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

Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 7
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
  • #1

    Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

    I can't believe Bob is now concerned that only 12,400 tickets were sold. He seems a little surprised by that.

    One thing I've learned many years ago, is if something is repeated enough, "Pacers are thugs, no good for nothin losers" people will believe it - whether it is true or not doesn't matter.

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...plate=printart


    Bob Kravitz
    Theories abound regarding lack of Fieldhouse sellouts
    February 12, 2007


    This Indiana Pacers' homestand has almost nothing to do with making the playoffs. As long as the Pacers are hanging around .500, which has been the case both pre- and post-trade, they will find a spot come spring.

    No, more important than winning or losing, the Pacers need this stretch of nine home games out of 10 to win back some of the multitude of fans who've lost interest in them, either because of their mediocre play or, more likely, because of the off-court incidents that have plagued this organization and doomed it to eternal guilt in the court of public opinion.

    Here was the burning question in the wake of the Pacers' artful 94-80 victory over the Los Angeles Clippers on Sunday at Conseco Fieldhouse:

    Where was everybody?

    The fans, I mean.

    This was a Sunday afternoon, a game with no local TV coverage, a semi-marquee opponent in the Los Angeles Clippers, a perfect game for the Pacers to start to re-establish themselves in a city that is just catching its breath from the Colts' Super Bowl run. The announced crowd was 12,489. That's four home games out of five in which the crowd was announced at fewer than 13,000.

    For a week or two, you could chalk it all up to the mania surrounding the Colts; certainly Monday, the night of the Colts pep rally, was one of them. But how about Wednesday night, when 12,923 showed up? Or Sunday, when the number was 12,489?

    "We know that we've got to win some fans back here,'' coach Rick Carlisle said. ". . . I really believe the fans who've kind of departed will return if we play hard and win games."

    Even when the Pacers were winning 61 games and reaching the Eastern Conference finals, they weren't selling out with regularity. But it's clear, both in quantitative and qualitative measures, that fans have taken a wait-and-stay-at-home approach with this group.

    "My plea to the public is, give this team a chance to do well,'' Jermaine O'Neal said long after the game. "Donnie (Walsh, team CEO) and Larry (Bird, team president) have a vision for this team. These new guys weren't a part of what went on before. If somebody is eventually found guilty of something, fine, bring down the hammer. But until then, give us a chance, and we'll do our best to win back the fans.

    "It hurts me to hear the things that have been said. That we have thugs in this locker room. We don't have thugs. When people say the Pacers are this and that, they're a trash organization, that's just wrong. We're trying to make our city proud. We do care, and we're going to do what we have to do to get people back in the building.''

    Let's be honest: This has not been a readily supportable team since Reggie Miller's final season. Last year's team was completely dysfunctional and unlikable. And this year's team, which was sold to the public as the new-and-improved Pacers, fell apart so quickly and dramatically, Walsh and Bird chose to change direction and make that eight-player trade with Golden State.

    There's a creeping sense of impermanence with this franchise after so many decades of stability, and it's hard for fans, many of them digging deep to buy basketball tickets, to make that fiscal and emotional investment.

    So whose fault is it that the city is currently turned off on the Pacers?
    To listen to some members of the Pacers organization, it's partially our fault. They say we've overreacted to the latest imbroglio. They say the print media, and the guy renting this space in particular, have already convicted Jamaal Tinsley and Marquis Daniels in the court of public opinion.

    Quite naturally, I disagree, but then, you're not going to get an objective appraisal from me on this one.

    Suffice to say, the longtime Pacers, the few who are left from a better time in franchise history, are frustrated. They are frustrated that teammates have put themselves in positions to get caught in trouble's crosshairs. And they are frustrated by the way we've covered those alleged missteps, the way the public now perceives the entire team in the most negative way possible.

