An simple explanation why some of us attack players or the team

[ctchamps]

The negative response isn't surprising. It's as predictable as a politician's lies. Sorry to insult you political types.

It's a certain fans mentality. He wants his trophies. He collects cards and struts as he displays them. If the card has a mark, a crease, it doesn't show well. He can't stand it if he doesn't have the perfect collection.

This fan becomes so intertwined with these teams they become his alter ego. Their success is his success. Their failure is his failure. But he can't have that. So he does an exorcism and removes the devil from his soul. Which is why he characterizes the players as evil or bad. He can't just describe the positives and negatives of the team or players, he has to destroy the team or players.

This isn't confined to sports and fans. Any venue which we choose to make heroes or superstars results in the same type of passionate twisting of identities by certain individuals.

Are all passionate fans prone to this inability to separate themselves from the object of their focus. Not by a long shot. Most of us can be extremely disappointed with an outcome and not need to lay blame. Or we can be ecstatic with a victory and recognize these are people doing great things as opposed to them being gods. We critique versus attack. We see the positive along with the negative, and vice versa. We don't run the extremes. Not because we're dispassionate. But because we know how to separate our identity from the object.

I'm not sure who is interested in this type of thing. I believe it is important to understand things about ourselves, the same way it's important to understand anything. The people who need to understand it are probably not ready to understand it. I'm hopeful that they don't take it as an affront to who they are. I prefer understanding things as a means to helping one another, versus as a means to put someone down. Although I'm far from perfect in this regard.

And that brings me to the last part of this. There is no way to stop this. The individuals have to recognize this isn't the healthiest situation for them if I'm correct about what I wrote. If they don't agree with any of this they won't consider it necessary to change. And nothing we do or say will alter that.

Peace to all my UConn brethren.

 

[Fishy]

Your post was very long and clearly must have involved quite a bit of thought. Although I did not read it, as long as it hit on the point that people are basically really, really duck*ing stupid, I agree with it.

 

[NaughtybyNapier]

C'mon ya'lls. Don't do Joober Jones like that. If correct in my assumption, his post-Wagner post was among what precipitated the hate above. What I'm saying is don't do Joober like that. It's like that very first scene of the Wire: this is America, you gotta let him play.

(And I'm def serious, not mocking, Joober Jones above. I first came to UConn board-om on rivals ~6 years ago and he was the man - more than a thousand posts - to me.)

 

[Danzz]

The negative response isn't surprising. It's as predictable as a politician's lies. Sorry to insult you political types.

It's a certain fans mentality. He wants his trophies. He collects cards and struts as he displays them. If the card has a mark, a crease, it doesn't show well. He can't stand it if he doesn't have the perfect collection.

This fan becomes so intertwined with these teams they become his alter ego. Their success is his success. Their failure is his failure. But he can't have that. So he does an exorcism and removes the devil from his soul. Which is why he characterizes the players as evil or bad. He can't just describe the positives and negatives of the team or players, he has to destroy the team or players.

This isn't confined to sports and fans. Any venue which we choose to make heroes or superstars results in the same type of passionate twisting of identities by certain individuals.

Are all passionate fans prone to this inability to separate themselves from the object of their focus. Not by a long shot. Most of us can be extremely disappointed with an outcome and not need to lay blame. Or we can be ecstatic with a victory and recognize these are people doing great things as opposed to them being gods. We critique versus attack. We see the positive along with the negative, and vice versa. We don't run the extremes. Not because we're dispassionate. But because we know how to separate our identity from the object.

I'm not sure who is interested in this type of thing. I believe it is important to understand things about ourselves, the same way it's important to understand anything. The people who need to understand it are probably not ready to understand it. I'm hopeful that they don't take it as an affront to who they are. I prefer understanding things as a means to helping one another, versus as a means to put someone down. Although I'm far from perfect in this regard.

