Style or Substance?

[Farmer Reil]

So, the God of Sport comes to you one day and gives you two choices:

Choice 1: Style. You'll have no guarantees as to the success of your team, but they'll always be exciting to watch, will always attack with style and will always be trying to score (or your sport's equivalent thereof).

Choice 2: Substance. Your team will be guaranteed to win the majority of it's games, and almost all of the games that it should win on paper, but will do so in a very boring manner, scoring very few goals and defending for most of the match - even against the easier teams in the competition.

Note that this is not just for one season, but for your entire life, so you can't just pick substance to get your team into the top league and then change your mind.

Personally, I'd have to go with Style. Partly because I tend to lose interest in things when the team or show I follow becomes popular or successful. And partly because I can't ever imagine Bristol Rovers or the Cornish Pirates *being* successful.

[METALMAN]

Style.

I wouldn't want to win things all the time. As a Kilmarnock fan, I've only seen my team win one trophy during my lifetime - the 1997 Scottish Cup - but because it was such a rare success it meant so much more than I'd expect it would if I was supporting a team like Rangers or Celtic where you're going to win it every couple of years.

[Jam]

Substance, I wouldn't care if we won one nil every week with the winner always coming off Enoch Showumnis cock in the 89th minute, anything to get out of fucking League One

[IAceI]

Substance. More so if you're actually involved with the team/sport than a spectator. If I'm manager than I don't care if what I'm watching is the most boring thing in the world, if they do what I want (be it play a particular tactic or way) then I don't care, as long as they do what I want and it works then that's all I care about.

As a fan, obviously I'm a fan of style as it's more entertaining to watch and even if you lose occasionally, the wins often offset that and make it worth while.

For example when I watch tennis on TV, as tennis is my sport, I love to see blitzing speed, force and winners and aces and that sort of thing. Big hitting, spectacular shots. As a coach I'm the opposite, I like to see the ball go in court more times than the opponent, hitting a winner is just a risk to me, grinding out the opponent and tiring them out is more my kind of thing, although it's not the sort of thing I'm a massive fan of watching.

So I'll go Substance.

[Cactus Drags]

Depends on the sport. Football, I'd definitely pick style, as it's a boring enough game to begin with >_> Same with Rugby/competitive surrender.

American football, I'd go substance, but I do enjoy the old run hard, tough defense style I've seen in older games. Probably substance with hockey too.

[Matt]

Substance, I wouldn't care if we won one nil every week with the winner always coming off Enoch Showumnis cock in the 89th minute, anything to get out of fucking League One

This.

If we could perform on big days, it'd be awesome. I'd take boring 1-0s every game if it meant we won something.

[Farmer Reil]

Enoch is far too close to Eunuch to rely on things coming off his cock.

Edited January 11, 2009 by Farmer Reil

[gunnar hendershow]

Substance in any and all sports. I want my teams to win, I don't care how.

[TheArsenal]

I'm not going to vote just yet.

Arsenal used to have substance. We used to win a lot of games one-nil. Now we have style, but we haven't won a trophy since Patrick Vieira scored that penalty against Man Utd and we won the FA Cup in 2005.

My favourite time was "Substance and Style" from the 03/04 season. Oh to be unbeaten.... those were the days....

[Darloboy]

Substance, success >>>> losing 4-3 every week

[Magus978]

Substance wins matches. Style wins fans. In the end, it's all about winning matches. (Putting butts in the seats is secondary: Who's gonna watch a team that doesn't win?)

[Matt]

Substance wins matches. Style wins fans. In the end, it's all about winning matches. (Putting butts in the seats is secondary: Who's gonna watch a team that doesn't win?)

Didn't Derby have like the 9th highest average attendance last year in the PL?

[Baddar]

That was because their fans enjoyed watching the other PL teams play them. ¬_¬

[METALMAN]

Derby are awesome.

[JSV]

I like Style and Substance (See Manchester United)

[Adam]

Style for me. I watch football (which is the sport Im voting on here as I don't follow any other 'team' sports really) because it's an entertaining game, and I'm not being entertained really if my team is playing crap. Rovers have always played with style whilst I've watched them, and it's brought about a ridiculous amount of success in the last decade. But for instance, if we go down this year, at least we've done it in good matches, playing good football. I've been thoroughly entertained in defeat far more than I'd expect to be this season.

[Toe]

I chose style.

In hockey, substance is what you call the "Neutral Zone Trap". It almost killed the game. Literally. I would much rather see my team fight and win with flash then watch them easily win games, scoring one early and defending the lead.

Look at the New Jersey Devils. They play defensive hockey, and are always a winning team. They always make the playoffs. They don't sell out their arena and they are not a team everyone talks about.

[Turbo Yannis]

Derby are awesome.

I think you're looking for the unpopular opinions thread

[Hajjhowe]

I picked Substance. I really like flashy big plays and dramatic high scoring offenses, but at the end of the day I'd rather have a team consistently in the post-season/title race and I can get just as much excitement out of a defensive struggle than a shootout.

This is basically like asking if you would rather be a Spurs Fan or a Warriors fan