that these sporting
    events get these days? Does that mean they aren't fans? What if they
    just watch it on TV? 

    any witnesses besides JB???  8*)
    
    I know you were wearing it proudly on the way out.  You went in a 
    chicken hawk and came out Foghorn Leghorn!
    
    Jimbo

    
    	A true fan moves air.  George is a true fan......  :*)
    
    Claybone

>    any witnesses besides JB???  8*)
    
    I met the Groaner outside the bar that night, and he had that 
    jacket *hidden*!  I had to ask him where it was.  If he says 
    otherwise he's a liar!
    
    glenn
    

    One of the Oxford definitions I saw was
    
    "Those influenced by excessive and mistaken enthusiasm"
    
    I don't know why they limited fan(atic) to only Yankee and Indian fans.
    
    I'll have to call my maiden aunts "from Roxbury"(as cousin Charlie of
    mta fame would put it) and see what Braves memorabilia they have lying
    around for poor George who is definitely as Oxford again puts it..
    
    "an apparition transporting the mind" (treatable by a poultice or
    topical remedy it adds).
    
    And it's perfectly all right and healthy by me if not by the political
    correct set on the edge of sprots; George I trust this Braves field
    haunting you do won't result in any coeds being buried in the ol' jury
    box?):-)

    
    The beer at Boston Beer Works is too expensive and the quality is too
    good.  Only a fool would toss it at anyone....well, maybe the
    Blueberries in the bottom of my Blueberry Ale.....
    
    

    
    Seems to me that even "bandwagon jumpers" are fans.  They are fans of
    the sport or the moment (ie "championship"), not necessarily the team.   
    
    To me, location has nothing to do with the team.  If you watch a team
    when you can (obviously if you live in a different state you can't
    watch too many of their games), follow them through good times and bad
    times, and don't just care about the end of season result, then you are
    a fan and nothing else matters.
    
    Marc
    

    
    
  >> I met the Groaner outside the bar that night, and he had that 
  >> jacket *hidden*!  I had to ask him where it was.  If he says 
  >> otherwise he's a liar!
    
     Gee, someone, who didn't know better, might conclude that Groaner
     is a bad ass when he's sitting anonymously at the keyboard of
     his pc in his little cubicle with his Star Trek posters peering
     over his shoulder but in reality he's a girly man who was too skeered
     to wear his team jacket in a yuppy beer joint. 
      

RE         <<< Note 251.11 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>     Not a chnace. You can sucker the rest of these guys into gving you
>     the attention that you crave by pretending to be a Braves fan but I 
>     haven't got time for your nonsense.

  Woops, contradiction. If you don't have time, why did you enter this note.

  George

  Back when I was a kid I was a big Willie Mays fan but because I lived in
Western Mass and he played in San Francisco I didn't see him much. I saw him in
the all-star games, wearing all those different hats and stealing bases, and
finally I saw him in the 1962 World Series (I think there was also a playoff
with the Dodgers that year that was on TV). 

  One reason I was a fan was because the big kids use to go see the Single A
Springfield Giants who were around because the Giants had played in New York.
That's what got me to thinking about Willie Mays in the 1st place. Maybe that's
where I get this history thing. 

  Anyway, I guess I'll continue to be a Braves fan largely because they are
from Boston and I'll keep stopping by from time to time to see the ghosts at
"Braves Field" (some of whom I'm getting to know rather well), and if I'm the
only Braves fan left in Boston then so be it but considering that the Braves
are the 2nd team we get on TV someone else must be watching, otherwise we'd
be stuck watching the Mets.

  GO BRAVES, REPEAT!
  George

    A fan is the gentle breeze generated by Albert Belle's corked bat
    missing a Glavine fastball by six inches.

RE         <<< Note 56.2041 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>       It is a fact that you did not start a Braves note until after 
>       the Braves were in their third World Series. Look it up, George.

  I've moved this here because it really has nothing to do with the Patriots.

  So what are you saying, the new definition of a fan is someone who starts a
note in the SPORTS notes file? Notes placed in other files don't count? Why
not?

  That note I entered proves I've been a fan since 1990. The fact that I took
the Braves as my SNAL Rotisserie team around the same time also proves that
point and in fact I 1st mentioned back then that I was doing it because the
Braves came from Boston. And that's when they were in last place.

  And as for football, yes I start paying attention when baseball ends and the
purpose for my notes is to ask questions so I can catch up, nothing more. 

  What is your problem anyway? Why does it bother you so much if I express my
opinions in this notes file? If you don't agree, why don't you just express
your point of view and leave me alone? 

  George

I'm going to have to hire another guy to mop the floors here in the SPORTS
tavern.

All these new pissing contests are keeping Cameron, the guy who mops the floor
now, way too busy.....

> All these new pissing contests are keeping Cameron, the guy who mops the floor
> now, way too busy.....

  Well, George wanted to know what the rules/definitions were for being a fan.
  It appears that he doesn't have any idea, so some kindly SPORTSters were just
  trying to help him out.  I think he has a clearer picture now.

RE      <<< Note 251.26 by CAM::WAY "Nine to the front, six to the rear" >>>

>All these new pissing contests are keeping Cameron, the guy who mops the floor
>now, way too busy.....

  The reason for this note is to keep this sort of pissing and moaning out
of sports related notes. Now if someone takes offense to you being a fan in
one of the real sports notes you can drag the discussion over here allowing
those not interested to hit "next unseen".

RE    <<< Note 251.27 by MIMS::ROLLINS_R "Northwestern Wildcats Bandwagon" >>>

>  Well, George wanted to know what the rules/definitions were for being a fan.
>  It appears that he doesn't have any idea, so some kindly SPORTSters were just
>  trying to help him out.  I think he has a clearer picture now.

  I still don't know. I've seen opinions and I've heard bashing by the SPORTS
file's P.C. Police but I still have not seen a rule that's anything more than
opinion saying I can't be a Braves fan nor have I seen any reason why I should
have to follow such a rule. 

  For example, if someone asked if there were any rules about free speech you
could say yes, the Constitution guarantees free speech. You could quote the
amendment and talk about how it was proposed and ratified by congress and you
could discuss case law on the topic from the Supreme Court. It's not just
noter's opinion, it's a rule you can point to. 

  Likewise I'd like to know the rules for when I can be a fan and when I can't
be a fan. I don't believe there are any but you'd never know that by the way
people get bashed around here for being a fan of the wrong team or for being
a fan for the wrong reason.

  George

RE            <<< Note 56.2111 by CNTROL::CHILDS "Washing Machine" >>>

>    Well I don't know but George if you've been a Mass resident all your
>    life or for longer than 4 years why then did you all of a sudden become
>    a Patriot fan 4 years ago? Did you never watch football until 4 years
>    ago?
    
  No point cluttering up the Patriots note since this is really the "What
is a fan" issue so I'll continue here. I guess the best way to put it is,
I disagree. What do I disagree with? Well let's look closely at what you and
others are saying.

  All of the criticism I'm hearing is of the form:

    Given that: There is a rigid set of rules as to what is a fan.
    Given that: You just violated those rules
    Therefore:  Explain yourself / your ridiculous / bandwagon / etc

  I disagree with the 1st given. I've seen Groner's rules on what is a fan and I
respect his opinion as to what he thinks the rules should be. I've stated my
opinion which is that all sports is just entertainment and being a fan is no
more than a whim. 

  What I'm looking for is some authority for that 1st given. If you do feel
that there is a set of rules and if you feel that Groner was close when he
spelled them out then what is the authority for those rules? They were not
voted on by any representative that I had a chance to vote for or against.
Except for Groner's note I've never even seen those rules before. Where are
they published? Who says they should be enforced? 

  Seems to me without rules made by a recognized legislative body the default
is freedom. At least I'd like to think so. If you chose to limit yourself to
rules fine. I chose not to and I'm a fan now even though I was not before
simply because I feel like it. OK I have my reasons but 1st give me a good
reason why I need them.

  But prove me wrong. Cite the rules, show me where they are published, tell me
about the legislative body that decreed that you could only be a fan under
certain conditions. I'm all eyes, let's have a look. 

  George

    
    quit being so melodramatic will ya and please answer my question. 
    
    mike

  Sure, no problem. 

  I've lived in Massachusetts all my life but I grew up in the Western part of
the state back when the AFL was not considered real football. The Giants were
the only team around so we were all Giants fans. 

  When I moved to Boston Pat Sullivan was starting fights with Howie Long while
his brother was blowing all their money on Michael Jackson tours. Then Victor
"Let's rape the women" Kiam bought the team and things got worse. How do you
follow a team like that? 

  When Kraft bought the team they seemed to change their entire outlook. It was
a breath of fresh air. Management moved to the background and they started
concentrating on football. Now they are a team that I feel I can support
without compromising my ethical beliefs. 

  Also this bunch of guys is completely different from any Patriots team that
went before. There is no one around who's been a fan of this team for more than
4 years because they don't have more than a handful of guys left from over 4
years ago. If anything this is more of a Giants team than a Patriots team.
Anyway it's fun to be a fan now and that's what sports is all about, fun. So
I'm a fan.

  George

    
    thanks

    It wasn't "fun" when Harpo got called out of the stands at Harvard
    stadium to suit up and made the tackle on the opening kickoff?
    
    How about when the fire started at BC?
    
    The time the coach almost got electrocuted and a lawyer saved him?
    
    Okay not fun 
    
    The victory over the Bills at Fenway park in the snowstorm?
    
    The coach being fired prior to the last game in Miami despite winning
    the division because he made a few calls to Colorado recruits from the
    office?
    
    Steve Grogan taking the helm at Miami in 1986 to lead the Patriots in
    a stirring comeback over dangerous Dan Marino to win the division and
    leave Chris Collingsworth and Boomer Esiason and a forever nameless
    sweet young Cinci fan crying in their beer in a Covington Ky nightspot
    of which epic poetry has been penned?
    
    It was no fun when Berry put Eason in next game vs Denver to lose in
    the first round.

    >> Also this bunch of guys is completely different from any Patriots 
    >> team that went before. There is no one around who's been a fan of 
    >> this team for more than 4 years because they don't have more than 
    >> a handful of guys left from over 4 years ago. If anything this is 
    >> more of a Giants team than a Patriots team.
    
       And yet you claim the Braves as a Boston team because they played
       here fifty years ago. Go take a nap.
    
    >> Anyway it's fun to be a fan now and 
    
       And stop calling yourself a Patriots fan.
    
    

That isn't the only criterion, is it?  I mean, my first name is Roland and
I jumped on the Northwestern bandwagon...

	Geez George, if sports are entertainment only then why are you going
	on and on and on when people call you a bandwagoneer?  Just tell them	
	tough sh!t and move on instead of playing the victim.

	Kevin

	

RE         <<< Note 251.34 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>                 -< Inconsistency thy name is George Maiewski >-
>       And yet you claim the Braves as a Boston team because they played
>       here fifty years ago. Go take a nap.
>       And stop calling yourself a Patriots fan.
    
  Even if this is true the question still remains, so what? What if someone's
reasons for being a fan or not being a fan make no sense and are completely
frivolous, what difference does it make? In fact, who can you show me that has
any reason for liking a team that is not completely frivolous?

  The way you present your argument it appears that you think it is important
who is a fan and why. Where do you get this idea? 

  I'm a Braves fan, a Red Sox fan, and a Patriots fan because I feel like it.
Show me a law I'm breaking or a rule I'm violating that in any way could be
called important. 

  George 

Gawd, I cannot believe I'm being sucked into this inane debate, but something
Roland ("Childe Roland to the Sports File Came....") made me want to put
this in.....


	For me personally, there's a difference between being a fan and
	rooting for a team.

	I'm a Giants fan and a Red Sox fan and a Bruins fan.  I follow
	their progress, bemoan their losses, and am exuberant in their
	success.  I "live and die" with them, so to speak.

	Northwestern I root for.  It's nice to see a school that has had
	such little success, do well.  America, I think, loves and underdog
	and Northwestern certainly was that for a while....  

	HOwever, I do NOT consider myself to be a fan of Northwestern.
	I know one player's name.....



As to the Bandwagon, I'm thinking of starting a TV series, inspired by our
debates in here, called "Bandwagon Train".  It's too bad Ward Bond is dead
cause I think he'd make a great Wagon Master....


'Saw

RE             <<< Note 251.37 by BSS::NEUZIL "Just call me Fred" >>>

>	Geez George, if sports are entertainment only then why are you going
>	on and on and on when people call you a bandwagoneer?  

  Writting in the SPORTS notes file is a sport unto itself. I do it for the
entertainment. 

  By the way, I'm a Joe Huber fan, he writes the best notes,

  GO JOE!!!

  Oops, wait ... I wonder if I'm just jumping on the Huber bandwagon?

  George

    
    Little known fact: my last name translates to "Wagon Man".  I'm a
    big, big fan of Northwestern.  None bigger.  I have imprimatur...
    
    
    glenn
    

>Rules for being a fan

You have to move a lot of air.  By my estimation, George, you qualify...

       ____
      /   /
     /   /
    /   /
   /   /
  /__ /
      -------------
 | Act 1 Scene 4   |
 | Take 351        |
 | Why do we read  |
 | this garbage?   |
  -----------------

    re. Childe Roland
    
    	Is that the Roland of the epic who was the nephew of Charlemagne?
    
    Wasn't there something about him blowing his horn?
    
    I've got to get this in since I suspect some serious business from CR
    after my UMass note  (in Literature this is pre-saging or have I got my
    terms mixed up Frank - what do they call it?)
    
    You guys are a riot - Tommy responding to George saying anyone who
    responds to George is an idiot, George having a ball, Groaner a woodie
    etc - Sherman's getting his money's worth over the ocean

RE         <<< Note 251.41 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>       Please stop feeding into George's pathetic cries for attention.
>      First that idiotic skating debate now this. 

  Funny you should say that Tommy since you were the one who started this
debate. Talking about feeding it, it was your idea so here we are. All I did
was move it out of the Patriots note.

>If he wants to assert 
>      that he's as much a fan as some guy that has had season tickets
>      for thirty years and never missed a game even though George is 
>      afraid to actually attend a game then let him. 

  Oops, after saying we shouldn't feed the debate, here comes some more food,
chomp, chomp, chomp. Looks like you don't take your own advice.

  What I'm still wondering about is the intensity of what you are saying. If
you were talking about whether or not we should have public education or pay
for the fire department it might deserve this level of intensity but what I'm
confused about is why anyone would go to such lengths to criticize someone for
something as meaningless as being a fan of some bunch of guys playing a kids
game.

  Which statement do you feel is closer to being true:

    1. The legitimacy of being a fan is of major importance and should be
       closely regulated.

OR

    2. Sports exist for entertainment and it's up to the individual to decide
       when they want to be a fan.

  George

	"Let me entertain you.
	 Let me make you smile."



	billl

>    re. Childe Roland
>    
>    	Is that the Roland of the epic who was the nephew of Charlemagne?

Off the top of my head, I think so...

There's a poem by Robert Browning called

	"Childe Rowland to the Dark Tower Came"

which is the inspiration for Stephen King's "Dark Tower" epic.

I haven't plowed all the way through the poem to know the ins and outs.


>    Wasn't there something about him blowing his horn?

That rings a bell, although I could be getting that mixed up with
Joshua....8^)

    
>    I've got to get this in since I suspect some serious business from CR
>    after my UMass note  (in Literature this is pre-saging or have I got my
>    terms mixed up Frank - what do they call it?)

