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

Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

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

  • Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder



    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000151159/article/elvis-dumervil-released-by-denver-broncos-after-fax-blunder



    Well that sucks for them. You lose your best pass rusher to a fax machine.

    Hopefully Freeney hasn't signed yet so he can play for the Broncos now.
    Last edited by Gamble1; 03-15-2013, 04:24 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

    His agent is ruined may never get another job. How can he be so careless?? When your client has that much money at stake I would be in the building on deadline day.


    EDIT: this guy has the low down on twitter https://twitter.com/MikeKlis
    Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-15-2013, 04:34 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

      How much money do the Colts have left? LOL

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
        His agent is ruined may never get another job. How can he be so careless?? When your client has that much money at stake I would be in the building on deadline day.


        EDIT: this guy has the low down on twitter https://twitter.com/MikeKlis
        Saint Paddy's Day strikes again!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

          Wow. Good bye agent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

            Originally posted by presto123 View Post
            How much money do the Colts have left? LOL
            Colts have spent $34.3M cap dollars
            By Paul Kuharsky | ESPN.com


            The figures I have access to said the Colts had $43.427 million of salary-cap room back on Feb 21. There may have been some jiggling of that number before free agency opened on Tuesday.

            Since then, they’ve re-signed defensive lineman Fili Moala and cornerback Darius Butler, and brought in seven free agents: Right tackle Gosder Cherilus, safety LaRon Landry, defensive lineman Ricky Jean Francois, cornerback Greg Toler, outside linebacker Erik Walden, guard Donald Thomas and outside linebacker Lawrence Sidbury. The Colts also put a franchise tender on punter Pat McAfee at $2.977 million.

            Collectively, they will count $34,330,333 against the cap.

            The team cut safety Tom Zbikowski today, gaining $1.158 million against the cap. So the Colts have roughly $10.181 million in salary-cap room remaining.

            Still enough to make some acquisitions if they want to.

            General manager Ryan Grigson, who was named NFL Executive of the Year in his first season, said in a news conference this morning that he feels great about the roster work the Colts have been able to do.
            "I really feel like you need to strike a balance [with free agency and the draft] and if there’s players that you can get and help create more competition and raise the bar and you know is going to make your team better as a whole, you have to at least explore those options. Even from the beginning, just seeing guys that we played against, the scout in me, you see guys and I say, ‘Wow, this guy plays hard, or this guy has a great inside move.’ You take mental notes of all your opponents. We played against LaRon this year. We played against Walden. We watched the film. We go through a process with all the pro scouts and then the coaches remember who they couldn’t block. It’s an entire process. You whittle it down, you target your guys and you look at how much money Jim [Irsay] is willing to spend, and as opposed to last year, we were in a completely different situation, so why not take advantage of that? I had the complete support of a great owner who’s been ultra-supportive in this whole process. He’s as passionate, if not more passionate than any of us. When you talk to him, he wanted to be aggressive. I wanted to be aggressive. Chuck [Pagano] did, because we want to win. I think you have to take these opportunities to acquire talent wholeheartedly, and I feel we did as an organization.”

            (Link)
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

              Does that $10mill include the money for drafted picks and undrafted FA's? Will they just hold onto the capspace for people cut loose during camp and next year's crop of our own FA's?
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                Hmmm...good question. If I had to guess the $10mil do not include the prospected draft picks.
                On a side note, read somewhere that last year's Colts draft picks counted like around 4 mil against the cap.
                Never forget

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                  I wonder if it was through fax

                  http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...res-his-agent/

                  Elvis Dumervil fires his agent

                  Posted by Michael David Smith on March 16, 2013, 7:19 PM EDT

                  Getty Images
                  The bizarre series of events that unfolded on Friday, when Elvis Dumervil agreed to a restructured contract with the Broncos, only to get cut because his revised contract didn’t make it to the team’s fax machine in time, has cost Dumervil’s agent his job.

                  Agent Marty Magid told Mike Garafolo of USA Today that Dumervil called him Saturday afternoon to say he wants to “move in another direction.”

                  Magid said Broncos fans have inundated him with angry emails, although he also claims that the Broncos deserve some of the blame for trying to make late changes to Dumervil’s deal. Magid added that he has waived the usual five-day waiting period for players to hire a new agent, so Dumervil can hire a new agent immediately.

