You never forget the first time you get your heart busted open by a team. Ever. A friend was walking through the hallways of a mall in northern Virginia yesterday morning, and he said it felt like he was walking through the largest funeral home ever. Nobody talking above a whisper. Nobody smiling.
“Look, I know the rest of the country thinks we’re the worst kind of bandwagon jumpers because we only drew, what, 2.2, 2.3 million people for a team that won 98 games,” he said. “But I can tell you: I’ve lived here a long time. D.C. is a Redskins town, always will be. But even the Redskins didn’t cause people to fall in puppy love like … this team … did …”
Hey! Are you starting to … um, cry?
“Nah,” he said. “But I am sad as hell. I’m pretty sure I could cry.”
The first time always is the worst time. There was a time when you instantly could guess the approximate age of a Red Sox fan by which baseball calamity first introduced them to the rigors of the struggle: 1946, 1967, 1975, 1986.
There were some Mets fans who thought the triplicate catastrophes of 2006-07-08 were unprecedented; fans of Kenny Rogers’ work from 1999 would have a different opinion; as would survivors of the Terry Pendleton/Mike Scioscia bookend bloodlettings of 1987/88; as would the veterans who remember Yogi starting Tom Seaver on short rest in the ’73 World Series against all logic and reason.
Yankees fans, with their personal encyclopedias of happy memories, know. Yesterday was the 52nd anniversary of Bill Mazeroski’s home run. Any Yankees fan 57 or older still shudders at the memory (and I know someone who refuses to watch “The Odd Couple” movie because of Mazeroski’s inclusion in the “triple play” scene). George Brett’s moon shot off Goose Gossage invokes shivers for many Yankees fans of my age group. Our kid brothers turn the TV off when they see Edgar Martinez in the batter’s box against Jack McDowell. And even younger fans raised on nonstop excellence had to live through Cleveland and 1997, or Phoenix and 2001, or Boston and 2004.
The first time is the worst time. Any sport you care about. Any team you care about. You hand your heart over, and because you’re a fan, a true believer, an optimist, you want to hope for good things. And sometimes you get them: The Mets did benefit from two of the greatest miracles in sports history, after all, in 1969 and 1986. In theory, that should offset the other stuff.
But it rarely does. As a neutral observer, you still could feel what Nats fans would have to live with as soon as Ryan Zimmerman ended it with a pop-up Friday night. I threw this question out on Twitter: “Does it hurt more to be a #Nationals fan than it feels good to be a #STLCards fan? Is it even?”
Dozens of dozens of replies arrived: Not even close. One of the replies was from Jeff Greenfield, political commentator, author and huge baseball fan, who said, “Behavioral psychologists say the pain of a loss outweighs good feelings of gain — see ‘Thinking Fast and Slow’” by Daniel Kahneman, and he’s right on, it’s a terrific book.
Because everyone knows. Everyone has been there. You pick the wrong team, the losses can make you cynical and sour, but even for those folks nothing is ever quite like the first time you understand just how profoundly sports can bring you to your knees. You love your wife or husband, after all. But the one that got away?
You still think about them, right? And never without a strong, bittersweet memory. Whether you want it or not.
Whack Back at Vac
Chris Freeman: Starting in September, sitting on my couch, it has been the most wonderful ride watching this Yankees team (and I wrote this even before Raul Ibanez’ heroics Wednesday). Baltimore is geeked because it hasn’t experienced this since ’97. In all honesty Mike, I haven’t felt this way since ’96.
Vac: We tend to hear the loudest and angriest voices in the room, but I know more than a few Yankees fans who really have felt this way about this team. And it’s good to hear Yankees fans talking that way.
@stwaldman: People who complain about Joe Girardi should be forced to watch Dusty Baker manage games on a loop in the seventh ring of hell.
@MikeVacc: I’ve always said that you don’t appreciate Girardi until you see some of the other hacks who have the same job across MLB. Of course, Dusty is nice enough to regularly underline that point if you see enough Reds games.
Gary Levick: “A Football Life” on NFL Network is excellent. The episode on the ’95 Browns was gut-wrenching and fascinating at the same time. Belichick’s staff: Saban, Mangini, Ferentz, Schwartz, Pioli, Dimitroff, all future head coaches/GMs. What a shame that the Ravens won a Super Bowl with the team that Belichick started.
Vac: The episode on Tom Coughlin was a must-see as well, especially the footage they had of him playing for Syracuse.
Bob Scotti: Loved your “Diner” reference in Sunday’s column. Just don’t know how many readers got it. Maybe you can find a way to get Charlie, Paulie, Bedbug Eddie and Jimmy the Cheeseman in one of your columns.
Vac: Bob has done his homework. He knows the easiest way to make the WhackBacks is to reference “Diner,” and the second-easiest way is to go the “Pope of Greenwich Village” route.
Vac’s Whacks
I May be misreading this a tad, but there are times that I firmly believe the only person in all of New York and New Jersey who really likes the idea of Tim Tebow anywhere near the Jets is Robert Wood (Woody) Johnson IV.
* There are times when they flash to Jim Leyland nervously twitching in a dugout that I find myself jonesing for a Marlboro.
* Every now and again you get TV characters so good and so rich you wish they were real so you could hang out with them. I used to feel that way about Coach and Mrs. Coach Taylor on “Friday Night Lights.” For now, it’s the Bravermans on “Parenthood.”
* Everyone always talks about the “tough” stretches of the Giants’ schedule, but don’t you suppose playing the defending world champions constitutes a tough stretch for the other guys, too?