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

Insider Request (NFL related)

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

  • Insider Request (NFL related)

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/insid...2=stateChanged

    "Don't be too surprised if Young is in '06 draftBy Len Pasquarelli
    ESPN.com
    Archive

    For those who missed the appearance by Vince Young on Pardon the Interruption this week, well, let's just say the University of Texas quarterback wasn't exactly steadfast in reiterating his previously stated stance that he will return for his senior season in 2006.

    And that's because, not surprisingly, the Heisman Trophy candidate is considering his options.

    In fact, ESPN.com has learned that Young and his family, with one wary eye on the NCAA rules concerning maintaining his eligibility and the other on the first round of the '06 NFL draft, have begun to consider potential agents. Not consider in the sense that they are winnowing down a laundry list of suitors, or even auditioning any potential representatives, although that latter element could change as soon as Saturday, following the Big 12 title game. Rather, the family, in a much broader sense and well within NCAA guidelines, is listening to recommendations and designing an interview process in the event that Young ultimately decides the NFL siren song is simply too tempting.



    Vince Young has publicly said that he will return to Texas for his senior season.For now, the process is more than a little unclear, according to people in the know. There is a local Houston attorney, and longtime family friend, who recently became accredited by the NFL Players Association to represent players, and who is telling some people that he will have a role in Young's decision. The person with the most influence, however, is Young's mother, who he lists as his "favorite superhero" in his media guide bio. And Ray Seals, his former coach at Madison High School in Houston, is almost certain to be among those counseling the quarterback about his future.

    League scouts, of course, are eyeing the Young situation with considerable interest. The senior crop of quarterbacks for the '06 draft -- led by Southern California's Matt Leinart, fast-rising Jay Cutler of Vanderbilt and perhaps the underachieving but talented Brodie Croyle of Alabama -- is not viewed as a strong one. While scouts are a bit divided over Young, with some feeling that Notre Dame's Brady Quinn is the superior junior, there is little doubt he would be a first-round pick if he entered the draft as an underclassman.

    Young has great physical stature, has played in and won some big games, and is viewed by teammates as a terrific leader. The early read from scouts is that he might not be quite as athletic as all those long runs make him appear to be, but there are plenty of tools and a lot of intangibles to work with.

    This season, Young, who tends to be his own toughest critic, has completed 168 of 268 passes for 2,576 yards, with 23 touchdown passes and nine interceptions. He has rushed 128 times for 793 yards and eight touchdowns.

    It's hardly a slam dunk, as is the case with juniors like the Southern Cal tailback tandem of Reggie Bush and LenDale White, that Young will be in the '06 draft. He is said to be a good listener, open to advice, and will probably lean a bit on Texas coach Mack Brown, who has a legion of NFL contacts, for counsel as well. But the jump to the NFL is a lot more viable now for Young than it was only a few months ago, and no one should be too surprised when recruiters start cozying up to him within minutes of the end of Saturday's conference championship game.




    Around the league
    • On the subject of guys going from the college campus to the pros, rest assured that a number of owners plotting head coaching changes in the offseason have already made various degrees of third-party contact with Pete Carroll of Southern California. Lots of intermediary, back-door type stuff, but Carroll likely has a pretty educated read already on who the potential suitors might be.
    Poised to win a third straight national title with the Trojans, who take on UCLA in a huge Saturday rivalry game, Carroll has enacted one of the great comebacks in recent history. His résumé includes two strikes in the NFL -- although one could make a convincing argument he got a bit of a raw deal from both the New York Jets and New England Patriots -- and not many coaches would get a third chance. But winning national championships, restoring prestige to a once-proud program that had fallen into disrepair, regaining personal profile and turning out Heisman Trophy winners and big-time NFL prospects will dull the memories of people in the league and force owners to regard Carroll in a new light.

