What team has the most bandwagon fans?

I started playing basketball the summer before I went to high school because I got to see Magic play. My uncle took me to watch a Warriors vs Lakers game and Magic was doing his thing. I was instantly a fan...but of Magic not necessarily the team.  I have always been a person that roots for the teams of players that I like and proximity makes no difference to me.  I find it strange that people get bent out of shape over teams especially when they suck.  Having siad that I did feel an oblication to root for the home team against all others except my current favorite.  

Been a Celtics fan since '74

I'm actually just now getting my first taste of bandwagoners. I live in Norman, OK, so our sporting world is small. We don't get many bandwagoners for OU outside of the media on good years, and our NFL fandom is split between the spread of teams in the area (Houston, Dallas, KC, STL and Denver). In baseball it's similar to that of the NFL, but me personally, I took a liking to our subdivisional team of the Astros, the Redhawks (formerly the 89ers). And Stros haven't seen bandwagoners in 7 going on 8 years during their bleak 2005 WS run. But we got OKC Thunder now, and while I don't view Seatle fans as bandwagoners of the Thunder (we are their team too), I have seen a steady fluxuation of bandwagonning. In the interest of the topic, I can easily buy that Miami has the biggest bandwagon following, but I think it'd be more convincing to say LA Clips are the current bandwagon Kings.

Bandwaggon fans are fans that only start rooting for a team when they're good, but disappear when they're bad or even start rooting for another team when their original team is struggling. I don't think a person who's just starting to follow basketball, who happens to live in some random state and likes the Lakers, should be considered a bandwagon fan even as long as they stick to that one team. In my opinion, a bandwagon fan would be a fan that pops out of nowhere if/when a team gets good, or a person that isn't loyal to their team. We all saw a lot of this recently when the Miami big 3 was formed and when the Packers won the SB a couple years ago. There were a lot of people jumping on the Cowboys bandwagon when they were winning superbowls as well. Most recently, I've seen a lot of people jumping on the Clippers bandwagon.

 

I don't think a person who's just starting to follow basketball, who happens to live in some random state and likes the Lakers, should be considered a bandwagon fan even as long as they stick to that one team.

I kind of agree, but if that state is New York, and that city is New York City that the person lives, then there just is something, to me, that doesn't seem right about becoming a fan of the Lakers.  I'll probably get bashed for saying there's something wrong with that, but I guess I feel it's kind of the person's responsibility to root for the "home" team.

 

I signed up here solely to post this.  Before I post my choices for biggest bandwagon "fans", I'd like to make a few notes about my reasoning/rant a bit.

I'm sick and tired of the bandwagon Celtics, Blackhawks, SF Giants, Bulls, Red Sox, Bruins, etc fans.  Honestly, I don't even care about the bandwagon fans in places like LA, NY, etc because they can't claim to have ever really "suffered" through losing.  It's these "fanbases" that have the nerve to make themselves out to be suffering when they didn't even support the team before they started really winning.  Bulls "fans" always mention that they were in the Top 5 highest attendance for most of the past decade but for almost the past decade, your team was solid.  Don't try to give me this crap about "suffering".  You had one of the best young cores in all of basketball in Kirk, Ben Gordon, Luol Deng, etc.  Your team legitimately sucked for a handful of years, at most.  In fact, your team was such a great example of having a young core and building around it that the Sixers actually said at a press conference in 2007 that they were trying to follow the Bulls model of building around a young core.  "Suffering" fanbase my behind.  I don't hate Bulls "fans" nearly as much as the Celtics "fans" though because the Bulls aren't a storied franchise for the most part, and the team plays in a city that has high school and playground ball to rival the likes of Philly and New York at times yet they play in the middle of a parking lot and not in a more "city-centric" stadium like they should and haven't done a very good job of connecting to the actual basketball-mad part of the city for most of their history.  Obviously my own Sixers have the same problem.

Now don't get me started on the Celtics "fans".  How many of you were around before you got Ray Allen and KG?  Honestly, the funny thing is though that I can respect the younger fans much more than the "old school" ones from the '60s-80s' because they've legitimately suffered without a championship until 2008 whereas the "old school" fans saw some of the best dynasties to ever play the game.  It tends to be the reverse with most bandwagon "fanbases" from what I've noticed.  Still, it's an absolute disgrace for a city with such a storied franchise that is located in a prime urban arena to not even show up to games or support the team when they aren't winning.

