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

Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

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

  • #91
    Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

    Does it occur to anyone that this is a PERFECT example that it is easier to retain a customer than to get them back once they are disaffected or get a new one?

    In reality, it almost doesn't matter WHY someone drifted away. Once they drifted away, they have lost the habit of being a part of the entire experience. To get them back into the habit you don't just have to overcome their reasons for leaving in the first place, you have to actually get them interested enough to try again. The first part may be easier than we think, because people answering why the second part isn't working often, out of self-justification, will use the same excuses they think they had for leaving rather than saying, "Yeah, you're right, I just really don't care any more" - mainly because that latter statement seems very hard to defend even in the case of a cognitive dissonance over whether the circumstances/costs/personalities/whatever are not what they once were.
    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


    • #92
      Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      IU remained one of the top 10 attended teams in the nation every year while they were down, but comparing IU to the Pacers is not a fair fight. Apples to oranges.
      This. One thing people downplay is that there is a built-in audience (student body) and a constantly replenishing source of new potential fans for any college team. Add that to the people who have tight associations to their college identity and you really have to screw the pooch to lose a fan base.
      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


      • #93
        Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

        Originally posted by Reggie4Three View Post

        2. I still see NBA highlights. I hear and read things. I know enough about the NBA to know that the Heat won last year and are favorites to win again this year. Just because I don't devote myself to the league doesn't mean I'm completely obllivious to what's going on. And yes, I still maintain the opinion that the stars will get more than their fair share of calls, particularly in the playoffs. Maybe I'm mistaken about that given that I don't watch every second of NBA basketball but you'll have to remind me of who won the title last year.
        Who one the title 2 years ago? The Mavericks comprised of a bunch of aging veterans and an aging Dirk Nowitzky. That right there basically throws your stars comment out the window. If it were true, then there is no way the Heat would have lost to the Mavs. My gosh it should have been a free throw line parade to the title for the Heat, how could an old and slow Dallas team achieve such a feat.

        Originally posted by Reggie4Three View Post
        3. I'm not an NHL fan. I'm just picking it up more this year and I find it infinitely more watchable than 48 minutes of NBA basketball. Fighting really has nothing to do with my interest in hockey. To be honest, the biggest reasons my interest in the Pacers plummeted were Reggie's retirement, JO's existence, and JOB's coaching. As for the brawl, the main disappointment for me was how Stern handled the whole thing and it really made me less of an NBA fan in general moreso than just losing interest in the Pacers. I appreciate your attempt to take one of many reasons I gave and doing your best to make it look hypocritical but that's a huge reach to make.
        Well guess what, Reggie Miller dont' give a **** out the Pacers today, JO hasn't been here for about 5 seasons now, JOB is gone, and David Stern is retiring! All we got is a bright young team with a great future, and superstar level player in the making. You outta feel really good about that.

        Originally posted by Reggie4Three View Post
        4. Where do you expect to pick up new fans from if you don't listen to the people who don't currently watch the NBA product? Like I said before, I'm not completely oblivious to everything NBA. I will occasionally bet on a game on a Friday night when there really isn't any other sporting event going on. I follow the Pacers record, their position in the standings, and will watch a few games and probably the playoffs. If I were in marketing and trying to get more people to Pacers games, I'd be targeting people like me in the Indy area (I now live near the South Bend area). However, nothing is to be gained for telling me I'm wrong for liking what I like or not liking what I don't like.
        Listening? You haven't even offered why you dont like them today and what it will take for you to like them. You haven't even given them chance by the sound of it.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          So apart from BillS suggesting that PG was trained on defense by JOB and Heisenberg talking about locker room discipline within this thread, I rescind my comments directed at any of you.
          Well, no, you've got the referrals wrong.

          I could just as easily say "ahh, there goes Seth, no need to pay any attention to what he says because he always blames everything on JOB".

          My only point was that if Bird is the reason for the turnaround (which he was made so in the post I was responding to), and Bird credited JOB for many of the changes, at what point is Bird credible or not?
          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


          • #95
            Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            Does it occur to anyone that this is a PERFECT example that it is easier to retain a customer than to get them back once they are disaffected or get a new one?

            In reality, it almost doesn't matter WHY someone drifted away. Once they drifted away, they have lost the habit of being a part of the entire experience. To get them back into the habit you don't just have to overcome their reasons for leaving in the first place, you have to actually get them interested enough to try again. The first part may be easier than we think, because people answering why the second part isn't working often, out of self-justification, will use the same excuses they think they had for leaving rather than saying, "Yeah, you're right, I just really don't care any more" - mainly because that latter statement seems very hard to defend even in the case of a cognitive dissonance over whether the circumstances/costs/personalities/whatever are not what they once were.
            This is pretty true. Sometimes we all don't realize the fans that lost interest aren't the weird ones, we are. I mean we watched year after year of "might get the 8 seed!" Pacers. And not even because we enjoyed it just....because?

