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

Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #31
    Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Except down the street at Conseco...

    I agree with you except for one point... I don't really blame Irsay. The system is what the system is. It takes two to tango.

    I think these sport palaces and the corporate welfare that goes with them need to be addressed at the federal level. It needs to be stopped. I think it's getting more clear by the day that most cities just cannot keep their hands out of the cookie jar when it comes to pro sports. At the state and local level nobody has the self-control to pass meaningful legislation to stop this kind of thing. It needs to be addressed not only in cities and states that have pro teams but also in cities that don't. Unless it's done on a federal level it just won't be done. Every city wants to keep their options open to snag the next pro team on the move. And every city with a pro team wants to have every possible goodie, tax break, etc in their pocket to offer.

    Unfortunately, even at the federal level it's going to be hard to see anything done about it. Those people have to come home to their cities and states and live with the negatives that would come out if they suddenly looked to be 'against' the owners of the local pro team(s). There'd go the free tickets... the votes of the diehards... The campaign donations...

    Maybe one day a fiscally responsible president will use his position to lead and argue against sporting palaces and corporate welfare and try and create a grassroots movement that would take some heat off the lawmakers... as well as put some pressure on them to act in ways to enact laws to keep local politicians' hands out of the taxpayers' cookie jar.

    This is another one of those 'genie out of the bottle' problems... How do you get that genie back in the bottle?

    The question I always ask is:
    If Irsay had to fund Lucas Oil Stadium out of his own pocket do you think it would still have a gazillion dollar retractable roof??

    Good post, Bball, and I agree with all of it. This is definitely not just an Indy problem, it's a national problem that has gone out of control. And you bring up a good point about Conseco - again, billionaires who this town has bent over backward for. I'm really supposed to believe that the Simon's lost money in a brand new hyped arena in a year which we sold out every game and went to the Finals? If that's true then they aren't very bright. But that doesn't make much since considering they built a mall empire and had been owners for well over 10 years when the Conseco plans were being drawn up and therefore logically would have known what it took to make money out of an arena. Wasn't Conseco that arena they just had to have to remain competitive in the NBA? Wasn't it built to make them money since MSA was such a loser for them? And yet they lose money in 10 of the first 11 years, including the Finals year where we sold out every game? If that really is true, which I don't think it is, then they are complete fools for not being able to come up with a better deal when the team was at the zenith of it's popularity here.

    And that's what I think their whole tantrum was about last year. They negotiated a sweet deal in the 90's, but Irsay negotiated an even better one. That couldn't have sat well.

    I still put a huge chunk of the Colts blame on Irsay. 50 million is just pitiful for a billionaire, especially when the dude is getting all of the Colts ticket sales, half of other events, all of the concessions, all of the avertising, the naming rights money, a rent-free deal, etc, etc. All for a place that he barely paid anything for. He literally is living like a king off the backs of average joes. When he told the city "screw you" in 2006 when they had that 10 million operating shortcome, well, that told me all I need to know about Irsay. The city gave him what's basically the most generous deal in the entire country and he couldn't even fork over 10 extra million when they were in a pinch. 10 million for him is like me writing a check for 100 dollars.

    I wish we would have said, fine, we'll build you a brand new stadium. But since we are building the place we are going to actually keep a sizable chunk of the ad revenues etc coming into it and pour it into the city since it was built on the backs of our citizens. Heck, even getting like 10% of the ad revenue would be sizable.

    You are certainly right that this is a national problem, but there are plenty of other owners who have been willing to dig deep into their own pockets to fund the palaces they play in. Bob Kraft and Jerry Jones gave hundreds of millions of their own money for their stadiums, so I have a hard time believing they would have told their cities to stick it had they been in a pinch and needed ten extra million. I'm sure those guys would have forked over some dough.

    The Colts should never ever come begging for a stadium again. If in 25 years they are demanding another one then I just hope they go away. Two stadiums in 24 years is obscene enough. We should've had the foresight to tell them to start saving when they came here in 1984 if they wanted another one. They could have budgeted a little like normal human beings do. Is it to much to ask for to expect them to maybe put a way a million here or there? Many are struggling while this guy is making out like a king on something we all built.