Need more detail of what you're getting at....

    
>    You guys are a riot - Tommy responding to George saying anyone who
>    responds to George is an idiot, George having a ball, Groaner a woodie
>    etc - Sherman's getting his money's worth over the ocean

We are a motley crew aren't we.....

    
    >> Tommy responding to George saying anyone who responds to George 
    >> is an idiot, 
    
       I never called anyone an idiot. I said George's attempts to keep
       this idiotic debate alive were themselves idiotic. It's a shame
       that he didn't go into a period of noting silence after Eddie
        Munster look alike, Sergei Grinkov, took a dirt nap.

Sometimes this file truly amazes me.....

RE         <<< Note 251.50 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>       I never called anyone an idiot. I said George's attempts to keep
>       this idiotic debate alive were themselves idiotic. 

  OK I'll offer you a truce. If your side stops bashing me for saying I'm a fan
and stop bashing me for talking about sports you don't like, I'll stop my side
of the argument.

  Deal?

  George

    I was using rhetorical license Tommy, sorry but help me out with the
    literary stuff and we'll call it even.
    
    Presaging is what?  Hinting at what's to come or is it in hindsight
    like the Pat's preseason presaged their poor regular season.
    
    Foreshadowing.  That's maybe what I was thinking.  King likes to do
    that.
    
    

    
    Presaging is what?  Hinting at what's to come or is it in hindsight
    like the Pat's preseason presaged their poor regular season.
    
>    Foreshadowing.  That's maybe what I was thinking.  King likes to do
>    that.

Yes, as far as I know, forshadowing is giving a hint as to what is to come.

King often (some say TOO often) does it with a line like

	"It was the last time he saw her alive"

Presage means the same thing, but I've never heard it in a literary sense,
which is why you threw me there....  


'Saw

    
    

  From the American Heritage Dictionary:

    Presage n. 1. An omen; portent. 2. A presentiment; foreboding. v. presage
    (presaged presaging)1. To indicate or warn of in advance; portend. 2. To
    foretell or predict. [<L praesagire, to perceive, beforehand.] 

  George

>   You guys are a riot - Tommy responding to George saying anyone who
>   responds to George is an idiot, George having a ball, Groaner a woodie
>   etc - Sherman's getting his money's worth over the ocean

You got that right, Bill.  And you have to imagine me reading the whole
thread at one shot, with no time lag.

Please, don't anybody accept George's offer of a deal, losing these
LDUCs would be more than I can bear.

George, FWIW, my take is this:  when a team wins, it's a major high for
its fans.  Paul and Joe must have been on Cloud Nine with their Indians
after so many years of futility.  UMDan must have had something similar
when the Braves finally won it all.

So here you come and declare yourself a Braves fan (which, BTW, I had no
problem accepting).  That means you claim the right to the same high as
the people who have been backing Atlanta for thirty years.  And that, I
think, is what gets people's dander up.  They feel you're celebrating
under false pretenses.

My own feeling is that you don't take these games seriously enough to
achieve the high experienced by the "true fan".  As you've said, it's
just entertainment, like this notesfile.

Steve

RE   <<< Note 251.57 by MUNDIS::SSHERMAN "Clean living and a fast outfield" >>>

>So here you come and declare yourself a Braves fan (which, BTW, I had no
>problem accepting).  That means you claim the right to the same high as
>the people who have been backing Atlanta for thirty years.  And that, I
>think, is what gets people's dander up.  They feel you're celebrating
>under false pretenses.

  Celebrating under false pretense. I like it. Now THAT's entertaining. :*)} 

  For what it's worth, I've been a Braves fan for about 5 years. I became a fan
about the time I got my Braves based Rotisserie team which was the winter after
the last year they came in last place. The reason I picked the Braves was
because they originally came from Boston and because I could see their games on
TBS. 

  That spring I got to go to a Braves game when I was at DECUS in Atlanta.
About 10 of us got to the game and bought our tickets as they were singing the
national anthem and we got lower deck just beyond 1st base. The following year
after they were in the World Series the people who went down to DECUS couldn't
get tickets at all, they were sold out. 

  I've been a Braves fan ever since and I've entered a number of notes about
them in the baseball notes file. The reason I just started entering them here
has more to do with the fact that the baseball notes file is all but dead and
baseball discussion has recently moved to this file. 

  So I don't know, is that being a fan under false pretense? During that time
I've been pretty faithful. I've even followed the AAA Braves in Richmond and
the AA Braves in Greenville although I have to admit it's partly because my
Rotisserie team gets Braves rookies. Still I was jazzed a few years back when
the AA Greenville Braves behind Chipper Jones and Javy Lopez won 100 games.

  George

>  I've been a Braves fan ever since and I've entered a number of notes about
>them in the baseball notes file. The reason I just started entering them here
>has more to do with the fact that the baseball notes file is all but dead and
>baseball discussion has recently moved to this file. 

Regrettable but true.  There's been much better ball talk here than in
::BASEBALL, and most of what's good there has come from ::SPORTS noters.

> So I don't know, is that being a fan under false pretense?

Not to me, but I'm not really a fan of any teams.  I've been in Europe too
long to have maintained any loyalties.  I was a Cardinal fan growing up
and remained one when the Dodgers came to LA, but they lost me when they
put down a rug.

I usually manage to find a reason to root for one team or the other when
I watch a game, but it's not with the same passion as a fan of a team.
I've maintained my National League preference, thanks to the DH, so I
was glad when the Braves won, but I can't say it made my day.

The answer of the people who live and die with a team might well be
"Yes", but what do you care?  They don't watch games the same way you
or I do, anyway.

The extreme example is my pal Jeff's brother Jon, who as soon as the
Rangers are eliminated from the playoffs stops watching hockey (and
stops sending us videotapes).  My question to him is, "If it doesn't
matter who wins, why does it matter when the Rangers win?"  But it
doesn't help, we still don't get any more tapes.

Steve

RE<<< Note 56.2206 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "I've always been a closet Steeler fan - even though they suck!" >>>

>    Don't worry George... if you waste enough time thinking about it, i'm
>    sure you'll come up with another team to root for AND justify it in
>    your own mind...

  So once again we hear the empty frustrated argument implying that all of
this is somehow real and important and obviously there's something wrong with
you if you don't see that. So tell me groner, are you ready to come up with
some reason to back that up?

  If this is all just entertainment and doesn't really mean anything then
what's wrong with just picking a team for fun and cheering for them to win?

  And if it's not just entertainment, if there is some real meaning to being
a true fan, and there are real rules for who is and who is not allowed to cheer
for a team what is the authority for those rules? Why should we follow them?
Why do they exists? And where's the harm in picking a team just for fun?

  Here, let me get you started:

    It's important to have laws against murder because murder deprives someone
    of their right to life, it deprives their loved ones of their right to
    association, causes them pain, and deprives dependents of their support.

    It's important to strictly regulate who is and who is not a fan because
    ....

  Put up or shut up. If there is a reason why being a fan should be regulated
let's hear it. Unless of course this is all frivolous and there is no reason
why someone can or can not be a fan.

  George

RE         <<< Note 56.2209 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>      I don't know a single Patriots fan who gives a um... crap about
>      beating Buffalo twice. 

  Yes you do. You know me. I'm a Patriots fan, you admitted as much a week
or so ago and I care about such things. I like the other things you mentioned
as well but I get a kick out of the Patriots going 4-0 against New York teams
and having a winning record in their division.

  Are you now going back to saying there are rules for who is and who is not
a fan? If so, what is the authority for those rules and why are they more
important than someone else's rules?

  Take your pick, if this is all just frivolous illogical fanaticism then it
seems anyone can be a fan any time they like for any reason they like. If this
is all "serious" and there are real reasons why someone can or can't be a fan
then what makes it so serious and important? 

  George

  >> I'm a Patriots fan, you admitted as much a week or so ago 

     No, I didn't. 

  You said I could call myself a fan which sounds like the same thing.

  But ok, now you don't agree once again. Whatever. When we last left off
I think we agreed that the definition of a fan was based on fanatic and that
being a fanatic was illogical devotion or words to that effect.

  So in what way am I not being illogically devoted by saying I'm happy the
Patriots beat the Bills?

  George

  >> You said I could call myself a fan which sounds like the same thing.

     I also said you could call your self Marie, Queen Of Rumania though
     I don't consider you Rumanian royalty.


      As far as I'm concerned you're one of those yuppie faux-fans 
     that are one of the root causes of the slow ruination of spect-
     ator sports in the '90s. If it wasn't for never-been-to-a-game 
     wannabees like you supporting stadium deals, luxury boxes, PSLs 
     and other like abominations, greedheads like Modell wouldn't get 
     away with the kind of crap that he's pulling. You have no passion 
     for the game ("No one wore sunglasses like Jim McMahon."  What an
     odd thing to say. "Center linebacker." Even odder.) but you do have 
     money and the desire to sit in a climate controlled environment with 
     a bunch of other self-important yuppie faux-fans and affirm each others 
     status. Folks like you are slowly killing sports for the average guy 
     and you're too numb and self-involved to realize or care. You're all 
     for giving Kraft his stadium because we wouldn't want to lose "our"
     Patriots but you couldn't name the Patriots starting offensive
     line. You're much more dangerous than you know.
    

RE         <<< Note 251.64 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>     Folks like you are slowly killing sports for the average guy 
>     and you're too numb and self-involved to realize or care.

  Again, you have defined fans by a very narrow definition not at all like the
word fanatic and you are criticizing others for not meeting that definition. It
is you who are self-involved. 

  Fanatic is defined as excessive or irrational zeal. It would seem to me that
someone who gets psyched about a losing team because of some quirk in their
record is being a lot more excessive and irrational about their zeal than
someone who carefully memorizes players names and tries to calculate their
chances next year. What's excessive or irrational about that? 

  Likewise someone who is zealous about a team that left town 40 years ago is
being a lot more excessive and irrational than someone bogged down in
repressive rules of behavior such as limits who can and can not be a fan. 

  Same thing with moving the stadium. In what way am I failing to be excessive
or irrational saying they should build a new mega-stadium for the team? Are you
more excessive and irrational when you say the money should be spent for things
like education for our kids or rebuilding the highway superstructure?

  George 

    
    Websters Seventh
    
    fan n 1: an enthusiastic devotee (as of a sport) usually as a spectator
    2:  an ardent admirer (as of a celebrity)
    
    
    Let's see if we can end this discussion once and for all.  Per the
    definition above, George is definately a fan (he fits the criteria of
    being enthusiastic about the Braves, Patriots...).  Per the majority of
    voices expressed in the SPORTS notes conference George is not a fan
    (per the through thick and thin, watch all games, etc argument).  I've
    been a fan of the Raiders since 1978, but because I now live in
    Colorado and the Broncos and Raiders almost always play at the same
    time, and the Colorado TV stations carry EVERY single Broncos game,
    I've only seen one game this year.  Guess I'm not a fan either.
    
    In any case, I think we can ALL conclude that by the dictionary
    definition, anyone in this notes conference is a fan.  However, by
    SPORTS definition, most people in here are not.
    
    Can we just leave it at that and go on with REAL talk about sports? 
    Please.
    
    Marc
    
    

    
      Nice try, Marc but you won't stop George from perpetuating
     these arguments with stupid questions. It's been tried before.

RE         <<< Note 251.67 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "Plan 9 From Outer Space" >>>

>      Nice try, Marc but you won't stop George from perpetuating
>     these arguments with stupid questions. It's been tried before.

  Woops, someone's flying upside down.

  The reason you won't stop these arguments is that Tommy and Groner won't
let them die. Just look back a few notes and you'll see that like always it
was Tommy and Groner who started this whole thing up again. Just like the
Great Figure Skating debate, I've never once started these arguments.

  George

    
    
      George is 100% correct.  Can we move on?
    
    Jerry

  Good description of yourself Groner.

  So tell me (I know you won't), in what way does my being a Braves fan fail
to be excessive irrational zeal?

  Oops, no answer. I guess it's Groner that changes the subject when he
looses yet another debate.

  George

    I would just like to say that I have followed a baseball team since I
    was 6 years old, as they were the first side I ever saw on the
    television.
    
    The team is the Pirates and the reason I picked them over the other
    team was because I preferred the colours they wore.
    
    I have never been to a game, seen a game live...er.....seen a full game 
    on T.V. for that matter but I still like them to win as much as poss and do
    get hacked off if they lose.
    
    I suppose that doesn't make me a fan though does it?
    
     
    CHARLEY$London,England.

  Sounds good to me.

  The Bucs do have good colors.

  George

RE <<< Note 251.75 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "I've always been a closet Steeler fan - even though they suck!" >>>
  
  Swing and a miss.
  
  Like I said, there will be no answer from Groner to the question, In what
way is my being a fan failing to be excessive illogical zeal?

  George

    
    At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters a @#$& who's a fan 
    of what team and what your reasons are and what other people think,
    it's your life.
    
    
    
    CHARLEY

  I agree 100% but I'm amazed at the people who don't feel that way at all and
take serious offense if you don't follow their own narrow repressive rules as
to who can and who can't be a fan.

  Go figure,
  George

    
      @broken_record.com

  Then why do you and Groner keep starting this fight over and over and over
and over ...

  George

    Here, run this program:
    
    1. GO TO = (FOREST)
    2. EXTRACT = BRANCH (FROM TREE)
    3. FIND = EQUINE CARCASS (@FESTERING, MAGOTT INFESTED)
    4. EXECUTE = BEAT @3 WITH @2
    5. REPEAT AD NAUSEAM
    
    Useful for figure skating (is not/is too) debates also.
    
    UMDan

    .81
    
    Why does it upset you so much that George likes one team more than
    another.
    
    
    CHARLEY$newtothisconference.

RE<<< Note 251.81 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "I've always been a closet Steeler fan - even though they suck!" >>>

>    Gee George, if you'd just admit that the picture next to fair
>    weather/bandwagon fan in the dictionary is your picture, we'd be
>    all set.  Instead, you keep deflecting it by asking others questions
>    and then saying, he won't answer... sure, i'm still waiting for your
>    admission.
    
  Hee hee hee, he's twisting in the wind.

  Why is my last 5 years of cheering for the Braves and running a Braves
Rotisserie team because they use to be in Boston a failure to show excessive
and irrational zeal? 

  He can't answer it. It completely destroys years of yelling "BANDWAGON,
BANDWAGON".

  George 

    .84
    
    Don't be childish.
    
    
    CHARLEY

    heiser will be sent to his room next!!!  8*)
    
    Jimbo

    I think George has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt
    that he is both excessive AND irrational.
    
    Sheesh, gone for 5 months and it's still going on!
    
    dr.a
    

	George,

	Where has any one said that they accepted the definition of
	a fan as someone who was excessive and irrational in regards to
	a team ?

	If I accepted that definition, I would certainly say you are
	excessive and irrational.

	I don't accept that as the definition of a fan.  [I do, however,
	agree that you are excessive and irrational.]

My finger was twitching over keypad comma about 20 replies ago, but I have
persevered.  I would like to say the following:

1. I don't accept Tommy's characterization of George as a faux yuppie fan,
   at least where baseball is concerned.  George's knowledge of the game
   is considerably greater than that of a casual fan.

2. I don't find George excessive and irrational, except perhaps in his
   insistance on responding whenever this issue is raised.  I also find
   his credentials as a Braves fan perfectly acceptable, but then I'm
   not a Braves fan.

