Blackout?

[GoColts8818]

I disagree with the bolded.

When your team makes decisions you don't agree with, you have little recourse other than to withhold your money. Criticizing fans who have spent thousands of dollars supporting a billion dollar organization because they choose to stop spending money without prejudice is out of bounds, if you ask me.

And teams get this. Part of the reason the Colts paid Manning so much money over the years is because they understand that having a marquee player helps your ticket sales. When you get rid of said marquee player, it is going to affect your ticket sales negatively, at least for a period of time. The fact that 13% didn't renew isn't surprising to me. It could have been a lot more. Kravitz is twisting the knife.

You can disagree with that all you want but that's what a die hard fan is. They stand by their team no matter what. http://www.yourdictionary.com/die-hard

With that said it doesn't mean it's a bad thing if people aren't die hard fans. There is nothing wrong with not being one and it doesn't mean that people who are die hard fans are some how better fans than those who are not and it doesn't mean that if you aren't one that you some how aren't a fan either.

Also like I said I don't think Kravtiz and I know I am not are saying people were right or wrong to do what they did. i clearly get why some people did and I am willing to admit that there were reasons beyond Peyton that went into people giving up tickets. With that said the Colts didn't raise prices this year and didn't tell people they couldn't come to games. That's all he was trying to say that the team didn't walk away from the fans. If anything as much as people might not like to hear this and even if those people were justified to do so, people walked away from them. Just because the people walked away doesn't mean they didn't have fair reason and it doesn't mean they were wrong to do so. It's just what happened.

That's why this thing was handled so poorly by the Colts on the PR front. They let someone else shape the news story who left out all the parts that if you read you can see exactly why the Colts made the decision they did. They just said the Colts to black out games if not sold out and it came in an off-season where you've already asked the fanbase to take a lot of body shots. So it wasn't a smart PR move on their part which I think Kravitz got at as well.

Again, I am not a huge Kravitz fan I just happen to think I understand what he was trying to say here and I agree with it. I can easily see how people may not because no one likes being told that even if they were right to do so that they were the one to walk away from something.

[Gavin]

"While we value all of our fans, our first priority is to protect the investment of paying customers." I thought this is a key point in the article from, and in my opinion the best way to

protect the investment of paying customers is to win games. To me not relaxing those rules as they call it is not only a bad PR move by voicing that but bad business decison making. In a time of uncertainty you do alienate fans that help put money on your pockets you give them a discount and say hey pay me be later when the team is winning and prices will go up some, My situation as it stands now makes it hard for me to go see a game, not impossible but it would take quite a bit work and more money then just gas and tickets

[Superman]

You can disagree with that all you want but that's what a die hard fan is. They stand by their team no matter what. http://www.yourdictionary.com/die-hard

With that said it doesn't mean it's a bad thing if people aren't die hard fans. There is nothing wrong with not being one and it doesn't mean that people who are die hard fans are some how better fans than those who are not and it doesn't mean that if you aren't one that you some how aren't a fan either.

Just because you stop buying season tickets doesn't mean you're not a die hard fan. I understand characterizing people who decided to go follow the Broncos as not being die hard Colts fans. We're just talking about people who decided they weren't ready to keep spending money on season tickets.

Like I said, their only voice is the voice of their money. Holding that against them is unfair, and Kravitz saying that they abandoned the team is unfair. Those fans haven't done anything wrong.

Also like I said I don't think Kravtiz and I know I am not are saying people were right or wrong to do what they did. i clearly get why some people did and I am willing to admit that there were reasons beyond Peyton that went into people giving up tickets. With that said the Colts didn't raise prices this year and didn't tell people they couldn't come to games. That's all he was trying to say that the team didn't walk away from the fans. If anything as much as people might not like to hear this and even if those people were justified to do so, people walked away from them. Just because the people walked away doesn't mean they didn't have fair reason and it doesn't mean they were wrong to do so. It's just what happened.

I don't think the team did anything wrong either. Kravitz is making the opposite point, the point you're defending, that the fans who stopped buying season tickets aren't die hard fans, they abandoned the team, they're the problem. By that rationale, all fans who don't buy season tickets aren't die hard fans.

All I'm saying is that when fans stop buying season tickets, it doesn't mean they abandoned the team. Kravitz has been pushing that meme for months now, and I think it's unfair.

That's why this thing was handled so poorly by the Colts on the PR front. They let someone else shape the news story who left out all the parts that if you read you can see exactly why the Colts made the decision they did. They just said the Colts to black out games if not sold out and it came in an off-season where you've already asked the fanbase to take a lot of body shots. So it wasn't a smart PR move on their part which I think Kravitz got at as well.

Terrible PR. Again. They've made a number of PR mistakes this offseason, but with as much tumult as there has been, I'm not surprised. In this instance, they should have been way ahead of the story with a press release: "We fully intend to sell out every game, and as such, there's no reason to lower our blackout restrictions. The teams that have struggled for years to fill their stadiums will benefit from this new rule, but the Colts' fanbase has stuck with us through thick and thin, and we look forward to rewarding them with an excellent gameday experience in a packed stadium this season."

Maybe that was the plan, and they wanted to wait until they were ready to start selling single game tickets, but Fox59 pre-empted them. But they didn't handle this very well at all.

Again, I am not a huge Kravitz fan I just happen to think I understand what he was trying to say here and I agree with it. I can easily see how people may not because no one likes being told that even if they were right to do so that they were the one to walk away from something.

I get Kravitz point, but like I said, he's twisting the dagger here. Not helping. Fans have a right to withhold their money if they desire to do so, and when your team is doing things that you don't agree with is the best time to do that. I'm on board with what the team has done, but I understand some not being so agreeable. To say they've abandoned their team is a needless dig in a tough offseason for Indy faithful. Completely unnecessary.

[Gavin]

Really if you think about it, before Peyton came along how many sell outs did the team have before him? in my opinion it sounds like the organization thinks that just because they had 13 years of success and sell outs that it deserves more from here on out (in other words a sense of entitlement) rather then doing the smart business move and focusing on putting a good product out there in which those fans would undoubtedly would come back they would rather blackout games when fans arent willing to come see the games in person anyway at this point, This is bad PR. bad business management all around and unless those tickets get sold this could get ALOT worse from a fans perspective which could lead to it getting alot worse from a team perspective, A chain reaction could happen if this doesnt improve

[Superman]

Really if you think about it, before Peyton came along how many sell outs did the team have before him? in my opinion it sounds like the organization thinks that just because they had 14 years of success and sell outs that it deserves more from here on out (in other words a sense of entitlement) rather then doing the smart business move and focusing on putting a good product out there in which those fans would undoubtedly would come back they would rather blackout games when fans arent willing to come see the games in person anyway at this point, This is bad PR. bad business management all around and unless those tickets get sold this could get ALOT worse from a fans perspective which could lead to it getting alot worse from a team perspective, A chain reaction could happen if this doesnt improve

I don't know if the Colts had issues selling tickets before Manning, but I do know that the Jets playoff game in 2010 didn't sell out until the last minute. This isn't all about pre/post-Manning, and it isn't an issue that the Colts marketing department is completely unfamiliar with. The trends around the league show that teams are often left with tickets remaining just days before the game, especially teams in difficult markets that aren't winning, that are coming off of dreadful seasons, etc.

In my opinion, the ticket issue is being blown completely out of proportion, especially for this time of year. It makes zero sense for the Colts to lower their blackout restriction, not because they want to threaten fans with blackouts, but because they don't expect to have any blackouts.

[Gavin]

I don't know if the Colts had issues selling tickets before Manning, but I do know that the Jets playoff game in 2010 didn't sell out until the last minute. This isn't all about pre/post-Manning, and it isn't an issue that the Colts marketing department is completely unfamiliar with. The trends around the league show that teams are often left with tickets remaining just days before the game, especially teams in difficult markets that aren't winning, that are coming off of dreadful seasons, etc.

In my opinion, the ticket issue is being blown completely out of proportion, especially for this time of year. It makes zero sense for the Colts to lower their blackout restriction, not because they want to threaten fans with blackouts, but because they don't expect to have any blackouts.

normally I would agree on all accounts I wouldnt expect any blackout except this isnt a normal situation where a team just came off just any horrible season, Peyton Manning was cut, that right their says uncertanty and in most peoples minds like I said including on this forum it already spells doom for the forseeable future (this season), so why would the fans want to come watch there team lose at an expensive price when they can do it for example for 70 bucks on Rewind and get every single game for that 1 flat rate, This is directly related to Manning being cut and there is 14 years of sell outs to prove it. We are going to have some blackouts Im sure

[GoColts8818]

Just because you stop buying season tickets doesn't mean you're not a die hard fan. I understand characterizing people who decided to go follow the Broncos as not being die hard Colts fans. We're just talking about people who decided they weren't ready to keep spending money on season tickets.