    Hoosierguy, if Indy can pave it's roads then why doesn't it? Yes, I know the downtown roads are getting paved but that's becuase this is Indy and downtown is all that matters. I'm talking about the rest of the city, much of which is filled with some of the worst roads you'll find in any city in the country.

    And while crime isn't out of control by any means, it's far from great. The murder rate in Indy is pretty bad for a city it's size. For instance, it's drastically higher than say Louisville even though it's not that much bigger of a city.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-01-2011, 07:46 PM.

    Comment

    • #32
      Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

      Hoosierguy, if Indy can pave it's roads then why doesn't it? Yes, I know the downtown roads are getting paved but that's becuase this is Indy and downtown is all that matters. I'm talking about the rest of the city, much of which is filled with some of the worst roads you'll find in any city in the country.

      And while crime isn't out of control by any means, it's far from great. The murder rate in Indy is pretty bad for a city it's size. For instance, it's drastically higher than say Louisville even though it's not that much bigger of a city.
      Ballard is spending a record amount of money to rebuild Indy's streets all across the city, not just downtown.

      Indianapolis has over 500,000 more people in its metro area than Louisville. You can't compare their crime rates head-to-head as a result.

      Comment

      • #33
        Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        I still put a huge chunk of the Colts blame on Irsay. 50 million is just pitiful for a billionaire
        You are certainly right that this is a national problem, but there are plenty of other owners who have been willing to dig deep into their own pockets to fund the palaces they play in. Bob Kraft and Jerry Jones gave hundreds of millions of their own money for their stadiums, so I have a hard time believing they would have told their cities to stick it had they been in a pinch and needed ten extra million.
        Jim Irsay is a billionaire BECAUSE he owns the team, whereas Jerry Jones and Bob Kraft were billionaires BEFORE they purchased NFL teams.

        Irsay's net worth is due to the team- it's not like he has $1 billion in liquid assets. Kraft and Jones contributed more to their stadiums' construction because they could, but both required significant public subsidies. Massachusetts upgraded U.S. 1 by Gillette Stadium and the city of Arlington, Texas collected $300 million in taxes to help build the Cowboys' stadium.

        Comment

        • #34
          Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

          Originally posted by Bball View Post

          Maybe one day a fiscally responsible president will use his position to lead and argue against sporting palaces and corporate welfare and try and create a grassroots movement that would take some heat off the lawmakers...
          Why would the President concern himself with an issue that involves no FEDERAL tax dollars?

          It is state and local tax dollars that are going to build these stadiums- and many cities have said "no" to teams requesting assistance to build a new stadium. It's why LA no longer has an NFL team and Seattle no longer has an NBA team.

          Comment

          • #35
            Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

            Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
            Why would the President concern himself with an issue that involves no FEDERAL tax dollars?

            It is state and local tax dollars that are going to build these stadiums- and many cities have said "no" to teams requesting assistance to build a new stadium. It's why LA no longer has an NFL team and Seattle no longer has an NBA team.

            Because cities and states bankrupting themselves (or nearly so) by investing taxpayer monies into places that don't have the same impact or ROI as it would spent more prudently does affect the nation. As does citys and states taxing citizens and taking away money they could be reinvesting in the economy.

            Following your logic, why were both a dem and rep president concerned with auto-maker bailouts and wall street bailouts?
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment

            • #36
              Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

              Because both have a national, and global, economic impact? If the Colts pack up and leave town, it hurts Indy and Indiana. It doesn't spread it's self out beyond those borders.

              GM shutting down doesn't just hurt Detroit. It would impact the lives of people in every state, and lives of people across the world.
              “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment

              • #37
                Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Because both have a national, and global, economic impact? If the Colts pack up and leave town, it hurts Indy and Indiana. It doesn't spread it's self out beyond those borders.

                GM shutting down doesn't just hurt Detroit. It would impact the lives of people in every state, and lives of people across the world.
                You missed the point... Allowing a city or state to nearly bankrupt itself in doling out corporate welfare (and in this case we're talking specifically about sports stadiums and other incentives doled out to billionaire owners), and then continue to do so without actually getting a positive ROI needs to eventually have some oversight and protections for the taxpayers. It's taxpayer money at risk.

