Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

    Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
    The word thug has a negative conotation not racial undertones. The word itself is not racist. Modern day black culture has adopted the word as a way of identity. This also happened with the Italian and Irish gangs. Its a way of social evolution.
    In the Italian culture, at least, thug was not adopted as a positive term. Other words were adopted, none of which implied violence until after their use.
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

      Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
      IMO, the word thug has a negative conotation not racial undertones. The word itself is not racist. Modern day black culture has adopted the word as a way of identity. This also happened with the Italian and Irish gangs. Its a way of social evolution.
      Fixed!!!!

      Not all words are continued to be used to their dictionary definition in modern cultures. I guess we all have our ways of looking at things, but it is real hard for me to see the word thug used without the racial undertones.
      Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 03-12-2008, 10:02 AM.
      ...Still "flying casual"
      @roaminggnome74

      Comment


      • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

        Back to the original topic for a minute.

        I was listening to 1070 The Fan yesterday and Kravitz and Eddie were throwing Benner so far under the bus he is unlikely to see saylight for years.

        I was actually pretty proud of them for doing that.

        Then Jersey Johnnie cam on and took it a step further.

        He related an incident from the years that the Colts were having problems with attendance, and a discussion he had with Benner at that time.

        What was Benner's reply to Jersey's concerns about the low attendance?

        "Why would people pay to see bad football being played?"

        Judging by that, it would appear Benner speaks out of both sides of his mouth.

        Comment


        • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

          Originally posted by Wu-Gambino View Post
          For hosting big sporting events and conventions, definitely. But when it comes to actual fan support, that's a whole different story.
          What's the test? Attendance?

          Is the test of the "true sports town" a packed house regardless of the competitive level of the team?

          When Indy teams make playoff runs the arenas are loud and packed.

          Contrast that with Los Angeles in football or Atlanta in anything and I don't see this as such a bad sports town.

          When I moved here 15 years ago I could walk up to the dome and buy tickets game day. Fans didn't know when to cheer and when to be quiet.

          In the time I've been here the Pacers had a decade of playoff runs, made the finals, the Colts won a championship, Nascar came to town, Roy Jones fought here, etc etc.

          If you're whole point is attendance should never drop then so be it.

          I guess it's relative. To some of the places I've lived this is a great sports town.

          Comment


          • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

            Originally posted by Tom White View Post
            Back to the original topic for a minute.

            I was listening to 1070 The Fan yesterday and Kravitz and Eddie were throwing Benner so far under the bus he is unlikely to see saylight for years.

            I listened to it for as long as I could stomach it. I thought they were completely misrepresenting what Bill Benner had written. They kept asking, "do you blame the fans for the current Pacers situation" as if that was what Benner suggested. I had to turn it off

            Comment


            • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

              Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
              Did anyone call Jason Williams a thug?
              I did.

              Comment


              • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                Is that "Pistol Pete" Jason Williams or shotgun Jason Williams?

                Comment


                • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I listened to it for as long as I could stomach it. I thought they were completely misrepresenting what Bill Benner had written. They kept asking, "do you blame the fans for the current Pacers situation" as if that was what Benner suggested. I had to turn it off
                  I agree. It was pathetic. Classic strawman. I think the case I made in this thread already is dead on, I've heard nothing ever to refute it legitmately.

                  Take these Pacers TOTALLY OUT OF THE EQUATION. Okay, no Ron, Jack, "incidents".

                  Now explain why fans (and Kravitz at times) dismissed the Manning Colts or the Reggie Pacers, because they did. Not only did they not fill up the stadiums, they would snark-off with things like "oh, they'll never win the big one...they suck" (because those things are equivilent after all).

                  My go-to with the Pacers is "Smits is a clown" which I had to listen to during his 3rd or 4th year from some loudmouth behind us at a game. And I cite the half empty arena for Dale's first game after his holdout ended (remember the days of rookie holdouts?).

                  HISTORY, the fanbase can't escape their utter disdain for Reggie, Rik, Dale, Detlef, Chuck or Manning, Dungy, Harrison, Edge, etc. They had to be shown right to the front step of ultimate victory before they could come out and root for the team.

                  These fans had little interest in a team that was on its way to the ECF. Go 20 games prior to the end of that season and look at all the sell-outs, or lack thereof. The product speaks for itself, that team was game 7 ECF caliber, good guys, good teamwork. "Hoosiers", as in the film version, would have recognized that talent.

                  By my count there are about 7-10K of those. The rest had to see 2 ECF runs before they started to think "hey, these guys might win", as if Detlef winning back-to-back 6th man awards along side Reggie was not enough to interest them.


