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

Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

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

  • #61
    Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Walsh's job was done sometime in the late 90's. That was as far as his style was going to get a team. After that, accomplishments (Finals) were more in spite of him than because of him. If that wasn't clear then, it should be clear now in hindsight

    ...His reputation should be taking a hit and rightly so. If the Simons allow this to continue (bad management) then we will soon need League Pass to watch the Pacers play. IMO it is just that bleak. And don't think I'm giving Bird a pass here either. The two-headed monster has been part of the problem, not part of the solution

    ...This team needs some dynamic vision and management to energize the fanbase. We can't put lipstick on the pig any longer. We need someone who understands 21st century Indianapolis, Indiana, sports, the NBA, and basketball in general. "Dynamic" and "Walsh" are two words rarely ever spoken together.
    one thought about donnie being passed his prime... i agree. the problem is he still has his fingers in the mix. and then we have bird who is about ready to ride without training wheels for the first time. my worry is that we're missing the boat on a guy within the organization that could be the new, young voice we're looking for as an organization: david morway. he was being considered for the Cavs GM job and if he's ready to be a GM now, we could miss our chance with him. just a thought regarding your 'dynamic vision and management" comment. could be we have the guy just not in the right position.
    This is the darkest timeline.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

      Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
      one thought about donnie being passed his prime... i agree. the problem is he still has his fingers in the mix. and then we have bird who is about ready to ride without training wheels for the first time. my worry is that we're missing the boat on a guy within the organization that could be the new, young voice we're looking for as an organization: david morway. he was being considered for the Cavs GM job and if he's ready to be a GM now, we could miss our chance with him. just a thought regarding your 'dynamic vision and management" comment. could be we have the guy just not in the right position.
      First i'll comment on David Morway. I agree with you 100% on him. I really wish he would replace Larry Bird already.

      Anyways, as for Donnie being passed his prime, no I don't think so.

      Why is Donnie passed his prime? We failed to make the playoffs this year? First time in how many years?

      Look, just a few years ago Donnie did one hell of a re building job that KEPT us in the playoffs. You could see that while we were not going to win the title each year we took a little step. I remember, I think it was the season we made the Bulls trade, that we were the 8th seed and pushed the Nets to 5 games (back when the 1rst round was 5 games). Man, that was a hell of a series and that Game 5 broke my heart. Anyways while we didn't win you could see the team was in the right direction. We had young guys who looked like they would gel well together given time.

      Then come the 2003-2004 season and we win a league best 61 games and could have beat the Pistons that year, which is the year the Pistons went on to win the championship. We were really so close. It's sad. If Ron Artest wasn't messed up in the head this that team could still be together and we just may still be in the mix for a title run. But the team has went down hill and I blame most of it on Ron, not Donnie. That team that Donnie re built only had one shot at a title and that was during the 03-04 season.

      I will say this, I think that this team is going to be hindered as long as both Donnie and Larry are making the decisions. You can't carry out your vision if you have another guy trying to carry out his. It just doesn't work no matter how similar they are it just doesn't work. And I fear that things will continue to be bad once Larry is in charge all by himself.

      But anyways the state this team is in is not Donnie or the Simion's fault. We had some bad luck with a player or so and things just got really bad. We just need to calm down and relax and accept the fact that we won't start be contenders again with new owners, replacing Donnie, trading Jermaine, etc. We know that the Simions and Donnie will put us in a position to win a title, it will just take time. No matter what moves this team makes I think that at our best we are a 2nd Round Playoff team. So just calm down. We don't need tp panic and get new owners or anything nuts like that.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

        Ya'll need a huge dose of sunshine in your lives.

        I don't have enough time to reply to all this, and guys like UB, LA, Mal, and Seth have already done it anyway.

        Although picking on the Simons is pretty poor form, IMO. Owners should be supportive and willing to shell out the $. They've been that. If they don't want a championship, they would have forced DW to be a heck of a lot more thrifty with the dough.

        All this talk of 'vision' and whatnot sounds good, but I kind of think most of it is fluff. For instance, the Spurs have vision, but if they don't get lucky and win Groundhog Day in the draft, no one here cares even a little bit about them. If Bender had turned into a superstar, we'd all be talking about what visionaries the Simons/DW are. The draft is a crapshoot mostly, and it's also the major way teams get better.

