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

Q&A with Herb Simon

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

  • Q&A with Herb Simon

    https://theathletic.com/968170/2019/...-nba-and-more/

    In his own words: Pacers owner Herb Simon discusses his team, arena upgrades, state of the NBA and more

    Herb Simon is a background owner, involved in his Pacers without meddling. Heís also owned the team since 1983, making him the longest-tenured owner in the NBA.

    Simon doesnít often do interviews, but he sat down this week with The Athletic Indiana to talk about the state of the team, the league and life as an NBA owner.

    Hereís our conversation:

    Of all the current NBA owners, you have the longest tenure, having owned the Indiana Pacers for 36 years, since 1983. Is that something you take particular pride in?

    Everything in life is timing, right? When we got it, the city fathers needed somebody to own the team and reached out to (my late bother, Melvin) and I. It wasnít that important to me at the beginning except to keep it in the city. I had another life in business so it was just there, but as Iíve gotten older, Iíve become more involved and itís become more important to me and brought me greater enjoyment, so Iím all in on the Pacers.

    Why did you and Mel step up and buy the team during that desperate time in the Pacers history?

    Well, if you remember, the team was going to be moved to Sacramento at the time and the city fathers came to us to see if we would do something at the time. We were both so young back then; our business was just getting started. At the time, I thought, ĎWow they must think a lot of me.í Twenty years later (Pacers executive and longtime Indianapolis mover and shaker) Jim (Morris) admitted to me we were the sixth people they went to. But Iím glad they did.

    We talked several years ago, I think around 10 years ago, and you talked about how much money the team was losing after the lean years that came after The Brawl in Detroit. Have there been times when you thought about washing your hands of the franchise?

    Well, it got sticky after the Brawl and then in 2008-09, when we went into a recession. There were major cash losses during that period of time. Thatís when my brother and his wife wanted to get out and sell and I took a chance and bought it. It was scary for a while, but I always felt that it was going to be OK. But yes, Iíve thought twice about it, sure, when the team was losing money and the team wasnít worth what it is now, it was a very scary time. But I never gave up hope and I never, EVER, wanted to get rid of it.

    The franchise just made a deal with the city to upgrade Bankers Life Fieldhouse and the areas surrounding the arena. Why did you feel like that was something that was necessary?

    It was important for two reasons: One, we want to make sure the team is here long after Iím gone, and second, I also wanted to put in more public spaces to make the arena more enjoyable as a focal point in the city. Weíre really changing the inside of the building (Bankers Life Fieldhouse) and get it ready for the 21st century the way people like to be entertained and watch basketball games. It has a lot of other activities. The inside will be especially up to date.

    While youíre spending all this money, can you please fix the Internet? Iíd appreciate that.

    Listen (laughing), I have some of the nicest homes and my phone doesnít work well in either one, so donít tell me your sob story.

    (Note from Kravitz: I have only one home and can barely make the mortgage, so donít tell me about sob stories).

    The one criticism I hear from fans and taxpayers is this: Why should a privately owned sports franchise be feeding at the public trough at taxpayer expense? How do you counter that argument?

    I think most people understand that this deal is an economic benefit to the city and state. Iíve heard very limited criticism.

    (Note: At this point, Rick Fuson, the Pacers president, is sitting in and tells me the way he helped pitch it to the city. According to economic studies heís seen, the Pacers produce $400 million a year in revenue for the city and employ over 4,000 people. In addition, the majority of the money in this latest deal will come in from out of state).

    After the lean years, when you were losing money, did you ever think about selling or moving the franchise?

    Never. Moving was never an option. Because donít forget: The city fathers came to us to keep the team in the city. Now the team is worth a lot more in another city, what kind of gratitude would that be if we moved it to make some extra money? I couldnít live with myself.

    (Note: Simon bought the Pacers in 1983 for $10.5 million; itís now worth more than a billion).

    How would you characterize the fiscal strength of your franchise now?

    I think weíre as healthy as weíve been. Weíre still accumulating a lot of losses, but weíre in better shape now with the new CBA and revenue sharing. So the pressure is off for a while.