                  So here we are again with a bunch of yahoos who won't get anywhere near Dun, Diener, Troy, Danny, etc but will be yelling at the parade 6 years from now when Danny says "greatest fans in the world" at the title celebration.

                  There they'll be saying "I was with them all the time, I knew he could do it."

                  I'm bitter, I say GTF on the bandwagon now. The team isn't winning, but the product in terms of character and effort is all you can ask for, if that's really the factor holding you back.


                  I've said it before, the number 1 thing to make the point on unacceptable players is to show up when they sit and pass on games when they play. 15K to 6K from night to night would more than make a point and that player would be forced to sit.

                  Imagine if all month people were out cheering Dun/Dan and then suddenly Tins returns and 2K are there, tumbleweeds and crickets. They'd know what was up and it would GIVE THEM AN OPTION, which is to sit him and play the guys you want out there.

                  If you don't go at all then there is no option. They might as well play Tins now if you aren't going anyway. Heck, why keep Shawne out. Let his buddy play if he's out on bail even.

                  Comment


                  • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                    Urban called, it wants to talk about words with no connotation.

                    Hey, I live downtown, I'm urban, right? Urban music means people like me writing folk songs; urban culture is cookouts and dog walking and painting the kitchen and Pottery Barn catalogs.

                    There's technical definitions and then there's implied usage.

                    Comment


                    • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                      Look at Indy and the past 20 years whom have fans embraced? Peyton Manning, Reggie Miller, Jim Harbaugh, Marshall Faulk, the Davis boys, Rik Smits, Dwight Freeney, Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, etc.
                      Harbaugh 96, bandwagon over, mid-95 wagon not started.

                      5000 Titans fans for a playoff game, who was QB?

                      Pacers lose game 4 in MSA to the Knicks, lose game 3 to the Pistons...packed house?

                      They DON'T embrace "good guys" if they don't win. "Winning" is a virtue to this fanbase. Dungy was bad guy for not being able to get over the hump. It was time for him to go. Win the SB and it's "what a great guy". And it's not like his teams were 4-12 either.

                      Smits and his feet were thrown under the bus as much as JO is now. Fans were disgusted with him, and that wasn't just early in his career.


                      Using apathetic Atlanta or LA is not a good benchmark.


                      Mike Tirico (sp) said that the Big Ten Tourney belonged in Indianapolis and should ALWAYS be played there.
                      Not too shabby for a town that can't support sports.
                      You've just mixed points. As a city for VISITORS it's great. Good layout, easy to move around in, not too big or expensive. It's intentionally designed to be crowd friendly for the convention business.

                      Not unlike how IMS was one of the most popular international venues for F1. I spoke to tons of foreign visitors and they all loved coming here because it was so easy to deal with. That has 100% nothing to do with the local fanbase supporting F1 or not.

                      If it did then the Brickyard attendence wouldn't dwarf F1, and the 500 wouldn't see horrible attendence prior to race day.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-12-2008, 03:00 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        I agree. It was pathetic. Classic strawman. I think the case I made in this thread already is dead on, I've heard nothing ever to refute it legitmately.

                        Take these Pacers TOTALLY OUT OF THE EQUATION. Okay, no Ron, Jack, "incidents".

                        Now explain why fans (and Kravitz at times) dismissed the Manning Colts or the Reggie Pacers, because they did. Not only did they not fill up the stadiums, they would snark-off with things like "oh, they'll never win the big one...they suck" (because those things are equivilent after all).

                        My go-to with the Pacers is "Smits is a clown" which I had to listen to during his 3rd or 4th year from some loudmouth behind us at a game. And I cite the half empty arena for Dale's first game after his holdout ended (remember the days of rookie holdouts?).

                        HISTORY, the fanbase can't escape their utter disdain for Reggie, Rik, Dale, Detlef, Chuck or Manning, Dungy, Harrison, Edge, etc. They had to be shown right to the front step of ultimate victory before they could come out and root for the team.

                        These fans had little interest in a team that was on its way to the ECF. Go 20 games prior to the end of that season and look at all the sell-outs, or lack thereof. The product speaks for itself, that team was game 7 ECF caliber, good guys, good teamwork. "Hoosiers", as in the film version, would have recognized that talent.

                        By my count there are about 7-10K of those. The rest had to see 2 ECF runs before they started to think "hey, these guys might win", as if Detlef winning back-to-back 6th man awards along side Reggie was not enough to interest them.


                        So here we are again with a bunch of yahoos who won't get anywhere near Dun, Diener, Troy, Danny, etc but will be yelling at the parade 6 years from now when Danny says "greatest fans in the world" at the title celebration.