    Here's the thing: Carroll really doesn't need the ego boost the NFL once provided him. So he isn't about to jump at just any league vacancy simply for the sake of returning to the big dance. There are some openings that might interest Carroll, and others where the prospects are so dim that he'd be ill-advised to leave his current gig. The perfect NFL job for Carroll, with a team filling the Los Angeles market, doesn't exist. So with Los Angeles not a factor, at least not yet, Carroll will be very diligent in entertaining suitors. And while he doesn't need to have total control of a football operation to make the jump back to the NFL, he will seek more clout than he ever had in either of his two previous positions before even lending serious thought to coming back to the pro game.


    • Unless veteran players on the Detroit roster who are very cozy with club president Matt Millen are being fed a lot of hogwash, or are telling us fibs, offensive-oriented coaches who want to pursue the Lions vacancy need not apply. So forget the flood of stories out of Cincinnati this week that Bengals offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski, who has done a terrific job in putting together a high-octane unit, is under consideration for the position.

    Millen has tried twice with offensive guys, first Marty Mornhinweg and then Steve Mariucci, and twice flopped. Even the Ford family, which owns the Lions and characteristically takes a hands-off approach to football matters, would view another supposed offensive guru with skepticism. As apparently blinded by Millen as ownership is, one would think that, even in the football business, three strikes means you're out of a job. So despite the security of that new five-year contract extension Millen somehow got this summer, one would surmise the Lions' president, whose tenure has included an abysmal 20-55 record in four-plus seasons, has to get it right this time around. And to Millen, "getting it right" almost certainly will mean hiring a coach with a tough-guy reputation, one deemed capable of providing discipline to a locker room full of underachievers.

    Word from veteran players is that Millen wants a coach in his own image. We're not exactly certain what that means, although it sure lends itself to a lot of easy zingers, but it probably means the new coach won't be from the offensive side of the ball. It had better be a coach, too, capable of getting the Lions' high-priced collection of malcontents to play for him. Having tired of Mariucci, the Lions, whether in an organized conspiracy or just a moment of sinister serendipity, tanked the Thanksgiving Day game to complete his fall from grace. There are outsiders who see the Detroit roster as a dangerously talented bunch. Insiders contend it's dangerous, all right, with so many bad actors and personal agendas in the locker room.

    • It hardly qualifies as a cataclysmic shift of power, but it is notable that, through the first 12 weeks of this season, the AFC-NFC interconference series is tied 24-24. Not since 2001, when the conferences tied 30-30 for the year, has the series been very competitive. And last season, AFC teams walloped their NFC counterparts, winning 44 of 64 games. This season, despite the perception the AFC remains the stronger of the two conferences, all but three NFC franchises own at least one victory in the series.

    Their problems aside, the Eagles are 3-1 versus AFC teams, and even the moribund Lions are 2-0. But by far the biggest AFC killers have been the four teams from the NFC South, which sport an aggregate 10-5 record. All four teams are .500 or better against the AFC, even the New Orleans Saints.

    One other notable trend: In the last four weeks, road teams compiled a 31-29 record. Through the first eight weeks of the season, home teams were 77-39, and had they maintained that .664 pace, it would have been a league record.

    • The 310-yard performance authored by St. Louis rookie quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick in the Rams' comeback victory over Houston last week was certainly a remarkable feat. But nearly as remarkable as Fitzpatrick's scintillating debut, which established the seventh-round draft choice as an instant legend in Ivy League lore, is the fact that he is in the NFL at all.

    Fitzpatrick is only the 10th Harvard player selected in the NFL draft since 1970. He is the first Harvard quarterback in the modern era to even play in a regular-season game. The New England Patriots chose Brian Buckley in the 11th round of the '81 draft, and the St. Louis Cardinals took Eric Crone in the 17th round of the 1973 lottery, but neither of those Harvard quarterbacks made a regular-season roster. Before Fitzpatrick, the only former Harvard quarterbacks to appear in an NFL game were Joe McGlone (with the Providence Steamrollers and Boston Bulldogs in 1926) and Al Miller (with the Boston Braves in 1929).

