Giants win Superbowl XLII

Why must you DERAIL?!


And yes, I just glanced at that article, and I do understand where you guys are getting at. But these studies don't imply for EVERY SINGLE FAN. Stereotyping is usually more-so correct, but doesn't pertain to everybody. I noticed a line in that story that said when the team wins the 'person' reffers to the team as "we" and when they lose they reffer to as "they".. Which is stupid, this sounds more-so like a bandwagon fan if you ask me.

I just don't honestly see why the over-analytical process about sports is even going on. If fans want to act stupid and bandwagon and waste money on products that the team they like are plastered on, who cares? It's good for the economy, it's good for the city. Quit trying to be so negative and against anything popular

I do however, like the end of the article

Sports fans would answer these negative assessments of their lifestyle with a resounding "NUH-UH!" Sociologists, they might say, like to say big fancy words to make stuff sound bad. If fans want to center their lives on sports, that is their right. In the words of one Green Bay Packers fan, "the Packers are like your children. You don't love them because they're good. You love them because they're yours."

Basically where i'm getting at is Sociologists are just morons who over-analyze things because they have nothing better to study and analytically peice together for the purpose of their study. Basically, it just comes down to...


Who gives a fuck?..

Basically where i'm getting at is Sociologists are just morons who over-analyze things because they have nothing better to study and analytically peice together for the purpose of their study. Basically, it just comes down to... Who gives a fuck?..

Sociologists. Duh.

What you don't realize is that sociologists work in major fields of business and economics. They are not quacks. It is a social science, as economics is. You've told me to "learn economics" or some similar hypocritical nonsense. By your logic, economists "are just morons who over-analyze things because they have nothing better to study and analytically peice together for the purpose of their study." Holy crap that's a terrible "peice" of writing.

Economists are highly more important than sociologists. Finding new ways of how humans operate in their daily lives isn't going to be anything new to us, it's all old and we know already how humans function, anything new is just going to be more over-analyzed information that is in relevence will be insignificant.. While on the evolution factor the Economy is what makes us function towards the future, while our Society doesn't need to be analyzed to the extent that it is.

anything new is just going to be more over-analyzed information that is in relevence will be insignificant..

Yea...no.

These are a couple of pretty good rebuttals: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/ajs/current

http://jos.sagepub.com/

Both excellent and informative journals.

I'll have to check them out. Look, when you break it down with this particular argument, it's always going to be opinion vs. opinion, so you guys may think that i'm wrong all day long, but without somebody to question everything, where would the fun be?