I Hate to Love the Bucks

raferfenix · Post #1 » by **raferfenix** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:40 pm

Why does it have to be so hard? Every year our team is terrible, but the fact that our conference is so lopsided with cruddy teams that we can cling to an 8th seed is expected to make us all happy. There is no long term thinking except for when we overpay our own free agents who do not fit well that we weren't smart enough to trade rather than be forced to overpay.

We hung on to my least favorite player in the NBA---MIchael Redd---past the point when he could even be dealt for an ending contract. Say what you want about him helping us get to the playoffs, but Redd represents all that I hate in basketball, and I think most bucks fans were long sick of the Michael Redd show after all these years and wanted to see something different (yet year after year we get more of the same). This is why Hammond's whine about how we are pushed up against hte luxuary tax and have so few options falls on deaf ears for me. THIS IS HIS DOING! HE GAMBLED ON REDD (now Alan Houston 2.0) AND LOST!

Not to even mention the RJ trade that has bombed out. As bad as Simmons/Yi are, at least they won't prevent us from making the sort of moves teams need to make to win more than 40 games in a year (playoffs or no playoffs). For all the optimism surrounding the change of our hiring a top notch coach and a supposedly top notch GM...things really do seem the same don't they?

Big question for everyone: if the Bucks weren't your local team, would you have any affinity for them whatsoever?

Unless Hammond is posturing with the Hoopswolrd interview and gets it together to put this team on some sort of long term track, I'm firmly in the "hate to love" this team group. I'm starting to think the Bucks seriously do not appreciate or even remotely understand the few fans (especially the die-hards) that they have left.

Post #2 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:50 pm

Fan loyalty in Wisconsin is pretty damn good. We supported the Packers during the 70's and 80's of ineptness and we've supported the Bucks during Kohl's disasterous tenure.

GrandAdmiralDan · Post #3 » by **GrandAdmiralDan** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:50 pm

raferfenix wrote:Big question for everyone: if the Bucks weren't your local team, would you have any affinity for them whatsoever?

Of course not.
Why is that a "big question"?

You could say to just about any group of fans. 99% of a teams' fans become fans because of where they grew up or because their parents were fans of a particular team.

But if you mean if either the Bucks moved or I moved, meaning they would no longer be "local" to me, then I would still remain a Bucks fan in that instance.

Post #4 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:55 pm

I would be the opposite. If the Bucks moved to another city I'd immediately stop having any interest in them. I'd still be a basketball fan, but no longer a Bucks fan.

JoeHova · Post #5 » by **JoeHova** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:55 pm

I'm still not willing to lump Kohl in with Donald Sterling types. For one, he saved the team. For two, he's paid the money, it's not like he's been running the team on the cheap. Even his most egregious "cheap" move, hiring Terry Stotts, only came about because Doug Collins left the Bucks at the altar.

The team hasn't been successful during his tenure, but he at least seems to care quite a bit about the team unlike many owners. If Glenn Robinson had been Shaq or Duncan, or Bogut had been LeBron or Dwight, the Bucks would likely have titles or be on the way to some, imo, and the perception of Herb would be much different.

LUKE23 · Post #6 » by **LUKE23** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:56 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:I would be the opposite. If the Bucks moved to another city I'd immediately stop having any interest in them. I'd still be a basketball fan, but no longer a Bucks fan.

Yep. No way I still waste my time with a team that has been poor for almost two decades if they up and left my state.

msiris · Post #7 » by **msiris** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:57 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:I would be the opposite. If the Bucks moved to another city I'd immediately stop having any interest in them. I'd still be a basketball fan, but no longer a Bucks fan.

I would be the same except I would no longer watch the NBA. I am pretty much a local guy and thats it. I love the Bucks, but will they ever get it right again?

msiris · Post #8 » by **msiris** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:59 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:Fan loyalty in Wisconsin is pretty damn good. We supported the Packers during the 70's and 80's of ineptness and we've supported the Bucks during Kohl's disasterous tenure.

And you forgot the Brewers.

raferfenix · Post #9 » by **raferfenix** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:03 pm

GAD----there is a difference between liking/loving a local sports team like we all do ours and liking/loving other teams.

There are a variety of teams that I like/love to watch in the NBA that I have no direct connection to. If the Bucks were not in Milwaukee though, there is 0% chance I would check them out but to make fun of them.

I like Bogut a whole lot, I think Mbah a Moute and Sessions both can be studs, but this team has been and remains a joke for our inability to both develop young talent and create a core of players who can either win big in the short term or win period in the long term. Every year is a struggle for the most miniscule of success with over paid shot happy primma donnas that clog up the works and deny us the flexibility to make the kind of trades teams make to get and stay good to great.

