Are soccer fans the same as NBA fans when it comes to stanning players instead of teams?

[Soldier]

Its well known that many nba fans are stanning players rather than teams. Bron Stan’s are bandwagon/temporary lakers Fans just like they were bandwagon/temporary cavs and heat Fans many seasons ago. They follow him everywhere he goes. Many nba fans are Following their favorite players from team to team- suddenly becoming temporary fans of teams just because their idol signed with them . Do soccer fans behave the same way? Is the Ronaldo vs Messi debate the soccer version of the MJ vs Kobe vs Bron debates?

 

[TallMan_J]

I am, admittedly. I only like certain Football/Soccer players individually. I don’t support any particular club/team. I’ll cheer for a team that has a player that I rock with.

I cheered for France because of Mbappè and for that reason only.

 

[2legit]

Soccer fans will watch their favorite team get relegated to the 3rd division and still support their team. Don't ever compare Soccer fans to NBA fans.

 

[br82186]

Yes and no. While there are certain players people gravitate to, they ride and die with their club.

There really is (maybe a small amount) no such thing as bangwagoners when it comes to clubs

 

[Remote]

Sports fans overall are becoming less-tied to their hometown teams than ever before.

In part because:

1. You have the ability to see more teams and players. In the old days before cable tv and sports tv networks (think the Yankees and YES Network) you only saw your local team. You got the chance to watch national games once or twice a week. Now you can watch any team at any time through cable, streaming or even browsing highlights online. That broader exposure lets you expand your fandom.

2. Certainly fantasy sports and DFS (Fanduel. DraftKings, etc) have allowed fans to have a greater interest in players they normally wouldn't follow in years past. You might want the Lakers to win, but if your GPP builds routinely have Kevin Durant in them, you're going to check out more Suns games than you might otherwise have. And you may come to respect and root for and appreciate that player even though he doesn't play for your home team.

3. Free Agency played some part in it. This isn't the old days where athletes were largely restricted to the teams that drafted and developed them. While this board has this romantic view that players of yesterday stayed with 1 team out of loyalty and a fierce competitive spirit to win it for the home team, the reality is they simply didn't really have the options or power to control their own destiny. Sure, some of the highest profile superstars could put more pressure in this area. But most everyone else couldn't. The fact that players today have more power to choose where they want to play, and have the ability to get fair market value means they're going to move around. What that means is that when they do move around, other fans will be exposed to that player's skill and greatness. And any old fans of that player may still remain fans....or may even become bigger fans of them should that player succeed in a better team environment.


There is nothing wrong with stanning 1 team. But there's also nothing wrong with stanning a player who might not play for your team. Because if you love the game, what's the difference? Why would it be wrong to root for Jimmy Butler or Giannis Antetokounmpo if you're a Nuggets fan, but still root for the Nuggets to win if they played each other?

I don't understand why some people act like both can't exist.

 

[Soldier]

Sports fans overall are becoming less-tied to their hometown teams than ever before.

In part because:

1. You have the ability to see more teams and players. In the old days before cable tv and sports tv networks (think the Yankees and YES Network) you only saw your local team. You got the chance to watch national games once or twice a week. Now you can watch any team at any time through cable, streaming or even browsing highlights online. That broader exposure lets you expand your fandom.

2. Certainly fantasy sports and DFS (Fanduel. DraftKings, etc) have allowed fans to have a greater interest in players they normally wouldn't follow in years past. You might want the Lakers to win, but if your GPP builds routinely have Kevin Durant in them, you're going to check out more Suns games than you might otherwise have. And you may come to respect and root for and appreciate that player even though he doesn't play for your home team.

3. Free Agency played some part in it. This isn't the old days where athletes were largely restricted to the teams that drafted and developed them. While this board has this romantic view that players of yesterday stayed with 1 team out of loyalty and a fierce competitive spirit to win it for the home team, the reality is they simply didn't really have the options or power to control their own destiny. Sure, some of the highest profile superstars could put more pressure in this area. But most everyone else couldn't. The fact that players today have more power to choose where they want to play, and have the ability to get fair market value means they're going to move around. What that means is that when they do move around, other fans will be exposed to that player's skill and greatness. And any old fans of that player may still remain fans....or may even become bigger fans of them should that player succeed in a better team environment.


