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

Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

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

  • Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

    Sorry to say the Pacers name comes up quite a bit.

    Head straight to gate for sign of weakness in NBA money machine
    July 8, 2009
    By Ken Berger
    CBSSports.com Senior Writer
    Tell Ken your opinion!



    As the NBA ushered in its official free-agent signing period Wednesday, the usually feverish pace of trades, signings and huge contracts slowed to a crawl. The summer of 2009 has been a wakeup call for players and teams who've rarely known anything but booming economic times.

    Ron Artest and Trevor Ariza, who would've been in heavy demand any other year, had to settle for the mid-level exception starting at $5.854 million next season. Restricted free agents David Lee and Paul Millsap are still waiting for lucrative offer sheets that might never come. Mike Bibby, who has been a $10 million-plus player for the past five seasons, squeezed out a three-year, $18 million deal to stay in Atlanta. As you might imagine in this economy, he couldn't be happier.

    Potential free agents Kobe Bryant and Carlos Boozer opted to blow off the process altogether, keeping their current contracts intact rather than foolishly entering a buyer's market. Boozer, due to make $12.7 million next season, realized he wasn't going to exceed that as an unrestricted free agent. The richest agreements to this point, Ben Gordon to the Pistons and Hedo Turkoglu to the Raptors, will be in the $10 million to $11 million range in the first year of their new deals.

    The five-year contracts for Gordon and Turkoglu are worth $55 million and $53 million. For comparison's sake, Gilbert Arenas re-signed with the Wizards last summer for six years at $111 million, and Elton Brand landed $82 million over five years from the Sixers. Two summers ago, Rashard Lewis reeled in a six-year, $118 million deal from the Magic.

    The grim facts about how the recession has affected the NBA business have been delivered to executive offices throughout the league. In its annual memo setting the financial structure for the upcoming season, the NBA unveiled the widely expected news Tuesday night that the salary cap and luxury tax both will decline for the 2009-10 season. The salary cap will be $57.7 million, a modest decline of $980,000. The luxury tax threshold, after which teams are penalized $1 for each additional $1 in payroll, will be $69.92 million -- a decline of $1.23 million.

    But the league's assertion in its news release that basketball-related income (BRI) -- upon which the salary cap is based -- actually increased 2.5 percent during the 2008-09 season doesn't tell the whole story.

    A memo sent to all 30 teams warned that a reduction of between 2.5 percent and 5 percent in BRI is anticipated next season, which would send the 2010-11 salary cap plummeting as low as $50.4 million -- a level not seen in five years. A 5 percent reduction in revenue would set the '10-11 luxury tax threshold at $61.2 million.
    The 5 percent scenario is in line with what many teams already were projecting, and is significantly better than the doomsday prediction of a 10 percent decline that commissioner David Stern floated (to little fanfare) during the NBA Finals.

    Analysis of a league-wide revenue report for the 2008-09 season obtained by CBSSports.com helps to explain how and why the dollars are eroding.
    Regular-season gate receipts -- the money generated by individual ticket sales and all forms of season-ticket plans -- declined $2.66 million league-wide in 2008-09. That's a minuscule 0.2 percent in a business that generated $1.1 billion in gate revenue the previous season.

    But the results varied widely among the 30 teams, reflecting a growing chasm between haves and have-nots. Fifteen teams suffered declines in gate receipts last season, the worst being the New Jersey Nets, whose ticket revenue declined $11.4 million, a 29 percent drop from 2007-08. It's no wonder the Nets want so badly to move to a new arena in Brooklyn. The figures also peel away any curiosity over the Nets' decision to trade Vince Carter, scheduled to make $16.3 million next season. Carter, an eight-time All-Star, went to Orlando along with Ryan Anderson for the expiring contracts of Tony Battie and Rafer Alston, plus bargain-basement shooting guard Courtney Lee, due to make only $1.3 million next season.

    The Bucks' decision to dump Richard Jefferson and his $14.2 million salary on the Spurs in exchange for expiring contracts was thought to be a prelude to Milwaukee's bid to keep restricted free agent Charlie Villanueva. But Bucks GM John Hammond, trying to get the team's finances in order, didn't even extend a qualifying offer to Villanueva, who became an unrestricted free agent and signed with the Pistons.

