Are true rivalries between sports teams a thing of the past? I have heard that all these multi-million dollar players are all friends nowadays because they go from team to team through free agency and they even get together in the off-season and workout together. They're all buddies regardless of the team they play for because there is no true loyalties anymore.

It seems that the rivalries are between the fans only. So it makes me wonder if newer expansion teams will ever develop strong rivalries over time or if they won't because the original rivalries that already exist were because the players started them and the fans were supportive.

Are true team rivalries dead and how does a new rivalry begin?

Rivalries are not dead at least not when it comes to college football or basketball.

The rivalry isn't dead between the Yanks and Sox

For all intents and purposes, it really IS dead. The players have a new allegiance - it's no longer to their team; it's to green!!

The local tv station showed Big Papi and ARod embracing like the best of friends before yesterday's game.

I read an article awhile back stating that rivalries are dead(in pro-sports that is) the author states that how can you have a rivalrie when you play that team(which ever team it maybe) more than once in a season.

the author poses a good question I think. Now as for college football where 2 certain teams only play one time a year for the most part. That can only add to the rivalrie, with the old addage "we'll get them next year" and those 2 teams end up having that particular game circled right when the new schedule comes out.

Between the fans no doubt. But I don't think the players really care. They are just doing their job and getting paid a lot of money to do it.

I think what I was getting at more than just "are rivalries dead" is, will fan rivalries continue if the players don't care? If the Yankees and Red Sox players in the old days didn't care like the players today would there be a big rivalry today?

And will newer teams like, in baseball, the Rockies, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Rays... will they ever have a die-hard fan rivalry with another team? I don't think so because the players aren't showing the emotion to fuel the fans that love them.

Fierce rivalries in any sport in any country make for the best spectacles without a doubt!

I think it must be all the punch ups

College football rivalries are as good today as I ever remember. There are legitimate pro football rivalries today.

Certainly, pro sports has undergone a financial transformation in the past 40 years or so. Increased revenue from tv, sponsorships, merchandise, swelling gate receipts and corporate patronage resulted in an ongoing tug of war between ownership and players over their perceived fair share of the pie. I don't condemn either side for this. The emergence of free agency, which was the necessary result of the baseball owners' stubborn and greedy embrace of the reserve clause, has also diminished the intesity of rivalries a little bit.

I remember in the late 70s or early 80s when the NFL players were threatening a strike, the players, just prior to the game, would meet in the middle of the field and exchange handshakes in a sign of solidarity. This at the time was bizarre. Football players weren't supposed to do that. It was supposed to be team against team, and this new order pitted player against management.

I think there are still good rivalries in sports. Some endure, and others develop. For a good rivalry there must be an equilibrium of power. Yankees/Red Sox head to head has been pretty even this decade. In the late 80s to mid 90s, the Yankees were mediocre and the rivalry lost some of its shine. Nothing fueled the rivalry more than some of the fights between the team (Fisk and Nettles...with Bill Lee separating his shoulder) (Varitek and A-Rod) (Pedro and Popeye).

Now, there's something that you might have posted in the Ladies Thread!!

I didn't see this. While I believe there's nothing wrong about maintaining friendships throughout different teams, I don't believe in on-field fraternization between members of competitng teams prior to or during the game. The game is to be played to be won.

Even in little league while I stressed sportsmanship as a primary goal, I always instructed my players to wait until the game is over to exchange pleasantries with their opponents. Yes, they are your friends, but focus on the objective and your teammates during game time.

You can be friends and rivals at the same time. Some of the best competition is between friends.

You're just mad about your Warriors...

I'm not mad at anything.

Seriously though, everyone has answered the question of whether or not rivalries are dead but what bout my second question? With todays sports economics is it possible for new teams to develop rivalries such as the Yankees/Red Sox?

My feelings are that the rivalries that exist are only because they were started by the players long ago and the fans rallied behind their own players. When the players retire and the game moves on the fans don't forget and the rivalry continues. Without the players hating each other today how is it possible for new rivalries to being?

You aren't mad about losing your best player? What the hell kind of fan are you?