                  “It’s terrible, but he said he knows what happened and why it happened,” Magid said. “I know the people in Denver think I should be fired, but like I said [Friday], there were a lot of reasons for why it happened.”

                  Dumervil is now an unrestricted free agent, and Magid said several teams have already called him to express interest.

                  “I had teams lined up that were interested in him,” Magid said. “They’ll have to contact his new guy now.”

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                    I've seen both fax and emails take hrs to get to their destination, why?? I dunno, but I've seen it mumerous times.
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                      People still use fax machines?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                        Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                        I've seen both fax and emails take hrs to get to their destination, why?? I dunno, but I've seen it mumerous times.
                        If it's a fax to fax send then the reason it takes hours for a fax to get to its destination is because the sender didn't send it when he said he did.... or the receiver didn't bother to check the fax machine (or whoever in the office responsible for checking faxes didn't get it to the recipient when it arrived). A fax to fax send is a direct connection between machines so there's no technical reason it would be delayed once it is sent. It either receives it or it doesn't. Now if there is a service involved where email is involved in the process then we're back to email being a culprit.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

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

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          If it's a fax to fax send then the reason it takes hours for a fax to get to its destination is because the sender didn't send it when he said he did.... or the receiver didn't bother to check the fax machine (or whoever in the office responsible for checking faxes didn't get it to the recipient when it arrived). A fax to fax send is a direct connection between machines so there's no technical reason it would be delayed once it is sent. It either receives it or it doesn't. Now if there is a service involved where email is involved in the process then we're back to email being a culprit.
                          A fax to fax connection is not something that you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Elvis Dumerville Released by the Broncos over fax blunder

                            This is the most overlooked storyline in the SB

                            The fax mishap that cost the Broncos Elvis Dumervil, and its impact on Super Bowl XLVIII

                            It was one of the more bizarre sequences of last or any NFL offseason. A quick review of the stupid fax foibles that cost the Broncos a re-signed Elvis Dumervil, and how that could impact the biggest game of the year.


                            When the Denver Broncos take the field Sunday in New York, they'll be doing so without a player who had been a vital part of their defensive efforts for the last half-decade. And while players get lost to injury or cut for cap reasons all the time, the story of how Denver came to be without star pass-rusher Elvis Dumervil was one of the strangest sequences of the off-season.

                            Denver wanted their "Gloom and Doom" pass rush tandem of Dumervil (Doom, presumably) and Von Miller intact for 2013, but Doom was going to need to take a pay cut. Denver and Dumervil's agent, Marty Magid, went back and forth for more than a week before finally agreeing to cut Dumervil's 2013 base salary from $12 million to $8 million.


                            And then, things got weird.

                            As well as the story can be reconstructed, Dumervil assented to the new deal about 35 minutes before the 4 p.m. negotiating deadline. But with Magid in his office in Philadelphia and Dumervil in Miami, logistics got a tad tricky. Somehow, it fell to Dumervil to find a Miami Kinkos to fax his signed contract to Denver, and said fax failed to arrive at Broncos HQ until six minutes after the deadline. At 3:59, the Broncos informed the league that they were cutting Dumervil rather than face a $13 million-plus cap charge for the season. When the story broke, a basic set of questions erupted, such as:

                            Is fax technology the best way for billion-dollar organizations to consummate multi-million dollar deals in 2013?
                            While Miami > Philly in March, would it maaaaybe have been worth Dumervil's time to be on hand with his agent as negotiations reached the critical stage?
                            Was part of the delay due to the fact that Magid was wearing his pants on his head?
                            Magid was promptly fired by Dumervil and later fined and suspended by the Players' Association for his role in the fiasco, and Elvis himself ended up signing a five-year, $35 million (with incentives) deal with the Ravens after spurning the Broncos' subsequent attempt to bring him back into the fold.

                            Regardless of who's to shoulder what portion of the blame for the bizarre blunder, Denver found itself without one of the league's top pass rushers as they started the 2013 season. They've overcome that handicap to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl, but what was the season-long impact of losing Dumervil and how will his absence impact their chances on February 2nd?