                The comparison wouldn't be the Colts leaving town versus GM shutting down... The comparison would be city or state government going barebones on services, allowing crime to go almost unchecked, roads deteriorating, monster tax rates, a mass exodus of citizens, economic chaos, etc leaving the the national government in a position to consider bailing out the state...

                But you'd be asking the fox to watch the henhouse... It's not like the Feds are known to carefully manage taxpayer monies...
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment

                • #38
                  Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  You missed the point... Allowing a city or state to nearly bankrupt itself in doling out corporate welfare (and in this case we're talking specifically about sports stadiums and other incentives doled out to billionaire owners)
                  You really need to do some research as to how sports stadiums are actually financed.

                  They are built with special taxes the revenue from which is used specifically for the construction of the stadium. Cities and states are not funding these structures from existing revenue sources.

                  How you can the assert that a city or state would go bankrupt to build a stadium is beyond me.

                  Comment

                  • #39
                    Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                    I know exactly how they are built... With taxes (special and otherwise) and budgets that never hit the mark while giving away much of the building's revenue that could be utilized to help pay for the building without adding and raising taxes.

                    There is a limit to the amount of taxes businesses can absorb and pass on to their customers.

                    EDIT: There's also a need to consider what's necessary and what's a luxury when spending taxpayer money and increasing taxpayer debt. See: Retractable Roof, Lucas Oil Stadium.
                    Last edited by Bball; 06-04-2011, 01:55 PM.
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment

                    • #40
                      Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      I know exactly how they are built... With taxes (special and otherwise) and budgets that never hit the mark while giving away much of the building's revenue that could be utilized to help pay for the building without adding and raising taxes.

                      There is a limit to the amount of taxes businesses can absorb and pass on to their customers.

                      EDIT: There's also a need to consider what's necessary and what's a luxury when spending taxpayer money and increasing taxpayer debt. See: Retractable Roof, Lucas Oil Stadium.
                      And none of that bankrupts or comes close to bankrupting municipal governments.

                      And seeing as how these stadiums are mostly financed with sales taxes, the consumer pays ALL of the burden.

                      Comment

                      • #41
                        Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                        I'll stand by what I said.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment

                        • #42
                          Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                          No, I understand the point. I disagree that the federal government should step in and handle how states run themselves.

                          California (and a few others) are about bankrupt but yet I don't think the Feds should step in there either. It's their bed, make them lay in it.

                          You can argue about how if a state goes belly-up then it hurts every other state as well. Point taken. But Japan's earthquake also negatively affected Indiana. Should we help them out too?

                          At some point in time a line has to be drawn, or we should just do away with states. Obviously we disagree on where the line is.
                          “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment

                          • #43
                            Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                            Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
                            Jim Irsay is a billionaire BECAUSE he owns the team, whereas Jerry Jones and Bob Kraft were billionaires BEFORE they purchased NFL teams.

                            Irsay's net worth is due to the team- it's not like he has $1 billion in liquid assets. Kraft and Jones contributed more to their stadiums' construction because they could, but both required significant public subsidies. Massachusetts upgraded U.S. 1 by Gillette Stadium and the city of Arlington, Texas collected $300 million in taxes to help build the Cowboys' stadium.


                            Regardless, he is bound to have much more than the wussy 50 million that he contributed. No way he could own a team for all those years and not have more than that.

                            And 300 million taxpayer dollars in that wealthy part of the Dallas metro area vs 700 million in taxpayer dollars in Indiana. HUGE difference. Jerry Jones paid 650 million of his own money for that stadium while Irsay paid 50! So thanks for bringing Cowboys Stadium up because that only helps my point. It's one thing for taxpayers to pay 300 million when the owner is himself kicking in 650 million. It's quite another for the taxpayers to pay virtually the entire thing while the owner puts in an embarrassing 50 million. Jerry Jones understands that he will get all of that back and more due to revenue and that by paying for a huge chunk of it, he looks better from a PR standpoint. Irsay OTOH looks like a thief.