    "I spent three hours the other night defending Jamaal to people,'' said Jeff Foster, who was here when the building was filled and vibrant. "I don't necessarily know what happened (at the nightclub), but I know he wasn't involved. I just don't feel like, with the fans or the media, that we're getting the benefit of the doubt. There's supposed to be due process, but whatever we do, we're guilty.

    "What happens if everybody is exonerated, there are no charges, nothing? Will that be covered as zealously as the police report was?''

    Look. This is a great basketball city. If the Pacers play hard, win their share of games and keep their names off the police blotter, the fans will come filing back in. It's really quite simple. So why has it gotten so darned complicated?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

    Let's see, is this fixed yet?



    Nope, guess not.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

      "of fans who've lost interest in them, either because of their mediocre play or, more likely, because of the off-court incidents that have plagued this organization and doomed it to eternal guilt in the court of public opinion. "


      OK, here is my point. Reading this column - and listening to the general Indy resident - it seems like there have been maybe 5 or 6 maybe 10 off the court incidents. But unlessI missed something there has been actually 1 off the court incident as of right now. The Club Rio thing in October - and the player most associated with the incident has been traded. The thing last week at worst was a brawl fight that got a little out of hand. At best the thing last week is nothing.

      Ok, I'm racking my brain trying to come up with other off the court incidents. I don't know of any.

      The brawl in Detroit I consider that on the court. it started during a game - it started more so because Ben Wallace than anyone. The going into the stands - well the two players who really went into the stands are both gone.

      Are we supposed to punish, Murphy, Dunleavy, Ike, McLoud, DA, Marquis, Marshall, Baston, Granger, Greene, and Williams - players who weren't even on the team at the time.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        "of fans who've lost interest in them, either because of their mediocre play or, more likely, because of the off-court incidents that have plagued this organization and doomed it to eternal guilt in the court of public opinion. "


        OK, here is my point. Reading this column - and listening to the general Indy resident - it seems like there have been maybe 5 or 6 maybe 10 off the court incidents. But unlessI missed something there has been actually 1 off the court incident as of right now. The Club Rio thing in October - and the player most associated with the incident has been traded. The thing last week at worst was a brawl fight that got a little out of hand. At best the thing last week is nothing.

        Ok, I'm racking my brain trying to come up with other off the court incidents. I don't know of any.

        The brawl in Detroit I consider that on the court. it started during a game - it started more so because Ben Wallace than anyone. The going into the stands - well the two players who really went into the stands are both gone.

        Are we supposed to punish, Murphy, Dunleavy, Ike, McLoud, DA, Marquis, Marshall, Baston, Granger, Greene, and Williams - players who weren't even on the team at the time.
        The problem is not with the team but wit the press.

        Ppl like Mike Wells, who are "looking to be big and famous" are no longer "sports-journalist" but all aspire to become the next "big thing" themselves and "diggin up the dirt" has always been the best method for that.
        And no, I am not against things out "in the open" I am hjowever 200% opposed to "how it is written".

        As a more then examplatory case I hereafter post verbatim what is up on the wthr webside at this moment.

        Originally posted by wthr.com

        Pacers trying to improve image problems

        MinHee Kim/Eyewitness News

        Indianapolis - Pacers guard Jamaal Tinsley and former guard Stephen Jackson are both due in court Monday in connection with the spectacle outside a westside strip club last fall. That, along with last week's alleged incident at another Indianapolis club, put the team's image in question.

        Pacers fans want to see the players going after rebounds and getting physical on the hard court. But they don't want to see players showing up in judicial court for roughing people up and breaking the law.

        "I think a lot of people don't want to be associated with the team when the players have weapons and guns and violence," said Pacers fan Matthew Duncan.

        In the latest incident, guards Jamaal Tinsley and Marquis Daniels are accused of punching a night club manager at the 8 Seconds Saloon, February 5th.

        Both players say they're innocent. But it's now up to a grand jury to decide if the players will face any charges.