    If restricted free agent Ramon Sessions gets a decent offer sheet, the Bucks might not retain him, either. It's easy to understand why if you examine Milwaukee's $3.6 million decline in gate receipts last season, a drop of nearly 18 percent, according to the figures obtained by CBSSports.com. The Bucks were one of only five teams in the league to generate less than $500,000 in gate receipts per home game, according to the data. The Pacers, Hawks, Timberwolves and Grizzlies were the others. Only the Hawks made the playoffs.

    After the Nets, the next hardest-hit team was Sacramento, whose gate receipts declined $9.7 million, or 23 percent, in 2008-09. The Kings were one of only a handful of teams with significant salary-cap space to sign free agents this summer -- joining Detroit, Oklahoma City and Memphis -- but have wisely stayed on the sideline.

    Other teams sustaining massive declines at the gate were the Raptors ($9.1 million), Pistons ($7.7 million), Clippers ($6.8 million) and Heat ($5.3 million). The Wizards, Bobcats and Pacers each went down more than $4 million.

    The most interesting case is Oklahoma City, whose gate receipts increased $27.2 million last season, a 145 percent jump over the franchise's final season in Seattle. Jim Grinstead, publisher of the trade publication Revenues from Sports Venues, said the one-time bump from a new arena in an expansion city overshadowed the struggles in many other cities -- and can't be counted on again. If the team had merely experienced flat ticket revenues compared to the previous season in Seattle, the league as a whole would have posted an $11.1 million decline in gate receipts, according to analysis by CBSSports.com. Once the novelty wears off, the NBA will no longer be able to bank on such a boost from one of its smallest-market teams.

    "I wouldn't call them a savior," said Grinstead, whose publication tracks arena revenues in all major sports. "I would say it made this year a lot better than it could have been otherwise."

    To a degree, NBA teams are insulated from downturns in the economy because they share the league's eight-year, $7.4 billion national broadcast rights contract, which just completed its second season. But Grinstead said teams still derive a significant portion of revenues from their arenas in the form of individual tickets, season-ticket plans, parking, concessions and sponsorships. Those are the sources of income that are most vulnerable during a recession.

    While the NBA claims that its arenas were at 90.4 percent capacity last season, that figure doesn't account for comp tickets and people who don't show up. According to the league data, an average of 14,072 fans actually attended NBA games last season, putting average arena capacity at 73 percent.

    Paid tickets are good, but teams prefer to fill seats with people who are paying for parking and concessions. The teams that struggled the most to get people through the turnstiles last season were Memphis (7,570 per game), Minnesota (8,969), Charlotte (9,404), Indiana (10,057), Sacramento (10,188), Milwaukee (10,884) and Washington (11,030).

    If a certain number of tickets can't be sold, Grinstead said teams prefer to give them away -- or "comp" them -- in the hopes that those fans will show up and spend money on food, souvenirs and parking. But too many comp tickets can also mean lost revenues. Three teams shared the dubious honor of handing out an average of more than 5,000 free tickets per game last season: the Hawks (5,616), Nets (5,213) and Timberwolves (5,205).

    Even two perennial attendance powers, the Pistons and Heat, struggled to get fans to show up this past season. The Pistons, at the epicenter of the depressed Michigan economy, saw their streak of 259 consecutive sellouts end and posted actual attendance of only 77 percent capacity (16,957) in the Palace of Auburn Hills. The Heat, despite making the playoffs and having the No. 3 MVP vote-getter, Dwyane Wade, were at 70 percent capacity with only 13,578 showing up per game. Even the Thunder, among the 12 teams generating more than $1 million in gate receipts per home date, had trouble getting actual people into their arena, which was at 75 percent capacity (14,415).

    With numbers like that, it's no wonder the usual free-agent spending spree took a hiatus -- one that almost certainly will last beyond this summer and might even get worse.


    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  • #2
    Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

    Very, very, very interesting article. Interesting to see the number of people actually attending the games and to see the actual gate receipts.

    Sad that a team like the Hawks have to comp over 5500 tickets per game for a team that almost won 50 games, made the second round of the playoffs and are in an economy that is not nearly as bad as most cities.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      Very, very, very interesting article. Interesting to see the number of people actually attending the games and to see the actual gate receipts.

      Sad that a team like the Hawks have to comp over 5500 tickets per game for a team that almost won 50 games, made the second round of the playoffs and are in an economy that is not nearly as bad as most cities.
      Excellent article and good points, Buck.