I didn't say that. In fact I went out of my way not to say that. I said if you stop buying season tickets because they got ride of one player you aren't a diehard fan. The last part is the key part. I have freely admitted that there might very well be more reason that people gave up tickets than just letting Peyton go yet as foolish as it would be for to assume that everyone who gave up tickets did it it for that reason it would be equally as foolish to think that no one gave up tickets for that reason.

Like I said, their only voice is the voice of their money. Holding that against them is unfair, and Kravitz saying that they abandoned the team is unfair. Those fans haven't done anything wrong.

He didn't say they did anything wrong. He just said it was them who walked away from the Colts not that the Colts walked away from them. Again I don't think he was trying to say anyone did anything wrong. I think he was just stating what happened not casting judgement right or wrong.

I don't think the team did anything wrong either. Kravitz is making the opposite point, the point you're defending, that the fans who stopped buying season tickets aren't die hard fans, they abandoned the team, they're the problem. By that rationale, all fans who don't buy season tickets aren't die hard fans.

I disagree with that again I never said all fans who stopped buying tickets weren't diehard fans and neither did Kravitz. I have said and Kravitz said in the blog the ones who stopped buying them because of one player being let go were not diehard fans. I have admitted again that there are other reasons fans may have given up tickets but I don't think that everyone gave up their tickets because they just couldn't afford them anymore after last season. I think there were other reason's as well that caused fans to give up tickets such as Peyton not being here anymore or not wanting to spend money on a losing football team. Frankly that's up to the people that is well with in their right to do so. I am just saying if that is the reason they choose not to attend games anymore then they aren't diehard fans by the very definition of the words diehard fans they are people who stand by their team when things look bleak. If you are giving up tickets because you don't want to see them lose anymore or because the super star QB then you aren't a die hard fan. There is nothing wrong with not being one either. I am also in no way saying those people are wrong for doing that.

Now I've also made it clear that there is nothing wrong with not being one. Frankly I think we are way over too sensitive to people saying someone isn't a die hard fan on here. For whatever reason on here people seem to have defined there are only two types of fans diehard fans and bandwagon fans and if you aren't one you must be the other and that simply isn't the case. You can be a fan of something without fitting into one of those two groups. I think we are too quick to try to label people who aren't diehard fans as bandwagon fans and I don't think that's right or fair. i also think people who are diehard fans think somehow just because they are it somehow makes them more right when it comes to debating things on here. I don't agree with that logic either. It just means you are extremely loyal. A very nice trait to have but it doesn't make anyone's opinion more right based on that fact alone. So long story short I think people get all worked up on here if they aren't thought to be a diehard fan because it some how means someone is saying you aren't as good of a fan. Again, I don't think not being a diehard fan is a bad thing. There is nothing wrong with it and it clearly doesn't mean anyone who isn't a diehard fan is any less of a fan than someone who is. With the Colts I am a very diehard fan but with like the Pacers I am much more a casual fan. I don't view myself as a bandwagon fan because I don't stop following them when they struggle but I don't pay as much attention to them then as I do when they win either. With that said when the Pacers do win it's not nearly as sweet for me personally as it is when the Colts win either. That's the difference and I can easily see how people have the same views towards the Colts as I do towards the Pacers and I don't think that makes them any less of a fan for having that view point it just means they aren't a die hard fan and again there is nothing wrong with that. Not being a die hard fan doesn't equal being a bandwagon fan automatically.

All I'm saying is that when fans stop buying season tickets, it doesn't mean they abandoned the team. Kravitz has been pushing that meme for months now, and I think it's unfair.

I think Kravitz views it as also unfair for the people who label the Colts as the ones who abandoned the fans as well when they never told anyone they couldn't be fans of the team. It was probably poor word choice by Kravitz which is why I said I can understand how it would bristle some feathers. With that said I also think the Colts showed some horrible PR on this front and it shows they are going to have to get used to being more gentle with fans than they have been in the past. Anyone can do PR for a 12-4 team that is competing for a Super Bowl every year. The hard job is to do PR for a team who is rebuilding.

Terrible PR. Again. They've made a number of PR mistakes this offseason, but with as much tumult as there has been, I'm not surprised. In this instance, they should have been way ahead of the story with a press release: "We fully intend to sell out every game, and as such, there's no reason to lower our blackout restrictions. The teams that have struggled for years to fill their stadiums will benefit from this new rule, but the Colts' fanbase has stuck with us through thick and thin, and we look forward to rewarding them with an excellent gameday experience in a packed stadium this season."

Maybe that was the plan, and they wanted to wait until they were ready to start selling single game tickets, but Fox59 pre-empted them. But they didn't handle this very well at all.

I agree with you 100% on that point. They let Fox 59 tell the story rather than them controlling it. Of course the TV station grabbed the biggest headline that was going to get the most attention and frankly Fox 59 did a horrible job telling the whole story. With that said had the Colts made the effort to tell the story from the get go they wouldn't need to be back pedaling now.

I get Kravitz point, but like I said, he's twisting the dagger here. Not helping. Fans have a right to withhold their money if they desire to do so, and when your team is doing things that you don't agree with is the best time to do that. I'm on board with what the team has done, but I understand some not being so agreeable. To say they've abandoned their team is a needless dig in a tough offseason for Indy faithful. Completely unnecessary.

I don't think Kravitz would disagree with you on that point. With that said he didn't say all fans abandoned the team he was making it clear to say the ones who did so because of the lose of one player were abandoning the team and frankly he's right they were. "And I don’t buy the idea the Colts have abandoned their fans. If anything, the fans abandoned the Colts. I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door." That last sentence he said in there is the key part of it. He makes it known he's not talking about all the fans he's talking about the group that did it because Peyton isn't here anymore. People may not like it but if you stopped being a fan of the Colts becuase Peyton Manning isn't here anymore I don't know what else to say than yes you bailed on the team. No one likes hearing that but it's the truth. It also doesn't mean those who did are bad people either. People have to do what they have to do and that's fine. There is nothing wrong with being a Peyton Manning fan. Someone can be the most die hard Peyton Manning fan in the world and there is nothing wrong with that however it also means that if they stopped cheering for the Colts because he's not here they aren't diehard Colts fans either. Again nothing wrong with that. I happen to like the Giants because Eli is there when Eli is gone I may or may not like the Giants. I think i will still like them but I doubt I will follow them as close. I would take no offense to anyone telling me I am not a diehard Giants fan because they are right I am not.

With that said clearly not every Colts fan did that and infact most did not and Kravitz is rather senstive over the rest of the blog to those who did not going as far as to say he understands why they would be mad and pretty much rakes the Colts over the coals for doing a horriable job handling this on a PR front which is why I thought it was such a good blog by him. He did a good job of getting most of the story out there and why what the Colts was doing was right but how they told people what they were doing was wrong. The little line towards there end there isn't a major part of the blog it just struck me as being true. A lot of fans who stopped being Colts fans because Peyton is gone said the team walked away from them that's not true like Kravitz said in that situation if anyone walked from anyone because of Peyton being gone it was the fans. The Colts didn't tell those fans they couldn't buy season tickets anymore just because they liked Peyton Manning. That's what he was trying to say, they made the choice not to be Colts fans anymore. Again I don't think Kravitz was trying to cast blame or say anyone was right or wrong for what they did with that statement either I think he was just trying to say what happened. I also think in a way he was trying to stick up for those of us who have stuck with the team even threw all the changes over the rest of blog by pretty much saying hey the Colts should have done a better job of telling those of you who stuck with the team why they are doing this and I can understand why you are mad about how they did tell you.

[Gavin]

And I don’t buy the idea the Colts have abandoned their fans. If anything, the fans abandoned the Colts. I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door. The Colts have given them more than a decade of excellence, but the minute the team fell, a lot of fans scattered, a good 13 percent of season ticket holders.

Truthfully he is right but simply put, fans pay good money to watch a good product out on the field and when you make so many changes to everything and announce publicly although truthfully that this will be a couple year project at best then what do you expect? oh and did I mention Peyton is gone? Alot of people are still angry over that and the only way that will be fixed will take time-winning. Can you blame people for not wanting to pay those ticket prices after the crap that was put out on the field last year? I hardly think so.

