The Ultimate Debate continues. I've laid out seven factors that will be discussed individually over seven consecutive Saturdays as I try to determine who is truly my #1 team, the Red Sox or the Patriots. The knowledge component of this debate was laid out in Part 1. The Sox won that battle. But the Pats won the battle in Part 2, as I hashed out the second of the Ultimate Debate factors, tenure.
Today, we'll talk players.
Players
In my opinion, it is the players who are the face of a franchise. The players are the product. They are the reason fans flock to games en masse. They are the liaisons between the fans and an organization. If the roster is composed of individuals who are fan-friendly, humanitarian, and simply likeable, fans will likely find it easier and more pleasant to be sucked in. They'd have little problem latching onto the team with ardent vigor. On the other hand, if these players are arrogant, unapproachable, or downright unfriendly, I'd have a tough time believing that the players' respective fanbase would remain engaged and interested in the team's performance. Personally, I can't justify supporting a group of morons.
Judging a team based on its players goes beyond surface personalities. It also involves the degree to which you relate to a certain player or group of players. True, there is some correlation between a player's personality and how strongly you relate to that player. The general public tends to view themselves as likeable and classy, so they will, of course, move towards players and teams who conduct themselves accordingly. More to the point, if a player is of similar age, size, handedness, or anything of that nature, there will be a natural gravitation toward that player. The same goes for a player who shares the same hometown, birth date, number, or name. For example, Kevin Slowey, who is likely to be in the Twins Opening Day starting rotation, is a kid who I grew up playing baseball against. We went to rival high schools and are of similar age. We were very familiar with each other. As a result, I have a natural tendency to root for and follow Slowey.
The Patriots and Red Sox have both turned out their fair share of likeable players. But which team has had and does currently have the best crop of personalities? Ahh, 'tis the nature of this debate.
 |
| So what if Harrison is the Rasheed Wallace of the NFL? We love his for it! |
Besides Bledsoe, Tedy Bruschi and Ben Watson, to name only a couple, both have done a significant amount of charity work. Beyond that, many of the Patriots players over the years have made themselves available to fans. One memory I have is from my first Patriots training camp. After practice, a large group of players approached the fans to sign autographs, and my wife and I ended up with the autographs of Corey Dillon, Watson, and a handful of other guys. And, again, it's not just about charity work and autographs. It's also about how the guys play the game. How fun was it to watch Ben Coates, Willie McGinest, and Curtis Martin play?
Alot of the credit for the appeal of the players goes to the Patriots organization. You have to figure that they're doing something right. After all, over the past five years, they've brought in two previously disgruntled castaways in Dillon and Randy Moss who were both widely disliked for their antics and comments and turned them both into surprisingly likeable players.
As easy as it is to like the Patriots players, I think it's even easier to like the Red Sox players. It's my belief that Sox players are the easiest to relate to of any other roster in professional sports. These guys have larger-than-life personalities and truly enjoy the game. To illustrate the point, Fenway is the birth place of the "Dirt Dog," a term used to define a player with a particular style of play. No one defined a Dirt Dog more than the term's poster boy, Trot Nixon. Trot played hard day in and day out, did everything the team asked him to do, got dirt on his jersey and pine tar on his hat, and adored the Fenway Faithful.
Trot is only one example of the type of personalities that have set foot in the clubhouse over the past decade. And most of the guys have had the larger-than-life personality. Some of Fenway's favorites have been Kevin Millar, who coined the name "Idiots," Big Papi and his infectious smile, Schilling and his blog, Manny Being Manny, Papelbon and his Irish jig, and Pedro with his Jheri curl. Other favorites who have since moved on include Nomar Garciaparra, Rich Garces, and Mo Vaughn. And now the current crop of guys includes Dustin Pedroia, Jacoby Ellsbury, and Julian Tavarez.
When it all boils down, despite all of the tremendous individuals that have cycled through the Patriots system, the Red Sox have built a culture that seemingly breeds guys with these incredibly fan-friendly attitudes.
And let's face it. Who seems more personable, Terry Francona or Bill Belichick?
Advantage: Red Sox
Next Saturday: Thrill of Victory
7 comments:
I agree with you, I like the Red Sox players more than the Pats players.
Maybe it's just that personality shows through more during a baseball game (face masks hide a lot of expression, which is maybe why we have the touchdown dance instead of the touchdown high five).
Maybe we just get to know the ballplayers a little better since there only being 9 guys on the field during a game rather than 22.
Regardless of the reasons, these Red Sox teams have been a whole lot of fun to watch the last few years, especially in relation to the Nomar/Boggs years.
I'm a big fan of both players, but you have to admit that they always came across a bit on the dry side.
You make two very good points. It's far easier to read body language and facial expressions in baseball than in football because of the fact that football players wear helmets and, in some cases (LT), visors. And in baseball, an entire roster (23) is practically just as big as a starting lineup in football (22).
My only issue with using players to decide whether or not you like an organization is this: Players, in general, are not a litmus test of loyalty. They may be nice guys and all, but for most of them, this is a job, and like all of us they will move from job to job over the course of their lifetimes. Deciding loyalty based on the personality of the players is bound to result in a huge letdown, as they are more likely than not to be playing somewhere else in a few years.
I also don't think you have to like a guy in order to want him to do well for your team. I can't STAND Schilling, and in the truth be known, I wouldn't want to spend a whole lot of face time with Jonathan Papelbon or Mike Timlin, either.
We project on our players the qualities we want them to have.
BSB,
You are not wrong. Basing loyalty solely on the players themselves is a huge risk. Because I'm such a huge Griffey fan, I did follow the Mariners a bit back in the day. After he left, it was such a huge letdown. I'm sure Johnny Damon felt the same way after he left the Sox for that other team.
I do think that players are a big part of why you like a team, though. That's why players are one of the seven factors in this debate.
Well, you have a point, but I think the likability factor comes in primarily if you're not usually a fan of that particular team. I may like, say, the Cleveland Indians because I'm impressed with the makeup and character of their team, but they will never replace the Red Sox, even if the Sox were populated with real gold-plated assholes ala the Yankees and A's of the '70s, or more recently 80s and 90s Duke. You're always going to like-or at least defend-the players on your team
Also, to BSB's point, some of my favorite players ever from the Sox - Carlton Fisk and Dwight Evans - come from an era when the joke in the press was that when the team left the clubhouse it was "25 players, 25 cabs."
The team was not exactly one known for team unity. The players were often truculent with the media - Jim Rice being the most prominent example.
There are plenty of players I'm not thrilled by that have come through the doors of both teams. Randy Moss is impressive to watch on the field when his heart is in it, and while I respect his ability, I still have a profound lack of respect for how he handled himself in a losing situation.
Post a Comment