It's not fun baketball to watch or follow....and honestly, if I didn't have the REALGM boards to cathartically complain and the trade checker to imagine the ways we may get out of this hole I would probably plug my ears, cover my eyes, and pretend this team was already in a different state while preemptively imagining a new team coming back.

jerrod · Post #10 » by **jerrod** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:04 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:I would be the opposite. If the Bucks moved to another city I'd immediately stop having any interest in them. I'd still be a basketball fan, but no longer a Bucks fan.

yep

WEFFPIM · Post #11 » by **WEFFPIM** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:51 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:I would be the opposite. If the Bucks moved to another city I'd immediately stop having any interest in them. I'd still be a basketball fan, but no longer a Bucks fan.

Cosign.

And technically, the Bucks aren't my local team, the Bulls are. But they were my dad's local team, so I guess I still fall into that group.

http://www.last.fm/user/DPF55 · Post #12 » by **Buck You** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:00 pm

I'd be a Cavs fan. But, I really hope that never happens so I don't really want to think about it.

Post #13 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:05 pm

I didn't forget the Brewers. The Bucks have had pretty stead support despite having a lousy team and playing in a bad building. The Brewers support is because we have a good team and play in a great place. County Stadium was a ghost town in it's final years. Attendance picked up when Miller Park opened and is high now because we have a good team. Attendance this year will be good because of advance ticket sales (we actually had higher attendance in 1983 than in the World Series year of 1982). But we'll see where the support is in a couple of years when the current team is broken up.

I often hear that Milwaukee is more of a baseball town than a basketball town. Maybe. Maybe not. The Bucks seem to get a more constant level of support. The Brewers level of support is more tied with how they are doing that particular season. Certainly attendance is up at the BC when the Bucks are winning but given that we have had so little success under Kohl I think the attendance we do get is remarkable. Part of that is due to the economic differences in the two sports. The Bucks are bad because we've made bad basketball decisions, not because another team has a payroll 3 times our payroll.

aboveAverage · Post #14 » by **aboveAverage** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:12 pm

I agree. This could be one of the greatest basketball towns if we had a San Antonio type franchise. You would see Bucks memorabilia everywhere, just like with the Brewers the last couple of years. It always comes down to winning. Give Milwaukee a winning team, hell even a decent team, and we'll give lots of support. It's not that people don't care about the Bucks, you also have to factor in the expensive ticket prices. If the Bucks don't give the fans confidence that the attending a game will be worth the $70+ they spend, then fans won't show up. Even I haven't attended a game this year because I don't feel like it would be money well spent.

It all comes down to winning. Win and we will come.

WEFFPIM · Post #15 » by **WEFFPIM** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:14 pm

aboveAverage wrote:I agree. This could be one of the greatest basketball towns if we had a San Antonio type franchise. You would see Bucks memorabilia everywhere, just like with the Brewers the last couple of years. It always comes down to winning. Give Milwaukee a winning team, hell even a decent team, and we'll give lots of support. It's not that people don't care about the Bucks, you also have to factor in the expensive ticket prices. If the Bucks don't give the fans confidence that the attending a game will be worth the $70+ they spend, then fans won't show up. Even I haven't attended a game this year because I don't feel like it would be money well spent.

It all comes down to winning. Win and we will come.

You could put the Spurs in Anchorage and you'd have a great basketball town.

jerrod · Post #16 » by **jerrod** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:17 pm

WEFFPIM wrote:
aboveAverage wrote:I agree. This could be one of the greatest basketball towns if we had a San Antonio type franchise. You would see Bucks memorabilia everywhere, just like with the Brewers the last couple of years. It always comes down to winning. Give Milwaukee a winning team, hell even a decent team, and we'll give lots of support. It's not that people don't care about the Bucks, you also have to factor in the expensive ticket prices. If the Bucks don't give the fans confidence that the attending a game will be worth the $70+ they spend, then fans won't show up. Even I haven't attended a game this year because I don't feel like it would be money well spent.

It all comes down to winning. Win and we will come.

You could put the Spurs in Anchorage and you'd have a great basketball town.

seriously, if all it takes is a ridiculous legendary level title run to turn this into a good basketball town then we're screwed

Mags FTW · Post #17 » by **Mags FTW** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:18 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:I often hear that Milwaukee is more of a baseball town than a basketball town. Maybe. Maybe not. The Bucks seem to get a more constant level of support. The Brewers level of support is more tied with how they are doing that particular season.

Yup. During the beginning of the '01-'02 season the Bucks and Brewers played home games on the same night and the Bucks had a sellout while the Brewers probably drew around 10,000 or less. This city supports winners.

aboveAverage · Post #18 » by **aboveAverage** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:27 pm

I didn't mean necessarily as great of a franchise as the Spurs, I just meant that winning brings fans. Even something as small as a 5 or 6 game winning streak will draw people to the BC. Imagine what would happen if we actually won 50 games.

THE DINJ · Post #19 » by **THE DINJ** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:05 am

You can get in the door for $10 most nights. Get your food before the game. What do you have? 6 kids?