                            Indy wants to put 700 million into a stadium? Fine. Indy gets zero advertising revenue, zero from concessions, zero from the naming rights, all while paying for all the maintenance and upkeep while not charging this guy a dime in rent? Not fine. It would be one thing if the city was getting a huge chunk of that money and pouring it back into the city, but instead the money is going to Jim Irsay who is making a fortune for himself off of something that us common folk are all paying for. Every time you go out and pay to eat, just remember that a chunk of that is going to Irsay so he can buy himself another guitar.

                            This guy was born with a silver spoon in his mouth is making out like a thief on the backs of taxpayers. It's really downright criminal that our civic leaders would screw the public like this just so this man can make himself a fortune and get on the Forbes list, all while a large percentage of the population struggle to make ends meet. Well, Irsay isn't the only one getting rich I guess. The downtown elite have made a fortune off of this as well. Most people turn a blind eye because they can't see through their Number 18 jerseys. But the older I get, the more completely turned off I get by how this went down and how every time I pay to eat in Indy or go to a Colts game, I'm adding to the fortune of a billionaire who is getting rich off of something that I and everyone else paid for but that he contributed virtually nothing of. I can't help supporting the team because I love them so much, but I can see where those who don't care about football are completely irate.


                            Here is something that appeared in the IBJ today. I am quoting this off of the Advance Indiana blog who put it up before the it was pulled due to whinny Irsay cronies complaining. So you won't be able to find it now. Indianapolis censorship at it's best. Seriously, everything here is controlled by the elite at the top. You can't even post a factual statement on an IBJ blog without it getting pulled. Unbelievable.

                            " Nobody has more reason to smile about Indianapolis winning the bid to host the Big Ten Football Championship than Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay.

                            Indianapolis’ victory to host the game for the next five years means Irsay’s Colts will reap $10 million to $15 million over the period—2011 to 2015—while making little if any capital outlay to make it happen. That’s because the Colts lease with the city’s Capital Improvement Board stipulates the Colts get half of all revenue from non-Colts related events while the city picks up the tab for operations.

                            The $10 million to $15 million could be conservative. Lucas Oil Stadium holds 63,000 but is expandable to 70,000. If the game puts 63,000-plus fans in the seats—which most football followers believe it will—that will generate more than $3 million in ticket revenue alone. Add the Colts’ share of $1.5 million in ticket sales to the concessions, parking and other ancillary revenue, and the Colts’ total annual take easily eclipses $2 million.

                            The annual city-wide economic impact of the game is estimated at $20 million. The Colts should net more than 10 percent of that.

                            And it’s an unforeseen revenue stream for the Colts. When the stadium opened in 2008, there was little discussion of even having a Big Ten Football championship, let along Indianapolis hosting such an event."

                            http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2...-from-big.html
                            __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___________


                            How can this sit well with anyone? This fool didn't build the stadium and has nothing to do with the Big 10 coming here, yet he's going to make out like a king all while sitting at home and playing his guitar. This is criminal and every Indianapolis resident should be furious over it. The fools who negotiated this deal should have never been allowed to run anything again.

                            This money should be going back into OUR CITY since we paid for this damn thing. There are a million different things in Indianapolis that could use this cash. Making someone on the Forbes list even richer is about dead last on that list.
                            Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-06-2011, 11:07 PM.

                            Comment

                            • #44
                              Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              Regardless, he is bound to have much more than the wussy 50 million that he contributed. No way he could own a team for all those years and not have more than that.

                              Indy wants to put 700 million into a stadium? Fine. Indy gets zero advertising revenue, zero from concessions, zero from the naming rights, all while paying for all the maintenance and upkeep while not charging this guy a dime in rent? Not fine. It would be one thing if the city was getting a huge chunk of that money and pouring it back into the city, but instead the money is going to Jim Irsay who is making a fortune for himself off of something that us common folk are all paying for. Every time you go out and pay to eat, just remember that a chunk of that is going to Irsay so he can buy himself another guitar.

                              This lucky sperm who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth is making out like a thief on the backs of taxpayers. It's really downright criminal that our civic leaders would screw the public like this just so this man can make himself a fortune and get on the Forbes list, all while a large percentage of the population struggle to make ends meet. Well, Irsay isn't the only one getting rich I guess. The downtown elite have made a fortune off of this as well. Most people turn a blind eye because they can't see through their Number 18 jerseys. But the older I get, the more completely turned off I get by how this went down and how every time I pay to eat in Indy or go to a Colts game, I'm adding to the fortune of a billionaire who is getting rich off of something that I and everyone else paid for but that he contributed virtually nothing of. I can't help supporting the team because I love them so much, but I can see where those who don't care about football are completely irate.