        In general we've tried to be a winning team, and you can't ask for much more than that. The line between "We try to just be 'very good'" and "We try to win it all" is so thin that I can't really believe any of you are actually privy to it. It's your own biases seeing what you want to see.


        Anyway, I'm going to enjoy watching JOB and D.Harter coach up our defense next year. And oh, hey... what is it that wins championships in the NBA? (Defense, mostly.) Who did we just recently hire? (#1 D.Cooridnator in the game, D.Harter.) There's a little bit of vision for you...
        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

          Lots of good stuff in here, and I'm late to the party as usual.

          Here's my take, if anyone cares...

          #1. The Simon brothers are held in high esteem in my book. They put their money where their mouths were and saved Indianapolis from Sam Nassi's ownership of the about-to-become Sacramento Pacers. I utterly disagree with anyone that thinks this franchise in in peril. It hasn't been at risk of moving since 1983 and Conseco Fieldhouse is a big testament to its security. Now, having said that, the next generation of Simons might not be as civic-minded.

          #2. What did the Simons promise us when they rescued the franchise? I don't have the exact wording anymore, but they promised us the following: Indianapolis would continue to be a city with an NBA fanchise, they promised us the franchise would be competitive and make us proud.

          Were we competitive from 1983-86? Hell no. We were far-and-away the worst team in basketball. Ted Stepien's Cavs? Better. The San Diego Clippers? Better. Even the relocated Kings and expansion Mavericks? Better. It took a long time to overcome Sam Nassi's firesale of the Pacers assets (draft picks, Alex English for an aging George McGinnis, Mike Bantom and Louie Orr traded for cash. Don't forget that the 82-86 Pacers were awful on the court because of the way they were managed from 79-83.)

          Were we proud of the team on November 19, 2004? Heck no. But between those dates (1986 and 2004), this team was competitive and it made us proud.

          I think, overall, the Simons have achieved their goals as NBA franchise owners. They haven't accomplished the ultimate goal of a championship, and they need to work very, very hard at regaining the "make us proud" status they had previously acheived.

          #3. I think many of you have an unreasonably short timeframe for turning this franchise around. I think the team's current management may be prolonging the problem. Having Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, and perhaps this is also true of Jamaal Tinsley and Jermaine O'Neal - I don't know - in that lockerroom for three-four seasons has been just as detrimental as four years of Sam Nassi's ownership. That doesn't mean the franchise is at risk of leaving, just that cleanup is going to be long, costly, and painful.

          #4. This is what I fault the Simons for - when it was clear that the Bird/ Walsh plans of the mid-2000's were not working, SOMETHING needed to change. In retrospect, I believe Donnie should've "fallen on the sword" in 2004. Or he should've fired Bird if Bird was really the driving force behind the franchise's atrocious decision making. What really ****es me off is that we are trusting the exact same guys who made the mistakes that put the franchise in its current state to ACTUALLY fix thos mistakes.

          The franchise will not return to respectability until this is fixed.

          #5. And that's where the "lets tinker, but not completely blow this thing up" strategy is actually hurting, not helping. 12 months ago, Stephen Jackson was clearly "Public Enemy #1." Management promised "big changes" and then changed everything but the two players that the fans were fed up with: Stephen Jackson who deserved every single bit (and a whole lot more) of the criticism he received, and Jamaal Tinsley who probably deserved half of the criticism he received. But the idea of promising "big changes" and then delivering the exact opposite (e.g., "a new bench but four of the five starters returned") was not lost on Pacers fans.

          #6. Look, the customer is always right. The paying customers in particular have said, "We'll pay to see a competitive team with class." They have not yet proved interested in paying ot see a team win without class (if you think the fans were willing to pay, then explain to me why I was surrounded by thousands of Pistons fans during the 2004 and 2005 playoff games at CFH) and they haven't proven interested in paying to see a 35-win team that may or may not have class.

          #7. I think a lot of fans do need to evaluate the definition of competitive. In the NBA, I like to say that my grading scale is as follows:

          Championship = A
          Losing in Game #7 of The Finals = A-
          Losing in Game #6 of The Finals = B+
          Losing in Game #5 of The Finals = B
          Losing in Game #4 of The Finals = B-
          Losing in Game #7 of the ECFs = C+
          Losing in Game #6 of the ECFs = C
          Losing in Game #5 of the ECFs = C-
          Losing in earlier rounds of the playoffs = D
          Missing playoffs = F.

