Your latest article confused me a bit (Hammer, “Buyer’s remorse,” Oct. 3-10). For the most part, I am with you. I agree that we need better roads in this city - much better roads. Where the confusion begins for me is in your argument about the new (or any) stadium being used 12 times a year. I think you and your wife’s plans to go downtown and spend your money in the local economy is a good thing. But if you are inconvenienced only 12 times per year — could you schedule your trips downtown around that? That leaves you 353 days of Colts-free consuming. That sucks, I know, but people in every other major city across the country seem to have figured out how to do it.

This is where your stagnant selling points became moot for me. As your mug shot has you wearing a sports team logo, you might attempt to direct your articles a bit tighter. It seems as if you are trying to sell the article to INtake readers and not NUVO readers.

When everyone running for mayor and governor is for a new stadium (for guaranteed soft-money contributions) the challenge is tough. To me that is the nut of your article — and it is a bit odd to bring it up again at this point in the game. Pun intended.