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

Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

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

  • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

    Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
    Look for the casino owning Maloof brothers to move the Kings to Vegas once the economy picks up a little. I feel like we may end up in either St. Louis or KC, but the idea of Raleigh / Durham to take advantage of the basketball junkies of that area makes the most sense.
    Raleigh/Durham would probably be a great location.... if there wasn't a team already located in Charlotte. I imagine the owners would stand behind the Charlotte team owner in opposition to a team located so close to his. [I don't know it as a fact, but I can only presume that the Charlotte franchise would not look kindly on a team being located a short distance away in Raleigh.]

    Comment


    • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

      And then somebody would need to put a franchise in basketball-crazy Indiana.

      The current (and in my opinion, short-term) popularity problem of the Pacers has two roots, (1) a few too many years of shoving unlikeable players down the throats of a fanbase, and (2) macroeconomics.

      The first item is being solved. Nobody is really saying "this Pacers team is unlikeable." There are comments about coaching and talent (which are both legit concerns for a team on pace to win 31 games) and perhaps even the front office. As they get better results, fans will return.

      The second item is a challenge. But as America divides itself between the major cities and the close-but-not-really-major cities, this challenge does not go away and also affects places like Charlotte, San Antonio, Sacremento, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Portland, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, Memphis, Oklahoma City, etc. The NBA has shown the ability in the past to make sure that the franchises outside the big 3/4 tv markets still have a mechanism for survival.

      The problem is not of "is there general interest in basketball/ professional sports there?" Clearly, there is.
      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


      • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
        The problem is not of "is there general interest in basketball/ professional sports there?" Clearly, there is.
        That is a valid point. Just after the past three years of mediocre ball, and the focus being shifted away from basketball, fans are reluctant. Not to mention the current state of the team.

        Every morning I listen to local talk radio (WFBQ, WIBC), and they always have a blurb about the Pacers and their game the night before in their hourly headlines. Most of you do the same have noticed.

        Yeah, we are in the right direction, in the lines of disipline and behavior. The fact is that now we need to be pointing in the direction of winning.

        I would think that a winning product will make this team more likeable, and will have the full support of the city and state if something can be done.

        Comment


        • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          The second item is a challenge. But as America divides itself between the major cities and the close-but-not-really-major cities, this challenge does not go away and also affects places like Charlotte, San Antonio, Sacremento, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Portland, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, Memphis, Oklahoma City, etc. The NBA has shown the ability in the past to make sure that the franchises outside the big 3/4 tv markets still have a mechanism for survival.

          The problem is not of "is there general interest in basketball/ professional sports there?" Clearly, there is.
          And this is probably the biggest reason why if franchises move anywhere, they'll move to where they are the only game in town. Some studies were done a year or two back looking at a metro's total personal income and the personal income required to support a franchise in each of the 4 major leagues. To support baseball, a metro needs roughly $90 billion of personal income. The other sports are in the $30-$35 ballpark. Every single major league, mid-market city other than Seattle that does not have an NBA team is overextended or at capacity with their current NFL/MLB/NHL franchises. Without looking at the general basketball interest question, these are the best markets in terms of macroeconomics, and nearly all of them have problems:
          1-Vegas -- gambling + maloofs would get the shot first
          2-VA Beach/Norfolk -- municipalities can't get on the same page, just spent their money on a convention center instead, publicly said they're out of running for 15 years.
          5-Seattle -- can't get arena deal financed
          #s3,4, and 6 - Hartford, Austin, G-boro/Winston-Salem: and the Knicks/Celtics, Spurs, or Bobcats would never let any of these happen.
          7-Louisville - the only immediately viable choice
          8&9-Birmingham and Richmond - interest?? Need an arena.
          10-Grand Rapids - there have been grumblings in Orlando and the DeVos family of GR owns the Magic. If anyone goes here, it would be Orlando. Still, there are no fortune 500s in town, only DeVos-owned Amway.
          11&12-Rochester and Albany--zero growth markets. Probably will have less income for the Pacers than what the Indy will have (after subtracting for the Colts share) in a couple of years.
          13-Indianapolis, assuming they didn't have an NBA team today.

          Columbus and Raleigh-Durham fall short of the $$$ needed for support after you account for hockey.

          #13 Seems low, but the macro differences between 7-13 are low. In terms of interest, and potential fan base, only Seattle, Vegas, and Louisville are even in the mix. Throw in arena considerations, and it's not even close. Add in the fact that a lot of existing NBA franchises have even more unfavorable macro environments (Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Cleveland) and the odds of relocation are slim.

          International options, in macro order would be Mexico City, Montreal, Vancouver, Monterrey, and San Juan. From an interest level it would probably be San Juan, Vancouver, Monterrey, Mexico City, Montreal.

          Comment


          • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

            1. Simons aren't losing as much money as they claim, if they are losing money at all. Someone tell me if they've been losing money for that long (for 25 years or more) why they wouldn't have looked to relocate before now? Either there are no locations they believe they can make more money in, or they are not losing as much here as they claim. They are shrewd businessmen and are just trying to negotiate from a position of strength. The only way they are going to get a better deal, especially in this economy, is if they are claiming losses. If they admit they made even $1 last year, then they lose all leverage.

