My $0.02 on the crowd

[Ring 6]

Would you be able accept fans booing if the team had played 4 or 5 games in a row like the Miami game?

Yes.
10 characters

 

[Patslifer]

This entire thread is hilarious. I've never seen fans be more holier-than-thou to fellow fans in my entire life. Undignified scumbag? And you are a moderator?

I know right? What a joke. Some "mods" this board has. Oops! I bet a get a warning for calling out the biased mod.

 

[maryjane]

I agree. The analogy is perhaps, far-fetched.

People who boo at this stage should be taken out in leg-irons. They're unduly harming the psyche of our team.

 

[maryjane]

Your point is interesting.

Fans booing COULD cause a team to regroup mentally and focus.

Or it could just piss them off and make them question themselves.

It's hard to figure how exactly it would work. I myself would be incensed if I were being booed. Kind of "now even the fans are turning on us, we can't win!". But maybe I'm a defeatist somewhat.

There's no way to know, but in my OPINION, in general booing doens't help a team. It just frustrates them more. And it infuriates some of the fans still rooting for the home town guys (like me). For that reason, I think booing fans should be led away in leg irons. That would stop them in their tracks.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Would you be able accept fans booing if the team had played 4 or 5 games in a row like the Miami game?

Yes.

And this admission really does the best job illustrating that much of the division on this issue is really one of semantics.

AJ apparently feels booing is acceptable after 4 games of poor performance. Some feel booing would be acceptable after 2 games - others 1 game.

My personal opinion is that much depends on the situation - if you've got a team with little talent that's losing against the best team in football, it doesn't make sense to me to boo in that situation.

If you're among the best teams in football, playing the worst team in football, and letting them push you around in the worst loss in a decade - that's a different story.

So all of these things, taken together with multiple quarters of poor performance or multiple games of poor performance, all typically need to be factored with one's personal views and expectations.

I'd say the only unacceptable position is one where fans feel a need to demean other fans for having a different view of what's acceptable and what is not.

 

[Ring 6]

And this admission really does the best job illustrating that much of the division on this issue is really one of semantics.

AJ apparently feels booing is acceptable after 4 games of poor performance. Some feel booing would be acceptable after 2 games - others 1 game.

My personal opinion is that much depends on the situation - if you've got a team with little talent that's losing against the best team in football, it doesn't make sense to me to boo in that situation.

If you're among the best teams in football, playing the worst team in football, and letting them push you around in the worst loss in a decade - that's a different story.

So all of these things, taken together with multiple quarters of poor performance or multiple games of poor performance, all typically need to be factored with one's personal views and expectations.

I'd say the only unacceptable position is one where fans feel a need to demean other fans for having a different view of what's acceptable and what is not.

You really need to get over yourself.

Admission? You say that as if I changed what I have said all along, which I have not.

The point is about rules for booing. The point is about THIS CASE, THIS GAME, THIS SITUATION.
As I have said in all the other posts that you chose to ignore, it is shameful that all the success this team has delievered to its fans earned it less than one half of one game respect to underperform.

You say:

I'd say the only unacceptable position is one where fans feel a need to demean other fans for having a different view of what's acceptable and what is not



I say is unacceptable to DEMEAN THE PLAYERS in this situation, because THEY DESERVE BETTER.
What have you done to deserve better than being demeaned?

Think about what you are saying.

It is OK to demean the players, theyhave done nothing to deserve better

But it is a cardinal sin to demean the fans for their childish reaction. Why? What have they done to deserve the benefit of the doubt that you refuse to give to the players?


You seriously cannot be so ignorant as to not understand that this issue is about WHEN it happened, and about DESERVING support, and about how quickly and unfair the support was taken away and replaced with DERISION.
I know you arent that ignorant because you ignore most of my posts, and are showing you really aren't trying to have a rational discussion by are thinking you are trying to win an argument, and proving it by ignoring what doesnt help your side, and exagerating what does.

 

[JoeSixPat]

You really need to get over yourself.