    As for his passing numbers, Fitzpatrick's statistics placed him among an elite group for players making their first NFL appearance. Only four other players -- Otto Graham (Cleveland, 346 yards in 1950), Ed Rubbert (Washington, 334 yards in 1987), Mark Rypien (Washington, 303 yards in 1988) and Peyton Manning (Indianapolis, 302 yards in 1998) -- threw for 300 yards in their first regular-season appearances. In fact, Fitzpatrick's 310 yards were 1 yard more than he combined for in the final two games of his college career.

    Larry Johnson
    Running Back
    Kansas City Chiefs

    Profile
    2005 SEASON STATISTICS
    Rush Yds TD Rec Yds TD
    191 968 9 20 220 0

    • Look for Kansas City tailback Larry Johnson, who recently changed agents, to seek a contract upgrade during the offseason. The team's first-round choice in the 2003 draft, Johnson signed what is essentially a five-year contract (the last two years of the seven-year deal void) for $6.7 million. He is scheduled for base salaries of $741,000 (for '06) and $854,000 ('07) under his existing contract. Notable is that Johnson has already earned an increase of $250,000 on his 2007 base salary by rushing for more than 850 yards this season. With 191 carries for 968 yards, he can raise the '07 escalator to $500,000 when he cracks the 1,000-yard mark, likely on Sunday in the key showdown against the Denver Broncos.

    With the future of Priest Holmes still uncertain because of injuries, Johnson is a key for the Chiefs, a very stable franchise that has been fair to players, and which might be willing to make some contract adjustments. Johnson has now started seven games in his career. In those seven starts, the former Penn State standout has 188 carries for 845 yards and 10 touchdowns. He's added 24 receptions for 311 yards and one score.

    While it's not exactly fair to extrapolate Johnson's seven starts over a full 16-game season, the projections are interesting. Projecting his seven starts through 16 games factors out to 430 carries (which would be an NFL record), 1,931 yards and 23 touchdowns, with 55 catches for 711 yards and two scores. A lot of people (including coach Dick Vermeil) questioned the wisdom of team president Carl Peterson when he chose Johnson in 2003. No one is second-guessing him now.

    • A lot has gone sour for the New York Jets this season, and put the performance of the team's two high-priced defensive ends, John Abraham and Shaun Ellis, near the top of the list of disappointments.

    Abraham, who is making $6.7 million this season under the one-year franchise qualifying offer he signed after missing virtually all of training camp as he unsuccessfully pursued a long-term deal, has just 5½ sacks. The six-year veteran notched sacks in his first three games, but has only 2½ quarterback takedowns in the eight outings since, and just one in the past month. Ellis has just 2½ sacks this season. It will be interesting to see what the Jets do with Abraham, who has at least managed to stay healthy after missing a total of 13 games the past two seasons, but who has not been a consistent pass-rushing force. Given his production, it will be difficult for the Jets to offer Abraham a long-term deal. But to use the franchise marker on him again would cost just over $8 million for a one-year tender.

    This week, Abraham conceded a long-term deal probably isn't going to happen. "Probably not," he said. "We're 2-9. If we were winning, it would be easier for them to say, 'Let's write this check for this guy.' But we're not winning, so they could be like, 'Hey, he's not really helping us that much because we're not winning.' It's always going to be something. Hopefully, I'll get it handled. If not, it's just part of the game."

    One strategy for the Jets would be to retain the rights to Abraham with the franchise tag and then trade him. Even with a subpar year, Abraham would still have some value, since pass-rushers are always at a premium. But the New York salary cap situation for 2006 is not a pretty sight, and even temporarily eating an $8 million charge to designate Abraham a franchise player might not be feasible. And unless Abraham finishes strong, and can demonstrate to other teams that he can still pressure the pocket, no one is going to meet his long-term demands.

    • Any hopes New England coaches harbored for getting left offensive tackle Matt Light back for the final month of the season may have been quashed last week when he quietly had a second surgery on his broken right leg. The procedure, designed to address the persistent and uncomfortable swelling Light was experiencing, is certainly a setback and could mean that the five-year veteran, who suffered a broken fibula in a Sept. 25 victory at Pittsburgh, won't make it back on the field until the 2006 season.