            2. I can't see any relocation possibility that has better long-term potential than Indy. Vegas is the only viable one that I've read about and the NBA doesn't want a franchise there right now. Even if they did, I think the Maloof's have dibs on relocating there first. I have to think there are other teams that are in worse shape than Indy currently.
            Can we get a new color commentator please?

            Comment


            • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

              Originally posted by Reggie4Three View Post
              1. Simons aren't losing as much money as they claim, if they are losing money at all. Someone tell me if they've been losing money for that long (for 25 years or more) why they wouldn't have looked to relocate before now? Either there are no locations they believe they can make more money in, or they are not losing as much here as they claim. They are shrewd businessmen and are just trying to negotiate from a position of strength. The only way they are going to get a better deal, especially in this economy, is if they are claiming losses. If they admit they made even $1 last year, then they lose all leverage.

              2. I can't see any relocation possibility that has better long-term potential than Indy. Vegas is the only viable one that I've read about and the NBA doesn't want a franchise there right now. Even if they did, I think the Maloof's have dibs on relocating there first. I have to think there are other teams that are in worse shape than Indy currently.
              1. The CIB has a great idea how much money they're making since the majority of their dollars are from event tickets and TV deal. The TV deal is pretty well known and CIB gets a % of event tickets, so easy math equates total revenue. Costs are even easier. CIB knows building costs and NBA team salaries are well known (70-80% is from player salaries). Above and beyond, I'm guessing CIB is going to ask to see some financials if PSE wants a huge re-negotiation.

              The franchise is probably worth around $300MM. Didn't the Simons buy it for less than $25 MM? If so, they can technically lose millions for 25 years and still profit it off it long-term.

              Also, losing a couple mill a year isn't a huge deal to billonaires who are profiting long term. Losing multi-million becomes a big deal, especially when their other money streams are decreasing (Malls aren't making a ton of money).

              Bottom line is -- it would be ridiculous for any for-profit company to not re-negotiate if they have the contracted option. I just hope it doesn't hit tax payers, but how else..?

              2. Seattle. San Diego.

              Comment


              • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

                Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                This is a little different than the typical "sky is falling" thread regarding the state of the Pacer franchise and a possible relocation.

                What I want to consider is that Mel and Herb won't own the team forever, and that apparently none of the other family members want to take over the responsiblity. Therefore, it is a near certainty that the team will be sold "at some point".

                I won't even ask you to identify potential buyers, that doesn't matter. What I will challenge you to do is to name a possible city for relocation that can support an NBA team. I contend that it is much more difficult to come up with a viable relocation city than what you might think.

                Among NBA owners, it is common that the owner or group of owners have substantial business interests in the city where their teams are located, or are residents of the city themselves.

                So, in order for the team to be relocated, that may require that a pairing of a willing buyer and his city be found to assume ownership. And, in my opinion, there simply aren't very many viable city/metropolitan areas that can support an NBA franchise.

                To relocate an NBA team to a city with the expectation of long-term success, I believe it would require either a very substantial population base, or at the very least, a city with lesser population that does not already have an NFL team and/or a major league baseball team.

                Oklahoma City has 2/3 the population as the Indy area. Even without other pro teams, just how long do you expect them to hold a fan base of nearly 19,000? Once the novelty and the "honeymoon" are over, give them a couple of losing seasons and let's see how many fans are still attending and how viable the franchise is. If they can continue to connect with the city and establish some traditions, then maybe they have a chance. Otherwise, probably not.

                Anyway, many are fearful of a relocation. All I'm asking is if you really think that is likely, where do you think the Pacers could be relocated? Hopefully, in going through this exercise, perhaps we can all be a little calmer about the current news regarding renegotiation between the Simons and CIB.

                I've listed the 50 largest municipal areas by population to help in your selection. Municipal areas (or near by areas) with NBA teams appear in bold print.