    (Note: Simon also owns the WNBAís Indiana Fever, Pacers Gaming and the G-League team, the Fort Wayne Mad Ants).

    How would you describe your ownership style and philosophy? You seem to be hands on without meddling, enthusiastic without being the Clippersí Steve Ballmer or the Mavericksí Mark Cuban.

    My ownership style has changed.

    How so?

    In the beginning, I had another business and I was just checking in on it, honestly. It was in very capable hands with Donnie Walsh and (president) Rick (Fuson, who has been with the organization for 35 years). As I got more involved with the league and finally owned the whole team, I became more involved. But as an owner, Iím not a basketball man. I donít consider myself an expert. I played in the schoolyard as a kid, but never anything beyond that. I still have to make the final decision, but itís wholly dependent on what the basketball people think. Iíve seen too many times when people (in ownership) think they know basketball. Itís not a science; even the greatest make mistakes. But with Donnie, Larry (Bird) and now Kevin (Pritchard), I feel very comfortable letting them do what they have to do. We havenít had much turnover here and all three guys are still with us, as a matter of fact.



    Is it safe to assume that owning an NBA team is a whole lot different than owning a mall or real estate?

    Absolutely. When you own a piece of real estate, thereís no real emotion to it. Itís nothing like owning a team. With a team, youíre talking about young men, exciting plays, emotion, great plays up and down the court.

    You seem like an intense fan. You watch very closely without getting wildly emotional.

    Iím not pleasant to be with, thatís why I sit next to Donnie, we both take it seriously.

    What are some of the challenges you face as one of the smaller markets in the NBA?

    Some days, it can be a problem but right now, itís not a problem. And we donít want to use it as an excuse. You look at San Antonio, theyíre about the same size market as we are, and theyíve had a lot of success. You see what Milwaukee is doing right now. So we have no excuses.

    You would acknowledge, though, that you have to approach team building differently than a large-market team that can lure a Kevin Durant or a Kawhi Leonard.

    Well, sure, there are limitations. But you look at Milwaukee, they did it the right way through the draft. Not that thereís a right way or a wrong way, but theyíve done it the way we try to do it: Through the draft and strategic acquisitions while knowing that maybe weíre not going to get the No. 1 free agent. And when Victor (Oladipo) gets healthy; heís a better person than he is a basketball player and heís a pretty good basketball player.

    Youíve paid into the luxury tax before. Are you willing to go that route if your management team comes to you and says, ĎWe can get a high-level player whoís going to increase the payroll and possible mean paying the tax?í

    To be honest, the luxury tax is something you donít want to enter into, especially on a repeating basis because it gets very prohibitive. Youíve got to be creative. Thereís always that time when you think you can go for the whole thing, then you think you can go into the tax, but just as a matter of course, we havenít been faced with it (largely because the Pacers donít draw big-name free agents). My philosophy is weíll do what we have to do, but weíll do it for the right reasons. Not because someone is threatening to leave, and not because weíre afraid of the press because mean guys like you say we wonít spend any money. We donít care what you guys have to say because you donít know what youíre talking about.

    Wait, Iíve never criticized you for failing to spend more money.

    I meant that generically. You know, you started out sassy, but Iíve come around to like you (smiling).

    So just to clarify, if Kevin (Pritchard) came to you and said he could get the kind of stud free agent who rarely, if never, comes to Indy, youíll say Ö

    Absolutely. If itís for the right player and for the right reasons, Iíll do it.

    (Note: Oklahoma Cityís payroll was more than $145 million and they paid more than $91 million into the luxury tax. They won one more game than the Pacers, who not only had the 25th-ranked payroll in the NBA, but lost Oladipo in the 36th game of the season).

    After the Brawl, you were forced to trade away players like Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley. That would have been a perfect time to tank, but the franchise refused to embark on a version of The Process. Management often talks about your distaste for tanking.

    When Donnie was struggling early, we tried to win every game even though we didnít have a very good team. We never started dumping in order to get higher draft picks. It was never in our DNA and never will be. Itís the one thing I tell them, I want to play to win, not dump. Itís just not the way we do business.

    Does it bother you when a team like Philadelphia adopts a strategy of losing in order to position themselves at the top of the draft?