                              Here is something that appeared in the IBJ today. I am quoting this off of the Advance Indiana blog who put it up before the it was pulled due to whinny Irsay cronies complaining. So you won't be able to find it now. Indianapolis censorship at it's best. Seriously, everything here is controlled by the elite at the top. You can't even post a factual statement on an IBJ blog without it getting pulled. Unbelievable.

                              " Nobody has more reason to smile about Indianapolis winning the bid to host the Big Ten Football Championship than Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay.

                              Indianapolis’ victory to host the game for the next five years means Irsay’s Colts will reap $10 million to $15 million over the period—2011 to 2015—while making little if any capital outlay to make it happen. That’s because the Colts lease with the city’s Capital Improvement Board stipulates the Colts get half of all revenue from non-Colts related events while the city picks up the tab for operations.

                              The $10 million to $15 million could be conservative. Lucas Oil Stadium holds 63,000 but is expandable to 70,000. If the game puts 63,000-plus fans in the seats—which most football followers believe it will—that will generate more than $3 million in ticket revenue alone. Add the Colts’ share of $1.5 million in ticket sales to the concessions, parking and other ancillary revenue, and the Colts’ total annual take easily eclipses $2 million.

                              The annual city-wide economic impact of the game is estimated at $20 million. The Colts should net more than 10 percent of that.

                              And it’s an unforeseen revenue stream for the Colts. When the stadium opened in 2008, there was little discussion of even having a Big Ten Football championship, let along Indianapolis hosting such an event."

                              http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2...-from-big.html
                              __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___________


                              How can this sit well with anyone? This fool didn't build the stadium and has nothing to do with the Big 10 coming here, yet he's going to make out like a king all while sitting at home and playing his guitar. This is criminal and every Indianapolis resident should be furious over it. The fools who negotiated this deal should have never been allowed to run anything again.

                              This money should be going back into OUR CITY since we paid for this damn thing. There are a million different things in Indianapolis that could use this cash. Making someone on the Forbes list even richer is about dead last on that list.
                              Yep then he *****es to Kornheiser about how he won 115 games etc. Yeah you're just an owner you did nothing but manage to luck out in the draft. ..

                              Comment

                              • #45
                                Re: Tony Kornheiser vs Jim Irsay

                                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                                Regardless, he is bound to have much more than the wussy 50 million that he contributed. No way he could own a team for all those years and not have more than that.

                                And 300 million taxpayer dollars in that wealthy part of the Dallas metro area vs 700 million in taxpayer dollars in Indiana. HUGE difference. Jerry Jones paid 650 million of his own money for that stadium while Irsay paid 50! So thanks for bringing Cowboys Stadium up because that only helps my point. It's one thing for taxpayers to pay 300 million when the owner is himself kicking in 650 million.


                                How can this sit well with anyone? This fool didn't build the stadium and has nothing to do with the Big 10 coming here, yet he's going to make out like a king all while sitting at home and playing his guitar. This is criminal and every Indianapolis resident should be furious over it. The fools who negotiated this deal should have never been allowed to run anything again.

                                This money should be going back into OUR CITY since we paid for this damn thing. There are a million different things in Indianapolis that could use this cash. Making someone on the Forbes list even richer is about dead last on that list.
                                It's pretty clear that you have your mind made up on the matter and no amount of FACT will sway you.

                                Irsay is a billionaire on paper- only because he owns the Colts. Jerry Jones was a billionaire BEFORE purchasing the Cowboys- an iconic team with a MUCH greater income stream than the Colts. He had the liquid assets to pay for a significant portion of the stadium. Irsay does not. Speculate all you want to the contrary but that is the truth.

                                While the Colts get a decent share of revenue from non-Colts related events held at the stadium, local businesses prosper with packed hotels and restaurants, and the city receives a large amount of additional tax revenue from the additional spending. Everyone wins. Quit your *****ing.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                                Working...
                                X