    At least statistically, the absence of Light, regarded by most scouts as the Patriots' best lineman, hasn't hampered the ability of the Pats' unit to keep rushers off quarterback Tom Brady with superior pass protection. Despite starting two rookies (first-round pick Logan Mankins at guard and third-round choice Nick Kaczur in Light's tackle spot) on the left side of the line for most of the season, Brady has been sacked only 19 times. That's an average of 1.7 sacks per game and projects to 27.6 sacks for the season. In his four previous seasons as the starter, Brady was sacked 2.1 times per game and 32.5 times per season.

    So the New England rookies must be doing something right in pass protection. And, as usual, offensive line coach Dante Scarnecchia has done a masterful job with the unit. Of course, like Indianapolis counterpart Peyton Manning, who has been sacked a league-low nine times, Brady aids his offensive line by getting the ball out quickly.

    David Carr
    Quarterback
    Houston Texans

    Profile
    2005 SEASON STATISTICS
    Att Comp Yds TD Int Rat
    287 177 1429 11 8 79.9

    • Speaking of pass protection, or more aptly the perceived lack thereof, the notion that quarterbacks who play in the Mike Martz offense take more hits than counterparts in virtually every other system could keep the St. Louis Rams coach from being a potential candidate for the Houston Texans job. Assuming, of course, Dom Capers is dismissed by Houston owner Bob McNair at the end of the season, and that Martz will not be returning to the Rams in 2006.

    The feeling is that whoever is the head coach in Houston next season will have to better insulate the battered David Carr -- especially after McNair antes up between $5 million and $8 million to exercise one of the buy back clauses, for either two or three more seasons, in the quarterback's contract -- and Martz's design might not be capable of creating a cocoon for him.

    In 54 career starts, Carr has been sacked 190 times, an average of 3.5 times per game. In Martz's 101 games as the Rams' offensive coordinator or head coach, excluding the six recent games he has missed as he recovers from a bacterial infection in his heart, St. Louis allowed 264 sacks, or 2.6 per outing. That's nearly one fewer sack per game than Carr has suffered in his four-year career.

    But the Martz-coached quarterbacks, who usually don't benefit from the kind of max protection blocking schemes so many offenses are using these days, get hit on a lot of plays on which they aren't necessarily sacked. If the Texans are going to lay out more money to keep Carr around for at least two more seasons, a decision that essentially has been made already, they don't want him laid out as much. Keeping their quarterback perpendicular in 2006 will be a priority for the Houston coaching staff, and that probably means that, while Carr might have a chance to really blossom under the tutelage of a guy like Martz, he probably won't get a chance to work with him.

    • The quarterback carousel keeps churning. There are at least three changes this week, with David Garrard replacing the injured Byron Leftwich in Jacksonville, and Jeff Garcia (Detroit) and Alex Smith (San Francisco) returning to starting jobs they previously held. That brings the number of switches since the second week of the season to at least 36. That doesn't count the almost certain change in St. Louis, with Fitzpatrick as the likely starter, or the possibility that Charlie Frye will supplant the wounded Trent Dilfer in Cleveland. There have been 51 different starters, and that number will rise as well if Fitzpatrick and/or Frye gets a start this weekend.

    • Last week in this spot, we reported on the two-year contract extension (through the 2007 season) that Tampa Bay defensive coordinator Monte Kiffin signed this summer. Seems the report ruffled a few feathers in the Bucs' organization -- with Kiffin going so far as to deny the extension -- and that certainly wasn't our intent. But the Bucs, who prefer to operate under general manager Bruce Allen with KGB-like stealth, apparently didn't want news of Kiffin's deal, which averages about $1.7 million annually, leaking out. How come? The contracts of several current Bucs assistants, notably assistant head coach/defensive line Rod Marinelli and secondary coach Mike Tomlin, both extremely well-regarded aides, expire after this season. Tampa Bay officials are concerned, it seems, that the scope of Kiffin's deal could raise the ante in negotiations with some of their other assistants.

