One of the most common reasons is given by Cleveland fans, who say that Lebron betrayed them by leaving the Cavaliers, and embarrassed the whole city in the show ESPN's The Decision. As a professional athlete, he nor any other athlete is held beholden in any way to the very first team he plays for. Its like the difference between an army of domestic citizens and an army of mercenaries. You can't be surprised or feel betrayed when the mercenary leaves your city, for he by definition is a mercenary and has no loyalty to country, only money.
As to The Decision embarrassing Cleveland, that kind of thing only has as much sway as you give it. I really doubt that people from other cities watched that special and then pointed and laughed at Cleveland. I think it's more that by leaving the Cavaliers, he embarrassed them by saying they were losers and leaving them for a team he thought he could win instead. The really big thing to notice here, is that people every where shouldn't equate the Cavaliers to the city of Cleveland. Maybe the Cavaliers are losers, but in no way does that represent anything about Cleveland or it's citizens. The only people that should feel embarrassed should be the Cavaliers franchise. And in that case, should any of us really care?
I think that people hate Lebron because he broke the archetypal storyline of the hero. Pre-The Decision, Lebron was a young prodigy playing for his native team the cavaliers, leading them each night to victory. He carried the entire fandom's hopes of glory on his back, he single-handedly made them a relevant franchise. And he wasn't a felon. Apparently thats a new standard of achievement for professional athletes. One can imagine Prince Hektor of Troy as a metaphor, a young soldier who led his armies for the glory of the city. When he left, it's as if Hektor left Troy to fight alongside Achilles and Odysseus because he felt like they'd win more often. Its also how people who know nothing about Dirk Nowitzki felt him to be the hero of the series solely because he stood between Lebron and glory.
That kind of storyline, of a domestic hero-turned-traitor, engenders spite nearly universally except in Heat fans (Mycenaeans). People all over hate Lebron because of this.
He also seems to exude personal traits that have been taken in a negative way: ambition, greed for both money and glory, and arrogance. But really, I'd say it'd be pretty hard to find any professional athletes, politicians, CEOs, movie stars, and musical artists that don't have all of those too, often in even greater quantities. I think its more that he broke the storyline, therefore his negative qualities have been amplified past what they truly.
People really took him to be arrogant after his post-game press conference when he basically said that it didn't really matter that people hated him or really wanted him to lose, because at the end of the day he was making millions and they still had their mundane lives to live. That is pretty offensive to say, but that doesn't mean that it's not true. It's like he broke through the fog of people believing that there is an actual caring relationship between professional athletes and their fans. It's really only a one-way street.
I'm not trying to defend Lebron, because I do still think he's an ass. I just think that maybe people shouldn't care so much.
I googled the topic beforehand and here are some articles that give other points of view, probably more eloquently then myself. If your interested.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/735875-why-the-world-hates-lebron-james
http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2011/06/15/why-do-you-hate-lebron-so-much/
The NBA spent the entire playoffs airing commercials talking about how much the players care for and appreciate the fans, so I don't really think the relationship is one way. I think the players realize that they would be nothing and have no careers without the fans. Lebron is the biggest joke of a superstar and when he becomes mature enough to realize the importance of the fans and wipes that smirk off his face maybe people will start liking him again or at least start to respect him as a player. Because despite being the most physically gifted and probably the best basketball player of his generation, he has no respect from me or the majority of fans of the NBA.
ReplyDeleteYou realize that the NBA has a vested interest in airing those commercials right? That by advertising their players and corporate body as being gracious to it's fans they hope that you'll continue to watch and they'll get money from commercials and whatnot. They don't do those things out of the goodness of their hearts.
ReplyDeleteOn a macro scale, yes the NBA would be nothing without it's fans because economically it couldn't exist. But on an individual scale a player can have no fans and still make boatloads of money. To lebron as an individual, he certainly lost a ton of his fans over the past year and yet he still makes millions. He was right in suggesting that it really doesn't matter how many he loses: by being the best hes going to get paid. You may not like it, I don't, but it's still the truth.
I understand that the NBA as a business probably promoted those commercials but the players still meant what the said. Professional athletes, especially in the NBA and NFL, do a boatload of charity work that they aren't forced to do for their cities and communities because they care about their fans.
ReplyDeleteAlso, individually you don't make it in the NBA for your entertainment value you make it for your ability to play basketball. Charlie Sheen would add a lot of entertainment value for the NBA but you don't see him on the court because he can't ball. As long as Lebron stays one of the best basketball players of his generation, he'll always have a place in the NBA no matter how many people hate his guts. In fact, all of the haters that tuned into the NBA Finals just to root against him adds to his financial value for the NBA.
I'm not sure charity work equates to caring about fans. Charity work means helping those in dire need of help, and that in no way encompasses all of their fans. To me, if they really cared about the fans they'd like personally subsidize tickets or something. Charity work comes across as trying to promote an image of being a good person rather then directly caring about fans. Something like meeting a young kid with cancer is certainly admirable, but it doesn't mean you care about the fans. It seems more like you want to help that one kid, and pose for the ESPN cameras that'll follow you.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say that players are only there for their entertainment value. Im not sure what to say to that second paragraph because I agree with you, but the tone comes off as criticism haha. Maybe you're criticizing the other person? it's hard to tell when everyone but me is anonymous.
Most of the charity work the athletes do is for the communities that they grew up in or for the city they play in, which are fans of that player. The majority of the NBA fans are financially stable and do not need help from charity, so I'm not saying charity work is the only way athletes show their appreciation. Athletes are athletes as a money-making career, and it wouldn't make sense to pay for fans to come see them play. That would be like a lawyer paying the jury to hear his case. He appreciates the jury, but he's still in the court room to make money. Also, a very small percentage of the volunteer work athletes do is publicized by the media.
ReplyDeleteI'm not really sure where we're going with this anymore haha. Discussing whether athletes care about their fans? And the subsidizing tickets thing was more of an off hand suggestion, but reducing ticket costs i think would help fans a lot more then either individualized or specific social group-based charity work. I'm not saying make them free, but maybe reducing costs. Again I dont really think its plausible, but whatever.
ReplyDelete