                            First off, it's important to take a look at the Broncos' overall cap situation in the context of their 2013 roster moves. Per the latest figures available at OverTheCap.com, Denver ended up with a 2013 cap spend of $120.9 million, leaving them with just over $6.6 million in cap room. Had they brought Dumervil back at his original $12 million base salary, they'd have been over the cap with all their other offseason moves held constant. But had Denver successfully inked (or lasered, or whatever goes onto a facsimile transmission) Dumervil to the agreed-upon pay cut, they would only have seen a net $4.75 million increase in their cap (factoring in the original contract's pro-rated bonus money against the $4.8 million dead money figure that Dumervil ended up slapping on their cap this year).

                            A history of prop bets


                            The birth of prop bets, and how they changed the way we gamble on the Super Bowl.
                            Denver's impact offseason acquisitions -- corner Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, receiver Wes Welker and defensive tackle Terrance "Pot Roast" Knighton -- were already signed four days prior to the fax fiasco, so it's not as if the Dumervil Dollar Delta "freed up" resources to make those moves. The surplus cash arguably enabled some lower-impact additions like Quentin Jammer and Paris Lenon, as well as freeing some extra 2013 dollars to be thrown in to left tackle Ryan Clady's big-money extension.

                            But in terms of on-field impact for this year's Broncos, the assessment really comes down to Dumervil versus Shaun Phillips. Phillips was signed to a one-year deal in April, ostensibly as a backup to Von Miller though he ended up logging all of his snaps at Dumervil's vacated defensive end spot.

                            So how has that swap worked out for Denver?

                            The NFL is a pass-first league, so any roster changes should be evaluated first and foremost on their pass-game impact. Phillips' season looks solid at first glance, as his top-line figure of 11 sacks wasn't too far off from Dumervil's three-year average of 13.7 from 2009-2012 (Dumervil missed the 2010 season with a torn pec). But sacks only tell part of the story for any pass rusher.

                            Fortunately, the Pro Football Focus boys have plenty of time on their hands to dig deeper into advanced metrics, and their Pass Rushing Productivity score is a great measure of total pass rush impact -- factoring in a rusher's sacks, QB hits and pressures against their total number of pass rush opportunities. Dumervil averaged a 10.1 percent PRP score from 2009-12 (and logged a tremendous 15.1% this year in Baltimore) against Phillips' 8.6 percent mark for the Broncos this season. What's more, Phillips' ability to get hands on the QB seemed to tail off as the season went on -- he logged a combined 12 sacks or QB hits in the season's first 10 games while amassing a mere three during the final six contests. He did bag Philip Rivers twice in the Divisional Round, but on balance, it's fair to say that Denver suffered at least a moderate pass rush downgrade when Dumervil left town.

                            On the run side of the ledger, both PFF's Run ratings and the eyeball test confirm that Phillips brings more to the table as a run defender than Dumervil. Stout run defense has been a Denver staple this season even after the loss of Derek Wolfe, and every little bit helps when you're about to face Beast Mode. Taken in toto, Denver's secondary could be the determining factor in just how much the Broncos end up missing Dumervil against Seattle.

                            Without Dumervil and Von Miller, the Broncos' pass rush has relied much more on delivering pass rush pressure along a broad front and bagging coverage sacks than it has on elite rushers quickly defeating blocks and ruining blocking schemes. Knighton and Malik Jackson have been an effective interior pass-rush tandem, but Denver's mediocre pass defense (ranked 21st by FootballOutsiders) reinforces that pressure often hasn't arrived swiftly enough to save a beleaguered secondary. The good news for Denver is that a healthy Champ Bailey played well in their defeat of the Patriots, and he may more than make up for the loss of slot corner Chris Harris Jr.

                            The Seahawks' roster of pass-catchers is just OK, and the biggest threat might come from Percy Harvin on the kinds of screens and hitches that the pass rush can't impact much anyways. A strong effort from the secondary could yield some coverage sacks, but you want to get as much heat as possible on a guy who's as mobile and creative as Russell Wilson. If Shaun Phillips and the rest of the Broncos' front can keep Wilson in the pocket and prevent him from creating his special brand of downfield magic on broken plays, Denver has the advantage to carrying the day and Lombardi Trophy. If they can't, the Broncos could find themselves wishing that a faulty fax hadn't taken Elvis out of the building.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X