[GoColts8818]

And I don’t buy the idea the Colts have abandoned their fans. If anything, the fans abandoned the Colts. I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door. The Colts have given them more than a decade of excellence, but the minute the team fell, a lot of fans scattered, a good 13 percent of season ticket holders.

Truthfully he is right but simply put, fans pay good money to watch a good product out on the field and when you make so many changes to everything and announce publicly although truthfully that this will be a couple year project at best then what do you expect? oh and did I mention Peyton is gone? Alot of people are still angry over that and the only way that will be fixed will take time-winning. Can you blame people for not wanting to pay those ticket prices after the crap that was put out on the field last year? I hardly think so.

I don't blame them and I don't think Kravitz does either. He's just simply saying what happened IMO. I really don't think he was trying to say anyone was wrong or right for how they acted on that front. He's just saying hey rather you were justified or not to walk away from your tickets you are the one who made that choice the Colts didn't say you couldn't buy them anymore because your favorite player isn't here anymore. Again, I don't think he was trying to get into the issues as to why people may have given up their tickets. He's just saying people gave them up they weren't taken away.

[NewColtsFan]

Bob Kuharsky of ESPN says don't allow the blackouts to take place.

His reasoning? Free TV is great marketing for fans who want to see the new team. If you have blackouts you give those potential fans an opportunity to find something else to do with their Sundays. And if they find they don't miss football so much, or if they like whatever else they're doing, it'll be even harder to win them back if the re-build process goes slower than expected.

Heres the story:

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/38296/colts-shouldnt-risk-blackouts

You can also see some thinking of the teams in this same regard.... give fans free TV and maybe they'll learn to like watching the games from the comfort of their living room. And maybe they won't mind missing out on buying tickets and the traffic around the stadium, and paying for parking and paying full price for pre-season games, etc. There's always the flip-side argument.

No easy choice here......

[87waynefan]

Glad I bought season tickets now. Anyone know what the radius of the blackout is? Just wondering if it would affect the games being broadcast in, say, Fort Wayne.

[JustAColtsFan]

Take last year for example, How many people would have payed to see the mess that was last season? well with that season happening and with the loss of Manning, fans are at worst expecting this team to not be that good including most of us fans on this forum and dont want to pay who knows how many bucks to (I dont have ticket prices in front of me) to watch them lose, which they will do this first season more often then not when fans can save there money and spend it on something that 1.Costs less and 2.and lets be honest will be more fun then watching them lose especially for those of us that will get NFL Rewind for 70 bucks and be able to watch the whole season and then some, Like it or not Irsay needs to lower prices, it wont hurt for one season especially when most feel the season will result in more losses then not

Since you do not know the ticket prices I assume you are not a season ticket holder. I do not have any complaint with your opinion then. However, the season ticket holders that think like you are the reason that Indiananpolis will never be a great NFL city in the vein of Greenbay or Pittsburg where you have to be willed tickets to even get a sniff of one. They realize that football is cyclical and there will be down seasons. When I purchased my season tickets the Colts were TERRIBLE but I new that with the addition of Peyton things were on the upswing. So I got to see a decade of great football. Now I am going to look at the next season or two as insurance. Yes the football will not be the best but I will get to see other great franchises play my team and I am sure the Colts will shock me a few times in the rebuilding process and steal a few exciting games. And in one or two seasons when they are winning 10-12 games a year and in the playoffs, all the "fans" that let their tickets go will be grumbling when they have to put up $100 per ticket just to be on the waiting list. Besides thanks to them I was able to upgrade my seats and am looking forward to the NEXT DECADE OF EXCELLENCE!!!! GO COLTS!!!

[IndyBarb]

I agree that watching the team on TV just might inspire others to purchase tickets.

Here is the latest article with the blackout or blueout region's.

http://www.indystar....ticket-interest

[dacoats]

i don't care if we get blacked out, we need to focus on the field as a team

money is a Irsay issues, the players are my goal.

[Coltman51]

Time will tell ( about 7 months) if this was the wise choice or not. Fact is that every team has to make their decision by the 15th of this month. A lot of controversy and varying totals of money discussed. Didn't like the old blackout rules, but don't know that the League did the right thing by making it a random choice of percentages instead of just making a distinct change that was the same for all. Think the Colts are right by not adopting the 85% choice, but not sure the full 100% was the way to go.

I do applaud them for looking at it and making this decision quickly, though the way it was presented to the public leaves a lot to be desired. Don't go to other team sites at all so don't know if this is popping up elsewhere, we will know next week where everyones decision had landed.

[shakedownstreet]

we're only talkin' about 2000 tickets for eight games. there is no way in [EDIT] those don't sell

[Superman]

we're only talkin' about 2000 tickets for eight games. there is no way in [EDIT] those don't sell

That's only season tickets. There are still other tickets to sell to be clear of the blackout.

[Gavin]

Since you do not know the ticket prices I assume you are not a season ticket holder. I do not have any complaint with your opinion then. However, the season ticket holders that think like you are the reason that Indiananpolis will never be a great NFL city in the vein of Greenbay or Pittsburg where you have to be willed tickets to even get a sniff of one. They realize that football is cyclical and there will be down seasons. When I purchased my season tickets the Colts were TERRIBLE but I new that with the addition of Peyton things were on the upswing. So I got to see a decade of great football. Now I am going to look at the next season or two as insurance. Yes the football will not be the best but I will get to see other great franchises play my team and I am sure the Colts will shock me a few times in the rebuilding process and steal a few exciting games. And in one or two seasons when they are winning 10-12 games a year and in the playoffs, all the "fans" that let their tickets go will be grumbling when they have to put up $100 per ticket just to be on the waiting list. Besides thanks to them I was able to upgrade my seats and am looking forward to the NEXT DECADE OF EXCELLENCE!!!! GO COLTS!!!

Also take into account a person or families income bracket, I read somewhere that the average ticket for a Colts game was I believe 77$ well if I pay 77$ for one game I do get that one game but what if that one game is a real stinker (the Colts do look to lay a couple of those in this first year of the new era whether that happens has yet to be seen though of course) a person can get NFL game rewind for 70 bucks and watch every game not only for this upcoming season but the previous 3.I have never been to a Colts game so I cant speak on that experience with the exception that I find it hard to believe that you can see everything such as fumbles for example unless you bring binochulars like you can on tv to me and my situation its better to go with NFL Rewind, thats not to say I cant afford 1 ticket at 77$ but when you take into account the 70$ dollars for Rewind then it dont add up for me

[Superman]

I didn't say that. In fact I went out of my way not to say that. I said if you stop buying season tickets because they got ride of one player you aren't a diehard fan. The last part is the key part. I have freely admitted that there might very well be more reason that people gave up tickets than just letting Peyton go yet as foolish as it would be for to assume that everyone who gave up tickets did it it for that reason it would be equally as foolish to think that no one gave up tickets for that reason.

Not really, though.

You said a die hard fan sticks with the team "no matter what." Setting aside people who can't afford to anymore, that indicates that anyone who stops buying season tickets because they don't like the direction of the franchise isn't a die hard fan.

He didn't say they did anything wrong. He just said it was them who walked away from the Colts not that the Colts walked away from them. Again I don't think he was trying to say anyone did anything wrong. I think he was just stating what happened not casting judgement right or wrong.

Again, it's kind of hard to hide his intent:

And I don’t buy the idea the Colts have abandoned their fans. If anything, the fans abandoned the Colts. I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door. The Colts have given them more than a decade of excellence, but the minute the team fell, a lot of fans scattered, a good 13 percent of season ticket holders.

To me, judgment is pretty clearly being cast. And he's made his opinion on this clear more than once.

I disagree with that again I never said all fans who stopped buying tickets weren't diehard fans and neither did Kravitz. I have said and Kravitz said in the blog the ones who stopped buying them because of one player being let go were not diehard fans. I have admitted again that there are other reasons fans may have given up tickets but I don't think that everyone gave up their tickets because they just couldn't afford them anymore after last season. I think there were other reason's as well that caused fans to give up tickets such as Peyton not being here anymore or not wanting to spend money on a losing football team. Frankly that's up to the people that is well with in their right to do so. I am just saying if that is the reason they choose not to attend games anymore then they aren't diehard fans by the very definition of the words diehard fans they are people who stand by their team when things look bleak. If you are giving up tickets because you don't want to see them lose anymore or because the super star QB then you aren't a die hard fan. There is nothing wrong with not being one either. I am also in no way saying those people are wrong for doing that.

