I think it's a rivaly. The LA fans at the RG games sure seem to think it's a rivalry. Given the way the Blazers have owned their sorry asses in Portland, you'd sure think the players would consider it a rivalry. If the Lakers DON'T think it's a rivalry now, they better pay attention. It's gonna be.
I don't get the "we" thing from many posters, and I'm not just singling Ed O. out, although he is as critical of "us" as anyone at times. If it really is "we", why do people criticize the players on the team, or why not enthusiastically try to pump them up in a positive manner to give them confidence? Isn't "we" a collective term? Wouldn't that mean that "we" are a part of the same team, and that criticisms should bring on a bit of defensiveness when issued by one of "us"? I ask because when I played ball, and if one of "us" had hypothetically talked crap about me, I'd confront them and wonder why they were talking about "us" negatively to anyone but "me".
I'm obviously too high to understand any of this. I guess it's time to light off another victory bowl!
If "we" are part of "us", then no one is talking crap to anyone but "us". Self-criticism is useful. When you played ball, no one ever had a bad word to say? The coach always just said, hey, we are playing great, don't change a thing? barfo
Well, usually I would know if someone was a part of "us", and I'd think they were contributing to the team in some manner if they were criticizing "me" when talking about "our" play. Truth be told, I would take issue if one of "us" took the opposing side on any issue regarding "our" team. It never happened, though.
Well, fans are either part of the team or not part of the team. If they are part of the team, then talking to each other about what's wrong with the team isn't a violation of this "not talking crap to others" rule you've laid out. And if the fans aren't part of the team, then they are just outsiders talking crap, and you can hardly expect to control what outsiders think. So I don't get your beef. barfo