3. I became a fan of Tottenham Hotspur in much the same way Charley did
   of the Pirates, except it wasn't the colors, it was one particular
   player (Danny Blanchflower), when ABC Wide World of Sports televised
   the FA Cup final in its (WWS's) inaugural year (1960? 1961?).  The
   difference is I now live over here, and have actually seen Spurs live
   on a couple of occasions.  (BTW, welcome aboard, Charley.  Good to
   have someone else from the Atlantic's right shore.)

4. Tommy's remarks about the effect of the yuppie influx on spectator
   sports, especially the price of same, are of considerably greater
   moment than deciding whether person A has a right to root for team
   B.  Our colleagues in STKHLM::HOCKEY have been lamenting being
   priced out of the market, but they attribute it to rising player
   salaries.  I have disagreed, attributing it to the law of supply
   and demand, and I think Tommy is saying pretty much the same thing,
   if I understand him correctly.  What I wonder is this:  given that
   these "faux yuppie fans" who populated the corporate suites and
   luxury boxes have notoriously short attention spans, what will
   happen to professional sports when they jump onto a different
   bandwagon?

Steve

Yup, same one.  And, stripped of the Gronowskian hyperbole, I agree with him.

Steve

    Spurs won the cup in 1961.
    
    
    
    CHARLEY$Supports_a_team_from_*WEST*_London

    I would just concentrate on runs + rbis - homeruns and keep it simple. 
    The stolen base is way overrated; ability to go from 1b to 3b and 2b
    home is far more important as well as stretching singles to doubles.
    
    Plus take the official score out of the equation - true mistakes will
    average out and the putting the ball into play should be factored in
    and it is in runs scored.
    
    In these "factors" as in Colorado factor do we factor in all the non
    hits that Devon White takes away or penalize him for not having to hit
    with him on defense?  This is tongue in cheek vis a vis these
    increasingly complicated statanals they're coming up with.

    Steve,

    Couple of thoughts regarding the "faux yuppie fan" (FYF) syndrome.

    It is (IMO) fairly prevalent here in Atlanta with regard to the Braves. 
    Once they started winning the bandwagon filled up (myself included),        
    tickets were hard to get, and seat prices rose.  Last year, after the
    strike, attendance (asses in seats, as opposed to tickets sold) went
    down up to the playoffs and WS.  That trend will continue next year
    when the Olympics arrive and the sports dollar is stretched thin. 
    However, paid attendance will not suffer as everyone is trying to get
    season tickets to get good seats in the new stadium.  Prices are
    increasing next year, so it will be interesting to see if the casual
    fan will come to the stadium.

    The point?  Corporations (FYF) will continue to buy season tickets as
    long as the Braves are winning (IMO) and the Falcons and Hawks are
    losing.  In any case attendance will slip next year and rebound the
    year after (new stadium).  Other sports will suffer, until it gets to
    the point that owners and players must have different expectations for
    various sports in each city.  One town may support a Basketball and
    Hockey team, but not a Football and Baseball team (at least on the same
    level).  All IMHO, of course.

    UMDan
     

>   Does runs created take into account park effect?

No, but when RC are used to compute offensive winning percentage (which is
the final state in Bill James' methodology), park effect is considered.  We
have in general Bill James to thank that we are as aware of park effects as
we are.  Where 20 years ago people simply spoke of "hitter's parks" and
"pitcher's parks", James did the research that made clear just how large
the effects can be.  And that was before Coors Field.

>                                                     How does it rate
>   rookies or young players - does it take into account their potential
>   development?  

It doesn't.  It is simply a measure of offensive performance.  James has
convinced me that it is the best such measure, that it reflects offensive
value better than OB+S or Linear Weights or Total Average or whatever.
   
>   Runs created is an attempt to rate players.  Its is not the 
>   GOD number of baseball George professes it to be.

The first sentence is correct.  The second reflects a misunderstanding of
what George and I and Bill James claim for RC and RC/27 (or RC/25.5) and
Offensive Winning Percentage.  See my previous paragraph.

Steve

PS - George, if this discussion goes on, you'll have to take over.  I'm
out of here til 10 January.  Happy Holidays everyone, and, as the Germans
say, "ein guter Rutsch ins neue Jahr" (a good slide into the new year).

RE<<< Note 251.96 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "I've always been a closet Steeler fan - even though they suck!" >>>

>    Does runs created take into account park effect?  How does it rate
>    rookies or young players - does it take into account their potential
>    development?  

  No and no one ever claimed it did. But as .-1 points out Bill James and
others have come up with formula for park effect and Bill James has also
come up with ways to analyze the chances of a player putting up great life
time numbers based on age (i.e. when he finally has his rookie year) which
is more important than if this is his rookie year.

>    Runs created is an attempt to rate players.  Its is not the 
>    GOD number of baseball George professes it to be.

  I believe that it's you Groner who are making this claim number, not me. All
I said was that it is better than the older numbers like Runs and RBIs because
it is not as dependent on what the other players do before and after the hitter
in question. 

  It is an attempt (and a very good one) to rate a player's performance over a
certain period of time. Nothing more, nothing less. It is one indicator of how
that player may do in the future but obviously other things must be taken into
account.

  George

    
      @another_broken_record.com

    There once were two guys in a notes file
    who were fond of their shots from the hip
    but when others did research
    they'd scratch on their T-shirt
    and gripe and complain and give lip.

  George

	Shoulda quit after your last poem, George.
	This last one needs serious help.


	billl

	This "fan" vs. "bandwagon jumper" really crystalized for me during this
	weekend's football games.  All of my in-laws are from Wisconsin and
	root rabidly for the Packers.  I decided I would become a Packer fan
	as well.  I was rooting for the Packers and was disappointed when they
	lost.  However, my disappointment paled in comparison to that of what
	I consider "true" Packer fans.  Whereas I was disappointed when they
	lost, I went on through the rest of the day with just a mild, quasi
	depression.  My in-laws, particularly my father-in-law (who is 80),
	were really upset.  The kind of gut-wrenching funk that only true
	fans can have.  The same would have been if the Pack had won.  While
	I would have been happy, they would have been elated, walking on cloud 
	nine.  Those kind of highs and lows are reserved for true fans, not
	casual fans.  Only the individual knows what category they fall into.

	Kevin

RE<<< Note 259.29 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "I've always been a closet Steeler fan - even though they suck!" >>>

>    Or you can use THE OTHER GEORGE METHOD - your team gets trounced so you
>    jump on the bandwagon of the team that trounced your team then
>    determine some lame excuse for it...  "I liked Hank Aaron ever
>    since he hit HR number 715" is a line heard repeatedly from George.

  One problem with this theory. A quick look at note 20.* in the baseball notes
file will prove that I've been following the Braves for 5-6 years. I've been
buying U.S.A. today baseball weekly ever since to follow not only the big
league club but their minor league teams in Richmond and Greenville as well. I
even picked them for my corresponding SNAL rotisserie team when they were
really bad because I was a fan and that goes back 5-6 years as well. And that's
not just a few players, that's a long term commitment to not only their major
league club but their farm system as well since in SNAL that's were you get
your rookies. 

  Your wrong on this Paul, let it go. The evidence is there, the Braves have
been my team for the entire decade of the 90's going back to the DECUS trip to
the ball park I helped organize before anyone knew they were any good. That's
in the baseball notes file as well. In fact Atlanta residents are so much worse
fans than we were that we bought our tickets when the national anthem was
playing and ended up in the lower deck just past 1st base. Once they started
winning so many fair weather Atlanta people showed up they were sold out days
in advance. 

  Face it, I was a Braves fan before all but a handful of guys on that team
wore a Braves uniform and last fall my team beat your team in the World Series.
Accept it. Move on. Life's too short to keep worrying about this sort of thing.
Maybe next year your team will win. Buck up and take it like a man.

  George 

    
    
      Well I only have one thing to say.  If'n George wants to be a Braves
    fan, fine let him.  Only thing I have to say is George we don't need
    you rootin for da Sox.  Oh and by the way...Winnning IS everyting. You
    don't get squat for 2nd place.  Ask the Indians.
    
    Jerry

RE<<< Note 251.107 by AD::HEATH "The albatross and whales they are my brother" >>>

>      Well I only have one thing to say.  If'n George wants to be a Braves
>    fan, fine let him.  Only thing I have to say is George we don't need
>    you rootin for da Sox.  

  So fine you don't need me rooting for the Sox but so what? I don't root
for a team because someone needs me, I root for a team because I feel like
it. As for The Braves and Red Sox are in different leagues. Do you tell someone
they can't be a Celtics fan because they root for the Bruins?

  Even within a sport it's not uncommon for people from New York, the Bay area,
and Chicago to cheer for both teams. In fact there was a time when people in
New York had 3 teams. 

>Oh and by the way...Winnning IS everyting. You
>    don't get squat for 2nd place.  Ask the Indians.

  Well that's not true. You get about the same thing for 2nd place that you get
for 1st place, some sort of trophy or pennant saying you won something. You
also get a bigger box office the following year. Just what type of thing does
a team gets for winning that they don't get for 2nd place? OK rings. I guess
they get rings. Like these guys couldn't go out and buy their own ring worth
10 times as much as the one the league gives them.

  George

RE<<< Note 251.108 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "I've always been a closet Steeler fan - even though they suck!" >>>

>    Jerry, you're stuck wif George.  This is the same clown who told me I
>    was full of it when I said Mercker would be gone after this past season
>    - I guessed the Indians, I was wrong.  He said he'd never leave... he
>    was wrongerest!

  Oops, where did this one come from?

  When did I ever say such a thing?

  George

  It doesn't sound like something I'd say. I generally don't try to guess who a
GM will sign and who he will not sign. That depends on too many personality and
salary type things that I don't care that much about. For example, how would I
know what city some players wife wants to live in or how well some pitcher
thinks he'll get along with the pitching coach a GM is likely to sign. 

  I'm interested in who goes where but I wouldn't know how to begin guessing
who will want to go where or which GM will sign whom. 

  I'd be curious to see the note to see what I really said (if it's my note at
all). 

  George 

	I'd be interested in seeing that, too.  The only argument I
	remember like that is you said Steve Avery would be an Indian,
	and I debated you on that one.

  Really? I can't imagine arguing over where someone would go. Seems those sort
of things depend on so much information not available. Is a guy married? Is his
wife someone from the South who would hate cold weather? Does he have kids?
Does he leave the family behind and live out of an apartment? Does he want a
long deal for less per year or a short deal for a ton of money? All sorts of
things that I would have no way of knowing. Even when I see rumors in papers
about where guys are going I tend to treat them with a grain of salt. Those
tend to be unreliable. 

  And it's not like I don't care. Having one AL and one NL Rotisserie team
I'm always sweating over who's going to jump leagues but I've never come up
with any reliable way of anticipating who's going where.

  Are you sure you guys don't have me mixed up with someone else?

  George

	Figures, I try and put in something kind of serious here (and on the 
	subject) and all we can read about is a big pissing match between 
	Groaner and George.  Kind of shocking that it's these two.

	Kevin

RE             <<< Note 251.105 by BSS::NEUZIL "Just call me Fred" >>>

  Complain, complain, complain. Can't you see that Paul and I have serious LDUC
business to conduct? What, do you want us to get infected bladders or something?

  Your note is a fine note and has some good points but I wouldn't rule out the
fact that there are different levels of fans. Just because one set of fans goes
into a gut-wrenching funk and you didn't, that didn't mean you were not a fan. 

  Think about it, if your in-laws found out that their neighbors not only had
season tickets but flew to all the Packers away games as well and burned down
houses in other cities when the Packers lost away games would that mean that
only having a gut-wrenching feeling was suddenly not good enough? 

  Being a fan is not a Boolean condition (TRUE/FALSE). There are degrees of
Fandom. If a team has 1 million fans you could probably rate each one between
1-100 where 1 was assigned to those who had only a flicker of fandom and 100
was assigned to those for whom the team was their life and everyone else could
be assigned a value in between. 

  If you did that then decided that the 99s on down were not real fans you
would probably have only a hand full of fans left out of the 1 million who
were real fans. Would that be right? I don't think so. If you were cheering and
wanted the team to win, I feel you were a fan. 

  George 

    This argument is very tedious lads.
    
    
    CHARLEY

>    This argument is very tedious lads.
>    
>    
>    CHARLEY
>

Charley, 

As a southern sheriff once said to me, "You ain't from 'round here, are ya
boy..."

This is commonplace and the norm of late.  Tedious is good word to describe
it...

8^)


'Saw

  With regard to Paul's rating system, I'd do it a little differently. I'd go
something like: 

  100  - Super Fanatic, Uses team cups, travels with team, the whole thing.
   :
   80  - Big fan. Goes to or watches as many games as possible.
         Wants team to win even if it means his Rotisserie guy gets pounded.
   :
   60  - Something of a fan. Still wants his team to beat his Rotisserie guy
         but is not happy about it.
   :
   40  - Not that great of a fan. Follows team more when winning. Is real
         conflicted when his Rotisserie guy plays his team.
   :
   20  - Bad fan. Pulls for his Rotisserie guy. Only follows team when they
         are winning.
   :
   00  - Not fan at all. Could care less about team. Might not even care about
         sport and might not even have a Rotisserie team. HITS "NEXT UNSEEN"
         when team/sport is discussed.
   :
  -20  - Minor negative fan. Gets a chuckle if he hears the team lost.
   :
  -40  - Gets a warm feeling if team lost.
   :
  -60  - Down right happy if team lost, makes entire day.
   :
  -80  - Estatic with joy if team loses, goes out and celebrates. Makes big
         deal of talking about how he hates to see topics discussed instead
         of just hitting "Next Unseen".
   :
 -100  - Goes ballistic if team loses. Takes out add in teams home town paper
         calling all their fans losers and laughs with joy even as they pound
         him to a pulp.

  George

Groaner,

In the future, feel free to use me as an example of level 7 fandom.

Respectfully yours,
Roland

  With Paul's system I'm probably an 7-8 Red Sox / Braves fan and probably
a 60-70 fan under my system.

  We probably don't have any fans around 10/100.

  No passion around here, engineering nerds and all that:

  George

>  We probably don't have any fans around 10/100.

How do you know?  Have you been checking people's underwear?

  No stories about what it was like flying to away games with the team.

  10/100 fans wouldn't be able to resist.

  George

I've flown to Las Vegas and Boston (a couple of times) to see the Hornets
but I always had other reasons to go there.

Right now, I don't even feel like walking across the street to see 'em,
but I do anyway. :=(

If'n travel is the criterion, I'd have to say that my support of them
'Eers is about my bestest effort. I went to Morganhole 3 times thised
season and drove to the other side of the world to see 'em play at East
Carolina. They went 2-2 in those games, if'n that counts fer anything.

On my list of new year's resolution is to quit giving people hard times
for their fandom. If'n you wanna pretend like you went to some college,
loved a football team while they went 1-15, run your mouth but don't go
to games, etc., etc., that's A-OK by me.

TTom

    I used to think I was a true and devoted Pittsburgh Steeler fan until
    I read Paul and George's "fan rating systems".  I didn't realize that
    it was in such bad taste to despise a team (Dallas) as much as you like
    another.  You guys make me feel like I'm a terrible fan (not really),
    because my second favorite team every week is whoever is playing
    Dallas (I guess that makes Pittsburgh my favorite and my second
    favorite team this week).  Well Paul, I guess I'm a 1 on your scale
    and pretty close to a -100 on your scale George.  Is there any hope for
    me??  Can I be cured??
    