I don't hate anybody as much right now as I hate the "fans" of the "Original Six" Blackhawks and Bruins though.  How many Cups have they both won?  How many Conference and Division titles?  Yet the vast majority of your attendance history is pathetic, especially recently.  You don't even remotely deserve your teams given the way you "support" them.  Real hockey markets sell-out regardless of team play.  They should've relocated your teams to the Sun Belt instead of those of Hartford, Winnipeg, and Quebec City.

As for the Thunder?  Well it's kind of hard to be a bandwagon fan of a team that just started.  It's really not fair to label people who the Thunder is their closest team as bandwagons when the team has only been around for about 5 years now.  That was the case in plenty of cities, and it's part of a place becoming a legitimate basketball market.  And the Heat?  Miami is Miami.  It's a nightlife and glamour/hedonism kind of city, not a sports city.  What you don't see though, just like in LA, is the kids who grow up in Miami in its less-glamorous neighborhoods who feel connected to their team the same way those in the less-glamorous neighborhoods of LA are.  Those real fans are no different than the real fans in any city.  That's why I think it's important to go by the percentage of the fans who are bandwagon fans versus just how many fans jump on the bandwagon.  It's also important to note that in the case of cities that lost teams and gained new ones (Charlotte, Minnesota, Baltimore, DC, etc), either the fans don't feel as much of a connection to the new team as the old or they're not going to games/supporting their team in protest or out of bitterness.  Charlotte is a great example of this because there was a very real connection between the Hornets and Charlotte but then they were pretty much driven away before having their team ripped from them and then ended up with a corny team named the Bobcats.

That said, here's my list....

Baseball: SF Giants

Basketball: Celtics, Bulls

Football: Cowboys, 49ers, NY Giants

Hockey: Blackhawks, Bruins, Capitals

Oh, and add Penguins to the NHL part of my list.  I can't believe I left them out.  What a disgrace that they were named the "Best fans in the NHL" recently.

celtic fan here... been here for a while... just not as active on the boards cause i have work and a social life beyond the interwebs

This message has been removed by the administrator.

Before it was the Cavs then Lebron moved and now it's the Heat.  These are the worst type of fans.  They follow the player not the team.  I can respect they're a lot of great players in the NBA and they're exciting to watch, but no way in hell do I jump from team to team just to follow a player.  The fans who do this are fair weather and front runners.  Characteristics of a coward and a follower.  Never the guts to make a decision and stick with it.  You cowards know who you are.  Two coach for one is an example.  He used to have the Celtics as his favorite team but now it's deleted.  I'm sure he changed it cause he noticed everyone saw the hypocrisy in this when all he did was give praise to the Heat while bad mouthing the Celtics when they played against each other.  A chump at its finest.  Don't believe me then read his posts about this subject and see how defensive he gets with other posters.  As for Heatmyshorts do I really need to explain to anyone about this sad sack of chit.  He's the epitome of a bandwagon fan and by far the biggest troll on this site.  

Why do you live in Phoenix, but are a Lakers fan? (Just curious, really)

Lived in California as a kid then moved cause of the military.  

I hear what you're saying.  I blame it on the NBA being a suckfest.  Every season, from the very first day, there are only a handful of teams that can realistically win it all.  If your local team is not among those handful of teams, you'll eventually end up either having to root for another team as well or following hockey (yuck) until baseball season.  And when you root for another team, without any relatable tie to that team such as if that team was the local representation (geographical tie), there's not much holding people back from hopping from team to team because there's no sense of loyalty there for those teams.

Look at the contents of this forum.  You'd think there were only two teams in the NBA and only two players playing on those teams.  It's disgusting.  Look at the nutpolishers.  You find a lot of them are neither from Florida or from Southern California.  One would wonder what's wrong with these folks' own local teams...except we already know what's wrong.  It's because the NBA sucks and is ludicrously imbalanced in almost every respect.

