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

Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

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

  • #46
    Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

    And I've fallen into the trap as well, but here we are again with a fan who is clearly on the fence about coming back fully and we all are calling him an idiot, etc. I'm just as guilty as the next guy, but like I said in another thread, our best way to convert people like this is to get their butt in the building and let them see Paul George do Paul George things in person. They need to see Lance get the rebound and start bursting up court like a run away freight train. And then they need to see David West just be a bad mother.....

    The point is, all us die hards, should take on ourselves to be ambassadors, not dicks. Like I said I'm just as guilty because I called his argument about single digit draft picks completely moronic.


    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

      Yes, going to a game is significantly more expensive than watching it on TV. But atmosphere and emotions experienced at the game are invaluable. In the end everybody has to weight that for himself.

      He has a valid point though that ticket sales only account for a fraction of a franchise's revenue. In the end these 3,000 empty seats won't decide whether professional basketball in Indy has a future or not. What he might forget is that he won't have a Durant et al. around long-term if those star players have to play in an empty arena.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

        You know, I don't actually care about the attendance. It is going up and as we keep winning it will keep going up.

        My problem is the mentality of the person who wrote that article.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

          *Warning: I'm going to ramble on as I re-read the guy's article and respond bit by bit with the thoughts that come to me at the time*

          I think it's fair for people to just not be that into the team. Regardless of the reason, that's perfectly valid in and of itself to simply not care about the team (much).

          The first question I have is, "Was he ever really here?" He says, "I know you want me back," but it's hard to tell when he left in the first place (and if he was ever here at all).

          I'm not sure what he means by the NBA having the best talent yet 'not always the best showcase for it.'

          I think it's completely legit to prefer the atmosphere of a game at IU to a game at Bankers Life Fieldhouse. There's a lot I don't like about the experience of an NBA game with regards to the environment (too much noise, too often, usually a little too loud, all of the stuff that placates kiddies and families that I don't care about, it's almost a non-stop barrage of noise pollution).

          Ditto for a good high school crowd (I'm spoiled because I grew up here in New Castle, in that regard).

          I think there's some truth to the Pacers not being the only game in town. If the Colts didn't exist I think you would see more people giving us a look.

          I get where he's coming from as well with regards to when fans try to tell non fans what they should do. I am a big fan James Cameron movies (particularly his first handful), but I don't go around insisting 'outsiders' go watch James Cameron movies, for example. Granted, his flicks don't have nearly the same financial problems as the Pacers. But regardless, these folks are NOT OBLIGATED to care about the Pacers. My only beef with outsiders is when they say a bunch of ******** that isn't true (like the team being comprised of thugs and that kind of crap).

          He then goes on to talk about selling out to corporations and the increased cost of tickets. It's hard for me to comment because I wasn't buying tickets prior to Conseco Fieldhouse (if I went to a game, someone was taking me back then). But I can say that as someone who has limited income, it's a big deal to invest in a lower level seat. I'm spoiled because I have friends who will invite me to sit with them in those locations, but if I didn't have that I would always be either in the balcony or at home with my budget. The closest I could ever imagine sitting on my own dime would be the fan zones in sections 19, 20, 1, & 2, but doing so would be a BIG bite for me.

          This brings me to Stubhub. People love to bring up stubhub. Personally, I've never used it. For whatever reason it never seemed attractive to me. I'm also not sure that everybody is aware of its existence. A lot are, but I'd guess a lot more than that are not. If they do use it, does that really make the Pacers any happier? I don't see why it would beyond the appearance of a bigger crowed because those tickets are all being RESOLD, are they not? So it's not making them any more money in that regard (though, yes, anyone who comes and then buys food or merchandise still adds something). Don't get me wrong, stubhub sounds like a fair counter point to make to those who complain about prices, but it's not perfect, and it does nothing to change the fact that a lot of people are going to simply go directly through the team to buy tickets, and yes those prices are relatively not cheap unless you're fine with sitting somewhere in the balcony.