    
                                                             D.J.
    

  No grasshopper. If you are a -100 you should feel no shame.

  For without evil there can be no good. Without down there can be no up.
Without -100 fans there can be no +100 fans.

  Seek not to reduce your fandom to zero, rather accept your -100ness and
let the anger within you for Dallas flow out of your mouth propelling ground
potato chips soaked in beer toward your television.

  Vent your rage and let it flow across your living room for this is the
way to find inner piece. It is the way of the Tao.

  George

	Hi, my name is billl and I'm a -100, too.



	I feel much better now.


	billl

The nice part about being a fan is that you don't need no rules.

Unless of course, you're in the Marine Corps, in which case you'll be a
fan-by-the-numbers....

But aside from that, we don' need no steenkin' rules....8^)

    *APPLAUSE*
    
    
    CHARLEY

  Sounds good to me. That's the way it should be.

  Too bad it isn't.

  George

RE<<< Note 88.2997 by ROCK::GRONOWSKI "SPORTS 1995 NOTY & RED_SOX Most Knowledgeable Noter Award!" >>>

    
>    Nice deflection attempt.  Two teams in different sports, both playing
>    in the same town is significantly different than multiple teams in
>    the same sport playing in the different towns.  

  So were those people who were fans of NHL teams but cheered for the 1980 U.S.
Olympic hockey team "bandwagon" fans? Same sport, different town. How about
Celtics fans who cheered for UMASS? Again, same sport different town.

>    4. Bandwagon fans always come up with what they believe to be
>    "acceptable" excuses for latching on to another team.
    
  Again, so what? You still haven't shown me a set of rules for what is and
what is not a fan.  You only gave me your opinion. I'm still waiting for a
law or regulation of some sort prohibiting me from being a fan of whom ever
I chose.

  My reference, which I've given several times, is the 1st amendment of the
U.S. Constitution that protects my right to free speech, freedom to assemble,
freedom of religion and through case law freedom of expression. What's the
authority of your set of rules for fans?

  I've showed documentation proving I was a Braves fan for years. I'm still
waiting for some law or precedent supporting your restrictive set of rules for
who is and who is not a legitimate fan. 

  George

    
    
    
      George quit comparing apples to oranges.  Comparing totally different
    sports is crazy and comparing college to pro sports is even worse. 
    Your the biggest Braves fan I ever saw happy.

  No ones comparing the sports. 

  Paul said the reason I couldn't have two teams was because they were the same
sport but were not in the same town. Where he got that rule I have no idea, he
won't tell us where he gets any of his fan rules but those were the rules he
used. Today anyway. 

  I appreciate your letting me be a Braves fan but it's obvious that your
feeling is not shared with others, hence the argument. At least give me credit
for moving it here so those not interested can hit "Next Unseen" and not miss
Red Sox notes. 

  George

    
    George,
    
    
      You can be a Braves fan, just get off that Boston/Milwaukee/Atlanta BS
    The team is called the Atlanta Braves. 

  But for some reason the "Atlanta Braves" seem to have retired Warren
Spahn's number even though he never played for the "Atlanta Braves".

  Curious that.

  George

        George, why are you always at the center of these
       extremely insipid "Am not"/"are too" arguments? You
       come off looking like the sixth grade pick-on who   
       doesn't have sense enough to ignore his tormentors
       until they get bored of his possum act and move onto
       livelier game. No, you have to launch into the same
       tired-ass "Why did they retire Spahn's number?" or
       the even lamer "Figure skating" spiel thereby committ-
       ing the unpardonable sin of boring to tears anyone
       unfortunate to trip across your string. Give it a big 
       long Rip Van Winkle type rest. Please.

    
    BFD Warren Spahn was the second best pitcher the Braves ever had, his
    number is retired. What does that have to do with your tying Boston and
    Milwaukee to Atlanta's 1995 MLB World Championship. Did they have a
    parade in Boston or Milwaukee after stompin the Indians. No! Actually
    your the only "person" ( I use this term to keep it clean) I can think of 
    that lays this claim.  

RE   <<< Note 251.138 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    BFD Warren Spahn was the second best pitcher the Braves ever had, 

  The Boston Braves yes. The Milwaukee Braves yes. If they and the Atlanta
Braves are all the same team sure. But if they are different teams and if
this team is not the same as the Boston and Milwaukee Braves then no. Spahn
never played for the Atlanta Braves. 

  It would seem to me that if history counts, it makes sense to retire his
number for the years he played in Boston and Milwaukee and through history
the team is tied to those towns.

  If history doesn't count then the Boston Braves died in 1952, the Milwaukee
Braves died in 1964, the Atlanta Braves were born in 1965 and Warren Spahn
had nothing to do with that team.

  Since they retired his number and are keeping it retired it would seem that
history counts and the Atlanta Braves consider themselves tied to their years
in Milwaukee and Boston. 

>Did they have a
>    parade in Boston or Milwaukee after stompin the Indians. No! Actually
>    your the only "person" ( I use this term to keep it clean) I can think of 
>    that lays this claim.  

  I would think that counting participants in parades would be at best a bad
sampling process when it comes to fans. I've bumped into a number of older
people around Boston wearing Braves jackets and hats and the few I've had
a chance to talk to are indeed Braves fans left over from when they played
at Braves field.

  In any case, what's your point? You can only be a fan if lots of other people
are fans for the same reason? Where does that rule come from?

  George

RE        <<< Note 251.137 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>        George, why are you always at the center of these
>       extremely insipid "Am not"/"are too" arguments? 

  I'm not at the center, I'm off to one side and for what ever reason I never
seem to have a problem getting someone else to hold up their end.

>No, you have to launch into the same
>       tired-ass "Why did they retire Spahn's number?" 

  It only got "tired-ass" when it became clear that it's a really good argument
for my side. Are the Atlanta Braves tied to Boston or Milwaukee through history
or not? Since they retired Spahn's number it appears they are and my argument
that they are the same team is correct.

  George

    
    Social security numbers are (partially) based on which state you
    acquire your number.  Even though I've lived for only a few years in
    Massachusetts, would anyone here say that I am a Massachusetts resident
    now.  Since I moved from one state to another, I should be able to
    change my social security number, right?  Well I hate to be the bearer
    of bad news, but I can't.  And, Massachusetts can not re-issue that
    number either.
    
    Think about, there is no difference between that and the Braves.  The
    Braves had some history in Boston and then in Milwaukee.  I had some
    history in Massachusetts and then in New Hampshire.  The Braves are
    currently in Atlanta.  I am currently in Colorado.  The Braves have a
    number that has been retired from a city then no longer reside.  I have
    a number that has been retired from a state where I no longer reside.
    
    As far as I'm concerned, anyone can be a fan of any team or as many
    teams as then want.  It makes no difference to my life.  However, these
    inane conversations, albeit amusing at times, just point out how silly
    we all (including me) can truely be.
    
    Marc
    

Rooles, we don' need on bloody steenkin' rooles...

    
    
       Be a fan of whoever or whatever team you want. But claiming that
    Boston owns any part of the Atlanta championship last year is just
    plain S.T.U.P.I.D.
    
    
         Plus I too think if you have two favorite teams in the same sport,
    that is Bandwagon jumping. Jumping on whichever team is winning.
    
    
    
    Chap

    
    
    S.T.U.P.I.D. tm. 
    
    	When the discussion makes no sense and the person continues for
    six months or more claiming a ignorant, childish, or a self edifing point of
    view. 
    
      example:  CLUSTA::MAIEWSKI "Bos-Mil-Atl Braves W.S. Champs" 

RE  <<< Note 251.143 by WMOIS::CHAPALONIS_M "Donnie Baseball Yankee HOFer!!!" >>>

>       Be a fan of whoever or whatever team you want. But claiming that
>    Boston owns any part of the Atlanta championship last year is just
>    plain S.T.U.P.I.D.
    
  Of course, this is an argument that is impossible to refute. Or to go a bit
further, claiming the fans in Atlanta own any part of that championship is
just plain S.T.U.P.I.D. Ted Turner owns that championship, the team, and has
rights to just about everything associated with it. As Browns fans learned the
hard way last year, fans own nothing when it comes to a professional team. 

  All relationships between fans and professional ball clubs is nothing but
pure fantasy. What you guys are saying is that there is a right way for fans to
fantasize and a wrong way for fans to fantasize and by geezes you guys are
going to enforce those rules.

  George 

RE   <<< Note 251.144 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    S.T.U.P.I.D. tm. 
>    
>    	When the discussion makes no sense and the person continues for
>    six months or more claiming a ignorant, childish, or a self edifing point of
>    view. 
>    
>      example:  CLUSTA::MAIEWSKI "Bos-Mil-Atl Braves W.S. Champs" 

  ... or for another example:

       OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations"

  George

    
    If we take a vote on who fits the tm. You'll find that the general noting
    public thinks it's you.

  No, we'll find out that the same 10 or so guys in this notes file that I
always argue with think it's me.

  Fact is I never start these arguments so someone else out there is just as
hip deep as I am.

  George

>> No, we'll find out that the same 10 or so guys in this notes file that I
>> always argue with think it's me.

    It never occurs to you that there's something wrong with this.
    

    
    
       No George you never start em!!

RE  <<< Note 251.150 by WMOIS::CHAPALONIS_M "Donnie Baseball Yankee HOFer!!!" >>>

    
>       No George you never start em!!

  Ok I'll issue a challenge.

  I promise to never argue over whether or not I am a legitimate Braves fan
again as long as no one else brings it up 1st

  What do you think, if I stick to that will we ever debate this again?

  George

    No one forced you to state that Boston and Milwaukee had a claim to
    the Atlanta Braves championship season. You started it, so don't try to
    lay the blam tm. on any of the other noters in this conference. I also
    think more than 10 of us would cast a vote in your favor of meeting the
    criteria stated in the tm definition.

RE        <<< Note 251.149 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>>> No, we'll find out that the same 10 or so guys in this notes file that I
>>> always argue with think it's me.
>
>    It never occurs to you that there's something wrong with this.
    
  What, out of the 5 billion people in the world there are 10 guys with whom I
disagree? No, I don't see anything wrong with that. 

  Oliver Wendel Holmes was considered one of the greatest Supreme Court
Justices in history but in his early years on the bench he most often found
himself in the minority and wrote mostly dissenting opinions. Was there
something wrong with Oliver Wendel Holmes because he didn't go along to
get along?

  And besides, you guys are taking a bath. I've made several points which
you can't touch which we all know dam well is why you are trying to shout me
down 

   - If history is not important and the Atlanta Braves have nothing to do
     with the Boston and Milwaukee Braves, why retire Warren Spahn's number
     considering he was sold to the Mets before the Braves moved to Atlanta?

   - If the only connection between a fan and a club is fantasy, how is it
     possible that there is a correct and an incorrect way to fantasize?

  George

    
    George,
    
>   - If history is not important and the Atlanta Braves have nothing to do
>     with the Boston and Milwaukee Braves, why retire Warren Spahn's number
>     considering he was sold to the Mets before the Braves moved to Atlanta?

    I don't believe _anyone_ has argued that the history of the Braves
    franchise is not important to the Braves; there's many reasons why
    it _should_ be important to them (many of them economic).
    
    So what?  Just because the Braves logically choose to value their
    past doesn't mean there's any incentive for their past to value
    the Braves.
    
    Joe
    

    
    
    
    Nice......

RE   <<< Note 251.153 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    No one forced you to state that Boston and Milwaukee had a claim to
>    the Atlanta Braves championship season. You started it, 

  No, I never said "Boston had a claim to the championship". I said that I
was a fan of the Braves because the big kids I grew up with were fans and
because I was inspired by the Braves history in Boston. I could care who else
in Boston is or is not a fan and I think any city that feels they have a
claim to anything to do with one of these teams is sadly delusional.

>I also
>    think more than 10 of us would cast a vote in your favor of meeting the
>    criteria stated in the tm definition.

  Considering that Paul is on your side I'm sure there would be 20-30 solid
votes from people we've never heard of.

  George

    
    What does this pn indicate ? 
    
    CLUSTA::MAIEWSKI "Bos-Mil-Atl Braves W.S. Champs" 
    
    To me it indicates that you think Boston and Milwaukee fans have some claim
    to the WS ring since the Braves happened to play there 40 or 50 years
    ago.  If the owner had changed the name to the Atlanta Eggsuckers would you
    make the same statement.  

>> What, out of the 5 billion people in the world there are 10 
>> guys with whom I disagree? No, I don't see anything wrong with that. 

    There are not five billion SPORTSnoters. There probably aren't
    more than thirty. Of those you've carried on ridiculous arguments
    with at least ten and bored the rest to tears. Quite a batting
    average. I've heard that your reputation extends to other notes-
    files as well. The question isn't whether you partake in an in-
    ordinate amount of idiotic arguments with the noting community 
    at large because clearly you do. The question is, is it an act? 
    Or are you just that starved for attention? Or do you really think 
    anything is gained by these mind-numblingly assinine discussions? 
    And as for your offer to cease and desist from these arguments, no 
    thanks. We've seen from that mother of all moronic debates, the 
    figure skating one, that you will resurrect an argument with even 
    the faintest whiff of an excuse and recommence with your flawed 
    logic and indeterinable conclusions with pentecostal zeal.

RE       <<< Note 251.156 by ROCK::HUBER "From Seneca to Cuyahoga Falls" >>>

>    So what?  Just because the Braves logically choose to value their
>    past doesn't mean there's any incentive for their past to value
>    the Braves.
    
  Fine Joe, but these guys are going beyond saying Boston people don't have to
be Braves fans, they are saying Boston people are not allowed to be Braves
fans if the reason involves the Braves having been in Boston.

  My feeling is that I should be able to be a fan of whom ever I want for what
ever reason I want. If I'm a baseball history buff and I want to be a fan for
historical reasons, what's wrong with that?

  Lots of guys around here think there's plenty wrong with that but they don't
seem to be able to come up with a reason why.

  George

RE   <<< Note 251.160 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    What does this pn indicate ? 
>    
>    CLUSTA::MAIEWSKI "Bos-Mil-Atl Braves W.S. Champs" 
>    
>    To me it indicates that you think Boston and Milwaukee fans have some claim
>    to the WS ring since the Braves happened to play there 40 or 50 years
>    ago.  If the owner had changed the name to the Atlanta Eggsuckers would you
>    make the same statement.  

  You can interpret that way if you wish. What I meant was that the Braves were
World Series Champs once each from Boston, Milwaukee, and Atlanta.

  George

    Atlanta Newspaper update - no mention of Mil. or Boston in any newspaper
    articles about the Braves since the watch started.  

    And George, since you appear to be the pillar of consistency regarding
    certain subjects, please be consistent and call all of teams in your notes
    by their proper names, such as the Brooklyn/LA Dodgers,
    Oakland/LA/Oakland Raiders, etc. 

    What is your take on the Texas Rangers and the Milwaukee Brewers?  Guess
    Washingtonians can root for two teams, eh?  

    UMDan

             

    I never said someone from Boston could not be a Braves fan. My point is
    that Boston and Milwaukee have no claim to the WS title as stated in
    your pn.  All the other BS you've brought up to show what a great
    Braves fan you are means squat. You can be the fan of the entire MLB if
    you like. As much as you would like it the Boston/Milwaukee Braves did not
    in any fashion win the 1995 MLB World Series.  