I've read Kravitz's words again and again, and it's pretty clear what he's saying: If you're among the 13% of season ticket holders who didn't renew, you abandoned the Colts. You "scattered" after a decade of excellence. He makes no distinction regarding the myriad of reasons a fan might stop buying tickets, and lumps them all in as disgruntled Manning defectors.

Now I've also made it clear that there is nothing wrong with not being one. Frankly I think we are way over too sensitive to people saying someone isn't a die hard fan on here. For whatever reason on here people seem to have defined there are only two types of fans diehard fans and bandwagon fans and if you aren't one you must be the other and that simply isn't the case. You can be a fan of something without fitting into one of those two groups. ... Not being a die hard fan doesn't equal being a bandwagon fan automatically.

I'm not sensitive about it, but I think people would do well to recognize that labeling someone as not a die hard fan has a negative connotation to it. You may not think so, but plenty of others do. It's kind of like how calling someone ignorant isn't necessarily an insult, just a statement of fact, but most people are insulted when called ignorant.

I think Kravitz views it as also unfair for the people who label the Colts as the ones who abandoned the fans as well when they never told anyone they couldn't be fans of the team. It was probably poor word choice by Kravitz which is why I said I can understand how it would bristle some feathers. With that said I also think the Colts showed some horrible PR on this front and it shows they are going to have to get used to being more gentle with fans than they have been in the past. Anyone can do PR for a 12-4 team that is competing for a Super Bowl every year. The hard job is to do PR for a team who is rebuilding.

This is a straw man. Maybe not yours, maybe Kravitz's, but I don't hear a lot of fans claiming that the team abandoned them.

Maybe we'll hear that if games get blacked out, but as of right now, it's not something that's even in play.

I agree with you 100% on that point. They let Fox 59 tell the story rather than them controlling it. Of course the TV station grabbed the biggest headline that was going to get the most attention and frankly Fox 59 did a horrible job telling the whole story. With that said had the Colts made the effort to tell the story from the get go they wouldn't need to be back pedaling now.

Yup. Maybe they planned to make a statement later, but they should have been out ahead of this.

I don't think Kravitz would disagree with you on that point. With that said he didn't say all fans abandoned the team he was making it clear to say the ones who did so because of the lose of one player were abandoning the team and frankly he's right they were. "And I don’t buy the idea the Colts have abandoned their fans. If anything, the fans abandoned the Colts. I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door." That last sentence he said in there is the key part of it. He makes it known he's not talking about all the fans he's talking about the group that did it because Peyton isn't here anymore.

He lumps them all in together. More on this below...

People may not like it but if you stopped being a fan of the Colts becuase Peyton Manning isn't here anymore I don't know what else to say than yes you bailed on the team. No one likes hearing that but it's the truth. It also doesn't mean those who did are bad people either. People have to do what they have to do and that's fine. There is nothing wrong with being a Peyton Manning fan. Someone can be the most die hard Peyton Manning fan in the world and there is nothing wrong with that however it also means that if they stopped cheering for the Colts because he's not here they aren't diehard Colts fans either. Again nothing wrong with that. I happen to like the Giants because Eli is there when Eli is gone I may or may not like the Giants. I think i will still like them but I doubt I will follow them as close. I would take no offense to anyone telling me I am not a diehard Giants fan because they are right I am not.

With that said clearly not every Colts fan did that and infact most did not and Kravitz is rather senstive over the rest of the blog to those who did not going as far as to say he understands why they would be mad and pretty much rakes the Colts over the coals for doing a horriable job handling this on a PR front which is why I thought it was such a good blog by him. He did a good job of getting most of the story out there and why what the Colts was doing was right but how they told people what they were doing was wrong. The little line towards there end there isn't a major part of the blog it just struck me as being true. A lot of fans who stopped being Colts fans because Peyton is gone said the team walked away from them that's not true like Kravitz said in that situation if anyone walked from anyone because of Peyton being gone it was the fans. The Colts didn't tell those fans they couldn't buy season tickets anymore just because they liked Peyton Manning. That's what he was trying to say, they made the choice not to be Colts fans anymore. Again I don't think Kravitz was trying to cast blame or say anyone was right or wrong for what they did with that statement either I think he was just trying to say what happened. I also think in a way he was trying to stick up for those of us who have stuck with the team even threw all the changes over the rest of blog by pretty much saying hey the Colts should have done a better job of telling those of you who stuck with the team why they are doing this and I can understand why you are mad about how they did tell you.

Here's the problem with what Kravitz is doing:

He's long had an issue with the Colts, mostly with Bill Polian. I wrote about this before last season started, the relationship between the local media and bloggers and the front office, which I've always found strange (you have a winning team, but local media spent more time the past two years complaining about the management and their lack of access than they did talking about the historic run the team was in the middle of).

On this particular issue, he actually gets it: The Colts are doing the right thing by not lowering the blackout threshold, and he has an opportunity to help the fanbase understand it. But he still doesn't quite "get it." Instead of embracing that opportunity to be and ambassador for the Colts and tell the franchise's story, he spits on the people who didn't renew season tickets. These people are already upset because the team was terrible last season, Manning is gone, half of his supporting cast is gone, Irsay didn't handle the lead-up to the Manning decision the best way he could have, and now, the local fans are being threatened with blackouts. They feel like they've been stabbed in the back. Instead of assuaging them and addressing their concerns, he grabs the knife and twists it. You're the reason this is happening in the first place, and all because you're mad that Manning is gone.

And to the bolded, people who haven't renewed, for whatever reason, have NOT necessarily decided not to be fans anymore. I would venture to say that the majority of them are still fans, but don't like what the team is doing, and are voting with their dollars. It's all they have, aside from showing up and booing. Would that be better? Thirteen percent of season ticket holders are disgruntled fans -- but fans nonetheless. Don't challenge their fandom, especially not with regard to this issue. It's counterproductive, and it's insulting.

This blog post by Kravitz is just further proof that he doesn't get it. He had a chance to bridge the gap between the team and the fans, endearing himself to both. Instead, he poured fuel on the fire.

[Superman]

normally I would agree on all accounts I wouldnt expect any blackout except this isnt a normal situation where a team just came off just any horrible season, Peyton Manning was cut, that right their says uncertanty and in most peoples minds like I said including on this forum it already spells doom for the forseeable future (this season), so why would the fans want to come watch there team lose at an expensive price when they can do it for example for 70 bucks on Rewind and get every single game for that 1 flat rate, This is directly related to Manning being cut and there is 14 years of sell outs to prove it. We are going to have some blackouts Im sure

Phones are ringing, and tickets are moving. Blackouts are highly unlikely.

http://www.indystar....ews|text|Sports

Colts home games are 97 percent sold out.

...

Hall and Colts Chief Operating Officer Pete Ward fully expect the team to sell out and blackouts to become a nonissue.

...

If all non-premium seat tickets are not sold 72 hours before kickoff, NFL games are blacked out

...

that means the Colts could avoid blackouts by selling a little over 53,000 seats, a figure they have far exceeded.

...

Teams have until Sunday to opt for a lower threshold. Most are still evaluating, although San Diego Chargers President Dean Spanos told the San Diego Union-Tribune the Chargers — who had two of the NFL’s 16 blackouts last season — are likely to stay with the old criteria.

...

“We’ve got less than 2,000 tickets to sell,” Ward said. “That’s why we never planned on a press release, because we obviously didn’t think it would be an issue and the policy hasn’t changed from what it’s been the last 28 years.”

The Colts have sold out 113 of their past 114 regular-season and playoff games at home, including 79 in a row since a Sept. 21, 2003, game against Jacksonville.

It's telling to me that even the Chargers, and team that has had issues in recent years, aren't likely to adopt the lax blackout rules.

[GoColts8818]

Not really, though.

You said a die hard fan sticks with the team "no matter what." Setting aside people who can't afford to anymore, that indicates that anyone who stops buying season tickets because they don't like the direction of the franchise isn't a die hard fan.

Yes they do. Also if they would stop buying tickets for that reason they yes they are not a die hard fan. As I clearly spelled out later that isn't a bad thing. However, that's what die hard fans do they stand by their team when others give up on the team because they don't like the direction of the franchise. Again just because someone isn't a die hard fan doesn't mean they are doing anything wrong. It just means they aren't a die hard fan that's all. Again as I spelled out before I think we over value being a die hard fan on this message board.

I did not however say that everyone who didn't renew season tickets did it because they are no longer die hard fans. I would agree 100% that people who gave up tickets because they can't afford them anymore are in a completely different group than those who gave them up becuase they don't want to support a losing team or they are mad that Peyton isn't here anymore.