          This brings me to his point about HDTV. Sorry, but I totally get this part, too. I've been a huge fan since 1998, but I've always been perfectly happy watching the games on TV. I go to games because I have friends there, I like that I'm supporting the team, and I like feeling like 'a member of the club' as a STH, but at the same time I spent years and years rarely making the trip to Indy because I never had a problem watching on TV. And that was how I felt back when it was SD on a 21" TV, let alone now on a 42" in HD. Every once and a while I just don't feel like driving over (takes me about 45 minutes or so), and in those cases I'm perfectly content to just hit the living room for the game. So I get that.

          And, again, depending on your level of disposable income, it's TREMENDOUS bang for your buck to just stay home and watch FSN Indiana, relative to attending games, let alone all/most of them. MUCH cheaper and still extremely satisfying.

          Now, he lost me with his bit about the cost of taking his family to the game is the same he could have spent on buying a new TV. That was ridiculous IMO.

          I don't claim to know all of the math, but I suspect there's truth to the point that it's the TV revenue (league wide) that matters a lot more to the league than having perfect / 95+% attendance matters. Especially the national TV deals.

          Jumping to the part about tax dollars, frankly, I tend to side with the tax payer on this. I think professional sports in general (at least what little I know about how it works with the NFL and the NBA, anyway) push their luck with the public funds they ask for. I know they argue that they make the city money, but it seems like people manage to come up with numbers that prove/disprove that depending on their opinion, so I'm decidedly UNdecided on that front. But that's not my main point here, it's this: If I don't care about a given pro sports team in my town, I sure as hell don't like the idea that I'm helping to pay for it. Especially if my city's economy isn't that great. So I think there's valid reason to not be thrilled here, too.

          Then he just goes into Stupidville with the bit about where our draft picks are, so enough said there. Nothing we haven't talked about ad nauseum here before.

          Then we get to the frontrunner stuff. It's hard for a Pacer fan to imagine, I think, but they can acknowledge that there are plenty of fans of sports out there who get more pleasure out of rooting for winners than rooting for one particular jersey year in and year out. They get more pleasure out of seeing greatness (wherever it happens to be playing that year) and cheering it on than hitching their wagon to one horse forever. And you know what? I'm fine with that. It's not my call or my place to tell them what to appreciate or how to enjoy sports. I even think I can see the appeal myself, to be honest. I've made my bed with the Pacers, but it doesn't mean I don't have appreciation for the great players out there, too. I can easily imagine a world where I would just support greatness and leave it at that. That's not how it ended up, but it could have. At least for me.

          But that's not exactly what he's arguing, is it? No, he seems to be making the argument that he's not rooting for someone else's team, he's merely refusing to root for THIS team until IT IS THE GREATNESS. Even the fact that we are damn good right now, we're not greatness, thus he's not buying. I really don't know what to say to him about that. If it's "The Pacers are the best team in the league" or bust, then I guess the bottom line is 99% of the time you won't ever care about the Pacers.

          He says we're "LeBron's bitch". I'd be lying if I said I had no idea what he's talking about, but that's still hyperbolic and frankly may not be a defensible position at all in a few months (call it a homer hunch, if you must, but I think I'm being objective to see a great chance to shock a lot of people). Regardless, I can see why outsiders would assume this is fact given the sports culture we live in (it's ESPN's world). Although his point about Vegas isn't easily dismissible IMO. People don't eff around where their wallets are concerned.

          He ain't wrong about the refs blowing Wade and James, though. That part gets infuriating to me. It's the closest I come to throwing in the towel myself with the NBA entirely, to be honest. Garbage.

