sorry budCelt, but what's the difference?
yes, bibby was foolish for saying this, but i agree with the OP that he was kind of right.
A real fan cheers for (publically) and attends games more than willingly, adamantly, even when the team stinks. Other "fans" are by definition "fair weather".
Regardless, the net result is that ALL fans, fair weather or not, were completely venomous towards him tonight - and while Bibby showed flashes of transcending it early on, he eventually played another dud.
as sheed would say, "ball don't lie!"
BudCelt was right on. Reread his post and you will see the difference.
Spending money for a game should lead to enjoyment, not despair. If others couldn't bear to watch the Celtics last year, I can understand. If they wanted the owners to earn their income, that is fine. Just because I still bought tickets doesn't make me feel the need to declare myself a superior "real" fan.
Bibby's comment was idiotic and Pierce had the best answer. EVERY team has fair-weather fans. But the Celtics still sold out many games last year while losing. The Celtics also had attendance much better than their record.
I also feel that the 'fair-weather fans' are no worse than the self-righteous, judgmental die-hards who complain throughout the game with nonsense critiques of every play, every call, and every coaching decision. I welcome all fans, even the casual and the obnoxious, so long as they don't complain when I cheer rather loudly during the game.
BudCelt I think is only partially right, to me. His description is essentially the description of a "fair weather" fan, a fan who is only there to support the team when the team is doing well. But there's some difference between fair weather fans, bandwagon fans and front runners, but it's like the difference between superstars, stars, role players and contributors (ahh, memories).
To me (and I think to BudCelt, though I can't speak for him), a bandwagon fan is more of a front runner than a fair weather fan in that a bandwagon fan will support ANY team that is doing well, not just one particular team (like a fair weather fan). Those are the fans who went from the Bulls in the 90s to the Lakers in the 2000s, or rooted for the Cowboys then the Patriots, etc. They don't have ANY loyalty to any team, they just want to say the root for the winner. This condition is more likely to occur in a city like New York, where Yankee fans become Met fans and Giant fans become Jet fans and Knick fans become Net fans when convenient and vice versa.
(By the way, I'm not saying that's the way with all NY fans. Obviously, there are Jet fans who hate the Giants, Yankee fans who hate the Mets, etc. I'm just using it as an example because frontrunning and bandwagon jumping is more likely to occur when you have two teams close to where you live. A better example might be some Connecticut people who jump from Red Sox to Yankees when the mood strikes by pointing out that their grandfather was a Sox fan and their Dad was a Yankee fan to justify it.)
Fair weather fans do have some loyalty to one team - they don't root for anybody else, they just don't root for their team unless the team is doing really well. Some call it being a bad fan, some call it being logical and being a good fan because you're demanding good performance if you're going to put forth money toward the team.
As an example, a fair weather fan is somebody who loved the Celtics in the 80s and early 90s, then lost interest when the team started to suck and had no interest in watching a squad full of kids lose all the time. The fair weather fan did not follow basketball much from the late 90s to about July 2007, maybe later. THen, when the Celtics became good again, they supported the team by shelling out beaucoups bucks for playoff tickets and merchandise, to show the team that when they put good product on the floor, they will be rewarded with increased revenue (there's the logic aspect).
A bandwagon fan is somebody who loved the Celtics in the 80s, switched allegiance to the Bulls in the 90s, and maybe started rooting for the Spurs in the 2000s (maybe the Lakers, though I don't think anybody who loved the Celtics in the 80s could actually root for the Lakers, even in the early 2000s when the Celtics were not good). Then, this year, they came back to the Celtics when the Celtics had the best record. It's not about logic, it's about emotional and mental weakness. (there's my judgment for the day)
So, I'd say Bibby was half right - the Garden in the Playoffs is 1/2 to 3/4 full of "fair weather fans" but not "bandwagon fans." The people in the crowd didn't root for the Bulls in the 90s or the Spurs or Lakers in the early 2000s - they just didn't care about basketball until the Celtics got good again.
Anyone see this gem from tonight's espn postgame:
"In the first two games of the series combined, Bibby is 4-for-17 from the field with two assists.
But he didn't back down afterward.
'The people I was talking about know who they are,' he said. 'If they took offense to it, they must be part of it. I guess they are all bandwagon jumpers.'"
Now, while I think he was half right at first, this is the equivalent of "whoever denied it supplied it" and simply shows immaturity on Bibby's hurt and implies that for whatever reason, the Boston fans are completely in his head.