Again, it's kind of hard to hide his intent:

And I don’t buy the idea the Colts have abandoned their fans. If anything, the fans abandoned the Colts. I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door. The Colts have given them more than a decade of excellence, but the minute the team fell, a lot of fans scattered, a good 13 percent of season ticket holders.

To me, judgment is pretty clearly being cast. And he's made his opinion on this clear more than once.

I disagree and that's fine. We hold different view points and I don't think we are going to change either's on that one.

I've read Kravitz's words again and again, and it's pretty clear what he's saying: If you're among the 13% of season ticket holders who didn't renew, you abandoned the Colts. You "scattered" after a decade of excellence. He makes no distinction regarding the myriad of reasons a fan might stop buying tickets, and lumps them all in as disgruntled Manning defectors.

Poor word choice by Kravitz but again and probably some generalizing on his point I honestly don't think he's trying to lump them together. If you disagree that's fine. I do think that a good chunk of those 13% probably did it for one of two reasons they didn't like that Manning isn't here anymore or that they didn't want to support a losing football team. I am not buying that most of those people gave up those tickets because they couldn't afford tickets anymore because the economy has been bad for almost four years now yet the Colts didn't have that kind of drop off in season tickets till this season. I am sure some may have very well given them up because they couldn't afford it anymore and I wouldn't put those in the same spot light as I do everyone else. With that said I don't think they were the majority that elected to give up tickets though either.

I'm not sensitive about it, but I think people would do well to recognize that labeling someone as not a die hard fan has a negative connotation to it. You may not think so, but plenty of others do. It's kind of like how calling someone ignorant isn't necessarily an insult, just a statement of fact, but most people are insulted when called ignorant.

Only if they take it that way and if they do that's on them not on the person who is saying it. Like I said if someone told me I wasn't a diehard Giants or Pacers fan I wouldn't think twice about it because I am not. I know I am a casual fan of them and I wouldn't take it as someone trying to insult me telling me that I am not. The problem is around here people try to use saying someone isn't a die hard fan as an insult because they are really trying to say if you aren't a die hard fan you aren't a fan at all. I don't agree with that view point. I think you can be a fan of something and not being a die hard or a band wagon fan. Die hard fans stand by their team when times are hard that is the very definition of the word. If people are giving up their tickets because Peyton Manning is gone or they don't want to support a losing team then they aren't die hard fans by the definition of the word. Again, there is NOTHING wrong with not being a die hard fan. Just like being a die hard fan doesn't make anyone a better fan of something like some die hard fans think it does.

This is a straw man. Maybe not yours, maybe Kravitz's, but I don't hear a lot of fans claiming that the team abandoned them.

Maybe we'll hear that if games get blacked out, but as of right now, it's not something that's even in play.

I've heard it mostly on the radio not on this message board and I would guess by the word choice Kravitz used he probably got e-mails or tweets saying it to him and he was just saying hey look the Colts didn't tell you you couldn't buy season tickets if anyone abandoned anyone it would be the fans who choose to walk away. That's all I think he was honestly trying to say. I really don't think he was trying to say that someone was right or wrong for choosing not to buy tickets.

Yup. Maybe they planned to make a statement later, but they should have been out ahead of this.

I think we agree on 90% of this which is why I posted the Kravitz thing is that I really liked the part that 1, he did a much better job of telling the whole story than Fox 59 did and 2, he went after the Colts for doing such a horriable job on the PR front of this. We are debating one paragraph and losing sight of the main part of the blog.

He lumps them all in together. More on this below...

Here's the problem with what Kravitz is doing:

He's long had an issue with the Colts, mostly with Bill Polian. I wrote about this before last season started, the relationship between the local media and bloggers and the front office, which I've always found strange (you have a winning team, but local media spent more time the past two years complaining about the management and their lack of access than they did talking about the historic run the team was in the middle of).

I don't disagree with that. That's why I've said more than once I am not a big Kravitz fan. WIth that said I just happened to like this one blog. In fact I've been extremely hard on both him and Philip B. when others liked them both always whinning about how Polian wouldn't talk about them. Frankly as much as they cried about Polian and ripped him at any chance they got I wouldn't have talked to them to help them make their jobs easier if I was Polian either.

On this particular issue, he actually gets it: The Colts are doing the right thing by not lowering the blackout threshold, and he has an opportunity to help the fanbase understand it. But he still doesn't quite "get it." Instead of embracing that opportunity to be and ambassador for the Colts and tell the franchise's story, he spits on the people who didn't renew season tickets. These people are already upset because the team was terrible last season, Manning is gone, half of his supporting cast is gone, Irsay didn't handle the lead-up to the Manning decision the best way he could have, and now, the local fans are being threatened with blackouts. They feel like they've been stabbed in the back. Instead of assuaging them and addressing their concerns, he grabs the knife and twists it. You're the reason this is happening in the first place, and all because you're mad that Manning is gone.

And to the bolded, people who haven't renewed, for whatever reason, have NOT necessarily decided not to be fans anymore. I would venture to say that the majority of them are still fans, but don't like what the team is doing, and are voting with their dollars. It's all they have, aside from showing up and booing. Would that be better? Thirteen percent of season ticket holders are disgruntled fans -- but fans nonetheless. Don't challenge their fandom, especially not with regard to this issue. It's counterproductive, and it's insulting.

He also didn't say what they were doing was wrong. He was generalizing. Come on we know from being around here there are fair number of fans who did walk away from this team because Peyton is gone. I think Kravitz tried to make it clear that those were the fans he was talking too.

This blog post by Kravitz is just further proof that he doesn't get it. He had a chance to bridge the gap between the team and the fans, endearing himself to both. Instead, he poured fuel on the fire.

Which is part of his job to stir things up as much as we might not like it. He's not a beat writer whose job is to report just facts he's a columnist and their job is to spark a reactoin and he sure did it. With that said I don't think he was as bad about it as you do with this peace. With that said I am willing to chalk that up to two people read the samething and didn't get the samething from it. No harm no foul just two different takes on it.

[Superman]

[...]

1) I'm not hung up on this "die hard" issue. I just don't think it's a fair characterization of people who chose not to renew their season tickets. I agree that a die hard fan sticks with their team no matter what (for the most part). I don't agree that a die hard fan who is a season ticket holder keeps buying season tickets no matter what (finances notwithstanding). Buying season tickets and being a fan are two different things.

2) This "die hard" thing, along with the "real fan" designation, or the "Manning fan first" label, is something that a lot of people find offensive. And it's not specific to Colts fans, or this message board. It's always a touchy issue. And you might not mean it negatively, but a lot of people take it negatively. I think it's kind of naive to hide behind the "I don't mean it in a negative way" defense.

3) The people moaning on the Internet about Manning being gone, the ones who say they can't stand the team and hate Irsay now, I'm going to generalize them as not being season ticket holders in the first place. I'm not talking about them. The ones who put their money where their mouth is, and have for years, are the ones that I think shouldn't be labeled as deserters, as Kravitz is doing.

4) I don't think the word choice is something that Kravitz regrets. I think it's how he feels, as he's inferred many times since the news about the season ticket issue first came out a few months ago. He has called Indianapolis sports fans "fair weather fans" on a number of occasions, intimating that they don't stick with their teams through thick and thin, and that they even don't deserve a winning franchise because of it. This is not a slip of the tongue. It's an accurate portrayal of his feelings.

5) Kravitz was doing a great job on this issue, up until the abandonment paragraph. Colts PR didn't do their job, the outraged fans didn't understand the issue properly, and he nailed it. And then he nailed them. Like I said, further evidence that he can't get out of his own way.

6) If he wants to be treated as a media member, if he wants access and scoops and exclusives, and if he wants to be viewed in a positive light by his readers and the team, he should stop trying to incite reactions and be a reinforcer of the positive. It would have been the perfect time for him to highlight that the Colts are already at 97% for their 8 home games, that they've sold out 79 straight home games, and that there are two months before the first game at LOS. Blackouts are not at issue here. He did some of that. But he ruined any goodwill by blaming the fan base for this thing being an issue in the first place.

7) I know we don't see it the same way. That's fine. You know how I am; I know how you are. We can discuss anything in a levelheaded manner, as we always do. And it's always enjoyable to me. Thanks.

[JustAColtsFan]

That's only season tickets. There are still other tickets to sell to be clear of the blackout.