        This latest scuffle comes just months after the now, infamous brawl involving several Pacers players outside of a west side strip club last October.

        "It's just interesting to think that we traded some of our original players to try to get away from the team, you know getting that kind of image and it just seems to keep happening," said Duncan.

        Former Pacer Stephen Jackson was one of the players traded to the Golden State Warriors but for his part in the Club Rio fight he faces several charges in Indianapolis,including criminal recklessness, battery and disorderly conduct. In April, Jackson will have his day in court.

        Perhaps the most important court for the Pacers organization right now is the court of public opinion.

        "I think it's just bad for the city in general, just shows bad overall respect for the city," said fan Joseph Olas. "There's no way I would have showed up and paid money for the tickets."

        "The players that are in the trouble need to watch they-self more and I think the organization should be fining them a little bit steeper," said Keith Nye.

        "We know that we've got to win some fans back here," said Pacers coach Rick Carlisle. "This is not a new theme. We understand the way we present ourselves on the floor is important."

        About 12,500 people attended Sunday's game at Conseco Fieldhouse, the lowest turnout of the season so far.
        Read the bolded part to see what I mean, it has fine references to things that are not th ere, the "brawl" is mentioned but now refers to the Rio incident, it does not state why Tinsley has to be in court, we all know that he wasn't charged with anything except being there, but the way it is written makes you think Tinsley is standing trial.

        Garbage (or tabloid as we call it here) journalism at its best.

        I do notmention the quoted "fans" here, because I don't know them and for all I know they've never even seen CFH from the inside.
        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

          I don't normally read Kravitz. However I just woke up and jumped online to see if there were any word about Granger. Then I read the other articles without looking to see who wrote them.

          I didn't realize it was Kravitz until he said, "They say the print media, and the guy renting this space in particular, have already convicted Jamaal Tinsley and Marquis Daniels in the court of public opinion."

          Actually I don't know whether that is true or not because I haven't read any other Kravitz articles since this latest fight. I only read him accidentally nowadays. I quit reading him about a year ago because he writes so many negative articles and has shown he's pretty much clueless where the Pacers are concerned.

          On his question of where is everybody? I think it's a combination of things. No Reggie, competition for the dollar, the team wasn't likable, and the Pacers aren't making new fans at the ground roots level.

          The team not being likable I think mainly falls on Birds shoulders. I think he was the driving force behind keeping guys with questionable character too long. However, I don't fault him for it.

          The NBA has always had players with questionable character. Having played with such players and won championships I don't think he thought it was the big deal it's proven to be in Indiana. The good thing is I think he's had a change of heart, because the Pacers passed on a good point guard in the draft because he had stolen computers.

          As for the Pacers not making fans at the ground root level, it's somewhat the NBA's fault. I think radio should be free, yet the NBA charges for it. I started fellowing various sports teams when I was 11 years old, by listening to them on the radio. Nowadays if 11 year old's can't follow their team in some way, they will just find some other way to entertain themselves.

          Yes there's League Pass, but that doesn't mean much at the ground root level. And if you don't live in the US you're just out of luck.

          There's other reason's, and I was on a roll, but I'm stopping here because I'm hungry.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I can't believe Bob is now concerned that only 12,400 tickets were sold. He seems a little surprised by that.

            One thing I've learned many years ago, is if something is repeated enough, "Pacers are thugs, no good for nothin losers" people will believe it - whether it is true or not doesn't matter.

            http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...plate=printart


            Bob Kravitz
            Theories abound regarding lack of Fieldhouse sellouts
            February 12, 2007


            This Indiana Pacers' homestand has almost nothing to do with making the playoffs. As long as the Pacers are hanging around .500, which has been the case both pre- and post-trade, they will find a spot come spring.

            No, more important than winning or losing, the Pacers need this stretch of nine home games out of 10 to win back some of the multitude of fans who've lost interest in them, either because of their mediocre play or, more likely, because of the off-court incidents that have plagued this organization and doomed it to eternal guilt in the court of public opinion.