          Having said that, I've seen some Pacers teams that get a "D" that I've really enjoyed. My expectations are high, in terms of quality. But I'll tune in and watch (and cheer for) a D/ F team that is climbing the ladder toward one of the top grades.

          #8. We are several years away from "contending" again, but that's not the same as competitive. The 11 game losing streak was the first time this team has not been competitive since the ill-fated 1988-89 season when Stipo's injury, and Dr. Jack's unexpected early-season retirement, threw that team into chaos. You want to talk about a team with no direction, remember that team had four different head coaches IN ONE SEASON. Mel Daniels said, "I ain't coaching this team, either." Of course, George Irvine wanted to coach that team, and only in Pacer-land would Dick Versace be considered an upgrade over Irvine...



          In summary, I don't fault ownership for the failures. The culture of winning does come from the CEO and work its way downward. The CEO should've known that when he told his recently-fired coach, "You coach the other 11 guys, I'll deal with Ronnie" that it was a decision that undermined the entire franchise. And it will take the franchise years to recover from this decision that took the focus OFF winning; took the focus off teamwork; and allowed the inmates to take control of the asylum. I just don't see how the current management can rectify that mistake.
          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


          • #65
            Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            The Colts are going to be loved more than the Pacers regardless, because the difference in the sport. The NFL plays one game a week, whereas the NBA plays around 3 games a week. Each game for the NFL, for your favorite team, is THE thing to watch because you have to wait a whole nother week for the next one. You miss a NBA game, you get to see another one the next night. Whoopdee do, you missed one.
            So you're saying that from 1994-2000 the Colts were more popular in Indiana than the Pacers? No freaking way.

            There is no doubt that *AS A WHOLE*, the NFL is much more popular than the NBA. But that doesn't mean it is like that in every single US marketplace.

            In LA they had 2 football teams, but they both left town because LA's lack of interest. LA is an NBA/Laker town.

            While as a whole throughout the country, the NFL rules every sport, it is just not that way in every city. Take New York for example. New York is a baseball town. To say otherwise is just asinine. The Yankees/Mets are worlds more popular than the Giants/Jets. Pick up a New York paper anytime fo year. The Yanks or Mets are always topping the headlines. NFL is more popular than MLB across the country, but it certainly aint that way in New York.

            Same with Boston. The Pats maybe won 3 superbowls in 5 years, but there is no way that they are more popular and beloved than the Red Sox.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

              Go take a poll across the US.

              Indiana is following the trend, not setting it. Yes, there are exceptions like Boston and NY, but they are the exceptions. Just because the NFL doesn't rule in three or four cities doesn't mean that Indianapolis is backwards. The NFL as a whole has stepped up their marketing since 1989, when Tags entered the picture and when the league was faltering.

              When did the NBA start dropping in popularity? When the NFL started gaining in popularity, that's when.

              Here's a nice article about what Tags did for the league.
              http://www.usatoday.com/sports/footb...ue-cover_x.htm

              The NBA Finals set a record low for TV ratings.
              http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19253444/
              Compared to the Superbowl's highest ever TV ratings this year.
              http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9976386/rss

              American's just don't watch/care much about the NBA anymore, and Indianapolis reflects that. Football is king.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                American's just don't watch/care much about the NBA anymore, and Indianapolis reflects that. Football is king.
                I wholeheartedly agree.

                I think a lot of it has to do with the sport itself, however, and not simply marketing schemes. Football is just such an exciting spectacle, exemplified by the Superbowl, that it really is appealing to anyone and everyone on some level.

                For the most part, basketball is much more appealing to those of us who have played it a lot, or otherwise become fanatical about it.

                Things like end-of-game scenarios with all the time-outs and foul shots and what not are just not exciting to most people. It's boring and slow just like MLB to many.

                The NFL just has the primeval, kick-the-crap out of someone aspect going for it, and all the other constant excitement. The NBA has dunks, but they all look a like after a while to many people it seems.

                Just saying, it's not all David Stern and the players. Some of it is just inherent to basketball, I reckon.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                  Football passed baseball as America's favorite sport sometime during the Pete Rozell days, and despite TWO strikes, has never looked back. Its pulling away from the contenders.