Admission? You say that as if I changed what I have said all along, which I have not.

The point is about rules for booing. The point is about THIS CASE, THIS GAME, THIS SITUATION.
As I have said in all the other posts that you chose to ignore, it is shameful that all the success this team has delievered to its fans earned it less than one half of one game respect to underperform.

You say:

I'd say the only unacceptable position is one where fans feel a need to demean other fans for having a different view of what's acceptable and what is not

I say is unacceptable to DEMEAN THE PLAYERS in this situation, because THEY DESERVE BETTER.

What have you done to deserve better than being demeaned?

Think about what you are saying.

It is OK to demean the players, theyhave done nothing to deserve better

But it is a cardinal sin to demean the fans for their childish reaction. Why? What have they done to deserve the benefit of the doubt that you refuse to give to the players?


You seriously cannot be so ignorant as to not understand that this issue is about WHEN it happened, and about DESERVING support, and about how quickly and unfair the support was taken away and replaced with DERISION.
I know you arent that ignorant because you ignore most of my posts, and are showing you really aren't trying to have a rational discussion by are thinking you are trying to win an argument, and proving it by ignoring what doesnt help your side, and exagerating what does.

Andy - assuming that you feel Booing "demeans" the players YOU'VE now stated that its acceptable to "demean" the players after just 4 games of poor performance.

I called it an "admission" because previously it seemed like you viewed booing in all situations as "demeaning" to the players, and that it was never acceptable.

If you've been clear from the beginning that the Rule of Booing is set at 4 Games, I missed that and I apologize. But have you considered that someone who views it acceptable only after 5 games would be just as aghast at your view that 4 games is acceptable as you seem to react towards others who don't have the same "rules" of booing as you do?

As you know there are no "rules" for booing. You feel that it's acceptable after 4 games - others might feel 8 is the better number and rain righteous indignation down upon you for your views.

But it's really quite silly to set these arbitrary timeliness of drawing lines in the sand when it's OK and not OK.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy - assuming that you feel Booing "demeans" the players YOU'VE now stated that its acceptable to "demean" the players after just 4 games of poor performance.

I called it an "admission" because previously it seemed like you viewed booing in all situations as "demeaning" to the players, and that it was never acceptable.

If you've been clear from the beginning that the Rule of Booing is set at 4 Games, I missed that and I apologize. But have you considered that someone who views it acceptable only after 5 games would be just as aghast at your view that 4 games is acceptable as you seem to react towards others who don't have the same "rules" of booing as you do?

As you know there are no "rules" for booing. You feel that it's acceptable after 4 games - others might feel 8 is the better number and rain righteous indignation down upon you for your views.

But it's really quite silly to set these arbitrary timeliness of drawing lines in the sand when it's OK and not OK.

Are you kidding or stupid?
I said booing ON THAT DAY was inappropriate.
I was asked if they had played 4 straight terrible games would I feel differently, and I said yes.
DUH

Booing was inappropriate because THIS TEAM deserved better. Because this team did so much good that the amount of bad did not yet come close to 'Boo level'.

If HYPOTHETICALLY they played terribly for 4 straight games, it would be foolish for me to feel that way, wouldn't it?????????

When did I ever say anything implying that there is a timetable, that there are rules? that their is any line drawn anywhere. YOU ARE MAKING THAT UP.

Booing is demeaning to players, how could anyone view it differently than that? Its the intention.

Booing is not APPROPIRATE in the situation that we are talking about.
Booing would be APPROPRIATE after 4 straight horrible games because there are no longer mitigating circumstances. DUH, again.
That does not mean an arbitraryu time was picked, it means I answered he mans question.
It is not about an arbitrary time, it is about THIS SITUATION, and there is no doubt any reasonable person sees booing in this situation differently than in general.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Are you kidding or stupid?
I said booing ON THAT DAY was inappropriate.
I was asked if they had played 4 straight terrible games would I feel differently, and I said yes.
DUH

Booing was inappropriate because THIS TEAM deserved better. Because this team did so much good that the amount of bad did not yet come close to 'Boo level'.