            Here was the burning question in the wake of the Pacers' artful 94-80 victory over the Los Angeles Clippers on Sunday at Conseco Fieldhouse:

            Where was everybody?

            The fans, I mean.

            This was a Sunday afternoon, a game with no local TV coverage, a semi-marquee opponent in the Los Angeles Clippers, a perfect game for the Pacers to start to re-establish themselves in a city that is just catching its breath from the Colts' Super Bowl run. The announced crowd was 12,489. That's four home games out of five in which the crowd was announced at fewer than 13,000.

            For a week or two, you could chalk it all up to the mania surrounding the Colts; certainly Monday, the night of the Colts pep rally, was one of them. But how about Wednesday night, when 12,923 showed up? Or Sunday, when the number was 12,489?

            "We know that we've got to win some fans back here,'' coach Rick Carlisle said. ". . . I really believe the fans who've kind of departed will return if we play hard and win games."

            Even when the Pacers were winning 61 games and reaching the Eastern Conference finals, they weren't selling out with regularity. But it's clear, both in quantitative and qualitative measures, that fans have taken a wait-and-stay-at-home approach with this group.

            "My plea to the public is, give this team a chance to do well,'' Jermaine O'Neal said long after the game. "Donnie (Walsh, team CEO) and Larry (Bird, team president) have a vision for this team. These new guys weren't a part of what went on before. If somebody is eventually found guilty of something, fine, bring down the hammer. But until then, give us a chance, and we'll do our best to win back the fans.

            "It hurts me to hear the things that have been said. That we have thugs in this locker room. We don't have thugs. When people say the Pacers are this and that, they're a trash organization, that's just wrong. We're trying to make our city proud. We do care, and we're going to do what we have to do to get people back in the building.''

            Let's be honest: This has not been a readily supportable team since Reggie Miller's final season. Last year's team was completely dysfunctional and unlikable. And this year's team, which was sold to the public as the new-and-improved Pacers, fell apart so quickly and dramatically, Walsh and Bird chose to change direction and make that eight-player trade with Golden State.

            There's a creeping sense of impermanence with this franchise after so many decades of stability, and it's hard for fans, many of them digging deep to buy basketball tickets, to make that fiscal and emotional investment.

            So whose fault is it that the city is currently turned off on the Pacers?
            To listen to some members of the Pacers organization, it's partially our fault. They say we've overreacted to the latest imbroglio. They say the print media, and the guy renting this space in particular, have already convicted Jamaal Tinsley and Marquis Daniels in the court of public opinion.

            Quite naturally, I disagree, but then, you're not going to get an objective appraisal from me on this one.

            Suffice to say, the longtime Pacers, the few who are left from a better time in franchise history, are frustrated. They are frustrated that teammates have put themselves in positions to get caught in trouble's crosshairs. And they are frustrated by the way we've covered those alleged missteps, the way the public now perceives the entire team in the most negative way possible.

            "I spent three hours the other night defending Jamaal to people,'' said Jeff Foster, who was here when the building was filled and vibrant. "I don't necessarily know what happened (at the nightclub), but I know he wasn't involved. I just don't feel like, with the fans or the media, that we're getting the benefit of the doubt. There's supposed to be due process, but whatever we do, we're guilty.

            "What happens if everybody is exonerated, there are no charges, nothing? Will that be covered as zealously as the police report was?''

            Look. This is a great basketball city. If the Pacers play hard, win their share of games and keep their names off the police blotter, the fans will come filing back in. It's really quite simple. So why has it gotten so darned complicated?

            I've been telling you for years that the average local fan does not like this team as much as many of us do here online.

            I also realize that by being here online we are generally fanatics but I just don't feel & haven't felt like this area has embraced the team since the 00 team was broken up.

            Sadly, while I realize I am not the right person to say this it needs to be said, Jermaine O'Neal is far more popular online than he is with the local fan base.