                  Basketball had passed baseball. But over the past ten years, basketball has fallen back to the level of baseball (which had a temporary revival until we learned the word BALCO.)

                  David Stern decided to market a league of stars, which worked well during the Julius/Bird/Magic/Jordan/Barkley/D-Rob/Shaq days. Post-Jordan, and during Shaq's decline, that has backfired. And fans of the TEAM game of basketball suffered both during the "marketing the stars" era and the mindboggling "lets invent new stars even though there aren't any stars" era.
                  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


                  • #69
                    Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                    I want to say that if this thread happened a month ago, it would have been a landslide favorite for thread of the year. I have to keep it in mind next year. The fact that we're hitting some major nerve points and nobody has flipped out yet is a testament to the stability of the PD membership.

                    Keep it going, folks.
                    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Go take a poll across the US.

                      Indiana is following the trend, not setting it. Yes, there are exceptions like Boston and NY, but they are the exceptions. Just because the NFL doesn't rule in three or four cities doesn't mean that Indianapolis is backwards. The NFL as a whole has stepped up their marketing since 1989, when Tags entered the picture and when the league was faltering.

                      When did the NBA start dropping in popularity? When the NFL started gaining in popularity, that's when.

                      Here's a nice article about what Tags did for the league.
                      http://www.usatoday.com/sports/footb...ue-cover_x.htm

                      The NBA Finals set a record low for TV ratings.
                      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19253444/
                      Compared to the Superbowl's highest ever TV ratings this year.
                      http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9976386/rss

                      American's just don't watch/care much about the NBA anymore, and Indianapolis reflects that. Football is king.

                      I never challenged your statement about NFL being superior to the NBA as far as popularity. It is 100% correct and there is no denying it. I clearly said "As a whole, the NFL rules every other sport." There is no need to throw the NBA finals ratings compared to Superbowl ratings at me, as any sensible person knows that the Superbowl blows everything else out in rating.

                      But I do think that there are more than "3 or 4 cities" where football is not the top thing on people's mind. I'll leave it at that. But again, I'm not challenging you on the fact that football is superior to anything else popularity wise when you look at the nation as a whole.
                      Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-25-2007, 07:51 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                        The Pacers aren't going anywhere. The franchise has suffered some traumatic incidents, and it will take time to climb out from underneath them, but we're not experiencing anything any different than every other franchise has faced when the face of their franchise retired. This isn't just the result of the brawl. I don't think we've ever truly rebounded from Reggie's retirement. The Bulls, Lakers, Spurs, all of them have gone through the same thing. Don't underestimate the importance of Reggie's departure. Reggie brought a level of professionalism that we haven't seen since. Jermaine wasn't ready to step into that role. Then you add the extracurricular stuff; it's just going to take time to climb back up the mountain. We have many problems, and they won't be solved overnight, but TPTB are working to correct them.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                          Originally posted by Jay View Post
                          Lots of good stuff in here, and I'm late to the party as usual.

                          Here's my take, if anyone cares...

                          #1. The Simon brothers are held in high esteem in my book. They put their money where their mouths were and saved Indianapolis from Sam Nassi's ownership of the about-to-become Sacramento Pacers. I utterly disagree with anyone that thinks this franchise in in peril. It hasn't been at risk of moving since 1983 and Conseco Fieldhouse is a big testament to its security. Now, having said that, the next generation of Simons might not be as civic-minded.



                          In summary, I don't fault ownership for the failures. The culture of winning does come from the CEO and work its way downward. The CEO should've known that when he told his recently-fired coach, "You coach the other 11 guys, I'll deal with Ronnie" that it was a decision that undermined the entire franchise. And it will take the franchise years to recover from this decision that took the focus OFF winning; took the focus off teamwork; and allowed the inmates to take control of the asylum. I just don't see how the current management can rectify that mistake.
                          I think the Simons are nearing their end as owners. They aren't getting any younger and one way or another there will be a transition somewhere along the lines. It might not be tomorrow, but it will be sooner rather than later. Our current management is going to sink this franchise even deeper. By the time the transition takes place, this team won't be in a pretty place IF SOMETHING DOESN'T CHANGE. That's my caveat. We can't keep running the team like it's been operated. Maybe lightning will strike and we suddenly see a dynamic new focus from PS&E and wonder what took so long.... but the odds are it will be 'same ol', same ol' and I can see someone saying "If Indy doesn't support this team, I know a city that is clamoring for an NBA team"

                          Ultimately, we're poorly managed and need a shakeup. The Simons hold the key to that.