          His closing bit about 'let's just be friends' is a fair place to be. Just because someone makes an awesome dessert doesn't mean it's one you prefer to eat.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

            That point was completely moronic though. It should get corrected.
            The 19 Line Coming Soon!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Might be true, but he's a lot closer to the average person than we are or there wouldn't be a need to have these discussions.
              The average person in Indiana is like that?
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                I totally agree. Also, the new big screen billboard negates the problem of not being able to see as well from the balcony.
                True, but it begs the question: Why pay and drive to watch the game on a big screen TV in my seat when I can do the same thing for 'free' in my living room?

                I understand that BLF is a great venue, but that may not be as big of a deal to some people. I'm in the middle on it myself.

                *edit*

                And by the way, this brings me back to what I was talking about with others in another thread: The noise and non-basketball stuff at the games.

                Frankly, each year I come to hate it more. So much so that if I didn't love the Pacers, I probably wouldn't go to games, either. I know there's a market that likes that stuff, but I think there's an equally sized market (or if not equal, then let's just say a significant one) that does not at all. I get real tired of the constant jukebox / being almost yelled at.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                  By the way, I want to echo something I said the other day about this whole topic:

                  The bottom line is that people who want to be there will find excuses to be there, and people who do not want to be there will find excuses to not be there.

                  And I think the Pacers should market themselves as a good product they are proud of, try to show why, and not worry about encouraging people to show up so much (ie 'Come and see us!' or whatnot). Just demonstrate the quality, and move on. Make the commercials a love letter to the team and the product versus an attempt at wooing people. I would also stop giving away tickets left and right and having super sales left and right. At this point it just makes the product look cheap, IMO. I mean if a car salesman offered me a new car at 70% discount, I would be extremely skeptical as to why he's going to such lengths to basically give the car away.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    The average person in Indiana is like that?
                    If people didn't think like that, then there wouldn't be an attendance issue. The Indy metro area might be small, but it's still about a million people. BLF only holds less than 20,000 people. It takes less than 2% of the population to fill it. If that wasn't the predominate attitdue, then more would be going.

                    This isn't an Indiana thing. This issue impacts the vast majority of teams. The NBA said 75% of teams were losing money. The Pacers aren't in a unique situaiton.

                    EDIT: Math is a bit fuzzy this morning. It would really be less than 0.2% of the population.
                    Last edited by Since86; 02-22-2013, 11:33 AM.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                      This writer doesn't seem like much of a fan to me so much as one of the casual observers. Clearly hasn't seen the giant screen they've installed that makes even the highest nosebleeds seem like you're watching an HD television set in your living room with a much better atmosphere.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        And I've fallen into the trap as well, but here we are again with a fan who is clearly on the fence about coming back fully and we all are calling him an idiot, etc. I'm just as guilty as the next guy, but like I said in another thread, our best way to convert people like this is to get their butt in the building and let them see Paul George do Paul George things in person. They need to see Lance get the rebound and start bursting up court like a run away freight train. And then they need to see David West just be a bad mother.....

                        The point is, all us die hards, should take on ourselves to be ambassadors, not dicks. Like I said I'm just as guilty because I called his argument about single digit draft picks completely moronic.
                        But that was a terrible point to try to make. We had Reggie in the '90s, and if they'd pay attention we've got a legit star on the team now. We've not been "stuck in mediocrity" that long. For about 6 years we were, but we're not still there.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          As they should. I think taking out an full page ad in the Star, or some kind of campaign somewhere, saying they don't think they "deserve" your money, but are working hard towards putting a product worth your money would do some good.

                          I don't think guilting people into attending games is really going to do the trick. I would imagine it actually creates some animosity.
                          I'd like to see the ads all be loveletters to the team and also a bit of pointing to the scoreboard, so to speak. Express the passion people have for the team, show off the excitement and the winning and the talent, and let the public figure it out from there.

                          On the pricing front, one thing that sucks for PS&E marketing is they can't throw in a line like, "And if you go to stubhub, sit in the lower level for just $40! (or whatever)" They can only show off retail prices or their own sales.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                            Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                            *Warning: I'm going to ramble on as I re-read the guy's article and respond bit by bit with the thoughts that come to me at the time*

                            I think it's fair for people to just not be that into the team. Regardless of the reason, that's perfectly valid in and of itself to simply not care about the team (much).