And that brings me to the last part of this. There is no way to stop this. The individuals have to recognize this isn't the healthiest situation for them if I'm correct about what I wrote. If they don't agree with any of this they won't consider it necessary to change. And nothing we do or say will alter that.

Peace to all my UConn brethren.

"...because we know how to separate our identity from the object"
You made many good points but this probably sums up the difference between a fan who is disappointed after a loss and a fan who finds it necessary to burn down the building.We have both on this board and that second group makes The Boneyard unreadable after a loss.

 

[The Funster]

The regular season is important but only March matters. That being said, it's NOVEMBER.

You'd think UConn fans (and Boneyarders) would have gotten that fact after the nature of the last two NCs

 

[Rico444]

I can't help but think this is a shot at me (after you called me a jackal in my Shabazz thread), and I'm just getting more confused. I can see how my initial post in that thread seemed a little harsh. But I didnt railroad the kid. I didn't call for his benching, or suggest that Jim should have recruited a better point guard. I just said he played bad defense last night and needed to improve. If I had been half as harsh on Shabazz as just about everybody else was on AO after the first game, then I would understand the criticism im taking.

I can guarantee you I take losing a lot better than most. I don't call for firing, benching, or anything that extreme. But I don't think it's unfair to point out things I'd like to see improve.

This team is far from a finished product, and will be a force come BET time.

 

[buckley503]

Your name should be "freud"slipcon. good post.

 

[bobbygt]

It reads like Chuang-tzu!

domo,
Y

 

[Scot-e]

They have bad games and it gives us something to talk about- that's why. I am a positive guy when it comes to the team always have been- but Fishy is right- people are just plain %#$@&%$ strange- you get all kinds of fans.

Look at Free- he feeds on misery like an African dictator- that's his thing- nothing you can do about it except throw out a STFU every once in a while. Fleud is a very nice guy from what I can tell and very logical and positive which I like to read- but Flued sometimes a STFU makes you feel better and gets to the point just as quickly. It also makes for some good reading.

Many of these issues will be solved when the trolls find us and start positing here. We will have very little time to worry about anyone except the very worst of our fans.

 

[intlzncster]

They have bad games and it gives us something to talk about- that's why. I am a positive guy when it comes to the team always have been- but Fishy is right- people are just plain %#$@&%$ strange- you get all kinds of fans.

I believe it was "stupid". "really, really duck*ing stupid" actually.

 

[ctchamps]

I can't help but think this is a shot at me (after you called me a jackal in my Shabazz thread), and I'm just getting more confused. I can see how my initial post in that thread seemed a little harsh. But I didnt railroad the kid. I didn't call for his benching, or suggest that Jim should have recruited a better point guard. I just said he played bad defense last night and needed to improve. If I had been half as harsh on Shabazz as just about everybody else was on AO after the first game, then I would understand the criticism im taking.

I can guarantee you I take losing a lot better than most. I don't call for firing, benching, or anything that extreme. But I don't think it's unfair to point out things I'd like to see improve.

This team is far from a finished product, and will be a force come BET time.

My OP was not meant as an attack on any particular poster. And in spite of Fishy's humor it actually is an oversimplification of how we think, feel, act and react. I meant if for two purposes.

First, anyone scratching their head, or worse, regarding those angry posts, were given an explanation why some people are nasty when a team loses. As I said it is an oversimplification and there are other reasons why people behave this way.

Second, some people may want to examine why they immediately pounce on something when that something disappoints them. It's a time of reflection, not about the object they are placing their venom upon, but themselves and why they get triggered that way. Not every passionate fan falls into that trap.

The jackal comment was in relationship to the thread. It was meant to be humorous. It was purely a coincidence I posted it after your comment. Please don't take it seriously. I honestly don't bear anyone any ill will over this. It's one of the things I've been working on.

 

[Prezidint]

Your name should be "freud"slipcon. good post.

