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

Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

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

  • #31
    Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
    The Saints play indoors as do the Cowboys but they also are considered crazier fans than us.

    And as far as the extension... I should've known... the bigwigs are trying to drag this out so they don't have to pony up(pun intended) the $$$ to prevent the blackout.
    What does "crazy" have to do with anything? Of course New Orleans is crazier, ever been to mardi gras? That town isn't exactly dealing with a full deck. And Dallas, well.... what do you want me to say? You provided two examples of teams who you think might be less fairweather, and therefore proving how fairweather we are? Oooookay.

    The bigger problem is the NFL's format for blackouts, not the fact that we haven't sold out yet. 4 teams haven't sold out yet --- that points to an underlying problem with the format. Furthermore, I've never had anyone successfully explain to me how a blackout drives revenue in the least. I'm not going to the game; and them blacking it out isn't changing my stance, lol... I'll go to the game when I damn well want to, and am able to go. Blacking it out is like some asinine punishment for not going to the game. Alrighty then, don't show the game, and I guess I won't watch the hour and a half of potential advertisements you could have grilled into my brain in the process. Whatever. The world will continue to revolve.

    Same goes for the 500. Put that damn thing on TV.
    Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-02-2014, 04:26 PM.
    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


    • #32
      Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
      What does "crazy" have to do with anything? Of course New Orleans is crazier, ever been to mardi gras? That town isn't exactly dealing with a full deck. And Dallas, well.... what do you want me to say? You provided two examples of teams who you think might be less fairweather, and therefore proving how fairweather we are? Oooookay.

      The bigger problem is the NFL's format for blackouts, not the fact that we haven't sold out yet. 4 teams haven't sold out yet --- that points to an underlying problem with the format.
      The Eagles have sold out its us, Packers, and Bengals.

      My point about the "crazier" fans is that they won't be accused of being fairweathered because of how they act at games even though there are probably a few fairweathered fans within that fanbase but their reputation shows they're "hardcore"

      Indy fans don't come across that way so when you have a story of how they can't sell playoff tickets it just adds to that fairweathered reputation they had before.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

        Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
        I'll give you last season but the year before Irsay lied about Manning's health he knew Manning was going to be gone for the year but he wasn't going to tell the fanbase that because he had tickets to sell. Most if not all those tickets were sold before his neck took him out for the season.
        Even when we weren't going to make the playoffs, and the fans knew Manning wasn't coming back, we still sold out our home games, thats not a good excuse

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

          Black it out, NFL. I'm not in the local market. Fire away *****s.

          ...it won't happen.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

            Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
            Even when we weren't going to make the playoffs, and the fans knew Manning wasn't coming back, we still sold out our home games, thats not a good excuse
            My point was that would those tickets have been sold so easily had they knew ahead of time? I'm guessing the Colts didn't think so otherwise they would've been honest with the fanbase about Manning's health but they weren't.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

              Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
              My point was that would those tickets have been sold so easily had they knew ahead of time? I'm guessing the Colts didn't think so otherwise they would've been honest with the fanbase about Manning's health but they weren't.
              Thats irrelevant though tbh, people found out at one point that Manning probably wasn't coming back, and we weren't going to the playoffs, and they still sold out the games, regardless of what the franchise was saying

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                Blackout will not happen.

                Side-note: If any team I follow ever puts a roof over my head I will stop attending games. Football is a outdoor sport. Quit being a ***** and handle some rain/snow/ice/whatever

                And yes, I 100% sincerely loved all the cold games Ive been to (that were good football games to go to). And yes, I HATE the cold weather.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                  Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                  Blackout will not happen.

                  Side-note: If any team I follow ever puts a roof over my head I will stop attending games. Football is a outdoor sport. Quit being a ***** and handle some rain/snow/ice/whatever

                  And yes, I 100% sincerely loved all the cold games Ive been to (that were good football games to go to). And yes, I HATE the cold weather.
                  I do wish sometimes that Indy had an outdoor stadium, but I do love Lucas Oil so its tough

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                    The Colts building an outdoor stadium was never an option. Indy wasn't going to fork over a billion dollars for a stadium unless it could also be used for events such as the Final Four. Now, they should have built a drainage system in it so that they didn't have to shut the roof every time there was a 0.0000001% chance of rain. Aside from that though, they did the right thing with Lucas Oil.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                      Sadly, if the NFL wants to keep up with TV (and lets be honest, TV is better for a lot of folks) I think we will see more domes (or at least retractable roofs).

