something I think would make an interesting study

[The Wrath]

I have observed that college sports (and sports in general) are sort of a microcosm of international conflict. If you go to any sports game between 2 big rivals, you will understand why. The fans of the rival teams often feel a genuine hatred for each other, and act in a similar way.

I was at the A&M-Texas Tech football game in 2001, when A&M lost 12-0. The Tech fans proceeded to storm onto the field, tear down the goalposts, use them as a bridge to climb up into the visitor's stands, and start beating up A&M fans. The other time I was at Tech in 2003, I was spit on, called all sorts of names, and had my senior boots (I was in the Corps) intentionally scuffed. This is just one example, but similar things happen at all games between rivals, such as A&M-Texas, Alabama-Tennessee, and Ohio State-Michigan.

If you think about it, this is very similar to the way citizens of different countries feel towards each other. Israel-Palestine, Ireland-Britain, Iran-Iraq, Japan-China, France-Britain. Some of these conflicts aren't what they used to be, but they are all historic rivalries. These are, of course, based on grievances between the countries, in which each believes the other country has somehow wronged them in the past.

That may seem different than college football rivalries, but I can honestly say that I felt no animosity towards Texas Tech until the incident that I just described. I don't hate individual Tech fans, but I still get a sickening feeling in my gut whenever I see someone with a Tech t-shirt on. I'm sure they think that we deserve such treatment because of some incident where we wronged them in the past. In short, it's similar to international conflict, each side thinking they are the one that has been wronged.

I think this would make an interesting sociological study. Does anyone else see my point?

[KendallJ]

In the sense of studying school rivaly as a form of tribalism, i.e. as a throwback, or a perversion of competitive spirit, it might be interesting.

But studying it in terms of asserting that modernity has done this to people, well I think that is not helpful, even package dealing.

[The Wrath]

How was I suggesting that this is a result of modernity? There has been human conflict since before the beginning of written history...only an idiot would suggest that it is the result of modernity. But I do think that, on a very basic level, there are similar forces at work in both sports and international rivalries.

[KendallJ]

How was I suggesting that this is a result of modernity?

I didn't say that you did. I was simply expounding on the thought.

[BrassDragon]

It would be helpful to know why sports fanatics express hatred for fanatics of opposing teams. I've simply never understood this - when I've been briefly interested in sports, I've felt a form of comradeship with people supporting the opposing team, perhaps because I understand what they're supporting, and that their choice to support the other team is essentially arbitrary.

And while we're on the subject, why do people get so obsessed with a particular sports team winning anyway? I just never got drawn into this, and I can't think of any other major aspect of modern human culture I have really no understanding of. Perhaps someone who's felt these things can enlighten me/us.

*Edited for grammar

Edited October 20, 2006 by BrassDragon

[Blinky]

I am supposed to do some psychology research for some subject, so I will think about doing something related to it. It sounds interesting. Only disadvantage that occured to me is that somebody surely did some research before and it would be hard to find it.

Anyway, if somebody has any other idea for doing interesting and easily feasible research I will be very happy to hear it.

[JASKN]

And while we're on the subject, why do people get so obsessed with a particular sports team winning anyway? I just never got drawn into this, and I can't think of any other major aspect of modern human culture I have really no understanding of. Perhaps someone who's felt these things can enlighten me/us.

I would also like to know this. Ever since I can remember I have felt like a distant observer of national sports league fans, as I just don't understand the motivation. In fact, at work yesterday I was taking a break to get something to drink, and there were six people intently watching a baseball game on television, making what I would call the obligatory grunts and cheers. What gives? To me the game is only mildly interesting while you're there in person, so what could possibly motivate someone to care about a given team's victory away from the fact?

Some reasons I have considered: they could have friends or family on the team, they could have a financial stake in the game's outcome, they could just like the colors red and white together...

[konerko14]

It would be helpful to know why sports fanatics express hatred for fanatics of opposing teams.

Because the opposing fans did not choose their team. A fan of a team thinks his team is the best and others who dont see it the same way are morons(thats how a typical primitive sports fan views it, I think). Plus, it may also have to do with competition. As a fan, you may sometimes feel like youre part of the team, and when acting on your emotions they may resort to violence against opposing fans who mock or beat their team(similar to tribes possibly).

And while we're on the subject, why do people get so obsessed with a particular sports team winning anyway?

Someone picks a particular team because they think they will win, that they are the best team. So the outcome is essentially going to prove or disprove their judgment. Also, its like a hobby or an interest that peaks their mind. Putting an emotional attachment into the game makes it more exciting and fun to watch, as oppose to watching it without any personal thoughts to the game.

