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

Is it time for we as Pacers fans (myself in particular) to turn the corner and change how we view what is a good team?

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post


    I'd say we're in about the same place where the NBA is concerned. I used to live for the NBA season but it's been a slow natural process that it's became unimportant to me since I.find the game so much less entertaining. The good thing is there's a lot of things more important in life than basketball.
    The success of James Harden is a good example of where the league is today. Think about that for a moment. That trash game is actually effective. But-for the Warriors being such a perfect fit for today's game, James Harden and the Houston Rockets may well be working on their second ring.

    I get that James is talented at what he does for a living. But who in the world wants to watch James Harden dominate the NBA with that game? Complete ISO play. Constant flopping. Constant threes. I can appreciate what James does but I have a hard time calling it basketball. Yet, the Warriors may well be the only team standing in the way of that style winning multiple titles.

    Edit: As you could see, the T-Blazers laid down for the Warriors. Sweep. Harden was a lot tougher out. It's clear the Rockets would be in the finals for sure this year if GS was not standing in the way.
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 05-25-2019, 09:14 AM.
    Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

    Comment


    • #47
      I really feel the Pacers have dont a very good job of fielding a good team in Indianapolis. It will be interesting to see what they do this summer. I feel with Victor back and keeping the core of the team they will be very hard to beat. A lot depends on whether Sabonis can rebound from his very poor showing in the Celtic series. Had he played as well as he did most of the season we could have won. BTW the Indianapolis 500 is being run tomorrow and this will be my 43rd race.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

        You are being very generous in describing todays game as ball movement, passing, finding the open man and not calling it what it is....an endless string of pick and roll with no defense being played what so ever and chucking up bad shots constantly. The Warriors are fun to watch. Noone else is good at this crap and would get murdered by all those unskilled players of the 90s in an old school basketball game with defense as a part of the equation. Bodyslammed? Thats a gross exaggeration.....but yes that was much better than this. You mean like pro wrestling? One of the most popular sports worldwide in human history?

        People enjoy resistence. They enjoy a competition. They enjoy two guys going at it. Thats why they like hard fouls and actual defense being played. And yes MMA is ridiculously popular and ballet is not for that reason. Who do you know that is actually into ballet? Seriously. Some old women enjoy it I guess, but that's not the demographic the NBA is after.

        It's not about "the NBA of our youth" it's about the constant ****ing with something that there was nothing wrong with in the first place for what amounts to a temporary financial windfall for a few individuals in the sport. They've done it to all major sports. "We need more offense" "we need better flow" "we need to eliminate the three point shot" "we need to make it safer" Why? 100 years of sustained growth isn't good enough? Stop screwing up our sports. Please.
        Letís not kid ourselves. Pro wrestling and MMA arenít very popular. And I think a lot of people are romanticizing the past era of 90s bully ball. There were probably 5 or 6 teams tops that played that tough style of defense - Pistons, Knicks, Heat, Pacers, Rockets, Sonics, and maybe you could put the Bulls in there too. There were Finesse teams like the Lakers, Blazers,and Suns that won tons of games and made it to the Finals too.

        Either way, the NBA is as popular as it has ever been and is more of a global sport than back then. The ratings for Warriors games have been topping markers from the previous 10 years. For those that hate them, there are more fans that love the way they play. This is not my opinion (I think them losing in the Finals would be good for the NBA) but it is the reality.
        Last edited by naptownmenace; 05-25-2019, 05:40 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post

          Let's not kid ourselves. Pro wrestling and MMA aren't very popular.
          I think you're waaaayyyyy off on this.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

            I think you're waaaayyyyy off on this.
            Yeah they are both way more popular than the NBA, whose ratings slipped this year.

            People are already growing tired of the Warriors who are the single driver of those ratings.

            I love this narrative that 90s basketball was "bully ball" and the suggestions that those players were less talented than todays players.

            But the reality is it takes far more skill to score on a man who is actually allowed to guard you.

            "Maybe put the Bulls in there" buddy the Bulls were the best defensive team of all time lol
            Last edited by Taterhead; 05-25-2019, 07:34 PM.
            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

            Comment


            • #51
              I'm actually with Unclebuck here.....defense still rules the day. The Warriors win because of their defense as much as their offense and the good defensive teams dominated the playoffs.
              I hope this is still true, but I do appreciate Peck's thoughts on maybe we need to adjust our thinking.