                      IMO the trend we may see (sooner rather than later) is going to be domes (retractable or not) with a LOT of extras. Mark Cuban has it right when he says games need to be a family event. I also would not be surprised to see owners building smaller and smaller stadiums

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                        Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                        Sadly, if the NFL wants to keep up with TV (and lets be honest, TV is better for a lot of folks) I think we will see more domes (or at least retractable roofs).

                        IMO the trend we may see (sooner rather than later) is going to be domes (retractable or not) with a LOT of extras. Mark Cuban has it right when he says games need to be a family event. I also would not be surprised to see owners building smaller and smaller stadiums
                        I love going to a couple of games a year and taking in the live atmosphere, but I'd never want to go to all 8 of them. I just don't pick up on as much as I do when I watch on a nice HD TV. It will just be really hard for the NFL to fix that. HD TV's are the worst things to ever happen to teams trying to bring fans to the gate.

                        There are certain events where the live experience trumps TV by a billion. I was at both of the epic Pats games (AFCCG and 4th and 2), and the live atmosphere at the end of those certainly couldn't have been equaled in the living room. But by and large, I'm perfectly fine with watching on a nice TV. Going to a couple a year is enough of a fix for me.

                        Same with the Pacers. I usually go to at least 5 a year, but sometimes (like last year) have gone to as much as 10 or so. I wouldn't really have a desire to go to 25 of them. 8-10 is probably the number I'll continue to shoot for.
                        Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-02-2014, 07:54 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                          Indy does NOT have a reputation as a fairweather fanbase except to a certain percentage of people who actually have no idea what they are talking about. Donnie Walsh did a talk a lot of 'small market' BS excuse making back in the day when he was simply justifying the way he wanted to spend money and trying to keep fans pacified why he wasn't chasing FA's... so maybe that has morphed and is why we hear this BS from some people.

                          But all you have to do is actually pay attention around the NFL and NBA and not just to the 'hot' teams that happens to be on natl TV and you'll see that in down years those teams lose support just like in Indy or anywhere else. Heck, in some cases moreso than Indy.

                          I highlighted the fact that Green Bay was actually having trouble selling out and had more tix available than Indy. Green Bay is supposed to be one of the 'examples' of unflinching fan support in all of sports. That's the reputation anyway. Apparently the reality is a little different.

                          As for Cleveland... Have you looked in the stands of Browns games lately???? The Browns have already lost their team once. Yet for some reason there's this notion that Cleveland is the ultimate in hardcore fans who never miss a game. When they are down we just don't see Cleveland unless we go looking for them. Or else it's a national TV that the hype helps sell tickets.

                          How about the other day when the Colts went to KC? There were SEVERAL empty seats in that stadium from the start. In fact, I'm suspicious that some of the upper deck people came down to the lower bowl as the game went on and it was obvious there were seats to be had. The lower bowl filled somewhat... and the top simply looked even more sparse. Kansas City was the other day playing the PR game about dB's of the fans and then a few days later seats were open everywhere for a couple of teams jockeying for playoff position and potentially for a playoff preview (which it turns out they did end up matched in the playoffs).

                          So yeah, when SNF or MNF is coming to town, about ANY team is going to have a packed out, rocked out stadium. But that 3-12 team playing a 4-11 team on the west coast at 1PM EST on a regional broadcast isn't going to be quite the same atmosphere or see the stands filled the same. But then, we aren't really looking for those games. We'd have to go out of our way to even SEE those games or even highlights on TV. And IMHO that is it in a nutshell- People have these perceptions that they just don't want to let reality get in the way of. So Green Bay is always sold out with Cheeseheads and KC is filled with BBQ eating, rabid, record potential loud crowds. ...And the dog-pound is packed in Cleveland and the entire stadium has dog masks on, game in and game out, regardless of the season or opponent.

                          But Indy? Well, regardless of the numbers thru the turnstyles over the years, and trends in attendance vs record vs other franchises... We're fairweathers and don't support our team like these other teams....