I proposed in another post that all playoff series be reduced to best of 5 (hey, March Madness is single elimination).  That increases the odds of upsets, and I think that's what the NBA needs.  I believe every team should have a realistic chance of basking prominently in the sun within a generation or two.  That's how you get people excited about and build their loyalty to their local teams, and that excitement and loyalty gets passed down to the next generations.

That's crap.  There hasn't been a legitimate dynasty in the NBA since at the most recently, the Lakers in the early 2000s.  Even that is questionable.  Everybody is beatable these days.  Everybody has a shot, if they're smart enough to develop their players and create an actual team.  There has never been as much talent as there is now, and the growth of basketball worldwide makes that talent pool expand even further.  Dudes drop 40 and even 50 in a game at one point and yet people say they can't score?  Why?  Because they're not the favored players of those who don't know anything about basketball.  Fantasy basketball, blogs, and statheads have gotten a lot of people hypnotized these days.

Oh, and hockey is a damn fine sport.  Those guys are the absolute toughest athletes in the world.  No other athletes would lay down and deliberately try to stop a puck moving at a high rate of speed with their body and even their face.

Actually, you build loyalty by losing but playing hard and giving effort.  Then your fans aren't spoiled or more likely to be fair-weather fans because if they were then they would've jumped off a long time ago.  Either that or you do your best to connect with the city.

That's absolute crap.  The last dynasty in the NBA was, at the most recent, the Lakers of the early 2000s.  Even that is debatable.  Everybody is beatable these days.  Everybody has a shot, if you develop your players and create an actual team.  There has never been as much talent as there is right now, and the worldwide growth of basketball only adds to that talent pool.  Every team has a chance, almost every off-season, to solidify itself and improve.  Most of them simply don't have a clue what they are doing though, and they never develop their players or they try to turn their players into something they're not.

Oh, and hockey is a damn fine sport, and those players are the toughest athletes in the world.  No other athletes would deliberately lay down to block a shot by taking a puck that is traveling at a high rate of speed to their body and even to their face.  They take a puck to the head, maybe even have their forehead pouring blood, and still come back out to finish the game.

Lastly, you build loyalty by losing but playing hard and giving effort.  That keeps your fans from being spoiled and less likely to be fair-weather.  That or you do a good job of connecting with your city.  I've been a fan of the Sixers since the days of Clarence Weatherspoon.  That's what real loyalty to a team is.  You suffer through the bad times because it's your team.

You suffer through the bad times because it's your team.

Gotta agree with you there.  For at least the people living in or around a basketball city, fans should take ownership of their team.  It's their responsibility to root for that team that is in their respective geographic area.  Sure, there are always exceptions, like growing up in SoCal, and later moving to Phoenix, yet maintaining the Lakers as their rooting interest.  Also, if you live in West Virginia or Alabama you can't really have a "local" team, so the general rule is to select a team and, most importantly, stick with that team.

 

Only 7 teams have won the NBA championship in the last 20 years.  If Jordan hadn't taken a hiatus, it might have been 6 in 20 years.  The NFL has had 12 teams win it in the last 20 years.  MLB has had 11 teams win it in the last 19 years (1 season out of the last 20 was a lockout).  The NHL has had 13 in the last 19 years (1 season out of the last 20 was cancelled).

And when you keep going back for the NBA, it doesn't get much better.  Only 8 teams have won it in 30 years.  Only 12 in 40 years.

I think the tight concentration of rings in the NBA as compared to the other major sports is a bit overrated as an "issue". It's easy to see how it could happen with much smaller rosters. When you only have 7-8 guys making an impact, it's easier for the great teams to stay great.

TruePhillyPhan,

     I have to disagree with you re: Celtics fans. I agree that the Celtics fans are arguably the most annoying fanbase (I can't think of another fanbase that likes to blame the refs for EVERY SINGLE LOSS the way Celtics fans do), but they are also very loyal (twocoach being the exception that proves the rule. LOL!!).

     Also, how do you figure that only the newer/younger Celtics fans "suffered" through down years? Did the folks who were fans of the team from the 60's-80's not also suffer through the Celtics 20+ seasons between championships? I'd wager that they actually suffered more than the younger fans. After all, they saw all of the success of the 60's-80's and then had watch their beloved team be rendered irrelevant for over 2 decades. The younger fans only knew the bad times until they finally won again in 2008.

[]