My understanding from the interview 59 did with Colts Marketing that it is 2000 total season tickets. Or about 4%. If they don't sell as season ticket packages they will then release them for purchas as single game tickets which would mean that popular games/apponents will sell out while others won't and would be blacked out. Would be preferable to sell them as season tickets. It was stated this morning that since the blackout announcment there has been an up-tick in sales so less than 2000 now. My feeling is that they will sell all of them and this will become a nonissue.

[hawkeyes]

Not that many years ago you would watch a nascar race and every seat would be full ... the last year it seems that half the tracks are empty! IMO, the NFL isn't too far off feeling a pinch in their stadiums as well and when they do stuff like this it doesn't help the over all situation at all.

IMO again, If they actually black out games this season and potentially all of them, it won't help them sell more seats next season, it will have them selling fewer!

[The Fish]

I really don't see the upshot of releasing this information at any point.

[The Fish]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/12/blackout-decisions-due-sunday/

and that's why

[JustAColtsFan]

Also take into account a person or families income bracket, I read somewhere that the average ticket for a Colts game was I believe 77$ well if I pay 77$ for one game I do get that one game but what if that one game is a real stinker (the Colts do look to lay a couple of those in this first year of the new era whether that happens has yet to be seen though of course) a person can get NFL game rewind for 70 bucks and watch every game not only for this upcoming season but the previous 3.I have never been to a Colts game so I cant speak on that experience with the exception that I find it hard to believe that you can see everything such as fumbles for example unless you bring binochulars like you can on tv to me and my situation its better to go with NFL Rewind, thats not to say I cant afford 1 ticket at 77$ but when you take into account the 70$ dollars for Rewind then it dont add up for me

I am not putting down the family that has a budget that will not allow season ticket purchase. I am married but with no children. My husband is someone who preferrs his lazy boy and remote with the 52" in his "Man Cave". I have season tickets with a friend of mine - and yes there are female colts fans that go to the games without MEN. For us it is all about the live game experience. And we see the same replays that you see at home on the Jumbo Screens. If the replay is of a bad/missed call they will show it over and over and whip the fans into a frenzy LOL.

The excuse that the economy is bad for why ticket holders did not renew this year is for the most part bogus as the economy was bad for the two seasons prior to the 2-14 season and there was no drop in renewal. I have friends who have two pairs of tickets. They always used one pair and sold the others to help offset the cost of both. They are renewing both even though they know that the likelyhood of selling them for a profit is slim in the near future. They realize that they will not get them back easily later if they let them go. I think that in one or two seasons all the people that dropped their tickets will be grumbling and putting down their $100 per ticket waite list deposit and wishing they had never let them go in the first place. GO COLTS!!

[GoColts8818]

1) I'm not hung up on this "die hard" issue. I just don't think it's a fair characterization of people who chose not to renew their season tickets. I agree that a die hard fan sticks with their team no matter what (for the most part). I don't agree that a die hard fan who is a season ticket holder keeps buying season tickets no matter what (finances notwithstanding). Buying season tickets and being a fan are two different things.

This is where I think we are missing. I am really not trying to say that everyone who gave their season tickets are not Die Hard Colts fans I don't think Kravitz was either. I am saying the ones who choose too give them up because Peyton is gone or because they don't want to support a losing team are not die hard fans. I am doing that based on the definition of the term die hard fans. Again i am only saying those people who elected to give up their tickets for one of those two reasons are not die hard fans. The Die Hard fans took the view point of you know what it stink Peyton is gone and it stink they are still going to struggle but I am keeping my tickets. That's what a die hard fan does and that's why they get the nick name of being die hard fans becuase you can't kill them off even when the team is struggling. I have free admited that I don't think everyone who gave up tickets did it for those two reasons. I sighted giving them up as not being able to aford them anymore as another reason why someone may have given up tickets. If someone gave them up for that reason I don't think that really impacts rather they are a die hard Colts fan or not they just simply couldn't afford the tickets anymore.

Now with that said I have bent over backwards to make sure I am saying that just because someone may not be a die hard fan is not a bad thing and in no way shape or form means they are not a fan. I have used myself in two seperate examples of one can be a fan of a team and not be a die hard fan of that team. So just becuase someone may not be a die hard fan does NOT mean that they are not a fan. I am not trying to say that and I don't think Kravitz was trying to say that either.

I also know I am in no way saying that someone did something wrong if those choose to give up their season tickets because they don't want to pay to go see a losing team or becuase they didn't like Peyton Manning be let go. I can understand both view points and that's cool people have to do what they have to do. I am just saying if that is the reaosn they choose not to keep their season tickets it means they aren't a die hard fan. It doesn't mean they aren't a fan at all and it doesn't mean they wont come back at some point and it doesn't mean they did anything wrong. Again, I'll use me as an example. When the Brawl and everything happened with the Pacers I really lost interest in them because I didn't agree with the team they were fielding anymore. I still followed them and waited for them to start to turn the team around. Yet I wasn't going to spend money on the product. I also understand there were Pacers fans that stood by them and supported them the whole time and still went to games and were willing to spend money on the team. I'd free admit that those people are true die hard Pacers fans something I would never call myself. With that said I don't think either party did anything wrong. Samething here I don't think anyone did anything wrong. I am just saying it means they aren't die hard fans IF they gave up their tickets because they didn't want to spend money on a team that was losing or because they don't like that Peyton isn't here anymore. That's all.

2) This "die hard" thing, along with the "real fan" designation, or the "Manning fan first" label, is something that a lot of people find offensive. And it's not specific to Colts fans, or this message board. It's always a touchy issue. And you might not mean it negatively, but a lot of people take it negatively. I think it's kind of naive to hide behind the "I don't mean it in a negative way" defense.

Again I have gone out of my way to make sure I am not using the term as an insult and saying there is NOTHING wrong with not being one. If someone thinks I am using it to try to insult people then you know what that's on them and I can't really do much about that because they aren't listening to what I am saying. I think it's pretty clear if you read my response in no way do I think not being a die hard fan is a bad thing. If anything I think those of us who are die hard fans think it some how makes us better than we really are. Again I think that's part of the problem people get too wrapped up in the fan label thing.

3) The people moaning on the Internet about Manning being gone, the ones who say they can't stand the team and hate Irsay now, I'm going to generalize them as not being season ticket holders in the first place. I'm not talking about them. The ones who put their money where their mouth is, and have for years, are the ones that I think shouldn't be labeled as deserters, as Kravitz is doing.

I know I've heard people on the radio say they were giving up their season tickets because Manning was gone. The Manning fans if we want to call them that didn't just exist on the internet. With that said there is NOTHING wrong with being a Manning fan. People have just as much right to be a fan of his if they want. If they are a fan of his then yes I can understand why they wanted season tickets to watch him play and now that he's gone no longer want them. They might be the most die hard Peyton Manning fan in the world however that doesn't make them die hard Colts fan. Again, there is NOTHING wrong with not being a die hard fan.

4) I don't think the word choice is something that Kravitz regrets. I think it's how he feels, as he's inferred many times since the news about the season ticket issue first came out a few months ago. He has called Indianapolis sports fans "fair weather fans" on a number of occasions, intimating that they don't stick with their teams through thick and thin, and that they even don't deserve a winning franchise because of it. This is not a slip of the tongue. It's an accurate portrayal of his feelings.

I think he was also responding to e-mails and tweets he was getting about it. At the end of day Kravitz is right as much as fans don't want to hear it. They are the ones who choose not to keep their tickets the Colts didn't tell them they couldn't buy the tickets. It's the fans that for whatever reason, right or wrong, choose to walk away. The Colts would have been more than happy to sell them tickets. So I can see why people don't like the language he used but he was right in his point. He also made the point of saying IF anyone walked away... That tells me he might think no one really walked away from anyone and is just saying look if you want to say who ended the relationship the fans are the ones who ended the agrement not the Colts. I'd agree i wouldn't have used the term Kravitz used but I do think he has a fair point.

5) Kravitz was doing a great job on this issue, up until the abandonment paragraph. Colts PR didn't do their job, the outraged fans didn't understand the issue properly, and he nailed it. And then he nailed them. Like I said, further evidence that he can't get out of his own way.

This is what I meant when I said we are losing sight of what the blog was about. We are going over one paragraph over and over and not talking about what the main point of the blog was which was to say hey here is why the Colts are doing this and you know what they did a horriable job with the PR front of it.

6) If he wants to be treated as a media member, if he wants access and scoops and exclusives, and if he wants to be viewed in a positive light by his readers and the team, he should stop trying to incite reactions and be a reinforcer of the positive. It would have been the perfect time for him to highlight that the Colts are already at 97% for their 8 home games, that they've sold out 79 straight home games, and that there are two months before the first game at LOS. Blackouts are not at issue here. He did some of that. But he ruined any goodwill by blaming the fan base for this thing being an issue in the first place.