    It takes a lot to bother me right now (smiling).

    Am I bothering you now?

    No, I told you, you used to be tough on us, but Iíve come around on you.

    What was your takeaway from the four-game playoff loss to the Boston Celtics?

    Itís a sore spot with me. We were ahead in every game. Maybe we were just missing Victor. Donít get me wrong, I think our team played very hard and very well and we had a chance to win every game, and thatís all you can expect out of them. We didnít give up at all. Iím very proud of them.

    So much has changed in the NBA during the 36 years youíve owned the Pacers. What are some of the biggest changes?

    Iíd say the biggest thing is the fact itís more and more international now. Iíve been on the NBA China Board since its inception and weíve seen that business grow a lot in China and weíre looking in other areas of the world. Basketball along with soccer are now the two universal games. Itís really encouraging to see whatís happening internationally. We had a game in China; did you know there was a Pacers fan club out there? They came in the hotel lobby, a Pacers fans club; we had no idea they existed.

    Is this a good pro basketball town?

    (After a three-second pause): I think we have the enthusiasm here. We still donít get the income other teams get; weíre still below the league average. But I think we put out a pretty good product Ė 24 times in the playoffs in 30 years, 30 straight years of winning records at home Ė and I think people appreciate what weíre doing. I believe that.


  • #2
    My philosophy is weíll do what we have to do, but weíll do it for the right reasons. Not because someone is threatening to leave, and not because weíre afraid of the press because mean guys like you say we wonít spend any money. We donít care what you guys have to say because you donít know what youíre talking about.
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • #3
      He is just a liar, plain and simple. He ain't losing any money owning the Indiana Pacers. I'm tired of wealthy, manipulative liars like this man. Go pay for your own ****. Btw, 4000 people employed ain't ****, and it doesnt entitle you to steal tax dollars.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • #4
        Just a bunch of PR BS, he also acknowledge how soft Kravitz is now just asking him soft questions.

        Bob: "So how hard it is to see all that money in the bank?"

        Simmon: "very hard Bob sometimes my phone doesn't know what to do with all those numbers"


        Bob: "oh man I'm sorry for asking such a hard question" ...
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Just a bunch of PR BS, he also acknowledge how soft Kravitz is now just asking him soft questions.

          Bob: "So how hard it is to see all that money in the bank?"

          Simmon: "very hard Bob sometimes my phone doesn't know what to do with all those numbers"


          Bob: "oh man I'm sorry for asking such a hard question" ...

          Lol, I did laugh at this.

          Comment


          • #6
            Iím thankful we have an owner who actually cares about his team and is dedicated to keeping the team in Indianapolis.

            Comment


            • #7
              How many freaking updates does BLF need? The place is immaculate and looks like it opened yesterday. It has everything a fan could want. He says ďget it ready for the 21íst centuryĒ, but the place already has a massive scoreboard, Led ribbons, a billion concession options, nice gift shops, and pretty much every other way to get people to spend money.

              Also, didnít we just do like a $160 million dollar deal in 2014 that was supposed to keep them here for years? Now just 5 years later and were doing a $270 million deal to keep them here for 25 years.....except in about 7 years there will be a $500 million deal to keep them here for 30 years, etc etc.

              We can debate how bad things were for the Pacers in the past, but there is no doubt they are absolutely swimming in money under the new CBA and with tax handouts.
              Last edited by Sollozzo; 05-09-2019, 11:49 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Really folks ?? Can't you just be appreciative that there's an NBA team in town for you to throw your hissy-fits over ??

                This money they're talking about - hardly any comes out of your pockets. Yeah - maybe an additional .002% tax increase. BFD.

                4,000 people - I can see that. You throw all the organizations together, take into consideration all the people involved - yeah - it's a reasonable number.

                And if you're really tired of it - go buy your own team, lose 7, 8 figures for a few years, turn down better offers because you're a man of your word and let us know how things go.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                  Really folks ?? Can't you just be appreciative that there's an NBA team in town for you to throw your hissy-fits over ??

                  This money they're talking about - hardly any comes out of your pockets. Yeah - maybe an additional .002% tax increase. BFD.

