Should we say 'we' when we talk about the Packers?

Hello there and welcome to another edition of Ask Jon Anything! If you’re a supporter of The Power Sweep on Patreon or Substack, you can ask me anything and I’ll do my best to answer. This post is a preview, so if you want to see all the questions join us on Patreon or Substack and fire away.

RonnieBumpus - How do you feel about sports fans using “we” when referring to their favorite team? I’ve heard some people (namely my uncle, a former football coach) get really upset about it, yet I hear it all the time. I’ve never known how to feel about it. Interested to hear your take.

I don’t have a problem with it, and it dates back to a column Paul Lukas wrote on UniWatch a long time ago taking essentially the exact opposite opinion.

He took umbrage with the proliferation of the word “nation” in sports marketing (think social media calls for certain actions on the part of Packers nation, Bears nation, Lions nation, etc.) on the grounds that “nation” has a specific definition, and it doesn’t include groups of people with a common interest in a sports team.

But the word “nation” has a bunch of different definitions, many of which could refer to a group of sports fans! You’re telling me that sports cans don’t constitute a social organization with a collective identity? If the checklist for a nation includes a shared history, shared interests, and distinct customs and traditions, all often connected to specific geographical locations, sports fans definitely constitute a nation of some kind.

So if I work from that definition, I can’t have a problem with people saying “we” when talking about the sports team they support. The players are just a different part of the nation.

If we really want to torture this metaphor, we could talk about how fans represent the “economy” of a nation, while the players are, I don’t know, the military or something. They’re the ones that are actually going out to confront the opposing nation physically. The front office is the governmental structure, or something. I don’t know, the analogy breaks down pretty quickly. But I’m fine saying “we” about sports teams.

NoMisery - You can go back in time: Which decade of football you would like to attend in person and see the games live? You can only choose one because your flux capacitor was cheap, so choose wisely.

I think the easiest answer is the 1960s. I’d love to see the foundational years of the NFL as it really became the earliest version of the league it is today, both through its merger with the AFL and its growing prominence as a nationally televised sport. There’s something about football from that era that seems extra pure, somehow. Not that the game today isn’t great, but it feels like that was an era where a lot of things were being learned for the first time. I’d like to experience that.