Not sure, but I think the OP intends it as an irony - when saying Freudian slip, he slipped, and said fleudian slip. Or something like that.
I've always assumed he's got an MS or PhD in psych and is a counselor out there somewhere.

OP - Not sure if "attack" is the right word for the title. People rant and and complain and call for changes and point out every team minor flaw, but no fan really "attacks" the team or coach. With the possible exception of JD.

 

[Rico444]

My OP was not meant as an attack on any particular poster. And in spite of Fishy's humor it actually is an oversimplification of how we think, feel, act and react. I meant if for two purposes.

First, anyone scratching their head, or worse, regarding those angry posts, were given an explanation why some people are nasty when a team loses. As I said it is an oversimplification and there are other reasons why people behave this way.

Second, some people may want to examine why they immediately pounce on something when that something disappoints them. It's a time of reflection, not about the object they are placing their venom upon, but themselves and why they get triggered that way. Not every passionate fan falls into that trap.

The jackal comment was in relationship to the thread. It was meant to be humorous. It was purely a coincidence I posted it after your comment. Please don't take it seriously. I honestly don't bear anyone any ill will over this. It's one of the things I've been working on.

Thanks for the clarification. I've been taking some pretty serious heat for my Shabazz comments, so my patience has been a little short today. I appreciate your reply to my post.

 

[ctchamps]

Not sure, but I think the OP intends it as an irony - when saying Freudian slip, he slipped, and said fleudian slip. Or something like that.
I've always assumed he's got an MS or PhD in psych and is a counselor out there somewhere.

OP - Not sure if "attack" is the right word for the title. People rant and and complain and call for changes and point out every team minor flaw, but no fan really "attacks" the team or coach. With the possible exception of JD.

It was bad play on several things. Con is a corruption of UConn if anyone wanted to really stretch things. And I wanted to keep the UConn connection. But it really had another play.

Confucius say "I made a fleudian slip". Bad humor and bad taste on my part. The scramble was the slip.

I was actually surprised people read my post and responded to it. I'm not sure attack is too strong. Like everything the choice of a word or a phrase is relative.

Constructive criticism is the phrase we're searching for. It offers ideas about possible ways a player or a team can improve his or their play. It's not judgmental, condescending or ridiculing. It isn't impatient or spiteful. It accepts the possibility the suggestion can't be attained as opposed to insistence that the suggestion be fulfilled. It is advice given as if there was friendship. It is offered in a manner that the offerer would appreciate receiving.

nyhuskyfan used to post in the past. His critiquing was always informative and rarely resorted to anything other than analysis of the skills of the team or lack of skills. Rarely did I sense judgment in his analysis.

Dogmania has some great analysis, albeit a little long. Occasionally he is prone to going past a critique and project a flaw with a player in a judgmental manner, but he does it minimally. If anyone is interested in observing another set of great critiques, go to the football forum and read "The view from Section 241" They are observations from businesslawyer that reviews the game without the putdown of players or coaches. Some of the responses to his thread lack self control, but businesslawyer covers a lot of territory in a manner we could all learn from.

With regards to the negativity on this board: some of the stuff posted is someone just having a bad day and the loss or bad play was a last straw. Some of the stuff are just people with bad habits, that nobody took the time to teach that person a better method of communicating. Sometimes people know how to interact in a more civil manner and are just lazy or tired or taking shortcuts.

But for some of us the problem cuts deep.

I'm in the same boat most of us are in. In front of us is the tugboat of earthly angels who never cross the line of hurting people. These are the saintly people. Behind us is the dinghy with the small number of people who are rotten through and through and offer no redeeming value to the world. The rest of us are in the vast ocean liner between these two boats. We're the ones with character values and character weaknesses. Some of us are in first class and some of us are in the engine room. The station is unimportant. We're going through life together, and it's important to help each other when we're struggling, because the effort helps the boat move forward quicker and better.

But like any endeavor there is a wide spectrum of opinion about what is right and wrong and what is the best ways of accomplishing a goal.