                  4,000 people - I can see that. You throw all the organizations together, take into consideration all the people involved - yeah - it's a reasonable number.

                  And if you're really tired of it - go buy your own team, lose 7, 8 figures for a few years, turn down better offers because you're a man of your word and let us know how things go.
                  You're a complete fool and it's not a few bucks a year. Every single one of us pay thousands of dollars in corporate welfare every single year in our income tax bills. Grow a pair of balls and stand up for yourself. Better yet, educate yourself and stop talking out of your backside.

                  Billionaires need to get the **** out of my pocket. Most recent estimates are 100 billion a year spent on corporate subsidies nationwide. Yeah .002% my ***!
                  Last edited by Taterhead; 05-09-2019, 01:15 PM.
                  "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                    Really folks ?? Can't you just be appreciative that there's an NBA team in town for you to throw your hissy-fits over ??

                    This money they're talking about - hardly any comes out of your pockets. Yeah - maybe an additional .002% tax increase. BFD.

                    4,000 people - I can see that. You throw all the organizations together, take into consideration all the people involved - yeah - it's a reasonable number.

                    And if you're really tired of it - go buy your own team, lose 7, 8 figures for a few years, turn down better offers because you're a man of your word and let us know how things go.
                    Itís a lot of money and there are some valid questions to ask. Thereís no doubt the team is raking in the dough now, regardless of what happened in past years. Thankfully Kravitz at least calls out in the article that the team is worth more than 1 Billion. I also call BS on Simon saying the team is worth a lot more in another city as a way of patting himself on the back for staying here? Where are these cities? All of the major markets already have teams - some of them have two. Itís not as if weíd have moved to Chicago or Miami to become a second team there. Also, the Pacers are worth more than some teams in bigger markets like Denver, Atlanta, and Detroit according to the most recent Forbes breakdown.

                    Its also fair to question why The Fieldhouse needs all of these upgrades when itís already totally up to date and near perfect.

                    I just think that when youíre the city and do these deals, you shouldnít have to be doing another one just 5 years down the road. Now if we go 25 years without the Pacers wanting anymore money, I wonít say much. But Iíd bet money that in about 7 or years, weíll have to do another one of these deals. In a decade, weíll probably be hearing about how The Fieldhouse is a 30 year old arena and obsolete, so time for a new one...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm not saying there aren't questions to ask. There are. But this is out of the hands of the average citizen. Some things we just have to roll with. Some people just don't/won't accept that.

                      And taterhead - grow TF up. If the best you can do is resort to name calling and just more unintelligible babbling, I feel sorry for you. And your Mom. She probably has a use for the basement space you take up.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Simmon also has the cojones to talk about the team still losing money and stuff, nobody believes that bulls*** and if they are still losing money with all the system set up for people like him to never lose money then he is a worse business man than I thought.

                        Here is a thought maybe putting mediocre team after mediocre team every year might not be the formula to make the profits you are looking for I don't know

                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          I don't know
                          Finally. You say something that's right.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                            I'm not saying there aren't questions to ask. There are. But this is out of the hands of the average citizen. Some things we just have to roll with. Some people just don't/won't accept that.

                            And taterhead - grow TF up. If the best you can do is resort to name calling and just more unintelligible babbling, I feel sorry for you. And your Mom. She probably has a use for the basement space you take up.
                            Get a new joke buddy, this is the 2nd time you hit me with your dumbass mom's basement joke.

                            I do better in life than you, I guarantee you that.
                            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Simmon also has the cojones to talk about the team still losing money and stuff, nobody believes that bulls*** and if they are still losing money with all the system set up for people like him to never lose money then he is a worse business man than I thought.

                              Here is a thought maybe putting mediocre team after mediocre team every year might not be the formula to make the profits you are looking for I don't know
                              You know the name is Simon?

                              So you think he is a bad businessman? How would you really know? It is unlikely that you have even a hope of a wish of a dream of understanding 1% of what the man does for a living.

                              Pacers fandom is optional. Folks like yourself who donít like the owner or the management or the players should choose a different franchise to follow. One that would make you happy. Youíre not a Pacers fan.


                              Name-calling signature removed

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X