    • Stat of the week: The 80-yard touchdown pass that Pittsburgh allowed on Indianapolis' first snap Monday night, when Marvin Harrison torched cornerback Ike Taylor, was longer than the aggregate yards of all the touchdown passes that the Steelers had surrendered in their previous 16 games. Over that stretch, the Steelers had allowed 12 touchdown passes for a total of 77 yards, the longest a 22-yarder from Jaguars quarterback Byron Leftwich to wide receiver Troy Edwards on Dec. 5, 2004.

    • Punts: There are whispers that Baltimore quarterbacks coach Rick Neuheisel and former Seattle and San Francisco coach Dennis Erickson could be candidates for the anticipated vacancy at San Diego State. … Carolina kicker John Kasay has converted just 7 of 13 field goal attempts of 40 yards or beyond this season, for a success rate of only 53.8 percent. Entering this season, Kasay had nailed 64.8 percent (94 of 145) field goal tries of 40 yards or longer. … Word is that deposed Detroit coach Steve Mariucci, still owed $11.5 million for the final two years of his contract with the Lions, will consider taking at least a one-season hiatus from the sideline and seek a job in television. … Jets owner Woody Johnson was pretty convincing last week in his insistence that coach Herman Edwards will be back with the team in 2006. But if The Wood Man ever changes his mind, Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis would have considerable interest in Edwards. And that interest, from what we hear, would be mutual. … Dallas coach Bill Parcells is growing a tad frustrated with the slow recovery of cornerback Anthony Henry from a nagging groin injury. … The Jets very quietly reworked the contract of Ty Law recently, giving him a $3 million signing bonus (which raised his cap charge from $2.9 million to $3.6 million) in return for concessions that will help them with their cap problems for 2006. But no one expects Law, who has five interceptions but also 73 yards in penalties, to be back with the team next season. … The mention of Canadian wide receiver Andy Fantuz in this space last week drew positive reviews from league scouts, many of whom are curious about the 6-foot-4, 205-pound pass catcher. Fantuz holds the Canadian college record for receptions (189), receiving yards (4,123) and touchdown catches (41), and is expected to be invited to participate in the East-West Shrine Game. … It looks like the Chiefs will get defensive tackle Ryan Sims back on the field for Sunday's game against Denver. The team's first-round pick in 2002, Sims hasn't played since he suffered a foot injury in the opening game of the year and many felt the Chiefs should have put him on injured reserve at the time, which would have ended his season. But the Chiefs carried Sims on the roster, even though there was a chance he might not play at all for the rest of 2005, gambling he might be able to contribute in the final month of the season. The Chiefs, who face an uphill battle in the AFC playoff chase, are about to win the gamble. … Philadelphia left offensive tackle Tra Thomas, the Pro Bowl blocker who was placed on injured reserve last week, on Wednesday underwent surgery to remove a fragmented disk from his back. From a medical standpoint, Thomas should be fully recovered in plenty of time to participate in the Eagles' offseason program. But there is some question as to whether Thomas, who is due a $3.65 million base salary for 2006, will be back with the team, given the number of solid young linemen that Philadelphia has stockpiled. … Giants coach Tom Coughlin, a stickler for discipline and a guy who detests penalties, isn't happy with his team right now. New York had 11 false start penalties in last week's overtime loss at Seattle and the left side of the line (tackle Luke Petitgout and guard David Diehl, will be operating on a short leash against Dallas this weekend. The Giants have been flagged this season for the third-most penalties (102) in the league and are on pace to establish a new franchise record. In Coughlin's 27 games with the team, New York has accumulated 220 penalties, the fourth most in the NFL over that stretch. … Arizona has all but settled on Kurt Warner as its quarterback for 2006, and will offer him a longer-term deal than the one-year contract he had this year, and will permit the younger Josh McCown to depart as a free agent.

    • The last word: "I'm not going to drive off any cliffs. There aren't any around here anyway. I know, because I've been looking." -- Houston Texans owner Bob McNair, whose team is an NFL-worst 1-10.


    Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com. To check out Len's chat archive, click here ."
    Here, everyone have a : on me
Working...
X