I was aware that the aggressive nature employed in their presentation of a game was very important to these people even if it was imo, poorly done. I was aware that the way we tend to get people to conform is by trying to marginalize a perceived misbehavior the group finds undesirable. But that doesn't really work. The individuals who are marginalized don't really change. They either lash back or stay out of focus and are resentful. On an anonymous forum, people don't have any fear of societal disapproval. So they are less likely to be impacted by reprimands. Add the dynamic that most of us resent reproach, and there isn't much likelihood to affect a change.

The best any of us can do is recognize how this all works and try to be the least impacted by any undesirable actions we observe even as we offer suggestions that another way of approaching things is possible.

 

[61cygni]

Constructive criticism is the phrase we're searching for. It offers ideas about possible ways a player or a team can improve his or their play. It's not judgmental, condescending or ridiculing. It isn't impatient or spiteful. It accepts the possibility the suggestion can't be attained as opposed to insistence that the suggestion be fulfilled. It is advice given as if there was friendship. It is offered in a manner that the offerer would appreciate receiving.

Isn't that from Corinthians?

 

[ctchamps]

Isn't that from Corinthians?

I guess if I have to plagiarize that is a good source to take from.

 

[NightDog]

fleudslipcon

I appreciate your insightful posts. I myself use to go back and forth between the tug and the dingy back in the day. Now, at 45 years old, I chase around a six and eight year old who both are over scheduled. I find myself sitting squarely in the middle of the big boat, after the dust has settled and all is quiet, with remote in hand simply enjoying watching the Huskies play ball.

 

[BLUEDOGHOUSE]

I think for a person like myself college basketball and sports in general (including UConn basketball) has given me the opportunity to live vicariously through either coaches or players on teams. After choosing a particular career path that does not directly encompass sports/college basketball it leaves a void and periodically triggers the "what could have been" concept of thinking. Because failure is part of growing as a person it is undeniable any alternative career decision involving athletics would have been met with life's usual challenges and obstacles. Discussion forums that bring into consideration diverse thought processes that challenge your beliefs are healthy and entertaining if kept in the proper perspective. What concerns me at times is the lack of professional competence in the mainstream media (and social media to a lesser extent) when expressing their 1st Amendment rights. We often site sources of reference as authoritative because of a name or entity associated with the topic. The inherent nature of public forums like this or any others in the contemplation stage of development are to provide a venue of diverse expression. I am such a strong proponent of the 1st Amendment so my level of tolerance is higher then others . That is also applicable to my own thoughts. Not that you have turned this into a freedom of speech debate but expression is usually personal and unique.

Keep up the great posts. Thanks for the Dr. Phil moment and helping me do some reflecting on my own imperfections.

 

[Joobie]

At the end of the day, no matter how much we complain, bitch & moan, I think we all LOVE this team (I know I do)! Otherwise, we wouldn't be here...

 

[jleves]

A simpler answer to 'why some of attack players....'
Cause they're douches.

 

[intlzncster]

At the end of the day, no matter how much we complain, bitch & moan, I think we all LOVE this team (I know I do)! Otherwise, we wouldn't be here...

Nice to see you, Chuck.

 

[Joobie]

Chuck???

 

[Johnny Mac]

I think it's because forums like this give us a chance to pretend we're Doug Gottlieb or Andy Katz.

Those that can, do. Those that can't, coach. Those that can't coach, write.

 

[RabidHusky]

Hell hath no fury Like...

a) a woman scorned
b) a sports fan dissapointed
c) a Democrat
d) other

 

[RS9999X]

• Players who play below their potential get dogged.
• Players who let their NBA aspirations get in the way get dogged.
• Players who screw up off-the-court get dogged.
• Players who make repetitive mistakes get dogged.
• Players who pick up dumb, untimely fouls get dogged

And some fan disappointments, notably Donyell's foul shots, will always live on in fan infamy longer than they should. His career was so much more than that one painful minute.