                          Some people just need to get over it and realize not only are we the norm in sports and like most other cities, we're actually pretty good at supporting our teams and aren't quick to jump off the bandwagon without the team pushing fans off by compounding bad decisions.

                          And Sollozzo explained the Colts situation fairly well. For years TV commentators would mistakenly call them the 'Baltimore Colts'. And then they didn't do much for their first few years with Robert Irsay at the helm. But Jim Irsay has been anything BUT his father. And the team has been fairly well established, if not by the mid 90's certainly by the time Manning helped put that Lombardi trophy on Jim Irsay's desk. And then Irsay has brilliantly marketed the team and made sure they are beloved throughout the state.

                          Indy hasn't sold out and Green Bay hasn't sold out.... that says something but it doesn't say it about the weakness of the fanbases!
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            How much do you believe that outdoor stadiums have in terms of cementing in people's minds that fans are more "hardcore"? Like Green Bay, Buffalo, Pitt, Cleveland --- all of these teams are considered to have "hardcore" fans.

                            Here's my thoughts on outdoor stadiums: The ownership is cheap. You can sell the "hardcore" experience all you want, but we ALL know that $$$ and bottom-line is the, well, bottom-line. You don't wanna fork out money to put a damn roof over your fan's heads, and therefore --- you are a cheap, penny-pinching miser.

                            Putting a roof over a stadium is costly to implement and maintain. These companies provide a product for a clientbase. In EVERY business, taking care of your customers is THE number one way to drive revenue. It's all about making the experience for the customer, so that they dump more of their cash into your buckets. It's why Amazon is taking over the world. Their customer-service is absolutely redonkulous (more companies need to learn from Amazon).

                            In what business, besides skiing, is making your client-base sit outside in terrible weather considered good business? Every time I watch a football game that is being played in inclement weather, I think to myself, "Man it's awesome watching football in the snow." But the parallel thought I'm having is, "Look at those poor *******s, they look miserable, as much as they deny it. is a bunch of cheapskates for not putting a roof over their customer's heads and keep them comfortable." I know people look at Indy as being "soft", but I look at it as our management took steps beyond what a lot of companies did to ensure that our experience was enjoyable and comfortable. I've been ot games outside, I hollered and whooped it up and drank like a sailor to numb the pain --- and I'd be lying through my teeth if I said I'd rather not be sitting in my recliner in my 71 degrees of humidified comfort, watching the game with commentary on my 60-inch LED with whatever I want to drink being 2 rooms away, costing 80% cheaper. Of course we want to be comfortable.
                            This is just a bunch of nonsense and ********. Ownership is just being cheap when they don't put a roof on their stadium? HA! Then why is the 49ers new stadium half a billion dollars more expensive than LOS? And since when did ownership pay for the stadium? That money is coming from tax payers. So yeah if it can be cheaper then make it cheaper. Bad enough tax dollar fund stadiums like they do.

                            And guess what? A lot of fans love football outside. I absolutely prefer watching a game in an outdoor stadium. I've been to plenty of freezing cold game, they are great. Millions of fans agree. You think Chicago fans want a roof on Soldier field? You think Packer fans want a roof on Lambo? They don't.

                            Don't sit there and act like football should only be played in a controlled 70 degree environment. It never has been that way. And hopefully never will be.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                              Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                              Blackout will not happen.

                              Side-note: If any team I follow ever puts a roof over my head I will stop attending games. Football is a outdoor sport. Quit being a ***** and handle some rain/snow/ice/whatever

                              And yes, I 100% sincerely loved all the cold games Ive been to (that were good football games to go to). And yes, I HATE the cold weather.
                              I went to the Colts game in Cincy this year and it was freezing cold and just miserable. Football is a sport played on turf, nothing more. There's nothing written that says it was meant to be played in the elements. I'm really glad we play indoors and I certainly wouldn't go to winter games if the Colts played outdoors. I love the Colts but if I'm going to spend my money to go watch the game in person I want to be comfortable not miserable, and indoor heating is comfortable.
                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Colts (and others) Playoff Games Not Sold Out. TV Blackout?

                                As a Notre Dame season ticket holder, outdoor football is much worse than dome. The elements aren't fun. People can pretend like they are, but domes are louder, more profitable, and comfortable. If people want to pat themselves on the back by being crammed between two sweaty 300 pound guys while it's snowing, be my guest.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X