                RankMunicipalityState2000.07
                1New York cityNew York8,104,079
                2Los Angeles cityCalifornia3,845,541
                3Chicago cityIllinois2,862,244
                4Houston cityTexas2,012,626
                5Philadelphia cityPennsylvania1,470,151
                6Phoenix cityArizona1,418,041
                7San Diego cityCalifornia1,263,756
                8San Antonio cityTexas1,236,249
                9Dallas cityTexas1,210,393
                10San Jose cityCalifornia904,522
                11Detroit cityMichigan900,198
                12Indianapolis city (balance)Indiana784,242
                13Jacksonville cityFlorida777,704
                14San Francisco cityCalifornia744,230
                15Columbus cityOhio730,008
                16Austin cityTexas681,804
                17Memphis cityTennessee671,929
                18Baltimore cityMaryland636,251
                19Fort Worth cityTexas603,337
                20Charlotte cityNorth Carolina594,359
                21El Paso cityTexas592,099
                22Milwaukee cityWisconsin583,624
                23Seattle cityWashington571,480
                24Boston cityMassachusetts569,165
                25Denver cityColorado556,835
                26Louisville-Jefferson County cityKentucky556,332
                27Washington cityDistrict of Columbia553,523
                28Nashville-Davidson (balance)Tennessee546,719
                29Las Vegas cityNevada534,847
                30Portland cityOregon533,492
                31Oklahoma City cityOklahoma528,042
                32Tucson cityArizona512,023
                33Albuquerque cityNew Mexico484,246
                34Long Beach cityCalifornia476,564
                35New Orleans cityLouisiana462,269
                36Cleveland cityOhio458,684
                37Fresno cityCalifornia457,719
                38Sacramento cityCalifornia454,330
                39Kansas City cityMissouri444,387
                40Virginia Beach cityVirginia440,098
                41Mesa cityArizona437,454
                42Atlanta cityGeorgia419,122
                43Omaha cityNebraska409,416
                44Oakland cityCalifornia397,976
                45Tulsa cityOklahoma383,764
                46Miami cityFlorida379,724
                47Honolulu CDPHawaii377,260
                48Minneapolis cityMinnesota373,943
                49Colorado Springs cityColorado369,363
                50Arlington cityTexas359,467
                I actually can name quite a few off the top of my head. San Diego, St. Louis, Las Vegas (if even possible?) Pittsburgh, Cincinatti, and Louisville has been eyeing any professional team for years. Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, the list goes on. Pretty much all of these have a bigger metropolitan area than Indianapolis. St. Louis is like 3 times the size of Indy.

                Places like Louisville and Birmingham scare me more than Nashville and Buffalo, because like mentioned earlier, an NBA team would be a one man show. Lousiville has been craving a pro sports team for years and could lure one.
                Last edited by Midcoasted; 02-12-2009, 04:56 AM.

                Comment


                • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

                  Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                  I actually can name quite a few off the top of my head. San Diego, St. Louis, Las Vegas (if even possible?) Pittsburgh, Cincinatti, and Louisville has been eyeing any professional team for years. Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, the list goes on. Pretty much all of these have a bigger metropolitan area than Indianapolis. St. Louis is like 3 times the size of Indy.

                  Places like Louisville and Birmingham scare me more than Nashville and Buffalo, because like mentioned earlier, an NBA team would be a one man show. Lousiville has been craving a pro sports team for years and could lure one.
                  San Diego- Arena problem, highly doubt they'd build a new one

                  St. Louis- On the decline as a city, don't really care about basketball, when the Grizzlies were considering moving there they said something to the effect of St. Louis being "laughable" as an NBA city

                  Las Vegas- Stern wouldn't let it happen, but if it did, the Maloofs get first crack at it.

                  Pittsburgh- I've talked to friends from there, apparently basketball isn't that big of a deal at all there, besides PITT. Great sports city, possible, but doubt it.

                  Cincinnati- Doesn't have the arena, and I don't think it would fly out there.

                  Louisville- I've named them before when it came to this topic. I would love to see them get a team, just not mine. I think this is probably the second most viable.

                  Tampa Bay- My father lives in Tampa and I used to spend my summers there. Still do every once in a while. Tampa is a football city. It took the two other teams in the city to get to the finals before people would start coming out to their games. I don't think a team in Tampa would get the needed support, plus I'm not sure how Orlando's ownership would like that move since they advertise in the Tampa/St. Pete market.

                  Jacksonville- Before Tampa, my father lived in Jacksonville. I've spent a lot of time here too. They like basketball, but they're in the middle of football country and can barely support an NFL franchise. Bad city all around.

                  Nashville- Possible, but unlikely. They already have the Predators, I doubt they could support both.

                  Birmingham- I never thought about Birmingham. The NBA took a risk in Memphis, it's possible, but doubtful.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

                    Originally posted by YoSoyIndy View Post
                    The franchise is probably worth around $300MM. Didn't the Simons buy it for less than $25 MM? If so, they can technically lose millions for 25 years and still profit it off it long-term.
                    I once again point out that it isn't a profit unless it is realized. Numbers on paper are worth nothing.

                    If the Simons want to actually realize that so-called profit, they have to sell the team. The chances are that ownership groups from the cities we are discussing would be among the bidders.

                    So, raising this paper profit between the current estimated valuation and the original purchase price does not make for any kind of guarantee that the Pacers will stay here, in fact it is more the opposite.
                    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


                    • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

                      This is ridiculous.

                      Here's a thread on page 2:

                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...ad.php?t=44665

                      Can we stop this chicken little-like fairy tale?

                      Midcoasted's post should have more than a handful of posts and a celebration, instead of more silly and absurd speculation in this thread about a relocation.
                      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


                      • Re: Worried About a Pacer Relocation? Tell Me Where...

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        This is ridiculous.

                        Here's a thread on page 2:

                        http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...ad.php?t=44665

                        Can we stop this chicken little-like fairy tale?

                        Midcoasted's post should have more than a handful of posts and a celebration, instead of more silly and absurd speculation in this thread about a relocation.
                        I know, I've been wondering that myself. Why wasn't that given more attention? We had a prime opportunity to get hyphy and we missed it.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X