If HYPOTHETICALLY they played terribly for 4 straight games, it would be foolish for me to feel that way, wouldn't it?????????

When did I ever say anything implying that there is a timetable, that there are rules? that their is any line drawn anywhere. YOU ARE MAKING THAT UP.

Booing is demeaning to players, how could anyone view it differently than that? Its the intention.

Booing is not APPROPIRATE in the situation that we are talking about.
Booing would be APPROPRIATE after 4 straight horrible games because there are no longer mitigating circumstances. DUH, again.
That does not mean an arbitraryu time was picked, it means I answered he mans question.
It is not about an arbitrary time, it is about THIS SITUATION, and there is no doubt any reasonable person sees booing in this situation differently than in general.

Yes - I'm aware that you said that booing on "that day" is stupid. Try not to get too flustered.

I'm trying to help you understand that Tunescribe and others have effectively stated that YOU'RE stupid if you boo after 4 games, because THEY feel its NEVER appropriate to boo.

So welcome to the club of "stupid" and classless fans who, like you, recognize that there ARE appropriate times to boo.

There's apparently lots of people in the club, though they all have different ideas of when booing is appropriate and not appropriate. I would prefer it if you wouldn't judge others for THEIR ideas of when its appropriate, just as I would appreciate it if Tunescribe and others wouldn't judge YOU for saying its appropriate after 4 games.

 

[Disco Volante]

I saw a guy juggling for 21 hours straight last weekend.

When he finally dropped a ball during the 22nd hour, I boo'd the **** out of him.

 

[Tunescribe]

I saw a guy juggling for 21 hours straight last weekend.

When he finally dropped a ball during the 22nd hour, I boo'd the **** out of him.

Did he "man-up," "dig deep," and heed your booing as "motivation" to juggle better? :singing:

 

[JoeSixPat]

Face it Tunescribe - you got pwned.

Big Ben came right out and said he and the team used the boos of the fans as motivation to play better.

You can be in denial about that if you want, but stop wasting everyone's time with these sort of childish responses.

He hasn't faced it yet Hank.

 

[Tunescribe]

Dont count on it.. Lets not get facts get in the way and if they do try to spin it. Their thinking is too evolved to be dealing with pesty little creatures that present them facts.Spin all you want Tunescribe, but bottom line you were proven wrong. The statement presented by you in the form it was, was incorrect. Only a 'numbskull' like you put it, cant see that. I really doubt you are one but you cant get out of it now so I understand what you are trying to do.

Face it Tunescribe - you got pwned.

Big Ben came right out and said he and the team used the boos of the fans as motivation to play better.

You can be in denial about that if you want, but stop wasting everyone's time with these sort of childish responses.

He hasn't faced it yet Hank.

OK, tough guy. Let's try a little lab experiment with you and your fellow booing enthusiasts: Next time you're at Gillette and the Patriots fall behind, boo loudly. Encourage everyone around you to also boo loudly. Then sit back and see what results it brings. Do you honestly believe that you can "boo a team to victory"? If your theory is correct, the team will turn things around and acknowledge being motivated by boos. Odd how that doesn't seem to work in places like Cincinnati and Detroit. Why do you suppose that is?

And, sorry -- what Roethlisberger said/did is not the rule of standard in how you "want" to believe pro athletes respond to spoiled, ignorant fans. For every Roethlisberger reaching for something to say for press/public consumption, there are 52 other players (re., Ellis Hobbs) who are smart enough to disregard booing for what it is. Most keep it to themselves in the interest of avoiding misinterpretation as being "thin skinned" by people like yourself. Hobbs' view, while unpopular with you and your ilk, was directly aligned with the perspectives of the dozen or so NFL players I've personally talked to on this subject. These men are not liars. For you to simply dismiss what I'm telling you about this indicates intent to remain ignorant. My opinion on booing does not come from myself, but from the players and coaches I've encountered over the years in multiple capacities as a sports journalist, former college athlete, son of a championship-winning coach, and holder of a college degree in athletic coaching.

