Get in on the conversation with Alan Grant, a former NFL defensive back who writes football for ESPN The Magazine. E-mail him at alan.grant@espnmag.com, and check back each week to read his responses.

Kevin Smith writes:
What is the psychology of the "fan?" What is it that drives some people to invest so much time, effort and emotion into the success of someone else? I can't imagine my day being ruined by the fact that a well-paid athlete will not earn a Super Bowl ring. If your team does in fact win the Super Bowl, it won't change the fact that your mortgage payment is late.

Having an appreciation for athletic talent is one thing, enjoying sports as entertainment is another -- but beating your wife because of a loss that has no effect on your reality is ridiculous. Give me your take on how the franchise of sports in general has duped fans into thinking they have ownership in a team's success. An insightful answer may undermine your reason for being employed, but show some guts and take a stab at it.

Alan Grant responds:
I agree with most of your assessment. I too have difficulty understanding how a grown man's mood may be affected by the outcome of a game. And there is no rational reason to resort to violence because of it.

I enjoy watching Eddie George run the rock in the same way I appreciate the dancing of Gregory Hines. But do I get emotional about it? Absolutely not.

College sports I get. I can understand how people who attend certain schools cannot watch that school's teams perform without being moved in some way. In that case, the fan has "invested" time, emotion, and memories into that school and its sports team.

But when it comes to professional sports, I've been told it's a case of loyalty. Men like to see how long they can stick with a team through bitter times. When that team has success, they feel vindicated for all the "suffering" they've endured.

Of course I have a theory on that (and though it may sound cynical I really don't intend it to be that way). I think it's easier to be "loyal" to a team, organization, or person that doesn't even know you exist, rather than to a spouse, friend, or family member that actually counts on you.

An anonymous e-mailer writes:
What is your take on the fact that more and more rookies are holding out? If I am a veteran, and one of these punks is coming into my camp after holding out for a contract larger than my own, I would be gunning at the kid every play.

And it is not just the top picks anymore. Quincy Morgan, the Browns' second-round pick, was going to hold out. What has this kid proven in life that makes him think he should hold out? Instead of listening to greedy agents, take a look at kids like Dennis Northcut (another second-rounder) who held out and was never able to catch up. God these kids are dumb.

Alan Grant responds:
Okay, I know what I'm supposed to say here. I know I'm expected to take the stance of the typical curmudgeonly columnist and recite some tired diatribe about how the game (and society in general) sucks because too many young, talented people have a sense of entitlement.

If I were a "hater," one who is bitter and jealous of anyone even marginally successful, that would be my stance on just about everything (you know, like most sportswriters).

But I feel pretty good about myself, so I'll just tell you what I know.

When it comes to contract negotiations, there are more people involved than just the player. It takes an entire village to stage a successful holdout.

Remember the movie Jerry Maguire? There was a scene in which the team's GM hangs up on Maguire when he wants to negotiate his client's contract. Okay, I know it's a movie, but that scene was pretty accurate.

The relationship between agent and GM is, by nature, an adversarial one. When there's bad blood between the two, the player can be forgotten amid the dispute. If the GM doesn't like the agent, then he will purposely delay contract talks until it's too late for the player to report on time (yes, that does happen).

Conversely, if the agent doesn't like the GM or his team, he'll ask for some ungodly sum of money. The GM gets pissed off, there's a holdout and the whole world goes to hell.

As for the veterans' stance -- I'm sure there are some cases of resentment. When Curtis Enis reported to Bears camp in '98, LB Rico McDonald couldn't wait to take a shot at him. But for the most part, it's rare that guys have open animosity over money. Let's face it, everyone in the league is getting paid, so why should a veteran get mad at anyone who gets a piece?

Get in on the conversation with Alan Grant, a former NFL defensive back who writes football for ESPN The Magazine. E-mail him at alan.grant@espnmag.com, and check back each week to read his responses.