Edited October 22, 2006 by konerko14

[konerko14]

As I just don't understand the motivation- In fact, at work yesterday I was taking a break to get something to drink, and there were six people intently watching a baseball game on television, making what I would call the obligatory grunts and cheers. What gives?

I do this because I love baseball and sometimes during the game my emotions may get very high and the natural way to release this energy is to cheer, move around, or something like that. You dont understand this because you must not have a passionate interest in baseball.

Some reasons I have considered: they could have friends or family on the team, they could have a financial stake in the game's outcome, they could just like the colors red and white together...

You forgot interest in the game of baseball.

Edited October 22, 2006 by konerko14

[The Wrath]

I can't speak for everyone, but I get pretty into college football. I root for Texas A&M regardless of how good we are or whether or not I think we'll win. Why? Because I went there. The Aggie football team represents me in the world of college football. I've done my time going to yell practices and games, cheering for them and, as such, feel like I am a part of the team.

I can't speak for people who just choose to buy a t-shirt and, thus, become a fan of a particular team. I've never really understood that either. I also don't understand why people actually become violent as a result.

[BrassDragon]

Because the opposing fans did not choose their team. A fan of a team thinks his team is the best and others who dont see it the same way are morons(thats how a typical primitive sports fan views it, I think).

I think most people pick their team based on collegiate or geographical loyalty, not on which team is the best. But a few people probably do pick based on which team they think is the best, and many may be fooled into thinking they're doing that, so you may be right about the psychology.

Also, its like a hobby or an interest that peaks their mind. Putting an emotional attachment into the game makes it more exciting and fun to watch, as oppose to watching it without any personal thoughts to the game.

I've tried to put that emotional attachment behind a particular sports team, and I haven't really been able to. I don't think I can make an arbitrary emotional attachment to something like that. I think most of my emotional attachments have some ratonal basis. Now, that's not intended to be a criticism of you at all, konerko.

To be fair, I have enjoyed cheering on soccer teams in the World Cup - I think mainly based on how much I like the nation they represent, though. And I could really see myself cheering on particular golfers, because you can make a judgement about an individual competitor's character, especially in a game like golf. Both of those are sports I like more than most other sports, though.

I think I do have a negative stereotype about basketball and baseball players, and thus have much less respect for those games. (And I think in general, as a whole, those players have earned that stereotype.)

[The Wrath]

No one picks a favorite team based on who they think is the best. If anyone does that, their favorite team will shift about 8 times during the course of a season.

[konerko14]

I've tried to put that emotional attachment behind a particular sports team, and I haven't really been able to. I don't think I can make an arbitrary emotional attachment to something like that. I think most of my emotional attachments have some ratonal basis.

You should pick your favorite team based on who you think is best, like I said. If you analyze all the teams and come to a rational conclusion that this particular team is the best, then I think emotions will become present when dealing with that team. For instance, you may become somewhat defensive if another person starts criticizing your team, or your team loses.

I think I do have a negative stereotype about basketball and baseball players, and thus have much less respect for those games. (And I think in general, as a whole, those players have earned that stereotype.)

What sterotype would that be?

[konerko14]

No one picks a favorite team based on who they think is the best. If anyone does that, their favorite team will shift about 8 times during the course of a season.

You choose the team that you think is the best at the beginning of the season obviously, not just picking the team currently with the best record. And just because the team you picked doesnt have the best record at some point during the season, doesnt mean you still dont think they have the best team- its a long term, season long commitment. My favorite team for two years now has been the White Sox. They didnt make it to the playoffs this year, but I still think they have the best team this year. They just lost momentum at the end of the season, the starting pitchers may have been overworked during the first half of the season.

[miseleigh]

Well, I support the Patriots because a) I like football, they're generally good at what they do, and (maybe most importantly) c) most people around me do too, and it's a lot more fun to cheer at the TV screen with everyone else. I like the Red Sox too, but pretty much only because of c). And because the Yankees suck. (no offense to Yankee fans out there... )

What I find hilarious is the automatic polarity reversal that goes with team loyalty. Everyone around me loved Damon while he was with the Red Sox, and then quite suddenly started hating him when he went for the better option.

The 'Yankees suck' chants that happen at Patriot games (or at random other times) are hilarious too. The psychology behind those could make an interesting study as well.

edit: grammar

Edited October 24, 2006 by miseleigh

[BrassDragon]

You should pick your favorite team based on who you think is best, like I said. If you analyze all the teams and come to a rational conclusion that this particular team is the best, then I think emotions will become present when dealing with that team. For instance, you may become somewhat defensive if another person starts criticizing your team, or your team loses.

Well, most people root for the college team representing the college they went to, and the professional team based in their geographical area. I guess we're more interested in the psychology behind why most people support sports teams, not particularly rational people.

What sterotype would that be?