      The gate numbers tell the true story and it's hard to believe that 3 teams gave out over 5000 tickets per game!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

        Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
        Excellent article and good points, Buck.

        The gate numbers tell the true story and it's hard to believe that 3 teams gave out over 5000 tickets per game!
        It is also a bit eye-opening that the Pacers announced attendance increased by 2000 per game and yet their overall revenue decreased by more than 4 million. That shows just how much they discounted tickets. Plus the previous year was horrible to begin with. If the pacers were down $4M - they must be done at least $10-$15M from 2004 or 2005 seasons when there ticket prices were much higher
        Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-09-2009, 11:03 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

          [QUOTE=Unclebuck;909495Sad that a team like the Hawks have to comp over 5500 tickets per game for a team that almost won 50 games, made the second round of the playoffs and are in an economy that is not nearly as bad as most cities.[/QUOTE]

          Surprises me not at all given what passes for basketball fans in Atlanta.
          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


          • #6
            Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

            I wonder if there is any way that the public can get a look at the actual per team breakdowns that are referenced in this article? It would be interesting to see what the actual average price per seat sold that each franchise, including our Pacers, were able to charge.

            My guess is that the Pacers are somewhere around $30 per ticket "sold" and that we are hard pressed to match that for the upcoming season unless we have a significant improvement, both economically AND with our team record.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

              Hate to be the basher, but this is lingering from my defense of the thug era and how it would all be solved by milk. SOME people around PD were pointing to the attendance increase as proof that it was turning around. But those of us who paid full price and were hyper-aware of every single super-saver sale suspected different.

              I'm not at all surprised that the revenue was down despite the attendance increase. $5 seats in the upper level nearly all year long will do that, as well as endless 2 for 1s in the lower levels.

              I get the plan, not just to sell food but to gain interest. Show people the product to get them to pay attention more and start to enjoy the team again. The team never relented on these offers, right up to the end of the season, so the plan wasn't working right away.

              Of course I'll assume they didn't think it would and that they "gave up" on last season and were using it as a staging ground for sales this season. My concern there is that I think the buzz is that season ticket sales still aren't up, and the prices are lowered to some great deals.


              But bottom line to me is that it's just yet another indicator that Indy fans aren't basketball fans and have a bad habit of front running rather than supporting hard working players who play the game the right way. That's all just BS talk built on the rep created by ancient history and the movie Hoosiers.

              We've got about 6-8K of real NBA/Pacers fans and the rest are just waiting to be told that the team is one win away from the Finals so they can jump on board and say "I always knew this team could do it" or worse yet the dreaded "It's about time".


              And for you guys ready to say "this is the fallout from the brawl" I'm stopping you right there. We've already had the dismal numbers for the good but not great Chuck/Det era teams to prove my point. Besides that it took fans a few years of ECF caliber play to actually sell out a lot of games. People think it was all sell-outs circa 95-96, but it wasn't. Even after the first ECF it was still "yeah, but that was a fluke".

              The problem with front runners is they are slow to recognize a change in the team and only take interest when success is repeatedly shoved down their throats. 4 years of 45-48 win teams wouldn't fix attendance any more than the milk drinkers did. That's the chip on my shoulder in all this.

              Die hard basketball fans would know that Tins was permantly benched and that the "thugs" were all traded long ago. These people couldn't name 3 players for the current team. Try it sometime, ask that casual fan about the Pacers. When he grumbles something about them sucking or being punks or whatever, follow that up with "name 3 guys on the team".

              They can't.

              But die-hard Hoosier or Boiler fans can tell you about 8th graders the college might be recruiting. There's your difference. IU fans know Sampson is long gone. But they have no idea if JO or Jackson or Tinsley is still there or not. It's pathetic and shameful.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                Seth, I agree with pretty much everything in your post. I'll just add that Indianapolis and surrounding area is not a good NBA market, they like college and high school ball more and have turned into a good NFL market, so the Pacers are back to being what they were pre-1994 - under the radar and appeal to only a small segment of the area population.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  Seth, I agree with pretty much everything in your post. I'll just add that Indianapolis and surrounding area is not a good NBA market, they like college and high school ball more and have turned into a good NFL market, so the Pacers are back to being what they were pre-1994 - under the radar and appeal to only a small segment of the area population.
                  Actually I will even question if they really are a good NFL market or if it just happens to be that the Colts have been good to great for the past 8-10 years? Check back to see what attendance is about 5 years after Manning retires and if the team is back to winning 6-8 wins a season. My guess is Lucas Stadium will look like the Hoosier Dome did circa 1995


