Team vs. Player Loyalty
The Fan's Dilemma
Should a fan be loyal to a team or to individual players? I think it can be safe to assume that in general, fans are expected to be loyal to the team. But apart from the players that are part of that team, the concept of the "team" is mainly branding: logos, colors, etc. But there is another concept that goes along with team loyalty, and that is loyalty to the players that make up the team. In recent years, since the "Decision" by Lebron, superstar NBA players have been changing teams far more often than any time before, especially given the caliber of stars they represent. This can be explained in various ways, which we will get into in the following chapters.
The point here is that with the popular players changing teams so often, this challenges the traditional concept of being loyal to a team. Without the players, all a fan is left is with colors, branding, and some history. Fans are very likely to be loyal to their favorite players, wherever they go. This is evident in so many ways. The fact that the stars are so much more highly paid than before reflects their power relative to the team's brand. A popular player like Lebron can easily rival the popularity of an entire team in the league. Such is the case with a growing major league sport.
For Argument's Sake
Anyone who argues that a fan "should" be loyal to a team today is being a difficult individual. Let's take Lebron as an example. He has gone from Cleveland, to Miami, to Cleveland, to Los Angeles. In most cases, he was probably hated in the cities he was not a member of. Including his own, puzzlingly, after leaving....but then forgave him once he returned, and then he left again. This is exactly why it only makes sense today to be a fan of an individual player vs. a team because there is too much movement. And the reason for the movement is because of hard-fought rights by the players' union, and sociopolitcal porgress. This is why this should not be used as a criticism against the players who move around. There is, however, a conseqeuence to this movement. A player, or his branding/reputation, cannot argue on the grounds of integrity relative to the past players in these terms. In other words, if a modern player is able to achieve accolades and achievements today, he can not use those accollades in an argument against a similar player from the past who does not have similar achievements. A simple numerical argument will not suffice here. Let's take an example. Not many players can average 35 ppg. Let's take a look at them: Wilt, Jordan, Kobe, Harden. Are they all equal? No way! Extremely different circumstances. And those differences matter in reasonable arguments. Anyone who is arguing such a thing should be aware of the obvious and critical differences between these players.