                            The first question I have is, "Was he ever really here?" He says, "I know you want me back," but it's hard to tell when he left in the first place (and if he was ever here at all).

                            I'm not sure what he means by the NBA having the best talent yet 'not always the best showcase for it.'

                            I think it's completely legit to prefer the atmosphere of a game at IU to a game at Bankers Life Fieldhouse. There's a lot I don't like about the experience of an NBA game with regards to the environment (too much noise, too often, usually a little too loud, all of the stuff that placates kiddies and families that I don't care about, it's almost a non-stop barrage of noise pollution).

                            Ditto for a good high school crowd (I'm spoiled because I grew up here in New Castle, in that regard).

                            I think there's some truth to the Pacers not being the only game in town. If the Colts didn't exist I think you would see more people giving us a look.

                            I get where he's coming from as well with regards to when fans try to tell non fans what they should do. I am a big fan James Cameron movies (particularly his first handful), but I don't go around insisting 'outsiders' go watch James Cameron movies, for example. Granted, his flicks don't have nearly the same financial problems as the Pacers. But regardless, these folks are NOT OBLIGATED to care about the Pacers. My only beef with outsiders is when they say a bunch of ******** that isn't true (like the team being comprised of thugs and that kind of crap).

                            He then goes on to talk about selling out to corporations and the increased cost of tickets. It's hard for me to comment because I wasn't buying tickets prior to Conseco Fieldhouse (if I went to a game, someone was taking me back then). But I can say that as someone who has limited income, it's a big deal to invest in a lower level seat. I'm spoiled because I have friends who will invite me to sit with them in those locations, but if I didn't have that I would always be either in the balcony or at home with my budget. The closest I could ever imagine sitting on my own dime would be the fan zones in sections 19, 20, 1, & 2, but doing so would be a BIG bite for me.

                            This brings me to Stubhub. People love to bring up stubhub. Personally, I've never used it. For whatever reason it never seemed attractive to me. I'm also not sure that everybody is aware of its existence. A lot are, but I'd guess a lot more than that are not. If they do use it, does that really make the Pacers any happier? I don't see why it would beyond the appearance of a bigger crowed because those tickets are all being RESOLD, are they not? So it's not making them any more money in that regard (though, yes, anyone who comes and then buys food or merchandise still adds something). Don't get me wrong, stubhub sounds like a fair counter point to make to those who complain about prices, but it's not perfect, and it does nothing to change the fact that a lot of people are going to simply go directly through the team to buy tickets, and yes those prices are relatively not cheap unless you're fine with sitting somewhere in the balcony.

                            This brings me to his point about HDTV. Sorry, but I totally get this part, too. I've been a huge fan since 1998, but I've always been perfectly happy watching the games on TV. I go to games because I have friends there, I like that I'm supporting the team, and I like feeling like 'a member of the club' as a STH, but at the same time I spent years and years rarely making the trip to Indy because I never had a problem watching on TV. And that was how I felt back when it was SD on a 21" TV, let alone now on a 42" in HD. Every once and a while I just don't feel like driving over (takes me about 45 minutes or so), and in those cases I'm perfectly content to just hit the living room for the game. So I get that.

                            And, again, depending on your level of disposable income, it's TREMENDOUS bang for your buck to just stay home and watch FSN Indiana, relative to attending games, let alone all/most of them. MUCH cheaper and still extremely satisfying.

                            Now, he lost me with his bit about the cost of taking his family to the game is the same he could have spent on buying a new TV. That was ridiculous IMO.

                            I don't claim to know all of the math, but I suspect there's truth to the point that it's the TV revenue (league wide) that matters a lot more to the league than having perfect / 95+% attendance matters. Especially the national TV deals.