RE        <<< Note 251.161 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>    Of those you've carried on ridiculous arguments
>    with at least ten and bored the rest to tears. 

  The only reason this debate goes on is that you and others feel very deeply
that there is a set of rules and standards governing who can and who can not be
a fan and the passion with which you argue shows that you feel I have violated
these rules which you treasure. 

  Why else would your side of the debate go on? I'm inspired to debate because
I feel my freedom is being challenged. What's your excuse? I can't debate this
alone, what keeps your side going if not a passionate belief that I have
violated your sacred rules of fandom? 

>    And as for your offer to cease and desist from these arguments, no 
>    thanks. We've seen from that mother of all moronic debates, the 
>    figure skating one, that you will resurrect an argument with even 
>    the faintest whiff of an excuse and recommence with your flawed 
>    logic and indeterinable conclusions with pentecostal zeal.

  That's twice now that you've mentioned that topic today and I haven't
mentioned it once since our last debate. Of course using Tommy logic that
means that I'm the one spoiling for a fight. 

  George

RE   <<< Note 251.165 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    I never said someone from Boston could not be a Braves fan. My point is
>    that Boston and Milwaukee have no claim to the WS title as stated in
>    your pn.  

  Where in my pn does it say I'm talking about the 1995 World title when I
mention Boston and Milwaukee. Go back and look, the original note from which I
condensed that pn said: 

    1914 Boston Braves World Series Champs
    1957 Milwaukee Braves World Series Champs
    1995 Atlanta Braves World Series Champs

  If you'll recall I put the years in large block letters.

  George

    
    Or the Minneapolis/La Lakers, Chicago/St'Louis/Pheonix Cardnals,Philly/
    Kansas City/Oakland Athletics, New York/San Francisco Giants/ Brooklyn/
    La Dodgers, Washington Senators/Texas Rangers, Hawaii Rainbow/Colo
    Springs Sky Sox, Dallas Texans/Kansas City Chiefs, La/San Diego
    Chargers , Boston/New England Patriots, New York Titans/New York Jets,
    Baltimore/Indinapolis Colts, Ft Wayne/Detroit Pistons, New Orleans/Utah
    JAzz, 
    
    

    Last Thursday night I saw my old Boss who Serp'ed in '92 and the first
    thing he said was "How do you like  my Braves?".  In his case he has
    rooted for the "Braves" for nearly 50 years as did his father and now
    his son, an otherwise completely normal and fine example of the best of
    today's youth, roots for them even more vociferously.
    
    Frankly, going over to BU and tracing where the "Jury Box" used to be
    and sitting down and chanting some kind of mantra like
    "SibbiSistiSpahnSainprayforrainStankyforDarknowheretoparkEarlTorgeson"
    makes all the sense in the world and definitely should quiet the
    doubters of the intensity of his mania for all things Braves while
    perhaps opening worlds of doubt in other areas.
    
    There is some kind of organization of thousands of just this kind of nut -
    in England btw there are still serious tree worshipers.

  If you are bored, just hit "Next Unseen". That's why I always move this
debate to this note when other people start it up elsewhere. 

  This time I believe it was Paul who started it in the Boston Red Sox file. 

  George 

RE<<< Note 251.171 by AKOCOA::BREEN "Better days are coming bye and bye. Bull..." >>>

>                    -< So he's a nut, lotsa company there >-

  Anyone who spends any emotion at all cheering for grown men playing a
children's game is a nut. 

  And when you add to that the fact that to these grown men we are nothing more
than a head count at the box office it makes us all even bigger nuts. 

  I just feel bad for your friend because I'm sure he gets his dose of THIS IS
SERIOUS, YOU'RE BEING A FAN WRONG!!!

  Now those people are serious nuts.

  George

    By the way George here is his idea of serious braves trivia
    
    Name the only person to hit two grand slams in the same game?
    
    
    
    
    
    Tony Cloninger

  Your friend seems like a really great guy. He seems to really enjoy the
history of the game 

  George

      Just like I used to enjoy this conference ;-))
    
      Tim

  I became a Braves fan about 10 years ago when I moved to Boston. The things
that got me interested in the Braves were the combination of:

    - Memories of the older kids I grew up with talking about having been
      Boston Braves fans.
    - Memories of my older brother being a Milwaukee Braves because he was
      a lefty and liked Warren Spahn.
    - Living in Boston and hearing the old folks talk about the Braves.
    - Working nights at B.U. always being around "Braves Field".
    - Being able to see the Braves on TBS.

  Because of these things I developed an interested in the Braves then I picked
them as my SNAL Rotisserie affiliate around 1989-1990. That got me following
their minor leagues and from there my interest in the team grew. 

  Over the years I've visited "Braves Field" many times to try to figure out
what if anything is left of the stadium. I've read about the Braves history in
Boston going back to 1871 and in general I've had lots of fun being a baseball
history buff for the two teams that played in Boston over the past century or
so. 

  George

Dammit, now you all did it.

I'm verklempt.  

Talk amongst yerselves for a moment.  I'll give you a topic.


	How many California Angels can dance on the head of a pin?

  None, the pin master won't let guys with spikes out onto the dance floor.

  George

RE        <<< Note 88.3155 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>The very
>    essence of fantasy baseball is to pretend that you're a GM doing
>    the things that GMS do ie., draft and trade to build the best 
>    possible team. Again, that's why it's called fantasy baseball.

  Funny how you seem to be an expert on what's going on in everyone's head.
Do you have any solid proof to support your claim that everyone who plays
Rotisserie is pretending they are a real GM and not just playing a game?

  In any case, every game has some aspect of fantasy. You can say that football
is a fantasy form of warfare and considering that basketball was originally
invented for the purpose of giving football players something to do in the
winter the analogy can be extended there. What ever, in basketball you pretend
that throwing an inflated rubber ball into a basket means something when there
is nothing real about it except for the competition. Same with Rotisserie
baseball.

>But it's
>    ridiculous to pretend you're above all the common trappings of 
>    fandom when you obviously spend an inordinate amount of time 
>    fantasizing about sports and reading sports history.
    
  I never made any such claim. I'm the one that freely admits that being a fan
is as much "fan"tasy as "fan"atic. And based on that I'm arguing that for
someone to say that there are absolute rules as to what is and what is not a
fan is ridiculous. Since it's all fantasy being a fan is what ever you want
it to be.

  You and others are the ones arguing that being a fan is all somehow real and
that there are absolute rules governing who can be a fan and under what
conditions they can be a fan although you don't seem to be able to come up with
any arguments supporting your point of view. In fact except for Paul who gave
his opinion as to what is a fan you can't even articulate a set of rules that
you think regulate who is and who is not a fan despite being quick on the
trigger to point the finger at supposed violators of your phantom rules.

  George

        
  >> What ever, in basketball you pretend that throwing an inflated 
  >> rubber ball into a basket means something when there is nothing 
  >> real about it except for the competition. Same with Rotisserie
  >> baseball.

     Another poor analogy. If you're actually playing basketball, you 
     needn't pretend anything. Whether the activity is meaningless or 
     not it is physical activity. Fantasy baseball is completely pred-
     icated on *someone else* actually playing the sport and a group 
     of geeks sitting around collecting stats and pretending that they're 
     GMs drafting and trading players. You surely can't equate your-
     selves with NBA or even college basketball players, please. Or
     perhaps there's some rigorous training regimen that goes with
     fantasy baseball like 20 reps of pencil sharpening or heavy duty
     newspaper folding or something.
    

RE        <<< Note 251.182 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>Fantasy baseball is completely pred-
>     icated on *someone else* actually playing the sport and a group 
>     of geeks sitting around collecting stats and pretending that they're 
>     GMs drafting and trading players. 

  And being a fan depends on someone else playing the sport and a group of
geeks sitting around not doing anything at all. At least the fantasy players
are playing a game and competing with each other based on numbers being
produced

  Think of it this way.

  - Playing basketball is 1 level of fantasy, pretending that throwing a ball
    into a basket means something when it does not.

  - Watching a friend play basketball is 2nd order fantasy because you are
    living that fantasy through someone you actually know.

  - Being a fan of someone who doesn't know you is 3rd order fantasy because
    you are pretending to be involved with someone then living a fantasy
    through them while they are involved in something that is only a game.

  - Ragging on someone else for not following phantom rules you think exist for
    a 3rd order fantasy is so delusional that anyone who does it should seek
    help.

  Playing fantasy baseball is no different than any numbers game that they
might play at Las Vegas except for the rules by which the game is played. It's
1st order fantasy because you are actually participating in a competition. 

  George

 >> - Playing basketball is 1 level of fantasy, pretending that 
 >>   throwing a ball into a basket means something when it does 
 >>   not.

      And playing baseball is a fantasy and playing football is a
      fantasy and blah blah blah. None of them is predicated on 
      watching someone else play, collecting data and pretending 
      that you're a GM. You keep trying to equate yourself with
      Michael Jordan and it doesn't wash.

 >> - Being a fan of someone who doesn't know you is 3rd order fantasy 
 >>   because you are pretending to be involved with someone then living 
 >>   a fantasy through them while they are involved in something that is 
 >>   only a game.

      If you want to define yourself as a fan becuase you pretend to
      be involved with someone who doesn't know you, go ahead. Myself,
      I like to think of sports as a pleasant diversion like music or art
      but if you want to think you have something going with Ken Griffey Jr
      knock yourself out.

    

RE        <<< Note 251.184 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>      And playing baseball is a fantasy and playing football is a
>      fantasy and blah blah blah. None of them is predicated on 
>      watching someone else play, collecting data and pretending 
>      that you're a GM. You keep trying to equate yourself with
>      Michael Jordan and it doesn't wash.

  You keep saying over and over that people who play Rotisserie are pretending
to be a GM. I keep asking over and over what makes you think this? How do you
know we are not just playing a game fully aware that we are not real General
Managers? How long are you going to pretend this point hasn't been made and go
on repeating your unfounded claim over and over. 

>      If you want to define yourself as a fan becuase you pretend to
>      be involved with someone who doesn't know you, go ahead. Myself,
>      I like to think of sports as a pleasant diversion like music or art
>      but if you want to think you have something going with Ken Griffey Jr
>      knock yourself out.

  If you were simply watching as a pleasant diversion we wouldn't be having
this discussion. This discussion is going on because you and others have made
the claim that there are explicit rules as to who is allowed to be a fan
and under what circumstances they are allowed to be a fan. Your side has talked
nonsense about how fans in cities "own" championships when in fact they are
owned by private corporations and you have talked about how people are not
allowed to be a fan of a team once it has left town.

  If you are ready to say that anyone can be a fan of any team for what ever
reason they choose regardless if it follows any rules or not, then go ahead and
say that and this discussion will be over. Or at least you will have come over
to our side. There may be others that still need convincing.

  George

    Tommy,
    
    If that's all it will take, say it.  Please!
    
    Kevin

  >> You keep saying over and over that people who play Rotisserie 
  >> are pretending to be a GM. I keep asking over and over what makes 
  >> you think this? 

     And I've told you over and over that the fact that it's called 
     "fantasy" baseball is a dead giveaway, George. 

  >> How do you know we are not just playing a game fully aware that we 
  >> are not real General Managers? 

     I certainly hope you're not so deluded as to think that you're
     "real General Managers". The fact that you pretend to be is bad 
     enough.
    

RE        <<< Note 251.187 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

  Ok, you're begging off on the rules for a fan so I assume you admit now
that anyone can be a fan of anyone any time they feel like it and there are
no rules for being a fan. Great, glad that's finally settled.

  Now with regard to fantasy baseball, you seem to be saying that because
someone somewhere decided to label this activity as "fantasy baseball" that
means that anyone who participates is pretending to be a GM even if they
and the people they play with never call it fantasy baseball but call it
Rotisserie instead. Is that your position?

  You are saying that there is no possibility that people just find the game
in itself interesting, ignore the label that other people use, and play the
game just as a game without pretending to be something they are not? 

  I wonder, is everyone who plays Monopoly pretending to be Donald Trump or is
it possible that some people play Monopoly just because they find the game
interesting?

  George

    >I wonder, is everyone who plays Monopoly pretending to be Donald
    >Trump or is it possible that some people play Monopoly just because 
    >they find the game interesting?
    
    Naw, Donald Trump went bankrupt, I'd rather pretend to be someone who
    is making a profit screwing other people, someone like Modell.
    
    Marc
    

    
>  >> How do you know we are not just playing a game fully aware that we 
>  >> are not real General Managers? 

>     I certainly hope you're not so deluded as to think that you're
>     "real General Managers". The fact that you pretend to be is bad 
>     enough.
    
    Assuming rotiserrie baseball players _are_ pretending to be GMs in
    the first place (which I disagree with; some do, no doubt, but the
    majority realize that they are simply looking at one limited aspect
    of the GM's job), what the heck is wrong with that?  Rotiserrie
    baseball is a game of prediction, negotiation, and information
    filtering.  Are you saying it's bad to play wargames, where you
    pretend to be a (depending upon the scope of the game) squad leader,
    general, or commander?  Is it bad to play financial game, where
    you pretend to be a rail baron, counterfeiter, or venture capatalist?
    I've got games where you pretend to be a prospector, an elf reaching
    the age of maturity, a rabbit, an explorer, a slimy green thing from
    outer space, and an Easter Isalnd statue, and that's just _board_
    games, not role playing games.  Games involve active participation,
    unlike simply watching sports; sure, it's mental rather than
    physical participartion (unless you're playing twister or some
    such), but what in the world is wrong with that?

    
>    Naw, Donald Trump went bankrupt, I'd rather pretend to be someone who
>    is making a profit screwing other people, someone like Modell.
    
    Try 1830, or better yet Intrigue sometime.  Actually, Rette Sich
    Wer Kann is even better in terms of profitting from getting others,
    but the objective of the game is merely survival, not $.
    
    Joe

    .190
    
    Amen to that.
    
    
    CHARLEY

I think there is something inherently evil about "ordering" one's fantasies.

'Saw

  >> Ok, you're begging off on the rules for a fan 

     Because I don't care. I've told you that I don't care if 
     you call yourself "Marie, Queen Of Rumania" much less a fan.
     I don't know why you need me to validate whether you're a
     fan or not.

  >> and the people they play with never call it fantasy baseball 
  >> but call it Rotisserie instead. 

     I believe it's called 'rotisserie' because it was started in
     a restaurant called The Rotisserie. Be glad you're not playing
     Chuck E. Cheese baseball.


  >> You are saying that there is no possibility that people just 
  >> find the game in itself interesting, ignore the label that other 
  >> people use, and play the game just as a game without pretending 
  >> to be something they are not? 

     I have no doubt that some do. Then there are people like you 
     who think that you're doing the equivalent of playing in the
     NBA. Fantasy baseball is about as sedentary an activity as there
     is. Actually playing sports requires mental and phyiscal agility.
     There are no physical requirements for fantasy baseball anymore
     than there are physical requirements for playing RISK. 
     
 
 

Chuck E. Cheese baseball has me rolling on the floor laughing....

43 tokens for Kenny Lofton!

RE        <<< Note 251.194 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>     I have no doubt that some do. Then there are people like you 
>     who think that you're doing the equivalent of playing in the
>     NBA. 