That's his job to get a reaction though. Again he's not a beat writter. He's a columnist. He's paid to offer his opinion and spark a reaction. If you want a guy that is just going to give you just the fact that's what Mike Chappell is for. Sadly people respond the negative things alot more than positive things. That's why we so much negative stuff on the News and it's why Fox 59 went with the headline of Colts games to be blacked out in the first place. They knew it would get a much bigger reaction. Kravitz does the samething but he's far from the only person in the media who does it.

7) I know we don't see it the same way. That's fine. You know how I am; I know how you are. We can discuss anything in a levelheaded manner, as we always do. And it's always enjoyable to me. Thanks.

Ditto

[Gavin]

I am not putting down the family that has a budget that will not allow season ticket purchase. I am married but with no children. My husband is someone who preferrs his lazy boy and remote with the 52" in his "Man Cave". I have season tickets with a friend of mine - and yes there are female colts fans that go to the games without MEN. For us it is all about the live game experience. And we see the same replays that you see at home on the Jumbo Screens. If the replay is of a bad/missed call they will show it over and over and whip the fans into a frenzy LOL.

The excuse that the economy is bad for why ticket holders did not renew this year is for the most part bogus as the economy was bad for the two seasons prior to the 2-14 season and there was no drop in renewal. I have friends who have two pairs of tickets. They always used one pair and sold the others to help offset the cost of both. They are renewing both even though they know that the likelyhood of selling them for a profit is slim in the near future. They realize that they will not get them back easily later if they let them go. I think that in one or two seasons all the people that dropped their tickets will be grumbling and putting down their $100 per ticket waite list deposit and wishing they had never let them go in the first place. GO COLTS!!

well said and I agree on all accounts but people lose jobs and get laid off its just a part of business, the ugly part. Undoubtedly that happened to many or some of those fans that gave up there tickets not all of course by any stretch but there are many factors other then just the state of the team although like I have said before I believe Manning being released has alot to do with it to. I also agree those that sold there tickets will be upset they did. In other words there is no one reason why those fans gave there tickets up and for anyone to say its to do a lack of fandom (if thats even a word) its unreasonable.

[Superman]

...

I can agree with some of that. What I disagree with is the generalization of anyone who gave up their season tickets because they don't like the direction of the franchise as not being a die hard fan. I think it's unfair and largely inaccurate. I don't think "die hard fan" is equal to "die hard season ticket holder."

Also, I am not making an issue out of the fact that some of those 13% gave up their tickets because of finances. It's pretty clear that that happens every year, and it's probably a miniscule percentage of the total.

Again I have gone out of my way to make sure I am not using the term as an insult and saying there is NOTHING wrong with not being one. If someone thinks I am using it to try to insult people then you know what that's on them and I can't really do much about that because they aren't listening to what I am saying. I think it's pretty clear if you read my response in no way do I think not being a die hard fan is a bad thing. If anything I think those of us who are die hard fans think it some how makes us better than we really are. Again I think that's part of the problem people get too wrapped up in the fan label thing.

I hear what you're saying; I think it's naive. You may not mean it as an insult, but a lot of people find it insulting, and it sparks controversy and sometimes all-out fights. If a person characterizes himself as a die hard fan, and you come along and tell him he's obviously not one because he gave up his season tickets, not that there's anything wrong with that, don't expect him to give you a thumbs up.

I know I've heard people on the radio say they were giving up their season tickets because Manning was gone. The Manning fans if we want to call them that didn't just exist on the internet. With that said there is NOTHING wrong with being a Manning fan. People have just as much right to be a fan of his if they want. If they are a fan of his then yes I can understand why they wanted season tickets to watch him play and now that he's gone no longer want them. They might be the most die hard Peyton Manning fan in the world however that doesn't make them die hard Colts fan. Again, there is NOTHING wrong with not being a die hard fan.

I'm certain some of those 13% gave up their tickets because Manning left. But I'm also certain that some of them gave up their tickets because of a host of issues, and maybe Manning being gone is chief among them, but that doesn't wash the rest of them out.

We could be talking about an individual who has been a fan for 25 years, and when they realized that what was going on with the Manning Colts was historically special, they decided to become season ticket holders to see greatness in person. Maybe they only go to one or two games a season, and sell or give the rest of the tickets away. And maybe the primary draw for them is that they want first dibs for home playoff games. Now that Manning is gone, they don't have a strong desire to go see the team in person, and figure that they won't be able to sell the tickets anymore. And if they know that the team isn't playoff bound, the first dibs issue isn't that strong either. So they give their tickets up. But they are still just as supportive of the team as they were before, they just don't want to buy season tickets anymore. They still plan to watch every game on TV, and they still buy memorabilia, etc.

And now, they feel like their being threatened with blackouts, and Kravitz is telling them that they abandoned the team. And you're telling them they're not die hard fans.

I disagree with this as a broad characterization.

I think he was also responding to e-mails and tweets he was getting about it. At the end of day Kravitz is right as much as fans don't want to hear it. They are the ones who choose not to keep their tickets the Colts didn't tell them they couldn't buy the tickets. It's the fans that for whatever reason, right or wrong, choose to walk away. The Colts would have been more than happy to sell them tickets. So I can see why people don't like the language he used but he was right in his point. He also made the point of saying IF anyone walked away... That tells me he might think no one really walked away from anyone and is just saying look if you want to say who ended the relationship the fans are the ones who ended the agrement not the Colts. I'd agree i wouldn't have used the term Kravitz used but I do think he has a fair point.

Maybe he was responding to comments, but that doesn't mean he doesn't feel exactly what he said. He's made it a point to call out Indy fans as "fair weather fans," and he's said it enough times that it's impossible for him to hide behind the "poor choice of words" defense.

This is what I meant when I said we are losing sight of what the blog was about. We are going over one paragraph over and over and not talking about what the main point of the blog was which was to say hey here is why the Colts are doing this and you know what they did a horriable job with the PR front of it.

Just one paragraph, but potent. And unnecessary.

That's his job to get a reaction though. Again he's not a beat writter. He's a columnist. He's paid to offer his opinion and spark a reaction. If you want a guy that is just going to give you just the fact that's what Mike Chappell is for. Sadly people respond the negative things alot more than positive things. That's why we so much negative stuff on the News and it's why Fox 59 went with the headline of Colts games to be blacked out in the first place. They knew it would get a much bigger reaction. Kravitz does the samething but he's far from the only person in the media who does it.

All I'm saying is that he had an opportunity to establish some credibility and generate some goodwill, and choose to stoke the flame. And it's a pattern with Kravitz, as we all know.

[GoColts8818]

I can agree with some of that. What I disagree with is the generalization of anyone who gave up their season tickets because they don't like the direction of the franchise as not being a die hard fan. I think it's unfair and largely inaccurate. I don't think "die hard fan" is equal to "die hard season ticket holder."

Also, I am not making an issue out of the fact that some of those 13% gave up their tickets because of finances. It's pretty clear that that happens every year, and it's probably a miniscule percentage of the total.

Well I am sorry but the definition of a die hard fan is one who stands by their team during bleak times. If someone is saying they aren't willing to buy season tickets solely because they don't want to pay to watch a losing football team or don't like that Peyton Manning is not here anymore then they aren't a die hard fan of that team by the very definition of the term. With that said again, there is NOTHING wrong with people who made those choices and in no way shape of form does it mean they aren't a fan period or a band wagon fan or something like that. They just aren't die hard fans that's all I am saying. They have every right to do what they did and again I sight my Pacers story as an example of what I am trying to get at.

Frankly I think the bigger story here on that front is that 87% of the season ticket holders said heck yeah sign me back up! I want to be hear to view the growth of this team from the ground up! That's something that would have never happened before Peyton Manning and it speaks volumes for what he did to help grow the game of football in the city of Indianapolis.

I also think it's worth pointing out that I doubt most of those 13% who choose to give up tickets were probably "fans". I'd bet they were people or companies that would sell those tickets at marked up value to turn a profit on them. So truth be told we are probably dealing with a very small number of "fans" to start with.

I hear what you're saying; I think it's naive. You may not mean it as an insult, but a lot of people find it insulting, and it sparks controversy and sometimes all-out fights. If a person characterizes himself as a die hard fan, and you come along and tell him he's obviously not one because he gave up his season tickets, not that there's anything wrong with that, don't expect him to give you a thumbs up.