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Actually I will even question if they really are a good NFL market or if it just happens to be that the Colts have been good to great for the past 8-10 years? Check back to see what attendance is about 5 years after Manning retires and if the team is back to winning 6-8 wins a season. My guess is Lucas Stadium will look like the Hoosier Dome did circa 1995

                    Maybe. I hope to God not, but maybe.

                    Let's keep in mind that in 1995 the team had been here just over 10 years. That's not a very long time to build up a big fan base, especially when you aren't winning. But a new generation of fans have been born in the Manning era (young people like myself) and I hope they feel a special connection to the team for the rest of their lives.

                    It has always seemed to me that NFL fans are more diehard and less fickle than NBA fans.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                      Here's another sign of the times.

                      http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/07/08/n...back-9-of-pay/

                      In fact, salaries and benefits went so far over the threshold that for the first time this decade players will not get a cent of their escrow funds back. In recent years, players had received a nominal amount (about 10 percent of what the league collected, or about 1 percent of their total salary). But this season, there will be no payback.

                      Effectively, players made 9 percent less than you think. So Amar'e Stoudemire, for example, on the books for $15 million last year, only received $13.65 million from the Suns. That other $1.35 million is a part of the $191 million the league will now redistribute equally to teams, to the tune of $6.3 million per franchise.
                      "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                      Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                        And so the thought Indy does not support Pro sports brings us to what? I guess simply when and if the Pacers or Colts move out of town the die hard fans shouldn't complain because frankly you can't blame the owners right? If everyone thinks this is true then how can we complain when the team does not try to get the big star and not willing to shell out money to retain ones we think they should keep? I mean seriously why should they if Indy will not support them.
                        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

                          But bottom line to me is that it's just yet another indicator that Indy fans aren't basketball fans

                          Die hard basketball fans would know that Tins was permantly benched and that the "thugs" were all traded long ago
                          .

                          They can't.

                          But die-hard Hoosier or Boiler fans can tell you about 8th graders the college might be recruiting. There's your difference. IU fans know Sampson is long gone. But they have no idea if JO or Jackson or Tinsley is still there or not. It's pathetic and shameful.
                          Seth, I just don't get this comment. Just because someone is not a fan of the Pacers or NBA in general does not mean they are not baskeball fans. How about trying this instead....walk up to some Indy folks on the street and ask them what a pick and roll is? Then walk up to two or three times as many in LA and see what the response is? I could be completely wrong but suspect there will be more Indy folks who give you a coherent answer than the latter.
                          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                            Originally posted by RWB View Post
                            Seth, I just don't get this comment. Just because someone is not a fan of the Pacers or NBA in general does not mean they are not baskeball fans. How about trying this instead....walk up to some Indy folks on the street and ask them what a pick and roll is? Then walk up to two or three times as many in LA and see what the response is? I could be completely wrong but suspect there will be more Indy folks who give you a coherent answer than the latter.
                            I agree with you on that. However ask those same fans in LA and Indy questions such as what is an intentional foul in the NBA.(there is no such thing, but I see dozens of fans calling for them at Pacers games), what is the defensive 3 second rule?, or does the defensive player need to be set before they can get a charge foul called on the guy he is guarding??

                            I bet the LA fanw ill do better on the NBA specific rules, while the Indy fans will do better on college and or general basketball questions.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Declining gate receipts behind projected cap decrease

                              I think the 75-mile rule has a HUGE impact on this, considering that within those 75-mile limits you have the largest portion of the IU and Purdue fan bases. The problem is the competition - why cheer for a pro team with players you don't really identify with when you can spend somewhat less money to cheer for a team where you probably have a personal lifelong connection?

                              If I were the league, I'd be changing that rule to be a 75-mile EXCLUSIVE zone, where teams can't advertise within another team's area but can advertise outside it to whatever distance they want.

                              Obviously there'd have to be some special exceptions. How does the current rule affect teams that are right on top of each other like the Lakers/Clippers or the Knicks/Nets?
                              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

                              Working...
                              X