  Tommy, I think you need to take some deep breaths. I've read down this far
and all I'm seeing is verbal flailing having very little to do with anything
we've discussed. 

  Take this one for example. What in blazes are you talking about? Is it really
your position that when I play Rotisserie baseball I believe I'm doing the same
thing that people do in the NBA? 

  Where have I ever said that Michael Jordan and Scotty Pippen sit around
holding Rotisserie drafts? 

>Fantasy baseball is about as sedentary an activity as there
>     is. Actually playing sports requires mental and phyiscal agility.
>     There are no physical requirements for fantasy baseball anymore
>     than there are physical requirements for playing RISK. 
     
  So what? What does this have to do with anything anyone has ever said in this
file? To date I don't remember seeing a single note talking about the relative
aerobic demands of various activities.

  And yes, Rotisserie is named after a restaurant. I see now you've essentially
admitted you were wrong there by once again changing the subject. No one ever
denied that we played a game named after the restaurant in which it was 1st
played but the point you were trying to make that we are all fantasizing about
being real GM's because someone somewhere also calls it Fantasy Baseball was
obviously another of your many mistakes.

  George

    I don't know or care if its called rotisserie, chuck e cheese,
    fantasy or what.  I don't care about rules of fandom...
    BUT...
    
    Tommy is definitely ahead of George on this LDUC based on Humor points.
    
    kind of like the long term program versus the compulsories...
    

  Guess that depends on what you find funny. His joke about Rotisserie probably
was funny to those who hadn't heard those all those jokes 6-10 years ago.

  George

    -1
    Since I don't "fantasize" about "rotisserie" baseball, I find it funny
    

> Chuck E. Cheese baseball has me rolling on the floor laughing....
    
    I've played ball at Chuck E. Cheese and it's a lot more fun than
    RotoGeekBall...
    
    glenn
    

>> Chuck E. Cheese baseball has me rolling on the floor laughing....
>    
>    I've played ball at Chuck E. Cheese and it's a lot more fun than
>    RotoGeekBall...
    

I don't play at Chuck E. Cheese.  I get a beer, and the salad bar, and relax
whilst all the kids are going bonkers.

But Glenn, I'll trade you a 10 year old skeeball player with a .310 average for
two "roomful of balls" bruisers and a video-gamer to be named later....

Whatta ya say?    

>>> Chuck E. Cheese baseball has me rolling on the floor laughing....
>>    
>>    I've played ball at Chuck E. Cheese and it's a lot more fun than
>>    RotoGeekBall...
>    
> I don't play at Chuck E. Cheese.  I get a beer, and the salad bar, and relax
> whilst all the kids are going bonkers.
    
    The place is a living migraine headache, even as kids' amusement 
    joints go.  I think they use special sound-amplifying ceiling 
    materials or something.  That mouse reminds me of George Maiewski,
    too... ;-)
    
    I've traded in all my CeC tokens and tickets for the Fenway Park-
    modeled batting cage place in Litchfield NH (Mel's).  Send the kids 
    inside with $10 while I smash baseballs against The Wall until my 
    arms get tired.  That place is heaven...
    
    glenn
    

  What is Chuck E. Cheese? A bar? A restaurant? Some sort of place to play
arcade games?

  And what's this mouse? Does that find it's way into the burgers?

  George

    
    Chuck E. Cheese is a pizza "restaurant" that is designed for kids. 
    Thus it has all sorts of kids games.
    
    Marc
    

>    
>    The place is a living migraine headache, even as kids' amusement 
>    joints go.  I think they use special sound-amplifying ceiling 
>    materials or something.  That mouse reminds me of George Maiewski,
>    too... ;-)
>    

You're talking to someone who used to be a system manager who had to sit inside
the machine room.  I'm very good at tuning out background noise.  I could sit
next to a jet engine, probably, and tune that out (except for the pain).

As to the mouse, I think ou might have something there...


>    I've traded in all my CeC tokens and tickets for the Fenway Park-
>    modeled batting cage place in Litchfield NH (Mel's).  Send the kids 
>    inside with $10 while I smash baseballs against The Wall until my 
>    arms get tired.  That place is heaven...
    
I like to go shooting.  That's very relaxing for me...  course the kids can't
go yet, but someday, if they're interested, I'll teach 'em.


'Saw    

  >> Take this one for example. What in blazes are you talking about? 
  >> Is it really your position that when I play Rotisserie baseball 
  >> I believe I'm doing the same thing that people do in the NBA? 

     No, that's your position. For example: 

     " What ever, in basketball you pretend that throwing an inflated 
       rubber ball into a basket means something when there is nothing 
       real about it except for the competition. Same with Rotisserie
       baseball."

     Then there was that whole spiel about level 1 fantasies which
     I always thought involved Halle Berry and a half gallon of Crisco
     but apparently not.

  >> And yes, Rotisserie is named after a restaurant. I see now you've 
  >> essentially admitted you were wrong 

     I like the way you draw whatever conclusions you'd like no matter
     what is said. It's creative though dishonest.

  >> we are all fantasizing about being real GM's because someone somewhere 
  >> also calls it Fantasy Baseball was

     "Someone somewhere" like USA Today? And half the known galaxy?
    

    Saying CeC is a "Pizza" resteraunt is saying cardboard and sauce
    makes a pizza. It's the worse.
    
    

    Multiply CeC by two and throw in a car track and two floors and you
    have "FunWorld" of Nashua.  Extreme decibel level.  Unfortunately they
    have "games" that take kids tokens with the "promise" of tickets which
    add up to beans.  Pizza is worse too.

CeC -- you have got to do salad bar and beer.  That's the only food that's
really palatable.

But the kids DO enjoy it.  There are other places around here springing up,
however, that they are also enamored with.

    
    Having spent the last week in Italy. I do not find anyone in America
    the can make real pie. The junk we call pizza in America would cause
    a considerable amount of heartburn in Milan. Pizza was more a snack
    than a meal. 
    
    
    I watched one make a pie.  
    
    Flaten out the dough,add lots of cheese, slice a few cheery tomato's
    and threw on some proscuttio (ham) cut so thin you could read a paper
    through it. took about five mins to bake. 
                 

    Well, if you like CeC, you'll love the Gymboree places.  Huge
    MacDonalds play gym places that serve bad pizza, no beer, and cater to
    birthday parties.  The games spit out tickets (look dadddy, I got 1,000
    tickets, maybe I can get that plastic necklace!), and all the adults
    stuck there look like they definitly want to be elsewhere.  
    
    UMDan

    
    FWIW, CeC was founded by Nolan Bushnell, who had previously founded
    Atari and designed (or taken credit for designing) a number of classic
    video games.
    
    Joe

>    I've traded in all my CeC tokens and tickets for the Fenway Park-
>    modeled batting cage place in Litchfield NH (Mel's).  Send the kids 
>    inside with $10 while I smash baseballs against The Wall until my 
>    arms get tired.  That place is heaven...

It's also next door to Shorty's Mexican Roadhouse, no?

>>    I've traded in all my CeC tokens and tickets for the Fenway Park-
>>    modeled batting cage place in Litchfield NH (Mel's).  Send the kids 
>>    inside with $10 while I smash baseballs against The Wall until my 
>>    arms get tired.  That place is heaven...
>
> It's also next door to Shorty's Mexican Roadhouse, no?
    
    That be the one.  Baseball mashing, margaritas.  Like I said, heaven
    in Litchfield...
    
    glenn
    

    
    
    	I feel sorry for you guys having to eat what they call Mexican food
    in NE. I mean the Mex. food sucks here in the Co. Springs I can imagine how
    bad it is up there.  We have a few good places down in Pueblo, but the
    rest is really lacking. 
    

E        <<< Note 251.207 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove" >>>

>     " What ever, in basketball you pretend that throwing an inflated 
>       rubber ball into a basket means something when there is nothing 
>       real about it except for the competition. Same with Rotisserie
>       baseball."

  No, read more carefully. The thing that is the same is that you are not
doing anything real in either contest other than competing. That doesn't mean
they are the same activity or that they are equivalent in all respects.

>     "Someone somewhere" like USA Today? And half the known galaxy?
    
  Again the question is, so what? If someone choose to play this game more
as a simulation than as fantasy, what would preclude them from doing so? Even
if large numbers of people are claiming there is some make believe going on,
how do you know some people are not playing the game without that particular
fantasy going on in their heads? 

  Do the reporters at USA Today have the ability to read the mind of every
single person playing Rotisserie Baseball?

  George

There's not many pizza places around that do a GREAT job with pizza.

We've got one around here, and the nice part is that the two owners are both
health/workout nuts, so there's plenty of pizza available made with lo-fat or
no-fat cheese and stuff like that.

Other than that, most of the pizza places around here are Greek.


'Saw

    
    
      Yo Cad...You are right about the Mexican food up here in New England
    but Shorty's Mexican Roadhouse, finally got one here in Worcester and
    the food there is top notch.  Not quite as good as I got in Tucson but
    it is very good.  Habenaro sauce roooooools.

>
>    Habenaros are currently available in the produce section at the market. 
>    This only happens a couple times a year.
>    


I'm VERY lucky.   I have a friend who grows them, along with assorted other hot
peppers in his garden every year.  Granted, it's only in late summer/fall, but
he gives me a couple of bagfuls every harvest.

Man, oh man, oh man...


The ONLY problem is being very, very careful to get the oils off your hands
after you cut them.  I've yet to find a way to really do that.  Whatever you
do, don't touch your eyes, nose, or take a leak....

Any ideas?

'Saw

>    Not sure.  Even mild chilis give you the same problem.  Since they're
>    oils, maybe that orange gunk for car grease will take it off.  Those
>    petro products work good on removing oils.
>    
>    Mike

Now there's a thought.  That never crossed my mind.   I'll give that a
try....

Nothing like some scrambled eggs with some of those HOOOOOOOTTTTTT peppers in
there to really spice up a Sunday morning!

8^)

    two best places in Co Springs for mexican food are "La Casita"
    and "On The Border".  La Casita is not much to look at but has
    good food.  On The Border is chain out of texas but has good food
    as wel.  Now here in NC the Mexican food is lousy!!! 

    
    Mexican food is an aquired taste. The mex. food in the Springs has no
    taste or variety. I trek to Pueblo knowing they have a large Hispanic 
    population in the area, and several good eateries. The one place (
    Colima's) I would go to in the Springs changed owners and went down hill.
    
    I do not need atmosphere to enjoy the food. Most places think if they
    can have some mexican stuff hanging on the walls and a different paint 
    scheme they can get away with calling what they dish out as mexican food. 
    I find the best places to be those run by a Hispanic family. Madre y Padre
    shop's generally have the down home style, which for my money is the
    best. Nothing fancy or Americanized. Chain shops don't cut it, may as
    well go to Taco Bell.  

    -1 
    Well technically the best mexican food I've had was my mom's!!!
    LA CASITA is operated by Mexican family.  You can watch them
    make the tortillas on the grill.  Mexican food tends to be different
    from one place to the next.  I never heard of chimichanga's till
    I left home for college.  Also La Casita is where alot of the Mexican
    population go.  Places like Henrys, Mission inn and Mission bell are
    pathetic for my taste buds.  Contrary to popular belief, Good mexican
    food should not be measured by how hot it is...
    

    
    
    I agree, with that one. Those who go for the heat are missing the real
    taste and flavor. If it's to hot you'll never know what you're missing.
    A good green chili is just hot enough to wake up your tastebuds. If
    it's to hot your receptors are fried and can't tell what the next bite
    really taste like. The meal should be hot by temp not season.
    
    You find a few places that let you order enchiladas one at a time. If
    I order three, the second and third are cold by the time I get to them,
    and I find nothing worse than cold mexican food. 

    
    If you think the Mexican food in NE is bad, you should try the Chowder
    - tastes like something dredged up from the mighty Merrimack River!

    Just exactly where is this chowder that you're trying?  The Hudson cafe
    brewed in the wafer cleanup room?  Go to the noname in So. Boston
    (bring mug money) and try the fish chowder.
    
    I mean HoJOs chowder in Mass. is still HoJOs chowder.

    
    Bookbinders Chowder... now that's real chowder from a real seafood
    place... none of those here in Mass.

Best chowder I *EVER* had was made by a guy that I was in the fire department
with.  

Every six months we'd have a family picnic at the firehouse, spring and fall. 
He'd show up early in the morning, put on his apron and get to work.  There's
be this huge pot of chowder going before you knew it and it was going all day. 
When it got hot, he'd take off his shirt and cook in his t-shirt.

You always had some around noon, but by five o'clock it was even BETTER cause
it had been cooking all day.

Fellow died some years back before I could get the recipe, by man, it was
better than any I've ever had.....

      Personally, I prefer 'fantasy' chow which is where you don't
     actually eat anything but instead reduce what can be a fun activity
     to a bunch of numbers and sit around with a bunch of other geeks
     and pretend that you're eating a gourmet meal. It's not as satis-
     fying as being an *active* particpant but you never have to worry
     about spilling marinara sauce on your pocket protector.
    

    
    
    Gee thanks Tommy you gonna clean this country fried steak off my
    screen.

>    Gee thanks Tommy you gonna clean this country fried steak off my
>    screen.


If you were following the Tommy Diet you wouldn't have that problem!

Me, I could probably use a few of those fantasy meals....

If it's all over your screen Jerry he did you a big favor. I also opted for that
swill here in Hudon today. It'll be the last time I make that mistake.......

mike

    
    
    
     Your are right sir.

RE   <<< Note 51.1464 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    Is that anything like Boston having nothing to do with the Braves WS
>    championship?

  Sure, and to continue along that thread it's like Atlanta having nothing to
do with the Braves WS Championship. The Braves belong to Ted Turner, not the
city of Atlanta, and any feeling that Atlanta fans have toward the Braves is
based on pure fantasy. 

  - People in Atlanta make believe the Braves are Atlanta's team and
    celebrate the victory because the Braves play in Atlanta.

  - I make believe the Braves are Boston's team and celebrate the victory
    because the Braves once played in Boston.

  - In reality the Braves belong to Ted & Jane and fans in Boston and Atlanta
    are little more than a source of revenue.

  George

    
    I should have known it was only make believe. Now according to George they 
    are the Ted and Jane Turner Braves and not the Atlanta Braves as listed
    by the National League of MLB

RE                       <<< Note 251.240 by BSS::MENDEZ >>>

>                   -< fantasy...as in rotisserie baseball?? >-

  Or fantasy as in being a fan of a team from which not a single player or
person in management knows or could care less who you are.

  George

    got a funny reply from field service engineer out of Oakland one
    day a few years back.  I asked him if he went to any of the A's
    games?  His reply was as soon as they pay to watch him work he'll
    pay to watch them work!!!  I thought it was funny...
    

RE   <<< Note 251.241 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    I should have known it was only make believe. Now according to George they 
>    are the Ted and Jane Turner Braves and not the Atlanta Braves as listed
>    by the National League of MLB

  They are called the "Atlanta" Braves because they play in Atlanta, not
because the residents of Atlanta own the team. Atlanta is the region in which
they play and the region from which they draw the lion's share of their
revenue. Any other relationship between the people in Atlanta and the Braves is
what ever those people invent in their minds. 

  If the people who live in the town where the team plays wish to make believe
they somehow own the team and it's championship, fine they took the bait. The
team will gladly accept their money in exchange for allowing themselves to be
hero worshiped. That is unless they see a better deal somewhere else in which
case the fans see "their" team pick up and leave.