                        There they'll be saying "I was with them all the time, I knew he could do it."

                        I'm bitter, I say GTF on the bandwagon now. The team isn't winning, but the product in terms of character and effort is all you can ask for, if that's really the factor holding you back.


                        I've said it before, the number 1 thing to make the point on unacceptable players is to show up when they sit and pass on games when they play. 15K to 6K from night to night would more than make a point and that player would be forced to sit.

                        Imagine if all month people were out cheering Dun/Dan and then suddenly Tins returns and 2K are there, tumbleweeds and crickets. They'd know what was up and it would GIVE THEM AN OPTION, which is to sit him and play the guys you want out there.

                        If you don't go at all then there is no option. They might as well play Tins now if you aren't going anyway. Heck, why keep Shawne out. Let his buddy play if he's out on bail even.
                        You do realize Benner is talking to you too?

                        Comment


                        • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          I agree. It was pathetic. Classic strawman. I think the case I made in this thread already is dead on, I've heard nothing ever to refute it legitmately.
                          Perhaps not in your own mind or opinion, but those making opposing opinions have as much right to their own definition of "legit".

                          HISTORY, the fanbase can't escape their utter disdain for Reggie, Rik, Dale, Detlef, Chuck or Manning, Dungy, Harrison, Edge, etc.
                          What?

                          I've said it before, the number 1 thing to make the point on unacceptable players is to show up when they sit and pass on games when they play. 15K to 6K from night to night would more than make a point and that player would be forced to sit.
                          That is all well and good, but you don't always know when a player is going to be bench-ridden. Example: Williams did not play vs. the Sonics last night.


                          Let me just put this idea to you, and see if you agree.

                          We all (here at PD) care. We may disagree about what is wrong, who is to blame, what to do about it, etc..

                          But we all care. Otherwise, we wouldn't see all these posts with so much passion behind them.

                          Simply, we all care or we would not be here. I think sometimes we all tend to forget that.

                          We also all have a right to support the current team (or not) to whatever extent we are comfortable with. You can't really knock someone who has decided to not spend their money on any given product.

                          Maybe it takes the team getting to the finals before going to a game makes its way up a person's financial ladder of importance enough for them to attend. That is their choice. I just can't see anything wrong with that.
                          Last edited by Tom White; 03-12-2008, 04:30 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                            Originally posted by Twes View Post
                            Is that "Pistol Pete" Jason Williams or shotgun Jason Williams?

                            The one that wears the Miami Heat uniform. Any other way I might describe him (or anyone else for that matter) might be construed as racist or bigoted or something else.

                            Comment


                            • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                              Originally posted by Twes View Post
                              What's the test? Attendance?

                              Is the test of the "true sports town" a packed house regardless of the competitive level of the team?

                              When Indy teams make playoff runs the arenas are loud and packed.

                              Contrast that with Los Angeles in football or Atlanta in anything and I don't see this as such a bad sports town.

                              When I moved here 15 years ago I could walk up to the dome and buy tickets game day. Fans didn't know when to cheer and when to be quiet.

                              In the time I've been here the Pacers had a decade of playoff runs, made the finals, the Colts won a championship, Nascar came to town, Roy Jones fought here, etc etc.

                              If you're whole point is attendance should never drop then so be it.

                              I guess it's relative. To some of the places I've lived this is a great sports town.
                              Maybe you're right, I guess Indy is not truly a "bad" sports town, it's just almost every other city in the country, a bandwagon town. In fact, there's only one city that seems to have supported their teams through the thick and thin: Chicago. Of course even then, the White Sox had some problems with attendance and will probably see some more problems with attendance in the future. There are, however, franchises whose fanbase is made up of die hards who fill up the seats no matter how good or bad the team is, and I don't think one NBA team fits this mold (I would say the Jazz and the Bulls are the closest).

                              Comment


                              • Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                                Originally posted by Wu-Gambino View Post
                                Maybe you're right, I guess Indy is not truly a "bad" sports town, it's just almost every other city in the country, a bandwagon town. In fact, there's only one city that seems to have supported their teams through the thick and thin: Chicago. Of course even then, the White Sox had some problems with attendance and will probably see some more problems with attendance in the future. There are, however, franchises whose fanbase is made up of die hards who fill up the seats no matter how good or bad the team is, and I don't think one NBA team fits this mold (I would say the Jazz and the Bulls are the closest).
                                I also think of Green Bay in football. I think of the Cubs in Chicago.

                                I do understand the argument, the point about support.

                                I just see this area as a lifeblood of basketball support that the team is screwing up.

                                If they get this thing fixed the support will be fine.

                                Just my opinion.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X