                            Jumping to the part about tax dollars, frankly, I tend to side with the tax payer on this. I think professional sports in general (at least what little I know about how it works with the NFL and the NBA, anyway) push their luck with the public funds they ask for. I know they argue that they make the city money, but it seems like people manage to come up with numbers that prove/disprove that depending on their opinion, so I'm decidedly UNdecided on that front. But that's not my main point here, it's this: If I don't care about a given pro sports team in my town, I sure as hell don't like the idea that I'm helping to pay for it. Especially if my city's economy isn't that great. So I think there's valid reason to not be thrilled here, too.

                            Then he just goes into Stupidville with the bit about where our draft picks are, so enough said there. Nothing we haven't talked about ad nauseum here before.

                            Then we get to the frontrunner stuff. It's hard for a Pacer fan to imagine, I think, but they can acknowledge that there are plenty of fans of sports out there who get more pleasure out of rooting for winners than rooting for one particular jersey year in and year out. They get more pleasure out of seeing greatness (wherever it happens to be playing that year) and cheering it on than hitching their wagon to one horse forever. And you know what? I'm fine with that. It's not my call or my place to tell them what to appreciate or how to enjoy sports. I even think I can see the appeal myself, to be honest. I've made my bed with the Pacers, but it doesn't mean I don't have appreciation for the great players out there, too. I can easily imagine a world where I would just support greatness and leave it at that. That's not how it ended up, but it could have. At least for me.

                            But that's not exactly what he's arguing, is it? No, he seems to be making the argument that he's not rooting for someone else's team, he's merely refusing to root for THIS team until IT IS THE GREATNESS. Even the fact that we are damn good right now, we're not greatness, thus he's not buying. I really don't know what to say to him about that. If it's "The Pacers are the best team in the league" or bust, then I guess the bottom line is 99% of the time you won't ever care about the Pacers.

                            He says we're "LeBron's bitch". I'd be lying if I said I had no idea what he's talking about, but that's still hyperbolic and frankly may not be a defensible position at all in a few months (call it a homer hunch, if you must, but I think I'm being objective to see a great chance to shock a lot of people). Regardless, I can see why outsiders would assume this is fact given the sports culture we live in (it's ESPN's world). Although his point about Vegas isn't easily dismissible IMO. People don't eff around where their wallets are concerned.

                            He ain't wrong about the refs blowing Wade and James, though. That part gets infuriating to me. It's the closest I come to throwing in the towel myself with the NBA entirely, to be honest. Garbage.

                            His closing bit about 'let's just be friends' is a fair place to be. Just because someone makes an awesome dessert doesn't mean it's one you prefer to eat.
                            This. Very thoughtful and well-written response, and I agree with just about all 2,000ish words of it.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                              Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                              True, but it begs the question: Why pay and drive to watch the game on a big screen TV in my seat when I can do the same thing for 'free' in my living room?

                              I understand that BLF is a great venue, but that may not be as big of a deal to some people. I'm in the middle on it myself.

                              *edit*

                              And by the way, this brings me back to what I was talking about with others in another thread: The noise and non-basketball stuff at the games.

                              Frankly, each year I come to hate it more. So much so that if I didn't love the Pacers, I probably wouldn't go to games, either. I know there's a market that likes that stuff, but I think there's an equally sized market (or if not equal, then let's just say a significant one) that does not at all. I get real tired of the constant jukebox / being almost yelled at.
                              People do at at Redskins games all the time. By suite level boxes, then sit on the chairs and watch the games inside next to the bars and resturants.

                              I dont get it. I would rather save the money and watch it on my bigscreen.

                              By I love the atmosphere of the game....maybe I am not the norm

                              On topic, I feel we are beating a dead horse. I appreciate hearing "others" opinions, but good lord I hate the argument about draft picks.

                              As others have said, win and let the chips fall where they may (for this year at least)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                                Not that into you? Don't worry about it Pacers, the ex always comes crawlin' back.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X