  Outraged they go to court, write letters, and demand to know why "their"
team was taken away from them only to come to the sad realization that it was
never "their" team in the 1st place. Rather it's just another company trying
to make a buck.

  But no fear, this feeling of ownership by the fans is so deeply entrenched
that someone else somewhere else will be just as gullible and will take the
bait once again. In fact they will even make jokes about other people who don't
agree that their "ownership" of the team and it's championships is real. 

  To those people I say, "If the shoe fits ...",
  George

Ok, so what's the deal if'n you're in college? Can you say "my
Huskers", or "our Sun Devils"? And does it matter if'n it's a state
school, in which case you just mighta helped fund it, or private?

And of course, what if you just pretend that you went somewhere and
slipped in a_our team thing?

Of course, that wouldn't never happen in SPROTS...

                                                   
> Ok, so what's the deal if'n you're in college? Can you say "my
> Huskers", or "our Sun Devils"? And does it matter if'n it's a state
> school, in which case you just mighta helped fund it, or private?
    
    Please, please don't encourage the idiocy of it all...
    
    
    glenn
    

RE        <<< Note 251.245 by HBAHBA::HAAS "more madness, less horror" >>>

>Ok, so what's the deal if'n you're in college? Can you say "my
>Huskers", or "our Sun Devils"? And does it matter if'n it's a state
>school, in which case you just mighta helped fund it, or private?

  In my opinion you can be a fan of what ever team you wish to cheer for
for what ever reason you want to cheer for them.

  Others, however, believe that there are restrictions on who you can cheer
for and that there are restrictions on what reasons you can use to pick a
team to cheer for however they can't seem to articulate those rules. All
they seem to be able to do is complain when someone violates their rules
and supports a team for what they see as a non politically correct reason.

  I like the Braves because they once played in Boston. I will continue to
like the Braves because they once played in Boston for as long as I wish and
there is nothing that anyone can do about it.

  If you want to cheer on the Huskers, be my guest but be warned, if you do
it for a reason that offends someone's fuzzy notion of fan rules you will be in
for some ridiculous harassment that is really a joy to behold.

  George

>  In my opinion you can be a fan of what ever team you wish to cheer for
>for what ever reason you want to cheer for them.

On this, we agree...

Now, I bought a PSL for the Painters so i guess I can call it "my seat"

    
      George could (and has) post fifty notes in a day and not one would
    pertain to an actual game or play from the previous day. Why? Because
    he doesn't really watch sports, he doesn't attend and he doesn't read
    the sports page. This conference just provides him with a forum to en-
    gage in tedious little semantic debates on things that only someone
    who is entertained by fantasy sports could find interesting.

    
    But he is a Braves fan because they played in Boston, even though the fans 
    from Boston have no claim since they did not own the team.

RE          <<< Note 251.250 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "wannabe figure skater" >>>

>      George could (and has) post fifty notes in a day and not one would
>    pertain to an actual game or play from the previous day. Why? Because
>    he doesn't really watch sports, he doesn't attend and he doesn't read
>    the sports page. This conference just provides him with a forum to en-
>    gage in tedious little semantic debates on things that only someone
>    who is entertained by fantasy sports could find interesting.

  Of course Tommy does the same thing and .250 is an example of Tommy doing
the same thing but then we're not suppose to notice that.

  George

RE   <<< Note 251.253 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    But he is a Braves fan because they played in Boston, even though the fans 
>    from Boston have no claim since they did not own the team.

  That's exactly right. What I'm saying is that you don't need a "claim" to
be a fan. A fan is anyone who feels like cheering for a team for what ever
reason they wish to cheer for the team.

  If you wish to cheer for a team because they play in the city in which you
reside then fine. If you wish to cheer for a team because they play in the
large city near where you reside then fine. If you wish to cheer for a team
because you like their players, like their logo, don't itch when you hear their
name, live where they use to play, or just plain feel like it then that's fine
too. 

  At least that's the way I feel. Other's feel there are strict rules as to
who can be a fan and why they can be a fan and that people should be restricted
as to who they can cheer for. However none of these people can point to any
law saying that these restrictions exist.

  George

The scariest part about this whole thing is that it makes the same amount of
sense to me whether I'm sober (as I am now) or when I'm drunk (as I've been a
few SAturday afternoons when I've read from home).

Now that I'm on the wagon, I don't understand ANY of it....

    
    From a Sprots view point: You did not start cheering for the Braves until
    they won the WS eg; The bandwagon jumper tag 

   > Now that I'm on the wagon, I don't understand ANY of it...
    
   I'm glad that I'm not the only one not to understand.
    

Re   <<< Note 251.259 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

    
>    From a Sprots view point: You did not start cheering for the Braves until
>    they won the WS eg; The bandwagon jumper tag 

  Nope, I have documented evidence that I was a Braves fan earlier. Look
this up in the Baseball notes file yourself if you don't believe me. This
was after the season in which they came in last place. Following that was
the 1st note where I talked about the Boston connection. Check the dates.

  George

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 20.74                   The Atlanta Braves Note                  74 of 1774
PAXVAX::MAIEWSKI                                      6 lines  22-MAR-1990 13:52

  According to the Boston Globe, Tom Glavine will get the start on opening day.
He said he was supprised that it didn't go to Smoltz. Also, there's still talk
around the Boston press of Lee Smith going to Atlanta. He says he wouldn't mind
playing there.

  George (new Braves fan)
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Note 20.286                  The Atlanta Braves Note                 286 of 1774
PAXVAX::MAIEWSKI                                      3 lines   5-SEP-1990 20:02

  Maybe they'll come back to Boston where they belong.

  George
 

    
    What happens in baseball don't mean squat in the Sprots file. 

  I don't think that's quite right, there seems to be quite a bit of
interest in baseball in this file.

  Granted it probably has picked up since the baseball notes file died.
Yet another casualty to company down sizing.

  George

    
    
    Let me restate the reply.
    
    What happened the the baseball notesfile means squat in Sprots. We're not
    going to run to another notes file just to clarify one of your S.T.U.P.I.D.
    diatribes on Ice Skating, the Boston Braves or any of your other senseless 
    debates.   

  What do you mean my diatribe? You were the one who said I jumped on the
Braves band wagon when they won the world series. All I did was to defend
myself from your accusation by providing documented evidence showing I was a
fan back when they were in last place in their division before the 1991
season.

  If you didn't want a discussion on whether I was a true Braves fan or not
before last year, why did you start one?

  Don't get sore at me just because the razzing you started didn't turn out
the way you thought it would.

  George

    
    
    George,
    
       I never said or typed a word complaing about your being a Braves fan.
    My only contention is that you leave Boston and Milwaukee out of the
    Atlanta Braves. From a Sprots viewpoint you jumped on the wagon last
    year when you started the Bos-Mil-Atl WS champs nonsense. 

RE   <<< Note 251.266 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>                    From a Sprots viewpoint you jumped on the wagon last
>    year when you started the Bos-Mil-Atl WS champs nonsense. 

  This argument makes no sense. Are you saying that if we were debating in the
BASEBALL notes file then I could call myself a fan because of the notes I
entered there back in 1991 but since I didn't duplicate them in this file they
don't count? 

  I shifted my baseball discussions from that file to this one because the
BASEBALL notes file all but died due to company downsizing. I'm the same guy
who typed those notes in that file, why shouldn't I be able to hold the same
position here that I did in that file back then?

>    My only contention is that you leave Boston and Milwaukee out of the
>    Atlanta Braves. 

  Why? The Atlanta Braves themselves recognize their past in Milwaukee and
Boston, why can't I?

  If someone got called up to the Braves tomorrow from AAA Richmond and asked
for the number 21 they wouldn't give it to him in spite of the fact that no
Atlanta Brave ever wore that number. It was retired because of what Warren
Spahn did for the Braves in Boston and Milwaukee. 

  If Ted Turner, who really does own the Braves doesn't mind being associated
with the Boston and Milwaukee teams, why should I worry about rules made by
people who don't own the team? 

  George

    
         <<< Note 251.267 by CLUSTA::MAIEWSKI "Bos-Mil-Atl Braves W.S.
    <<< Note 251.267 by CLUSTA::MAIEWSKI "Bos-Mil-Atl Braves W.S. Champs" >>>
    
    RE   <<< Note 251.266 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic
    syncopations" >>>
    
    >                    From a Sprots viewpoint you jumped on the wagon
    last
    >    year when you started the Bos-Mil-Atl WS champs nonsense.
    
      This argument makes no sense.
    
    
    For once you got something right. You make a statement, then go to a
    another notesfile and pull out entries made 5 years ago and expect
    them to used as your defense against comments made in this file. I
    suppose you have entries in the Ice Skating file you'll pull out
    when discussing it being a sport.  Stick to this file George. Don't
    make statements about what you wrote somewhere else fives years ago.
    QED
    
    

RE   <<< Note 251.268 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>    For once you got something right. You make a statement, then go to a
>    another notesfile and pull out entries made 5 years ago and expect
>    them to used as your defense against comments made in this file. I
>    suppose you have entries in the Ice Skating file you'll pull out
>    when discussing it being a sport.  Stick to this file George. Don't
>    make statements about what you wrote somewhere else fives years ago.
>    QED

  I love this argument. While totally devoid of any rational it should win
hands down the "1996 Brass Balls Award".

  I can just imagine tuning in Court TV and hearing the prosecutor say: 

  "But your honor, the Bishop's testimony should not be allowed. True he will
   testify that the defendant was serving Mass 5 years ago when the murder
   occurred 400 miles away but so what? The defense should stick to what we saw
   in this court room. Next thing you know they'll be talking about how he was
   chair of the PTA meeting at the time our witness saw the body being thrown
   into the river".

  What difference does it make where the note was published, it proves I was
a Braves fan back before their championship year?

  George

>  What difference does it make where the note was published, it proves I was
>a Braves fan back before their championship year?

Of course it does, George, but you're not dealing with rational thought
processes here.  The people who believe there are "rules for being a fan"
believe it to the depth of their beings, and they aren't going to be
swayed by facts, not even documented ones.

To these people (I will now indulge in what we used to call [more or less]
mind raping), your announcement that you were rooting for the Braves at a
relatively late date was cause for storms of indignation, accusations of
bandwagon jumping (nowhere codified as a capital offense, but evidently at
least as reprehensible as, say, child molesting), and general damnification.
Your demonstration that you were advertised elsewhere as a Braves fan was a
feeble weapon against these monsters from the id.

Gronowski continues to assert that you jumped on the bandwagon, but he is
well known for his disdain of the facts.  Cadzilla at least has the decency
to attempt to justify his tirade by making up a rule.

Should it not be clear to you now that no amount of reasoning and no
amount of facts is going to change any minds?

Steve

    
    George, 
    
      I'll write this down one more time. I do not care if your are a Braves
    fan. 
    
    You came in this notesfile and started rooting for the Braves last 
    year when they get into the series. When this type of action takes place
    Groaner is going to slap you with the jumper tag. From the standpoint of 
    this conference you jumped at a chance to be the fan of the winning team. 
    Now we get this.
    
    "Oh but I've been a fan of the Braves since they were in last place, look 
    I'll go over to the baseball file and prove it."
    
     Does it make since that the noters in this file should have to read your 
    five year old replies in another conference to understand your point of 
    view.
    
    AlphaMikeFoxtrot 

No, Cadz, they shouldn't have to read another notesfile, but when he cites
from it chapter and verse proving he is not, horror of horrors, a bandwagon
jumper, they should get off his case.  Otherwise, it puts them in a position
of repeating statements known to be contrary to fact.

Steve

    
    Steve,
    
      If he had pulled these 5 year old notes out last year when he got
    tagged he may not have gotten stuck with the label.
    
    So let it be known!!
    
     George is a Braves fan and has always been a Braves because they were 
    in Boston before he was born. 

    .272
    
    Hear hear!
    
    
    CHARLEY$on_with_the_show

RE   <<< Note 251.273 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>      If he had pulled these 5 year old notes out last year when he got
>    tagged he may not have gotten stuck with the label.

  No, this isn't really true. In fact I did pull them out last fall which is
why most people backed off at that time.

  I got stuck with the label because Paul Gronowski sticks everyone with that
label. When Paul calls you a bandwagon jumper that's his way of saying he's
irritated that your team beat his team. He knew all along that I was a Braves
fan because he was participating in the Baseball notes file back when I was
entering those notes. 

>     George is a Braves fan and has always been a Braves because they were 
>    in Boston before he was born. 

  I was born in 1948. The Braves were in Boston through 1952.

  George

    
    
        George you were labeled a Bandwagon jumper because most people
    thought you were a Red Sox fan because of most of your notes. I started
    seeing you really pumping up the Braves after they "arrived". (you
    should TM that Joe G.)
    
    
    
    Chap

RE  <<< Note 251.276 by WMOIS::CHAPALONIS_M "Donnie Baseball Yankee HOFer!!!" >>>

>        George you were labeled a Bandwagon jumper because most people
>    thought you were a Red Sox fan because of most of your notes. I started
>    seeing you really pumping up the Braves after they "arrived". (you
>    should TM that Joe G.)
    
  Prior to the strike, most of our notes about baseball in general were either
in the BASEBALL or RED_SOX notes files. We just didn't talk about baseball all
that much in this file. 

  The bandwagon label came because Paul accuses everyone, never mind the guy
who's team beat his team, of jumping on bandwagons. In fact I've heard that
Paul says "Bandwagon" so much that his dog now thinks that "Bandwagon" is his
name. 

  Anyway, several of the people that are griping and complaining about me being
a bandwagon jumper participated in the baseball notes file back around '91 and
should have known better. I've got this label in part because several of my
accusers have bad memories.

  George

> The bandwagon label came because Paul accuses everyone, never mind the guy
> who's team beat his team, of jumping on bandwagons. In fact I've heard that
> Paul says "Bandwagon" so much that his dog now thinks that "Bandwagon" is his
> name. 
    
    The moral: half the world's problems could be solved if noters would
    ignore Paul, George (John, Ringo)...
    
    
    glenn
    

RE   <<< Note 251.279 by OLD1S::CADZILLA2 "Loose with rhythmic syncopations" >>>

>                          -< Just say no to George! >-

  And here, Glenn, is the reason why that won't work. Not only will people
not ignore what I say, they can't even leave me alone to cheer for the team
or sport of my choice.

  "Go Braves!!!"
  "NO George, you can't do that, it's against our rules"
  "What rules?"
  "We don't know what our rules are but we know that you are breaking them".

  George

    
    
       Po' po' George. Just a innocent victim. 

    
    George,
    
    
    If you did not say it, we would not have to ignore you.
    
    
    OBTW 
      
     Baseball was a heated topic of discussion long before you left the
    Baseball and RedSux files and graced this conference with your presence. 

RE        <<< Note 251.281 by MSBCS::BRYDIE "I need somebody to shove." >>>

    
>       Po' po' George. Just a innocent victim. 

  Funny you should give me the sympathy when it's your side doing all the
crying.

  Heck, this is fun, I'll go on as long as you guys want to bat this back
and forth but for the life of me I don't understand the obsession of what
team I choose to support or why I support them.

  George

    Does all this mean that I'll be labeled a "bandwagon jumper" if I
    declare to be Braves fan now, even though I never even heard of this
    conference until last month?
    