The Jaguars have a good rivalry developing with the Colts, it's been a little one sided but it's usually at least a close game. Tough division, every game counts and we play them twice a year. It's not Sox-Yankees but they haven't been playing each other that long. The Jags started in '95 (I think), then the divisions were re-aligned in 2000, or 2002, or somewhere near there.

Colts-Patriots used to be division rivals but it didn't really heat up until they kept meeting in the playoffs and that was also fairly recently.

I'd say all it takes is a few years of meeting each other in games that count for something and then you've got a big rivalry where now any game with that team counts.

I was sad, not mad. But now that a little time has passed good riddance to that greedy fake piece of Los Angeles garbage. He was good but overrated. There is a lot about that guy that hurt the team as well that most people don't realize.

I understand, Edge James when he left, and it turned out to be for the best.

And more on topic...Rivalries aren't dead, they just take time and circumstances as posted a few posts back.

Maybe professional sports rivalries are not dead, but they are definitely not what they used to be. With free agency, players switch teams constantly, so there is no sustained rivalry IMO.

I think college sports is the only place where true rivalries are still compelling and meaningful. There is nothing comparaable to Ohio State vs. Michigan, Oklahoma vs. Nebraska, Florida vs. Florida State in college football, or Duke vs. North Carolina in college hoops.

These statements seem to contradict each other. Players change at every level, so what is it about college sports that makes the rivalries better in your opinion?

History.

The rivalry exists among the institutions themselves. It runs throughout student bodies and alumni. these college rivalries also frequently pit state against state. they are like high school rivalries on a much grander level.

I think another factor why pro rivalries are losing their luster is that fans themselves move and live in many different places now. You add to your identity and can associate yourself with other teams.

Also it seems every handful of years a league is realigning. As a Reds fan growing up, the team I was raised to hate was the Dodgers. I still dislike them but it doesn't matter now that they are not in the same division.

College sports maintain because no matter what else I do in my life I will always be an Ohio State Grad and I will always get hyped for The Game.

I go to Indiana State University (Division 3 in most sports), so maybe that's why I don't get the college thing so much. They have won something like 1 football game in the last 3 years too..




I could move anywhere and still be a Colts fan. I tried getting into the Bears a little bit after moving close to Chicago but I just can't. They aren't MY team. I may wish them well and whatnot but I still go out to a bar or restaurant (one with NFL Sunday Ticket)on Sundays when the TV stations show the Bears game instead of Colts.







I guess this is the explanation that makes the most sense to me. And in college football they usually only play once unless it's for a title (right?) so each game matters and the divisions don't change often.

Longneck and I are keeping Rivalries alive!!

Longneck = LOOOSSSEERRR!!!

go fuck a koala.


Uhh, Hoosiers are losers. Go Boilermakers!

The Scots have a lot of enemies, There is the Irish and The Scots, The Germans and The Scots, The Italians and The Scots, The Scots and other Scots

DAMN SCOTS THEY RUINED SCOTLAND!

Yeah real original!!! Go put a helmet and pads on, cause you're too pussy to cop a tackle like a man!!

Ass.

Yeah, cause in the old days they weren't playing for a living, it was rivalry that bought food for their families.

It'd behoove you to read up on the history of baseball before making a reply like that. In the older days, team owners "owned" the players. The players couldn't move around from team to team as they do today. Whether they liked it or not, the players had an allegiance to their team that is not seen today.

Very true SC. Free agency didn't start in baseball at least until the 1970s I believe. And Catfish Hunter was one of the first or biggest names when he left Oakland for the Yankees. Was baseball the first American sport to integrate free agency and the NBA, NFL, and NHL just followed suit?

I believe it was (the first).

What Enzo said might be a little true though, right? I mean players have always played for money, but the difference is that today if a player gets hurt they still get paid a lot of money. Plus with modern medicine players don't have to worry if they can come back and play again.

I can understand why there would have been more of a rivalry in a sport like baseball back then because if a pitcher hit a batter he was possibly taking the batter out of the game and there goes his small source of income. So the batter would get extra mad and fights would start up because he was basically defending his job.

I don't know if that's true, but it would seem to make sense. I guess I'm still trying to find out how rivalries started and if it is possible for new heated rivalries to begin in today's sports market.