            Oh sure he gets cheers, the most actually, at the beginning of the game but I just don't get the feeling that people like him nearly as much as they did Reggie Miller.

            Yes I know Reggie is an icon and all, but let's look at the tale of this. Reggie's first seven years in Indiana that Pacers did no better than what J.O.'s teams have done. In fact they were worse.

            J.O. has been an all-star more times, has been a legitimate MVP candidate & other than the brawl issue has never had any trouble with the league.

            So why is his name not said in the same reverance as Reggies was at the exact same time frame?

            I have my ideas as to why, but I am biased.

            Or does everybody just think I'm all wet on this issue? If you do please explain the mediocre attendance during the 61 win season?


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

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

              Was Reggie who he was after 5 years with the Pacers?

              I think that his popularity grew over the years and became embedded after the Knicks heroics and the press writing his straifght into the heavens plus he was in they eye of the beholders a superstar.

              Perhaps in 3 more years, and one or two playoff heroics from JO he may rise to the same fame.

              Pound for Pound JO is the best player the NBA franchise of the Pacers has ever had, some day it will have to become clear to the "fans" as well I hope.
              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                I think Kravitz has a much better grasp on the realities of Pacer-dom than any other writer.

                Its not pretty, and Bob doesn't pull punches.

                But look at the Bulls. This isn't even really an "NBA City" even though its got a huge population base. When the team struggled and had unsavory characters like Artest, Oakley, Floyd/Krausse, et. al., attendance dipped. Now the Bulls have a likealbe, winning bunch and the fans are flocking back to the UC.

                This will eventually be the case in Indy. Eventually they'll field a competitive team with likeable players, just like they did from 1991-2000. And the fans will come back. The question remains: who do you trust to lead them there? Do you trust the same people who dug the big hole we're in now?

                Sometimes, you make a change just for the sake of making a change, to say, "This won't be tolerated anymore." And interestingly, I think Walsh (Bird?) is trying to do that. Problem is, did that decision come from high enough in the organization? It seems the fans are saying, "I'll come back when I believe in this team's direction."
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                  C'mon, Peck, we all know that until 1992, Reggie could not escape Chuck's shadow. And then until 1994, he couldn't escape Detlef's shadow.

                  For his first seven-eight years, he just was not the "best" player on his team, and he wasn't the most popular player on his team either.

                  Under Larry Brown, he began to come out of his shell.

                  How many game-winning shots did Reggie hit from 1987-1993? Maybe five, probably less. He was "Mr. First Quarter." I can remember one floater and one three-pointer. His number was not called very often in that scenario.

                  Later in his career, he became "Mr. Fourth Quarter." But those of us paying enough attention to the Pacers from 87-93 get looked at like nutcases for even suggesting there was a time that St. Reggie was "the opposite of clutch."
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                    C'mon, Peck, we all know that until 1992, Reggie could not escape Chuck's shadow. And then until 1994, he couldn't escape Detlef's shadow.

                    For his first seven-eight years, he just was not the "best" player on his team, and he wasn't the most popular player on his team either.

                    Under Larry Brown, he began to come out of his shell.

                    How many game-winning shots did Reggie hit from 1987-1993? Maybe five, probably less. He was "Mr. First Quarter." I can remember one floater and one three-pointer. His number was not called very often in that scenario.

                    Later in his career, he became "Mr. Fourth Quarter." But those of us paying enough attention to the Pacers from 87-93 get looked at like nutcases for even suggesting there was a time that St. Reggie was "the opposite of clutch."
                    I think your love for Person is severly clouding your judgement on this issue.

                    Look I used to take a beating back on the star board for not being a member of the R.A.S. (Reggie is a superstar) fan base. In fact I was very very very critical of him.

                    However he was wildly popular from about 89 on.