There is nothing wrong with stanning 1 team. But there's also nothing wrong with stanning a player who might not play for your team. Because if you love the game, what's the difference? Why would it be wrong to root for Jimmy Butler or Giannis Antetokounmpo if you're a Nuggets fan, but still root for the Nuggets to win if they played each other?

I don't understand why some people act like both can't exist.

Total Free agency in sports is a recent phenomenon. The first league to allow players to become free agents and sign with the team of their choice was the mlb in the early to mid 1970s. Then the nhl, nba and nfl followed suit much later in the mid-1990s. Until the 1970s players were literally owned by the teams for the entirety of their career. Back then sports teams were not the billion dollar entities they are now. They operated more like local mom and pop stores and small businesses. So owners were cheap on players salaries and athletes were paid way under their market value(free agency is pure free market capitalism applied in sports) and were traded like cattle to other teams without their consent. Players of the past never had the freedom, fame, money, no trade clauses, bird rights no full movement clauses, endorsements/sponsorship deals and leverage of current modern athletes. Average/bench players now earn 100 times more money than 1950s/1960s era superstars.

 

[yseJ]

You got it backwards. Soccer fans passion is pure fanatism for their team. They don't give a shyt about a single guy.

 

[Blessings]

I know a lot of African and Asian fans who would stan for their national team players (for example rooting for Atalanta because of Lookman, and Napoli because of Osimhen)

 

[Professor Emeritus]

lol at the idea that soccer fans don't stan players when Beckham, Ronaldo, and Messi are some of the most stanned sports figures in history. Christian Ronaldo has 600 million followers off the strength of Portugal and Al Nassr fans? Everyone who rooted for Argentina in the last World Cup is gonna keep doing it when Messi leaves? People don't get crazy excited when their favorite local player signs with a big club and start stanning that club until he leaves?

 

[Kunty McPhuck]

lol at the idea that soccer fans don't stan players when Beckham, Ronaldo, and Messi are some of the most stanned sports figures in history. Christian Ronaldo has 600 million followers off the strength of Portugal and Al Nassr fans? Everyone who rooted for Argentina in the last World Cup is gonna keep doing it when Messi leaves? People don't get crazy excited when their favorite local player signs with a big club and start stanning that club until he leaves?

Majority of those soccer stan player fans are generally from countries who don't have a strong soccer tradition so they will piggyback. They are the ones changing teams once their player leaves. I assume the OP is talking mainly about US NBA fans that shyt doesnt really happen in footballing strong hold countries tbh and if it is its new age young social media fans.

Then you have the *insert country * national team fans who will support/follow their fellow country people where ever they go. But usually they already have their team.

And then you have the Love of the Game fans who will watch any match anytime. The types to watch lower quality 4th tier football to get their fix.

 

[Gangstar8]

That's only Bron stans

They are the worst

 

[FukkaPaidEmail]

Lmao hell naw

Total opposite

 

[moli70]

Definitely less. If you're from an European country that has a long tradition in soccer you're usually do or die for your local team and don't give a shyt about other players. Then there are more casual fans who may not be into the local team but even those are usually more stans of a team (Asians who are into Liverpool or Man Utd etc) and less of a single players.

 

[StraxStrax]

lol at the idea that soccer fans don't stan players when Beckham, Ronaldo, and Messi are some of the most stanned sports figures in history. Christian Ronaldo has 600 million followers off the strength of Portugal and Al Nassr fans? Everyone who rooted for Argentina in the last World Cup is gonna keep doing it when Messi leaves? People don't get crazy excited when their favorite local player signs with a big club and start stanning that club until he leaves?

Outside of maybe 5-6 players in the history of the game people don't stan players if they've never played with their fav. team. Also because football is international so many people have fav. clubs in different countries.

 

[Grand Conde]

People don't get crazy excited when their favorite local player signs with a big club and start stanning that club until he leaves?

...no?