JerrySloan commented with this in earnest (I think?) response to what I thought was a pretty positive discussion. I deleted it because Jerry didn't use the quote function correctly and it was off-topic.
he psychology of sports generally is there's such an emotional attachment—fans saying we and us when talking about the team even though they are not on the team payroll—because it ennobles them to be associated with the team, assuming, of course, the team is successful. Thus the wild celebrations with a championship. Not only is the team a winner, but you become a winner, too, by association. But I also believe some fans actually prefer their team to lose. Not because they see themselves as losers, but because there's this fatalism about their lives, that things go wrong so often and so often they are disappointed by their lack of success or the success of others that they secretly want their team to lose, thus also to suffer. So they are not the only ones not to succeed. The team doesn't succeed, either, so they can feel somewhat enriched watching the defeat of the team, its coach, its management. And then enabling them to complain about the team or coach. In effect suggesting they would be better at it. So the team has to continue to fail. Otherwise, those fans would also be losers while the team and its base were just another who succeeded instead of them.
fuuuuuuuck off, man.
Ironically he's shitting on the genuineness of fans of a team IN A SITUATION WHERE HE'S BEING PAID BY THE TEAM TO ENGAGE WITH THEIR FANS
I have a theory about some journalists who take paid retirement from the teams they cover...