                          -Bball
                          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


                          • #73
                            Re: Tbird analysis: The "culture of winning", and calling out the Simon brothers

                            There's some good stuff here and I like it tons, but let's cut to the chase.

                            Tbird is correct when you look at the moves TPTB have made over the course of the last few years strictly from a dollars and cents perspective and/or from the perspective of ridding the team of poor character players. Now, to put things in their proper perspective when it's all said and done it's all about money - or rather how to squeeze the most out of what little you have to work with - and the fact is, the Pacers are and shall remain a small market team. There have been tons of discussions concerning this very fact about this franchise both here and on RATS (never understood that acronym, but I'll use it because everyone knows it to refer to the IndyStar forum), but when discussion like this one turn up where the direction of the franchise are concerned, we all tend to forget that if NOT for the Simons and their property mgmt/merchandising empire (i.e, shopping malls) the Pacers would not exist - PERIOD!...well, maybe not in Naptown anyway.

                            Point is, I don't think it's a matter of TPTB marginalizing the overall goal of winning a championship in leau of merely getting back to the post season. I think they've tried very hard to bring a winning franchise to the city bywhich the fans could and should be proud of. Certain things have sidetracked that endeavor, and we really can't blame the Simons or even Walsh or Bird for that. Just as "it" rolls down hill, that sour cream also rises to the top from the bottom up. In this case, I'm referring to issues steaped in sound financial decision making, things Tbird has alread eluded to, i.e., trading Jalen Rose for Artest and Brad Miller, and subsequently doing a sing-N-trade w/Brad for Scott Pollard, or even the more recent transactions of getting the very best quality/value player in the Artest for Peja trade. You really can't blame TPTB for making those such moves because for all practical purposes they were forced onto the franchise. Brad demanded a multi-million/multi-year contract to stay. Was he worth it? I'll leave it up to others to judge by virtue of his stats since being traded to the Kings. Maybe I would have ponied up the money if I were Pres., but the obvious risk at the time was that in doing so the team could not re-sign other players* who were more promonate to the team's overall success. And again, since this is a small market team, can you imagine how inking Brad to such a high price tag contract w/2 or 3 others already out there would have hampered the team for several years?

                            So, from one perspective, the moves TPTB have made in recent years does give the appearance that they'll settle for mediocrity over talent. However, like they say in football, "upon closer review..." some moves have been forced upon them. But make no mistake, this franchise wants to be contenders. Here recently circumstances have just got in the way. I think with this new coaching staff, as well as events of the not so distant past have forced TPTB to re-think quite a few things, and as a result they have become more focused by virtue of a "take charge" type of leader from the sidelines.

                            I will never question Bird's desire to win. I didn't while he was player. I shall not while he is a GM. I do, however, believe he still has a lot to learn as someone in middle/upper mgmt, but I'll give him credit where credit is due. He tried it "our" way attempting to pacify the fans (i.e., standing by Artest's side despite the majority saying the franchise should have parted with him long ago), and I'll admit he has made some mistakes here recently (i.e., the re-acquisition of Al; whether or not he had anything to do with giving away future draft picks and/or players like James White remain highly debateable), but I think he has learned from his mistakes and doubt he'd repeat them - not unless the situation dictates. Which brings us right back to bad character players, making moves to rid the team of said bad apples for the sake of good character players, and at the very least moving players for the betterment of the bottom line long range, something we are not privy to not matter how many times we play GM with trade analyzers. The fact remains, players were moved in an effort to either keep this franchise afloat while also keeping it competitive by bringing in the very best players available they could afford at the time, as well as, making such moves more out of necessity than just because they wanted to. As with the Artest fiasco, they had little to no choice but to let him go.

                            My boyz were counted out last year for only what...the third time in over a decade. I don't care what you say! The only way you best this track record is actually winning it all. Come close, but no cigar? Yeah, but I'll take it over being a perpetual bottom feeder any day of the week!

                            And that, folks, is my 5-cents worth. 'Nuff Said.

                            *FAs around that time were Reggie, JO, Tinsley
                            Last edited by NuffSaid; 06-26-2007, 05:55 PM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X