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

              Well after looking a little further into my own Saturday/Sunday attendance debate I'm at a toss-up. Attendance still isn't great for the few games we've had on Saturday, but considering the team played could it have been worse? I don't know, it's all debatable.

              Saturday Nov. 3rd opening night against the King.... attendance 18, 165
              Saturday Nov. 10th against the Washington Wizards....attendance 12, 036
              Saturday Jan. 5th against the Milwaukee Bucks.... attendacne 15,329
              Saturday Jan. 12th agaisnt the Charlotte Bobcats... attendance 13,656
              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


              • #97
                Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                But it's 60000 seats you have to fill, so "rarity" isn't quite true. It's easier to get into a Colts game in terms of available seats per game.

                60000 * 10 (you have to buy the 2 preseason also)
                18000 *40 (to keep it round)

                600,000 vs 720,000 seats to sell.
                It's not just the amount of seats to fill. It's the actual event. The demand for Colts tickets is huge. When people want to go to Colts games, and the games against NE/Pitt/etc, are going to get filled quickly and by people that can afford the majority of those on secondary markets.

                So that pushes people down the line. They can't go to the big draws, so they settle for the Bengals/Browns/etc. It's pusing people into a tighter space, forcing them into a very limited number of opportunities to go.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                  Originally posted by Reggie4Three View Post
                  I am the fan that they are talking about. Was a huge Pacers fan for the longest time. Then things just went south and interest declined. It started with the brawl. Then Reggie retired. Then the whole Artest saga and them trying to build the team around O'Neal who I hated. Then JOB and his awful coaching. On a scale of 1 to 10 the Pacers went from probably an 8/9 to around a 3 through all that. I still follow them from afar. I know what they're doing but catching a game isn't of great importance to me anymore. I cancelled the NBA package 2 years ago (I have to have it to get most Pacers games) after having it for 6 or 7 seasons straight and I don't miss it at all. I'm not a fan of the NBA to begin with. Never was. That brand of basketball doesn't appeal to me beyond whatever interest in the Pacers I have. I will probably watch the playoffs when they get here but I have my doubts they can beat the Heat come playoff times because the NBA is built for the stars and when it comes down to it, the Lebron James and Derek Roses (when he comes back) will get every call when it matters.
                  I want to say thanks for this perspective in spite of the vitriol it is getting from other quarters.

                  I think your position is much more likely the majority situation - as I said above, it isn't that you think the circumstances are the same as they were in those years, you just lost interest and haven't seen a compelling reason to come back. The difference, I think, is that you are willing to at least explain that rather than just blame the old circumstances. Maybe that, in and of and for itself, is as far as marketing the team can go this season without some kind of breakout event that causes people to embrace the team.
                  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


                  • #99
                    Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    I want to say thanks for this perspective in spite of the vitriol it is getting from other quarters.
                    I would like to second Bill's thought. Hope Reggie4Three continues to visit and add his/her thoughts.
                    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


                    • Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                      I know I should be nicer to Indy's frontrunner fans and convince the people I am still in contact with back home to come back, but I don't suffer fools and don't have the patience to convince people when there is overwhelming evidence that this Pacers team isn't the 2004 so-called "thug" squad that so many people hate. There is so much freaking evidence. People just choose to ignore it. I can't handle the backward mentality people have toward the Pacers.

                      When the Washington Nationals were the worst team in baseball in 2009 their attendance was under 23,000. They were a contender last year and their attendance rose over 30,000. Yeah, bigger, more lucrative market, but there are tons more games and MLB isn't what it once was. I wish people in my hometown would REACT TO THE EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF THEM and buy a $5 ticket to check the Pacers out. Because you won't get tickets that cheap anywhere else.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        On a cold Wednesday night in January when they've been working all day, nonetheless.

                        People can whine about this being a lame excuse all they want, but if you live in Carmel and get off work downtown at 5 o'clock, then attending a weeknight game against some scrub team isn't a desirable scenario. Driving back home seems silly, because as soon as you get back home you are going to have to turn around and head back downtown. So your only option is to hang around downtown for two hours. So by the time the game is over and you get home, it's 10 o'clock and you've literally been gone since like 8 a.m. You haven't had any time to hang out with the wife or kids. Plus, you literally have to immediately go to bed because you have to get up for work the next morning. If you aren't a diehard Pacer fan, then forfeiting so much of your valuable time on a cold winter's night to see the Pacers play some joke team simply isn't worth it. You'll wait for Friday night when it's far more desirable. Call that a weak excuse if you want, but not everyone's lives revolve around the Pacers. The weekend games seem to get decent attendance, but it's those weeknight games that kill us. They simply aren't desirable for a lot of people.
                        Apparently no one met me.