                    Do you remember the old rap group Kid'N'Play coming to M.S.A. to sit courtside to see him play? That was the first time in my memory that any celebs (& at the time they were fairly popular) came to see our team for any reason.

                    Yes, he later went from most popular Pacer to State of Indiana Icon (remember that as we talk, this guy trancended sports in Indiana he became so popular that people who didn't even like the Pacers knew him)

                    If you asked anybody on the planet (other than those of us on the net) who was the face of the Pacers in the 90's there would be no doubt it was 100% Reggie Miller & this started before his run on the Knicks.

                    However ask this today, who is the face of the Pacers from 00 on & see what people say.

                    You'll get some J.O.'s, you'll get some still saying Reggie, you'll get some who say Artest or Bird or Tinsley.

                    There is no overwhelming support for Jermaine O'Neal locally.

                    Why? Well again, I have a theory on that but I'll let everyone else state on this.


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

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                      Peck and everyone else. The bottom is is this. Fans in Indianapolis don't like this pacers team. Well OK, that is obvious.

                      But what team have they liked. Except for about 6 years in the 90"s and the ABA - all the other 25 years or so this city , these fans have hated the pacers and have hated the NBA.


                      That is the truth and it just hit me - it is the 80's again. It feels the same way.

                      Peck, I know I've been looking at things completely backwards. Instead of why don't people like this team or the 61 win team - not liking an NBA team is the norm - liking an NBA team is abnormal. it takes very unusual circumstances for people in this city to like an NBA team.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                        I do no know whether it is not like as much as not care.

                        For the first time since the 80s - I could not care less. Maybe it is because I think we are just going through the motions - have no clear direction, have no real vision.

                        Maybe I just miss the guys I used to love to watch... including Artest by the way. Let's remember how much fun he was to watch play. Sure he is a whack job - but I loved watching him play.
                        Heywoode says... work hard man.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                          This is just Kravitz stating the obvious to me. Of course no casual fans likes this team.

                          As for the off the court incidents, UB, there's:

                          1. The Brawl
                          2. Rio
                          3. Last week

                          And each one just snowballs in the public's eye.

                          BTW...How is this off the court? The basis for the story is attendance. I guess it's not on the court necessarily, but it's certainly inside the building.
                          Read my Pacers blog:
                          8points9seconds.com

                          Follow my twitter:
                          @8pts9secs

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                            I just phoned my wife (a former season ticket holder) at work and asked her to name the team. I figured she could name JT and JO and that was all she could remember and I was right. She said the team "just isn’t memorable anymore." She never "hears anything about them that isn’t bad." and "They keep changing them so much I don’t know who’s on the team."

                            There was a time I bet she could have rattled off 8-10 of them. This is a woman who remembers Pooh, Paco, and Granville Waiters.

                            Now….. 2.
                            Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Bob Kravitz: is asking where was everybody -is he now trying to be funny

                              Uncle Buck is onto something here:

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Instead of why don't people like this team or the 61 win team - not liking an NBA team is the norm - liking an NBA team is abnormal. it takes very unusual circumstances for people in this city to like an NBA team.

                              But do you think the point applies only to NBA? Maybe Hoosiers don't like basketball much anymore at all levels. I was reading recently that Indiana high school basketball attendance peaked in 1962, even before the class system was adopted. Consolidations explain most of that. We have 300+ high school now versus more than 700 a generation ago. Fewer people these days really care about their high school teams these days, because it is someone else's kid rather than their own kid or their neighbor.

                              As fewer kids grow up with a deep, personal affinity to basketball, the pro game has fewer automatic fans. So it has to compete for them rather than taking them for granted. Maybe Indiana is becoming just another place with a team, rather than Hoops Heaven.




                              (None of the foregoing applies to IU Assembly Hall, or at the present time, Hinkle Fieldhouse.)
                              And I won't be here to see the day
                              It all dries up and blows away
                              I'd hang around just to see
                              But they never had much use for me
                              In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
                              Working...
                              X