    I've seen some petty, childish arguments in the notefiles (though not
    nearly as petty and childish as in REC.SPORTS...) but this one is just
    plain a waste of time.
    
    Only someone as woefully pathetic as I could be sucked into this
    discussion.
    
    
    Rick

    
    Depends, are you from Atlanta?
    

    
    
        Petty arguments. And you only been in here a month. Boy do you have
    something in store for you!!! :-)
    
    
    chap

  As far as anyone can tell you are allowed to be a Braves fan if you live in
Atlanta or if you live in Lowel but grew up in the area around Atlanta as long
as you can show any evidence that you were a Braves fan before they started
winning. However you are prohibited from showing any evidence of being a Braves
fan that is more than 5 years old which only by the greatest coincidence is
about the time they started winning.

  But the up side is that this is a really liberal bunch of guys who believe in
free speech and the right of individuals to support the team of their choice
so dive right in and:

  GO BRAVES!!!
  George 

Up yours, George!~

Hey, we reserve the right to not only root fer any danged old team you
want but you can even quit rooting for 'em. Say they go into the toilet,
lose some key playoff games or you decide you just don't wanna root for
the same team as some of the assholed in here.

We're working on a series of litmus tests to see if'n you're a real fan
but we're not making much progress on accounta no one can agree on
nothing.

TTom

>>    Depends, are you from Atlanta?

	This from a guy who is obviously from Baltimore.


	billl

      I tought you just had to like peaches to root for the Braves;-)
    
      Tim

    >  I tought you just had to like peaches to root for the Braves;-)
    
    Peaches are for tourists.
    
    For the true Braves fan there's nothing better'n a big steamy bag of
    boiled peanuts...
    
    

    >As far as anyone can tell you are allowed to be a Braves fan if you live in
    >Atlanta or if you live in Lowel but grew up in the area around
    >Atlanta...
    
    Well, I live in Stockbridge, Ga.  We're about 15 miles from Atlanta-
    Fulton County stadium.  Is that close enough?
    
    
    >However you are prohibited from showing any evidence of being a Braves
    >fan that is more than 5 years old which only by the greatest coincidence is
    >about the time they started winning.
    
    So that leaves out the stubs from my 1983-89 season tickets?  Okay,
    okay, it was only the 20-game package, but, hey, I'm just an operator.
    
    That also leaves out my autographed 8x10s of Spahn, Aaron, Mathews,
    Niekro and Murph.
    
    Come to think of it, my Avery rookie card (signed and numbered) is
    over-the-limit evidence as well.
    
    Man, they sure do makes this hard...
    
    Oh, well.  I still have my Smoltz ball.  It was autographed in 1993. 
    Will that work?  No, wait, damn.  That was AFTER they started winning.
    
    
    Rick

      Boiled peanuts?  Never tried them.  Any particular type/brand and add
    on flavors in the water?  I'm assuming you use regular water, not that
    fire water(-)
    
      Tim

    >  Boiled peanuts?  Never tried them.  Any particular type/brand and add
    >on flavors in the water?  I'm assuming you use regular water, not that
    >fire water(-)
    
    >  Tim
    
    
    Hmm... never thought about using "fire water" for boilin'.  A little
    Tennessee sippin' stuff might add a bit of sweetness but would ruin the
    salinity.  'Course Jose and salt go quite well.  We may be on to some-
    thing here.  Anyone know the boilin' point of tequilla?
    
    Rick
    

Rick,

They got them boiled peanuts in a bunch of flavors. You got your spicy
like cajun and spicy like tabasco, too.

I never seen 'em cooked in no liquor, though

TTom

    I don't think they ever change the water in the boiling vats that are
    at the roadside stands.  Got to eat 'em hot though, as cold boiled
    peanuts are not the delicacies that some claim they are (IMHO).
    
    How about a Moon Pie and an RC?
    
    UMDan

re: Moon Pie

The most overrated food item of all time.

I always like Royal Crowns though. RC > CC > PC, IMHO. Dr. Pepper cooks
'em all, fer sure.

Couldn't get into Mountain Dew until a friend suggested a little gin. Now
we drink Tangadews.

TTom

    
    Dr. Pepper the friendly pepper upper it never lets you down. 10-2-4 keeps 
    you running for the door. For those that do not know. DP's are a prune 
    extract developed by a pharmacist in Waco Texas back in the 20's. He
    made the concoction in order to help some of his customers get regular.  
    
    At one time we had a 11/70 in the Dallas bottleing plant. After a day
    on-site, you never wanted to see or Smell another DP. Luckily they
    has a bar across the street.               

>    Dr. Pepper the friendly pepper upper it never lets you down. 10-2-4 keeps 
>    you running for the door. For those that do not know. DP's are a prune 
>    extract developed by a pharmacist in Waco Texas back in the 20's. He
>    made the concoction in order to help some of his customers get regular.  

I've heard Irish doctors use Guiness Stout for the same purpose.



I ain't never had a Moon pie.  

RC is okay I guess.  I'm not much into soda at any rate -- I'll usually have a
a Sprite or a DP if'n I do.


Used to hang out with a guy whose cure for hangover was Hawaiin Punch and 
Chee-zits.


'Saw

And then there's this drink they call a Dr. Pepper.

Made with 151 Rum, some liquor and just a bit of cola. You shake it up
and hoot it. The after taste is exactly like a real Dr. Pepper.

TTom

>I've heard Irish doctors use Guiness Stout for the same purpose.

I don't think so - Guinness tends to have the reverse effect (at least as
far as I can tell).

Irish doctors did, however, recommend one pint of Guinness a day as help
for anemia.  I guess it has a fairly substantial amount of iron.  From this
came the popular Guinness slogan, "Guinness is good for you."

      Dr. Pepper has another name in our house, Dr. Pooper...  Always used
    it on the kids when they were babies and had the lock ups.
    
      Mt. Dew is know as moose piss.  An old freind of mine used to live in
    Montana and he said that they had a plant there that made the stuff. He
    said the river that they got the water out of always had moose standing
    and releiving in it.
    
      Tim

    
>They got them boiled peanuts in a bunch of flavors. You got your spicy
>like cajun and spicy like tabasco, too.
    
    
    I've tried a few "flavored" from time-to-time, but (call me a purist)
    they just don't seem right.
    
    Buy 'em by the bag, but never pay the asking price...
    
    
    Rick

     >From this came the popular Guinness slogan, "Guinness is good for you."
    
    Then how come if I drink two gallons of the stuff I feel like $h!+ the
    next day?
    
    
    CHARLEY

Yes, but you're not anemic then, are you?  :-)

Perhaps we've stumbled onto another fan rule: ya gotta drink while
you watch it.

I upheld this rule in letter and spirit lasted night at the local AAA
game. 

They got this bar at the stadium called the Home Base Cafe or the like.
Anyway, you sit indoor, in the air conditioning, listening to the radio
feed and, oh yeah, knocking back a couple. And they serve cold bottle
beer as opposed to that lukewarm pisswater called draft beer, which you
get if'n you sit outside.

TTom

You mean to tell me that you boys in the Atlanta neighborhood don't
drink Georgia's carbonated pride, the official soft drink of the
Olympic Games and (incidentally) the only nonalcoholic beverage other
than fruit juice to pass my lips, Coca Cola???

Steve

>                       -< Where's your product loyalty? >-

Steve,

Coke they selves were the firsted to show lack of product loyalty. They
took about the bestest ever soft drink and changed it so it aint the
same.

I quit drinking it.

TTom

  Didn't Coke go back to their old formula under the name "Coke Classic"?

  I didn't know you could even buy the "New Coke" any more.

  George

Coke Classic aint the old coke.

So you've really got three diff'rent beverages: old, classic and new.

I liked the old but refuse to drink the classic or new.

But, I'll hand it to Coke. Even though they really blew it, they've
recovered and are making millions. In a_era of diversification, they've
succeeded with basically a single product line.

That is, if'n you don't count the sportswear which is another thing I
don't understand. I'm gonna pay you to wear a shirt that advertises your
product? Watta ya think you are, Nike or something...

RE        <<< Note 251.310 by HBAHBA::HAAS "more madness, less horror" >>>

>Coke Classic aint the old coke.

  By "old" do you mean the formula before the "New Coke" came out back some
time in the 80's, or the real old formula with the cocaine that gave Coke it's
name. 

  I thought that Coke claimed that Coke Classic was the formula used prior
to the "New Coke". Were they not telling the truth or did I misunderstand
what they were claiming Coke Classic to be?

  George

Yeah, Old is afore either Classic or New.

If'n they claim that it's the same formula, they're lying. For one thing,
the old stuff was sweetened with refined sugar and the new comes uses
syrup from corn, sorghum and other crops.

About the onliest people happy with the change is them deadbeat welfare
farmers. Course, they got Jesse Helms on their side. The sugar industry
was virtually unchanged in the latest agriculture "reform" bills while
his native state's industry, tobacco, took it pretty hard.

TTom

  Shows to go yeh, all this time I thought I was drinking the old stuff.

  So what now, Pepsi?

  George

    
     >You mean to tell me that you boys in the Atlanta neighborhood don't
     >drink Georgia's carbonated pride, the official soft drink of the
     >Olympic Games and (incidentally) the only nonalcoholic beverage other
     >than fruit juice to pass my lips, Coca Cola???

     >Steve
    
    
    I wasn't gonna say anything since I've had the "RC vs Coke" debate a
    gazillion times with friends and relatives all over the state.  But,
    since you brought it up, AMEN!!!
    
    
    Rick
    

     >Coke Classic aint the old coke.

     >So you've really got three diff'rent beverages: old, classic and new.
    
    
    Wrong!  "Old" Coke and Coke Classic are EXACTLY the same formula.  If
    ya don't believe me, dig up Bob Woodruff and ask him.
    
    
    Rick

Wail, Rick why are all the grain farmers happy? It ain't cause they're
still putting "sugar" in the Coke.

TTom

Yeah, I had heard (and since confirmed, by reading the label) that Coca Cola
was no longer made with sugar, but I couldn't see getting into a religious
war about it, for two reasons:

1.) over here, it's still made with sugar (from the label: Zutaten: Wasser,
Zucker, Kohlens�ure, Farbstoff Zuckerkul�r, S�uerungsmittel Phosphors�ure,
Aroma, Koffein.  Did you know Coke contains Phosphoric acid?).

2.) the variations in flavor caused by the individual bottlers, particularly
the water, far outweigh any difference resulting from the use of corn syrup
rather than sugar.

Then there's the third reason:  I probably couldn't give it up if I had to.

Steve

Steve, it's less than moot with me since I limit my carbonated beverage
intake to the alcoholic variety.

No Coke, no Pepsi, no O'Douls.

TTom

>
>Steve, it's less than moot with me since I limit my carbonated beverage
>intake to the alcoholic variety.
>
>No Coke, no Pepsi, no O'Douls.
>
>TTom


I'm on the opposite plan of yours TTom.  I've cut out alcohol all together.

I've lost ten pounds and am feeling better than I have in a while.

It was time for a change and I figured I'd give it a try -- so far, so good.

I don't like O'Douls, and prefer Sharps instead, but am eagerly anticipating
trying the myriad of non-alcohol "brews" out there, to see which ones I like.

I'm not a big soda drinker....

Saw,

I've been trying to stay in shape myself.

I figger if'n Digital shows me the door, I'll be doing a pretty good
stint of partying. And I don't wanna be caught short so I've been in
training this month, trying to get to a pace where I can really pound
'em. :=]

>... and am feeling better than I have in a while.

Congratulations! It doesn't matter exactly what you do but hopefully
whatever it is works for ya.

TTom

    'Saw,
    	Kingsbury is just about the best n/a and is usually the cheapest
    except not all have it but Market Basket/DeMoulas usually does.  I
    don't drink enough of it to buy a case or even use up room in the
    refrigerator so after Golf I simply buy a single O'Douls at the local
    variety.
    
    	It's very important with n/a to pour right down the middle and use
    either a stein or a bourbon glass with the heavy bottom.  I feel just
    about the same way, btw, about coke except you need the ice cubes.

I agree on the pour if'n it's a bottle and you're using a glass/container.

Most times with the Guard it's in cans, which suits me fine.....

I've lost enough weight now that I can start running again I think....

  What's the advantage of pouring down the middle?

  Don't you end up with lots of foam and flat beer?

  George

    With regular beer you'd get too much foam.  To achieve a normal foam
    with n/a you need to pour down the middle not the side.  The pour is
    what puts the taste in.
    
    I can't imagine sipping n/a out of a can but then again most cabonated
    beverages straight out of a can is pretty dumb.  I'd rather sip
    straight out of a bottle than a can.

I think we got us the makings of another controversy: Beer - bottle or
can. You make the call.

Put me down as one of them pretty dumb can fans. I don't know if'n I'm
pretty dumb relative to that crowd, though.

TTom

Beer out of a bottle is better, but beer out of a can is more portable.
If you're someone on the move, like TTom is, I can see having a can preference.

>
>Beer out of a bottle is better, but beer out of a can is more portable.
>If you're someone on the move, like TTom is, I can see having a can preference.
>


Which is basically why we have it in cans in the Guard.  Cans means more can be
packed into a cooler -- whether the "cooler case" in the lounge in the Armory,
or the coolers that go on the bus.

Don't matter to me one way or the other....


'Saw

Cans have some "moving" features.

When empty, you can crumple 'em up and they don't take up as much room.
In fack, they take up less room when they're filt, too.

You can get sloppy and drop a beer. With a bottle you might have a
problem. With a can, wail, there's no use crying over spilt beer.

While working on tan, I get a bit concerned with the bottle at pool side.

But mostly, I like the taste. My dad taught me the fine art of drinking
beer, at home, where you're supposed to learn things. He always drank
canned beer and he'd pour me some in a glass. It's still a very distinct
memory of growing up.

Of course, nowadays, he'd prolly get arrested by the moral police...

TTom

    
    > Wrong!  "Old" Coke and Coke Classic are EXACTLY the same formula. If
    > ya don't believe me, dig up Bob Woodruff and ask him.
    
    I completely disagree.  When they announced that the "old" Coke was
    going away, hoarding occured.  I still had several cases left (I drank
    a lot back then) when the Coke Classic was introduced.  Anyone who says
    they are the same is full of it.  They weren't even close.
    
    Marc
    

    
    Another (my final) word on Coca-Cola:
    
    It is true that corn syrup replaced sugar in the formula, but that
    occurred BEFORE the "New Coke" fiasco.  I invite all you nay sayers
    down here and we'll tour the World of Coca Cola and you can hear for
    yourselves straight from the horses' mouths.
    
    The Georgia legislature even held a mini-hearing on the subject.  They
    came away convinced.
    
    And if even if you can PROVE it is different, I don't care.
    
    It still tastes the same to me, and I've been drinking it since I spit
    out my ma's nipple nearly 39 years ago.  
    
    No, I'm not over 40...
    
    Rick

    The taste of Coca-Cola did indeed change before the "New Coke" fiasco -
    when corn syrup replaced cane sugar as the sweetener.  In fact, if you
    go to Canada try the Coca Cola there to get the real "old" flavor. 
    Canada still uses sugar as the sweetener.  Whenever I go to Canada, I
    make sure to bring back a couple of cases - makes it real interesting
    at US Customs when I tell them the only thing I have to declare is some
    "Coke"!  :-)
    
    A close look at the cans and you can see that where the US can says
    "original formula" the Canadian cans say "original taste".
    
    Steve