Well, at my university, basketball players are known for having poor SAT scores and being recruited and accepted into the school simply based on their athleticism, not actually being good enough students to get in (and that's not so hard to do). And today in the newspaper, somebody praised our football coach for, unlike other coaches, requiring men's football team members to have at least a 2.0 GPA. I didn't directly answer your question, but you see what I'm getting at. I don't particularly want to see a group of huge men who go here for free, without academic merit, win a game. (Well, I do like to see the basketball team win.)

[Febod]

Rand discusses (i forget where) that the most irrational sports fans are always from the most statist countries, suggesting that loyalty to sports teams is used as a distraction from an inability to choose values of their own.

As for why people act like animals when it comes to sports, Daniel Goleman covers the topic of groupthink extensively in Vital Lies, Simple Truths. I haven't read it in a while but i remember it being very convincing of why men abandon rationality when placed in groups.

That being said, i think athletes (esp. football players) are amazing to watch. And it's always uplifting to watch anybody do something amazing.

[konerko14]

Well, at my university, basketball players are known for having poor SAT scores and being recruited and accepted into the school simply based on their athleticism, not actually being good enough students to get in (and that's not so hard to do). And today in the newspaper, somebody praised our football coach for, unlike other coaches, requiring men's football team members to have at least a 2.0 GPA. I didn't directly answer your question, but you see what I'm getting at. I don't particularly want to see a group of huge men who go here for free, without academic merit, win a game. (Well, I do like to see the basketball team win.)

Thats probably true in a lot of cases. People who have great physical ability, probably lack more so in gaining knowledge and understanding complex theories. Just like how genius' usually dont have great athletic ability or not nearly as strong as the top athletic players. Of course you can be a top athlete and easily grasp knowledge, but I think its rare. I think the reason why a lot of athletes dont get good grades is because its very difficult for them, and they dont have a desire to learn the particular subjects. So if you have both those aspects present in an individual, below average grades may appear.

But why is it bad to recruit athletes just for their athletic ability? College isnt just for education, it can be mainly for advancing in a sport as well- it depends on the talent and goal of the person. An athlete attending a college specifically for sports probably wont have much of an interest in his classes since it doesnt pertain to his goal. How well would you do if you had to spend several hours each day on something you didnt have a desire to do?

[BrassDragon]

But why is it bad to recruit athletes just for their athletic ability? College isnt just for education, it can be mainly for advancing in a sport as well- it depends on the talent and goal of the person.

I didn't say it was bad, per se, but I hinted at a general sentiment of distaste of the idea of coming to college for free, only to play a sport. I think many people have this sentiment because they don't see playing a sport (full time - and the vast majority of college athletes don't become pros) as fulfilling any rational value whatsoever. Professional sports are a different matter entirely, as they're supported by spectators and such, and those athletes truly are creating the value that's represented in their high salaries.

Having said all these things, don't take me as a sports-hater. I do like watching football from time to time, and I especially like watching my college play basketball.

I would like to see regulations put in place in college sports associations so that sports teams can only draw from already-admitted students, and an end to college-sponsored (i.e. taxpayer-sponsored, at public universities) athletic scholarships. This would make teams more respectable and college sports more wholesome.

[konerko14]

I didn't say it was bad, per se, but I hinted at a general sentiment of distaste of the idea of coming to college for free, only to play a sport. I think many people have this sentiment because they don't see playing a sport (full time - and the vast majority of college athletes don't become pros) as fulfilling any rational value whatsoever.

Playing a sport in college and having it be your main focus can be rational if your goal is to advance to a higher level, and eventually get paid for it. Sure seems like the same thing as pursuing an education in college- youre going there to advance to a higher level of a career, its just a different type of career. And just because most college sports players dont become professionals, doesnt mean anything. Thats due to strict competition. Its similar to an "intellectual" job that isnt in that much demand, not a lot of college students may be able to get that job after they graduate either.

Professional sports are a different matter entirely, as they're supported by spectators and such, and those athletes truly are creating the value that's represented in their high salaries.

The typical path to becoming a professional sports player is playing in college though. College sports players that have a goal of making the pro's are trying to improve on their skills and gain exposure, to give them a better chance of making it to the professional level. How is that different from an "intellectual" learning whatever things he needs to improve his chances of getting the job he wants?

I would like to see regulations put in place in college sports associations so that sports teams can only draw from already-admitted students, and an end to college-sponsored (i.e. taxpayer-sponsored, at public universities) athletic scholarships. This would make teams more respectable and college sports more wholesome.

You have a hard time understanding because sports isnt your top priority. Also, creating such a regulation would just make college sports teams less talented and I dont think most colleges are trying to find ways to do this. It should be up to the college who it accepts.

Edited October 24, 2006 by konerko14