The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

It seems to me you and bernstein might be attempting to redefine "fan".

I'm not trying to redefine anything. All I'm trying to do is point out the multiplicity of fan perspectives, and that there is no monopoly on the characteristics of a fan. Bernstein happens to be the particular type of fan who does not react viscerally to sports phenomena. For fans wired that way, I'm sure they'll find his perspective to be refreshing. Others won't, and that's fine. Unlike him, I have no interest in converting everyone to one perspective over the other.

There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.

The "rational" approach to sports has never been the problem

I'm not trying to redefine anything. All I'm trying to do is point out the multiplicity of fan perspectives, and that there is no monopoly on the characteristics of a fan. Bernstein happens to be the particular type of fan who does not react viscerally to sports phenomena. For fans wired that way, I'm sure they'll find his perspective to be refreshing. Others won't, and that's fine. Unlike him, I have no interest in converting everyone to one perspective over the other.

Well, the very nature of being a fan is irrational. The word is short for fanatic after all. bernstein seems to desire that people cease being fans and begin being cold-blooded analysts.

Yes, well being fanatically devoted to one's team does not necessarily bolster, for example, a meatball's case against someone like Bernstein. Both are devotees of Chicago teams, but act upon that devotion in different ways. He may wish everyone approached sports analytically and dispassionately, but that doesn't mean he's any less "fanatical" about Chicago sports.

I get the impression from listening to him over the years that the only Chicago team he is really a fan of is the Bears. He likes the NBA, but he doesn't really seem to be a Bulls fan.

He's a Cubs fan too.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

I get the impression from listening to him over the years that the only Chicago team he is really a fan of is the Bears. He likes the NBA, but he doesn't really seem to be a Bulls fan.

And I might suggest that "dispassionate" and "analytical" are the opposite of "fanatical" in this context.

If you want to say that a fan must necessarily be irrational, then I would say one's relationship to a team is irrational itself, for most of our connections to teams are materially unilateral, and even a fan's joy and sorrow as a result of team accomplishments are entirely irrelevant to that team. So the idea that anyone would be inclined to devote so much intellectual and emotional energy into professional sports, despite receiving no appreciable return (outside of transitory emotional highs and lows) on that considerable investment of time is what's irrational in the first place. It doesn't matter whether that investment is demonstrated emotionally or dispassionately - the investment itself is irrational.

Well, the very nature of being a fan is irrational.

Well, the very nature of being a fan is irrational.

Time was, Terry would come back from vacation and sound recharged with both a bit of pep in his voice and some cogent and lucid thoughts. His return would be convincing enough to merit further listening both of what had transpired while he was away as well as what he could foresee in the near future. He not only would have read a thing or two but also have shared a conversation or gained insight that would make him the straw that stirs the afternoon show drink.

I didn't listen too much yesterday and regretted the time wasted today spent listening. It was as if the Rose discussion had been put on hold from over a week ago and resurrected while being every bit as stale and redundant. These two are the only ones pursuing this tired discussion, replete with no additional voice or sources to corroborate or support what they are saying. They are sounding "expert" only because they are talking out of their asses without any palpable sources, espousing a point of view that hasn't been reinforced by the original source that broke the story, the organization, or anyone who has spoken on the topic. They aren't just in full contradiction of the blog posted on 2/22, but they can't get one single athlete, doctor, or anyone affiliated with sports to openly support what they are saying.

As much as I want to believe they are capable of so, so much more. Maybe they've decided to take the easy route, mailing it in and cashing the checks.

"No one else is playing for him. No one else has to put on the uniform and go out here and play at a high level. He's the guy that has to do that. When he's confident, when he's ready, then he should come back. Before then, he shouldn't worry about it."

I believe he meant if you approach sports in ways that Bernstein often does, then you're technically not a fan because fans are irrational, not overly analytical. JORR, feel free to correct me on this if I'm mistaken.

Using Bernstein as an example, although he criticizes irrational approaches, he's still no less of a "fan" than others because he's committed to an irrational relationship with the teams he follows. He does not call into question one's basis for liking a team because he shares the same basis. He calls into question how one experiences that relationship.

I really don't think bernstein has much invested in either baseball team. But I think if he had a choice, he'd take a Cub World Series and give some tortured answer as to why that is. Maybe I'm wrong.

I think that being a fan by its very nature involves emotion. If that's silly- and I'm not saying it isn't- then a whole lot of people around the world are silly.

As far as the bernstein as Cub fan thing goes, I'm just telling you what I hear. When you talk as much as those guys do, it's tough to hide who you really are. In a similar way, when I came to this board JORR was just a character I had created. But I quickly realized that if I was going to post here regularly he had to just be me.

I really don't think bernstein has much invested in either baseball team. But I think if he had a choice, he'd take a Cub World Series and give some tortured answer as to why that is. Maybe I'm wrong.

I think you're characterizing this as a sort of black and white issue: you're either a fan or you're not, or true fans show emotion or else they're not true fans, and so on.

Going back to Bernstein again, I can remember numerous times where he's expressed disappointment in an outcome of a game. It often comes out as analyzing what needs to be fixed in order to avoid future disappointing outcomes. It's a big-picture approach, not to say small-picture, in the moment type discourse is of a lesser kind (although that's something he would probably say).

As for his Cubs or Sox allegiance, I don't really know enough to comment. I just think Epstein's arrival has him more interested in the Cubs at the moment since he can satiate his sabermatric interests.