              If indeed things have changed, it hurts from a strategic perspective. Me thinks the Pacers have always had a bit of an unseen advantage in that we targeted defensive players a lot. Why? Because we can't get the superstars, but the defensive superstars aren't as sexy and are more feasible to obtain. So while we don't make ESPN highlights, we do find ourselves in the ECF more often than most midsized city teams. And we have a fanbase that is a bit more open to emphasizing defense.

              If defense doesn't matter like it used to, we won't be able to have that backdoor advantage.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." óKevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #52
                You have got to have players who can score and shoot more threes. The Pacers have a coach who resists that and a GM who did a poor job getting players who can score this past year.
                I think Sabonis has plenty of room to improve on his threes and run more high post offense through him. But the main thing is getting the right kind of players who can do both.
                I think the defensive players on this team are in general average except maybe for Myles. Some credit goes to coaching for getting as much defense as he did out of this past group but they
                were exposed in the playoffs. Now that was without VO but still they got as much as they could defensively out of this past group. The Pacers need better defensive players. Not less defense.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #53
                  https://youtu.be/XnQ5YC0poTs

                  Great video....


                  Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    The Warriors play decent defense but this season has probably been one of the weakest defensively. They were 11th in the NBA in Defensive rating allowing 108.5 points per game during the regular season. Their defense has actually been a little worse in the playoffs as theyíve allowed 110.2 points per game.

                    The Warriors are still crushing teams with their offense. They were #1 during the regular season and their scoring is up during the playoffs, which is typically when it is harder to score. Their offensive efficiency and execution is why they win.

                    The Pacers need to increase their scoring, their three point attempts, and the speed in which they play. They wonít be able to do that unless they add players that excel in that type of play.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                      Yeah they are both way more popular than the NBA
                      Is there a single metric that supports this? Even one?

                      Itís not attendance, viewership, revenue, or media attention, thatís for sure...

                      I donít even disagree with your original point on a personal level, but letís face it: weíre Betamaxes in the DVD era. Outdated.

                      I think there could be a small tiny backlash eventually, maybe, but a lot of people and especially casual fans really donít mind this new style of play. It is what it is.

                      We live in a country where people are debating whether or not football will still be around in a few generationsí time. I think sanity will ultimately prevail but thatís where we are as a society at the moment.
                      Last edited by SaintLouisan; 05-27-2019, 07:28 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                        Is there a single metric that supports this? Even one?

                        Itís not attendance, viewership, revenue, or media attention, thatís for sure...

                        I donít even disagree with your original point on a personal level, but letís face it: weíre Betamaxes in the DVD era. Outdated.

                        I think there could be a small tiny backlash eventually, maybe, but a lot of people and especially casual fans really donít mind this new style of play. It is what it is.

                        We live in a country where people are debating whether or not football will still be around in a few generationsí time. I think sanity will ultimately prevail but thatís where we are as a society at the moment.
                        Of course the NBA is more popular than MMA and Pro wrestling. Basketball is a great game. Small number of players and you can see their expressions unlike football. Fans can see a lot of the game action. It's not a slow boring game. Very team oriented. So, all in all it has a lot going for itself in terms of being a great sport.

                        But I would argue that there is less strategy in today's game and the game is less diverse in terms of how teams score. Teams used to use the entire floor and now it's skewed toward longer shots. There's not really an inside-out game anymore either. Not many post-ups. Certainly no sky hooks. Rarely there are intended midrange shots that used to be part of game plans. Defenses are taxed to get out to the 3 point line and scoring is up. Scoring is easier because shooting a 3 takes less energy. For anyone who has played the game, you know it's less rigorous to spot up for a 3 versus pound into the paint, work the ball around and make a shot. Simply put, the game has moved out to the 3 point line and evacuated the rest of the floor. Sure there are exceptions but even ball movement is more predictable. You know that most passes are way out there on the floor when they used to pass into and out of the paint. Guys would score in all kinds of ways. We actually no longer have the same body types out there because their games are irrelevant. Roy Hibbert's career ended early because the NBA changed. Yes he had issues, but his game was destroyed as teams figured him out and used the league's newer rules to shut him down.
                        Last edited by BlueNGold; 05-27-2019, 08:12 PM.
                        Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                          Is there a single metric that supports this? Even one?