                        Bedford/Bloomington to Indy is much worse than Carmel to Downtown. I do it. Others can.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          And how did you acquire that personal connection to Reggie? Did he come to your house or save your dog?
                          (meant in non-snarky tone)

                          He made ESPN highlights and was shown on the news, that's how. If someone didn't tell you Reggie was worth watching you wouldn't know he existed. He didn't win you over by being a nice guy and you probably didn't know about him in 1990.


                          Following up on that - how can the current team make a personal connection to you? You don't follow the team, watch games or do anything that would create a connection to them. So it's self-fulfilling. You don't connect to them so you refuse to connect to them.

                          Or are you saying that you have tried and you just don't like their brand of basketball, you don't like West's post-game or PG's defense or Hill being a local hero or Roy's personality? I mean that sincerely. If you are saying you took time to take a "listen" to what they are all about and said "nah, not for me, I know everyone else thinks they are a great band but I just don't connect to the music" then that's fine.

                          But if you are saying "I never liked the Beatles....aren't they the ones that sang Ring My Bell" then that is on you, not the team.



                          I guess my question to casual fans is the simple one - "what DO you want from this team that they don't currently provide?". In terms of connection to them I mean. Skip the ticket prices or driving distance because Assembly Hall ain't free and it sure as F isn't easy to get to either, not from Indy metro let alone Fishers.
                          That's all fair. I acknowledge that I'm not as reachable at 35 as I was at 10 years old. Like I said, part of it has to do with how I've changed and part of it has to do with how the league and team has changed. I now have different responsibilities and and values at 35 than I did at 10 and I don't think that's a bad thing. At 10, all I knew or cared was that Reggie just stuck it to the Knicks (or whoever) and people were talking about the Pacers like a nationally prominent team like they never had before and that was really cool to me. The Pacers/Colts/Yankees/Purdue winning was alot higher in importance to me from 10-20 than it is at 35. I'm not even sure it's possible to develop that same type of connection as I did when I was just a kid.

                          I feel like I've given plenty of time to the Pacers over the years. While I can't sit through 48 min of regular season NBA basketball anymore, I probably watched large portions of 6-8 regular season games last year when they were playing the Bulls (the local tv team where I live) or I was at someone's house who might have had the NBA ticket or if they happened to be nationally televised. So they have that opportunity to connect to me. They also had all of the playoffs which I think I watched almost all of. It's not as if I completely avoid them but compared to 10 years ago when i probably averaged 75 games a season and playoffs it is a huge dropoff.
                          Can we get a new color commentator please?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            IU bandwagon fans are every where right now.

                            IU doesn't have attendance problems, beacuse of their massive alumni base. But when IU is down, support from non-IU alum drops off a cliff, and vice versa when they become good again.

                            We live in a state of frontrunners. Most of my friends are Bulls fans (those that watch the NBA anyways).
                            You would think that, but having been in the Bloomington area for the past 11 years that isn't true. IU left a bad taste in everyone's mouth after firing Knight, but they stood behind Davis then Sampson until they each wore out their welcome.

                            Armon Basset and Kelvin Sampson killed IU in 2008 from a competitive standpoint.

                            The spirit here in Bloomington for the basketball team hasn't changed, however.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                              Originally posted by Reggie4Three View Post

                              3. I'm not an NHL fan. I'm just picking it up more this year and I find it infinitely more watchable than 48 minutes of NBA basketball. Fighting really has nothing to do with my interest in hockey. To be honest, the biggest reasons my interest in the Pacers plummeted were Reggie's retirement, JO's existence, and JOB's coaching. As for the brawl, the main disappointment for me was how Stern handled the whole thing and it really made me less of an NBA fan in general moreso than just losing interest in the Pacers. I appreciate your attempt to take one of many reasons I gave and doing your best to make it look hypocritical but that's a huge reach to make.
                              "Just take me to the next block, I can walk from here."

                              I don't get it. You knew he wouldn't play forever.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Colin Cowherd Pacers Twitter Rant

                                Indiana didn't follow the Pacers very well until a big star (Reggie) took the reins. Indiana didn't follow the Colts very well until a big star (Manning) took the reins. Does Indiana appreciate hard-nosed, well-played basketball? Sure we do, and those two stars fit that description. But Indiana fans need to look in the mirror, get off our high horses, and come to grips with the reality that we like stars, too. Stars bring interest. People have to be interested.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X