Don't confuse any of this with what you occasionally hear from players like Vrabel, who may pander to popular public opinion on this subject. For them to say otherwise will only invite derision from fans who defensively maintain that, "Well, I paid for a ticket so I have the RIGHT to boo. Who is HE to tell me otherwise? He's just a spoiled, thin-skinned player who needs his butt kicked."

What mystifies me in all your defense of booing is why on earth you relish heaping negativity on the team you purport to like. As I've said before, no one has a greater stake in performing well than the players and their coaches -- a MUCH greater stake than fans do in enjoying what they see from the stands. They certainly don't need fans to "alert" or "motivate" them by voicing displeasure. If things really worked that way, why didn't the Pats turn things around vs. Miami after being booed? Did the booing not start early enough? Was it not loud enough? I remember the Rod Rust team being booed long and loud, yet it didn't "motivate" more than one win that season. All it did was cast a negative pall over attending the games.

I don't know if you've ever actually played football on an organized level. My guess from your comments is that you haven't. When a team isn't performing well, concluding simplistically from the stands that it's for lack of effort can be naive. There usually are strategic and physical factors involved that transcend any question of effort. And with a coach like BB in charge, I doubt that "playing hard enough" is ever of serious concern. If, by chance, it was, I'm willing to bet that BB would be on it long before fans figured it out. To assume otherwise from a fan standpoint strikes me as pompously ignorant.

So, that's about all I have left to say on this matter. I assume you'll come back with another righteous retort, so have at it, as you appear to be such a huge fan of booing and negative reinforcement in general.




“Booing speaks of nothing more than fickle and ignorant fans. As a supporter you stand by your team, whether they win or lose. You have an opinion and tell your mate they sucked, but you show your disapproval by either not [attending] the next game or by silence. To boo is crass … “
-- Mark Keohane, Aug. 27 2008

"Booing? I don't hear it. I'm too busy playing quarterback."
-- John Brodie, 1967

“Does it hurt? It doesn’t hurt … [but] it amazes me how people react. You would think this organization hasn’t won as much as they have, and been as successful in the years that they have. It’s a testament to how spoiled they are ... "
-- Ellis Hobbs, Sept. 21, 2008

 

[JSn]

Nice piece, Tunescribe.

I posted this elsewhere, but it seems to set nicely into this thread.

Source: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80b53dca&template=without-video&confirm=true

The Patriots had a chance to make a QB decision during their bye week and, as expected, they stuck with Matt Cassel. I admire the choice and agree with it. But now the team is on the West Coast for two weeks and a loss to the 49ers could trigger the panic button among some fans and media. Heck, the fans in Foxborough booed the team in the Miami loss. It's a rough crowd up there and as one coach said to me this week, "They may be a little spoiled."

It's not just active fans who think booing is lame at best.

 

[JoeSixPat]

OK, tough guy. Let's try a little lab experiment with you and your fellow booing enthusiasts: Next time you're at Gillette and the Patriots fall behind, boo loudly.

You're actively encouraging people to boo so you can test a theory? That's somewhat sick and peverse, don't you think?

Of course your righteous statement was that booing "NEVER" serves as a wake up call to a team. Rothlisberger already proved you wrong on that count by stating that the hometown crowd's booing did exactly that.

I'm guessing your "experiment" is designed to disprove a theory that booing "ALWAYS" forces a team to wake up and play better - something no one has suggested. Don't you know that is as idiotic as saying that booing "NEVER" sparks improved play? - and you now know you've been proven wrong about that. (As Hank P. said "you got pwned")

In any event, if the Patriots equal or "exceed" what was the worst loss in a decade and in the history of Gillette Stadium - against the worst team in football no less - I'm sure there will be some booing once again.

Should that happen I have every confidence that the Patriots are as tough, if not tougher, than Ben Rothlisberger and the Steelers and would act accordingly. I find it sad that you have such a low opinion of our team in comparison that you don't think they could be as tough as them.