                          Itís not attendance, viewership, revenue, or media attention, thatís for sure...

                          I donít even disagree with your original point on a personal level, but letís face it: weíre Betamaxes in the DVD era. Outdated.

                          I think there could be a small tiny backlash eventually, maybe, but a lot of people and especially casual fans really donít mind this new style of play. It is what it is.

                          We live in a country where people are debating whether or not football will still be around in a few generationsí time. I think sanity will ultimately prevail but thatís where we are as a society at the moment.
                          Yes there are many. Just a few years back in 2016, Wrestlemania drew 102,000 people in Arlington Texas. 102k wouldn't show up in any city in America to watch the Warriors play the Raptors. No chance.

                          My comparison is more about basketball vs combat sports as entertainment. And once you consider how many different promotions fall under that umbrella, worldwide, it's really not even close.

                          Their aren't really any apples to apples comparisons because the NBA holds about 1500 events a year, but let's be real, people only care about around 50 of those games, and most dont draw a sellout crowd. The WWE or UFC only hold 200-300 a year combined. All sellouts, or near sellouts with large gates. Combat sports as a whole might reach 1500 events worldwide total. I would wager they typically ask a higher ticket price and sell a larger percentage of their tickets vs the NBA.

                          My main point was that combat sports are truly global. Everyone likes to watch people fight. No matter where you are from. Basketball is semi global, it has a huge following worldwide for sure, but many cultures just dont dig it. I would guess that 90-95% of the NBAs popularity can be attributed to probably 5-6 countries.
                          Last edited by Taterhead; 05-29-2019, 09:28 PM.
                          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                            Everyone likes to watch people fight. No matter where you are from.
                            Really? Everyone? I don't think so.

                            A guy I work with owns part of a Tae Kwon Do business, but I don't think the interest is widespread. Whether it's boxing, MMA, wrestling or a slew of other "sports", I think only a small percentage of the population like it enough to watch regularly or attend contests. You would have to show something to back this up and common sense will tell you not everyone and probably a small percentage of women enjoy watching people fight.
                            Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                              Of course the NBA is more popular than MMA and Pro wrestling. Basketball is a great game. Small number of players and you can see their expressions unlike football. Fans can see a lot of the game action. It's not a slow boring game. Very team oriented. So, all in all it has a lot going for itself in terms of being a great sport.

                              But I would argue that there is less strategy in today's game and the game is less diverse in terms of how teams score. Teams used to use the entire floor and now it's skewed toward longer shots. There's not really an inside-out game anymore either. Not many post-ups. Certainly no sky hooks. Rarely there are intended midrange shots that used to be part of game plans. Defenses are taxed to get out to the 3 point line and scoring is up. Scoring is easier because shooting a 3 takes less energy. For anyone who has played the game, you know it's less rigorous to spot up for a 3 versus pound into the paint, work the ball around and make a shot. Simply put, the game has moved out to the 3 point line and evacuated the rest of the floor. Sure there are exceptions but even ball movement is more predictable. You know that most passes are way out there on the floor when they used to pass into and out of the paint. Guys would score in all kinds of ways. We actually no longer have the same body types out there because their games are irrelevant. Roy Hibbert's career ended early because the NBA changed. Yes he had issues, but his game was destroyed as teams figured him out and used the league's newer rules to shut him down.
                              My biggest complaint about todays game is there is not really any contrast in styles. Everyone is trying to do the same thing because they snuffed out post play to free up long range shooting.
                              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                                Really? Everyone? I don't think so.

                                A guy I work with owns part of a Tae Kwon Do business, but I don't think the interest is widespread. Whether it's boxing, MMA, wrestling or a slew of other "sports", I think only a small percentage of the population like it enough to watch regularly or attend contests. You would have to show something to back this up and common sense will tell you not everyone and probably a small percentage of women enjoy watching people fight.
                                Well Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquio generated 417 million dollars for 1 single match. They took home 300 million between the two.

                                It took Lebron Jamea a decade and 1000 basketball games to make that kind of loot.
                                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X