I don't think it's naive. I am just stating my opinion and am going out of my way to make sure it's known I am not saying anyone who isn't a diehard fan isn't a fan or that diehard fans are some how better fans than those who are not. So if someone still takes that from what I am saying that's on them. That tells me they are wanting to take it negatively and there is nothing I can do about that. Also if someone else disagreed my opinion that's fine that's up to them. They are just as entitled to their opinion as I am to mine. If they are secure in who they are as a fan they aren't going to care what my opinion is.

I'm certain some of those 13% gave up their tickets because Manning left. But I'm also certain that some of them gave up their tickets because of a host of issues, and maybe Manning being gone is chief among them, but that doesn't wash the rest of them out.

I didn't say it did, in fact I've said I am sure there are other reasons I just sighted two specific examples to make it known I was talking about people who gave up those tickets for those very reasons only. I am not talking about people who may have given them up for other reasons.

We could be talking about an individual who has been a fan for 25 years, and when they realized that what was going on with the Manning Colts was historically special, they decided to become season ticket holders to see greatness in person. Maybe they only go to one or two games a season, and sell or give the rest of the tickets away. And maybe the primary draw for them is that they want first dibs for home playoff games. Now that Manning is gone, they don't have a strong desire to go see the team in person, and figure that they won't be able to sell the tickets anymore. And if they know that the team isn't playoff bound, the first dibs issue isn't that strong either. So they give their tickets up. But they are still just as supportive of the team as they were before, they just don't want to buy season tickets anymore. They still plan to watch every game on TV, and they still buy memorabilia, etc.

That's why diehard fans are diehard fans though, they are the people who have the desire to want to go see their team no matter what. The person you describe I would clearly call a fan and never question that they are a fan. Short of watching every game on TV (because there are so many of them) that's how I am with the Pacers. With that said I would never call myself a die hard Pacers fan because I know I am not. I am not saying anyone isn't a fan. I am just saying that diehard fans are a specific group of fans that's all. They are no more special than regular fans. They are just a specific group of fans. You don't have to be a diehard fan to be a fan and if you are diehard that doesn't some how make someone a better fan than one who is not.

And now, they feel like their being threatened with blackouts, and Kravitz is telling them that they abandoned the team. And you're telling them they're not die hard fans.

No Kravitz is not telling them they abandoned the team. He is saying those who left because Peyton isn't here abandoned the team. He isn't talking about the person you described he made that point in the blog when he said "I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door." He makes it very clear what group of fans he's talking about there. The person you described does not fit that category because I doubt the person you described was running around going I am not a Colts fan anymore because Peyton Manning isn't here! That's the person Kravitz was talking about.

Frankly Kravitz starts the blog out be speaking to the person you just described and said hey I hear why you are mad and you have a right to be the Colts really miss handled this on the PR front. Now let me try to give you the full story.

Again by the very definition of diehard fan the people who did that aren't. Sorry, if they don't like it oh well. They don't fit the definition. With that said, as I keep saying there is NOTHING WRONG with not being one and it sure as heck doesn't mean that they are not a fan. Nothing even remotely close to that.

Maybe he was responding to comments, but that doesn't mean he doesn't feel exactly what he said. He's made it a point to call out Indy fans as "fair weather fans," and he's said it enough times that it's impossible for him to hide behind the "poor choice of words" defense.

He didn't call all Indy fans that he said the ones who left because Manning left were fair weather fans. In fairness he's not the only one who has labeled people that way. Many people have. As for the rest I don't read Kravitz that much so I am only talking about this blog and not going to bring his other stuff into it. If he truly feels the whole city is full of fair weather fans I would disagree with that view point and again sight the fact that 87% of the fans elected to come back knowing that they aren't going to be seeing a winner more than likely right away as an example of that.

Just one paragraph, but potent. And unnecessary.

Again I would say he added it because he was responding to something that people said to him. He also said IF ANYTHING which could very well mean he doesn't think anyone truly abandoned the other. With that said I really think he was just trying to get at the point that it was the fans that choose to give up their tickets, again for whatever reason, right or wrong, and not the Colts saying you can't buy tickets anymore. He's right in that point. Again I would have used another word than he did but I think he has a fair point.

All I'm saying is that he had an opportunity to establish some credibility and generate some goodwill, and choose to stoke the flame. And it's a pattern with Kravitz, as we all know.

I think if you asked Kravitz he would sight his whole career as credibility and frankly doesn't worry all that much about people who don't like him. I agree with you that he likes to stoke the flame but that's what his employer pays him to do. It's also why I avoid Kravitz most of the time. I just happened to agree with this one blog that is all and I mean the blog as a whole we are really losing sight of what the main part of this blog was about and are debating a very small part of it that frankly wasn't the main point of his blog. I think we agree on the main point of this blog which was to say hey here is why the Colts made the decision they did and you know what they did botch this on a PR level.

[Susie Q]

You know this post was interesting to read until all the quotes came into play and I got tired of reading all the quotes in the replies. :slaphead:

So I just quit reading.

[shakedownstreet]

You know this post was interesting to read until all the quotes came into play and I got tired of reading all the quotes in the replies. :slaphead:

So I just quit reading.

tell me about it. superman & gocolts need to get a room already

[Superman]

tell me about it. superman & gocolts need to get a room already

Don't be jealous...

[Superman]

I also think it's worth pointing out that I doubt most of those 13% who choose to give up tickets were probably "fans". I'd bet they were people or companies that would sell those tickets at marked up value to turn a profit on them. So truth be told we are probably dealing with a very small number of "fans" to start with.

This is true. I kept meaning to mention this.

That's why diehard fans are diehard fans though, they are the people who have the desire to want to go see their team no matter what. The person you describe I would clearly call a fan and never question that they are a fan. Short of watching every game on TV (because there are so many of them) that's how I am with the Pacers. With that said I would never call myself a die hard Pacers fan because I know I am not. I am not saying anyone isn't a fan. I am just saying that diehard fans are a specific group of fans that's all. They are no more special than regular fans. They are just a specific group of fans. You don't have to be a diehard fan to be a fan and if you are diehard that doesn't some how make someone a better fan than one who is not.

No Kravitz is not telling them they abandoned the team. He is saying those who left because Peyton isn't here abandoned the team. He isn't talking about the person you described he made that point in the blog when he said "I’m talking about the fair-weather fans who bailed the minute Peyton Manning walked out the door." He makes it very clear what group of fans he's talking about there. The person you described does not fit that category because I doubt the person you described was running around going I am not a Colts fan anymore because Peyton Manning isn't here! That's the person Kravitz was talking about.

They started buying tickets when Manning came, and stopped when he left. How are they not in that group?

I'm just saying I don't think being a die hard fan is necessarily tied to your willingness to continue buying season tickets no matter what. And whatever number of that 13% is actually fans who decided not to renew because Manning is gone, they are not necessarily not die hard fans. Maybe they're not die hard season ticket holders, but that's a different thing.

He didn't call all Indy fans that he said the ones who left because Manning left were fair weather fans. In fairness he's not the only one who has labeled people that way. Many people have. As for the rest I don't read Kravitz that much so I am only talking about this blog and not going to bring his other stuff into it. If he truly feels the whole city is full of fair weather fans I would disagree with that view point and again sight the fact that 87% of the fans elected to come back knowing that they aren't going to be seeing a winner more than likely right away as an example of that.

I'm not a regular reader, but there are themes to be picked up on. This one is clear.

[jvan1973]

There re plenty of diehard NFL fans who have never been to a game. You dont have to be a season ticket holder to be a diehard fan.

[Susie Q]

Don't be jealous...

Not jealous just tired of reading the same thing over and over again. Oh I know you just learned how to put multiple quotes in. JT

[GoColts8818]

There re plenty of diehard NFL fans who have never been to a game. You dont have to be a season ticket holder to be a diehard fan.

Not what I said or meant.

I said if you gave up tickets because you don't want to support a losing team or because you are done with the colts because Peyton manning is no longer here then you aren't a diehard fan.

I never once said you must have season tickets to be a diehard fan because you are right you don't have too.

[GoColts8818]

Update:

Not that I think there is any real danger that the Colts will not sell out but Channel 8 just said on the news that if they don't they will get with local businesses to buy remaining tickets.

[jbear72912]

Whether you agree or disagree with fans who do not renew their tickets, let's at least get one thing straight - Peyton Manning didn't leave the Colts. The Colts dumped Peyton Manning. Irsay was the one who decided not to pay the option on Manning's contract which made Manning a free agent.