A little off-day conversation piece

I now present to you a column printed in my college's student newspaper:

I’m in a dilemma. Even though I’m no baseball fanatic, I enjoy following
the Major League Baseball (MLB) Playoffs through all the late game
heroics, rally caps, and poor umpiring (which confirms my belief that
instant replay belongs in baseball - but that’s a different column). I
like watching because I get to be a part of each team’s journey, which
helps me render opinions on things like which team I’d like to see win it
all. This year, it’s just not that easy.

The New York Yankees advanced to the World Series by claiming the American
League Pennant over the Los Angeles Angels, while the Philadelphia
Phillies took care of the Los Angeles Dodgers to take the National League
crown. This pits the Yankees in their 41st World Series appearance
against the defending champion Phillies.

When I consider some of the other possible World Series
matchups, I can’t help wishing for something else. I would have loved to
see a Los Angeles cross-town
showdown between the Angels and the Dodgers, and I would have paid to see
Dodgers manager Joe Torre take on his former team, the Yankees. You want
drama? Torre coming back to face the team that ditched him in an epic
payback World Series pairing would have been some serious soap-style type
material.

While this matchup boasts a great “I-95” rivalry storyline and a host of
great players and past heroes, it’s been heart-wrenching to bring myself
to pick a favorite. This matchup reminds me of a schoolyard fight between
the bully and the preppy kid. It’s not hard to tell who’s who. The Yankees
have been clubbing other teams over the head with their payroll for years.
Instead of just taking lunch money, they’re enticing other teams’
All-Stars to throw their lunch money back to their old team, replacing it
with a nice big Yankee buffet. There are few team loyalties in baseball
that a few million
dollars can’t drown away.

As much as I despise the entire Yankee organization for its business
tactics, I will admit there are some bright spots. One is their fan base.
My brother and dad, even though they both grew up in Iowa, are lifelong
Yankees fans. Few other teams can say they have such loyal fans so far
away. The way that Yankee players both win and lose with class has been
instrumental to their worldwide fan base.

On the other hand, the Phillies are the new golden boys of the MLB.
Between the heavy bat of Derek Howard, the MVP play of Jimmy Rollins, and
last year’s heroics of pitcher Cole Hamels, Phillies fans have high hopes
for bringing back another title. Perhaps my exasperation with the Phillies
lies not somuch in the team itself as it does with, dare I say – their
fans. I realize that I may need to go into hiding once Phillies fans start
coming after me; if not it means that either no Phillies fans read my
column, or just that no one does.

Here’s my beef with Phillies fans – they’re fickle. Here’s why. A fair
amount of regionally local teams haven’t fared so well during my time here
at Geneva. When the Yankees were not as good, their fans
still showed their faces and were loyal. When the Boston Red Sox had a bad
season, Dr. Haas was still wearing his baseball cap representing his team.
The Pirates have been terrible for the better part of 20 years and I see
people still willing to sport their Pirates gear.

When the Phillies were bad, there was silence. I saw no hats, jerseys,
souvenir bats,pennants on dorm walls, or rowdy fans hanging out in dorm
lounges. Only when the Phillies got good did all that stuff start showing
up. It’s hard for me to be happy for or with Phillies fans whose level of
interest and enthusiasm is directly proportional to how many home runs
Howard has, how many strikeouts Hamels posts or how many postseason wins
manager Charlie Manuel chalks up.

Convince me I’m wrong. Tell me my sample of data is too small, that I just
wasn’t looking in the right places or that I’m just bitter and biased
against Phillies fans. Prove me wrong – not by rubbing it in my face if
the Phillies win, but by showing your brotherly Phillies love when your
team, heaven forbid, doesn’t make the playoffs.

Is it sadistic to hope that the bully knocks the preppy kid on his rear a
few times just so the preppy kid’s friends don’t stick their noses so high
in the air? Hopefully, the preppy kid will at least put up a good enough
fight to prove that being the bully doesn’t always give you the clear cut
advantage. Perhaps the
beauty in watching the fight is waiting to be emotionally drawn to one
team or the other. The only way to know is to watch. Happy World Series!


And now, my response:


I know that this is exactly what you were looking for when you wrote your
most recent column for The Cabinet, so I figured I might as well go ahead
and humor you by defending my fellow Philadelphia fans. I will try to do
so without directly attacking you for your beliefs, but please bear in
mind that you hardly showed the same courtesy for us. I will also attempt
to keep this from being too biased, but, again, bear in mind that this,
too, will be a difficult task (for obvious reasons.)

Now, as I am sure it was merely a typo, I'm going to skip right past the
part where you called Ryan Howard "Derek." I will begin with you calling
Phillies fans "fickle." You support this with the statements about the
Yankees still receiving fan support during a bad season and Dr. Haas
wearing his Red Sox hat throughout a bad year. The fundamental difference
here is that the Yankees haven't had a losing season since 1992, and the
Red Sox haven't had one since 1997. Since 1985, the Phillies have had 15
losing seasons. That's just ten winning seasons in 25. The Red Sox? Five
losing seasons in that span. The Yankees? Four. Last time I checked, it's
a little easier to cheer on a winner than it is a loser. And when
Philadelphia as a city hadn't seen ANY sort of major sports championship
since 1983, I think they have a right to jump on the bandwagon and be
happy for the Phillies.

Your next defense was that "When the Phillies were bad, there was silence.
I saw no hats, jerseys, souvenir bats,pennants on dorm walls, or rowdy
fans hanging out in dorm lounges. Only when the Phillies got good did all
that stuff start showing up." This one is actually pretty easy to defend.
You arrived on this campus in 2006. That year, the Phillies blew a chance
at winning the NL Wild Card in late September. That gave you one month of
exposure to Phillies fans during the time their team was bad. So, yes,
your sample size was too small.

Let's also consider that most of the people on this campus today were not
there at the time. You can't fault them for the fact that you couldn't see
them support their team; they weren't here. " It’s hard for me to be happy
for or with Phillies fans whose level of interest and enthusiasm is
directly proportional to how many home runs Howard has, how many
strikeouts Hamels posts or how many postseason wins manager Charlie Manuel
chalks up." Well, if our interest was proportional to someone's strikeout
totals, it certainly wouldn't be Hamels'. Also, during a 162-game season,
it's hard to always be thrilled about the team, and I'm pretty sure ANYONE
would get more excited about their team the more postseason games it won.

I get the point of your article. You state it here:  "Prove me wrong – not
by rubbing it in my face if the Phillies win, but by showing your
brotherly Phillies love when your team, heaven forbid, doesn’t make the
playoffs." I completely agree with that point. The true fans are the ones
who stick around during the tougher years. But there are better ways of
getting that point across than lumping all the fans together and calling
them out as bandwagon jumpers.

Through many years of reading about sports, I've learned that when
sportswriters don't know what to write about, a lot of them choose to bash
Philly fans for not supporting their teams. So here's my question: Why
would you choose to bash them for actually supporting one of their teams?
Any thoughts?