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

Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

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

  • Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

    Colts = class and no problems, Pacers = problem children


    Um, yeah.
    DUI + 26 mph over the limit for Rhodes
    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...RTS03/70220020


    And Dallas Clark got himself kicked out of a GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL basketball game just to spice things up.
    http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pb...00413/-1/ENT06


    (being sarcasm that most of the posters missed before I edited this comment in)
    Wow, it's so tough rooting for those Colts thugs. Personally I won't return to the dome till they cut both of these bad seeds. At least when Jack or Tins argued with a basketball ref they were actually playing...and it wasn't girls high school.

    I hope Irsay does the right thing and cleans house. These 2 and Mike Doss all must go, I've had enough of the outrageous, thuggish behavior. I would rather the Colts play the "right way" than win SuperBowls at any cost.


    (end of bitter sarcasm)

    Seriously, there are some voices here at PD that have some explaining to do right about now. Lots of big talk that at least of few of us correctly called BS on.

  • #2
    Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    Colts = class and no problems, Pacers = problem children


    Um, yeah.
    DUI + 26 mph over the limit for Rhodes
    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...RTS03/70220020


    And Dallas Clark got himself kicked out of a GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL basketball game just to spice things up.
    http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pb...00413/-1/ENT06



    Wow, it's so tough rooting for those Colts thugs. Personally I won't return to the dome till they cut both of these bad seeds. At least when Jack or Tins argued with a basketball ref they were actually playing...and it wasn't girls high school.

    I hope Irsay does the right thing and cleans house. These 2 and Mike Doss all must go, I've had enough of the outrageous, thuggish behavior. I would rather the Colts play the "right way" than win SuperBowls at any cost.


    (end of bitter sarcasm)

    Seriously, there are some voices here at PD that have some explaining to do right about now. Lots of big talk that at least of few of us correctly called BS on.
    Well at least the Colts thugs are winners.
    House Name: Pacers

    House Sigil:



    House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

      Mike Jorgensen, Southeast Webster-Grand school superintendent and girls' basketball coach, said he knew Clark had to leave but did not notice any major disturbances.

      "I didn't see it happen or hear anything because of the game," Jorgensen said of Clark. "All I know was that he was asked to leave. I didn't notice any kind of behavior that you would call disruptive."

      Troy Dannen, executive secretary of the Iowa Girls High School Athletic Union, said Monday night that he had received no report from school officials or the officiating crew of an ejection. Dannen said that the union's office is to be notified of any ejection that occurs during postseason play.

      "We will be looking into this to find out what transpired," Dannen said
      Ok Seth I thought you were joking are people really bitter towards the Colts success and clean image ?

      One Colts FA commits a DUI and now they are the Bengals? :.

      I think a little perspective is needed. The Colts as a whole have conducted themeselves like gentlemen with few exceptions for quite some time. There is no arguing that fact. Sure with any Franchise as with any company there are going to be a few hiccups,but the Colts have had a less than average rate of these indcidents. If someone claims the Colts are not a class organization I would sure like to see the proof in the pudding, and no one need apologize for calling them just that.

      I for one am an avid fan of both and don't feel I have to bring down one to justify the other. Sure as human beings there is going to be some bias given the recent past. I hope both teams manage to stay out the headlines for all the wrong reasons, and whatever consequences result from not doing so are well deserved, regardless the player or team.

      As an aside I have little tolerance for any alcohol related crimes and the danger they pose to innocent victims. If Rhodes is guilty of this I hope he is convicted to the full extent of the law, like any other individual.

      Why Not Us ?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

        I don't think anyone ever said that the Colts were completely problem-free angels. They just look that way compared to the Pacers. The Colts winning the Super Bowl around the time that 8 seconds happened didn't help that comparison.

        These two Colts incidents happened in the off-season (unlike the Brawl, Club Rio, and 8 seconds). They weren't preparing for a game on Sunday. Oh, and the Colts don't have a massive image problem that they're trying to improve.

        I admit, it's unfair to call the Pacers "thugs." But the Brawl was a huge black eye that the Pacers are STILL trying to recover from, PR-wise. Continuing to get into trouble as the result of bad judgment isn't going to help that, it's only going to make it worse.

        When Colts players start to average at least one or two bad PR incidents a year, let me know.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

          Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
          Well at least the Colts thugs are winners.
          And that is the point.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

            I don't think it matters one bit what these guys do on their own time. While I was looking up this story I came across this.

            Scroll down to good guy roster

            My Burgaled Post #26

            Talk about plagiaristic! He even copied my disclaimer about lifting the Rhodes charges due to length.
            I'm in these bands
            The Humans
            Dr. Goldfoot
            The Bar Brawlers
            ME

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

              Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot
              I don't think it matters one bit what these guys do on their own time. While I was looking up this story I came across this.

              Scroll down to good guy roster

              My Burgaled Post #26

              Talk about plagiaristic! He even copied my disclaimer about lifting the Rhodes charges due to length.
              Nice. Maybe that's VAPacersFan just spreading your word to the masses?


              BTW, since Frank has clearly missed my point (which I thought "bitter sarcasm" mixed no words about), it's not that I think those things about the Colts, it's that Goldfoot, myself and a few other posters who said "back off the crap 'Colts are clean, Pacers are thugs because it's BS' were right.

              I used the phrasing that some PD posters (including some long time posters) have put up in regards to the Pacers off-court issues - "I won't support them till they trade Tins, Jack, JO, Quis, Boomer and anyone else that looks at me funny or calls me Francis...you just made the list". They love the "clean" Colts and hate the "thug" Pacers.

              Turns out they aren't all that different. We all saw the brawl and we all saw a crowd that was out of control and throwing things BEFORE any Pacer did anything wrong.

              The Rio case isn't done yet, but we know that at least one of the people against the Pacers was already convicted (Dino).

              8 Seconds has apparently turned out to be a non-story at this point.

              And using those 3 items it's the PACERS who have been turned into the Bengals by their own "fans". The Colts have dealt with just as many issues in the same time frame and frankly it's just as meaningless to me.

              I'm not even upset at the Rhodes DUI. Freaking .09 wasn't even illegal a couple of years ago (and fatalities associated with DUI wrecks don't even rise above the sober fatal wreck rates till you get out to about .12 or so). And I go 81 in a 55 on I-65 EVERY day, along with 1000's of other Hoosiers.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                Ummm the Pacers have had attitude, discipline, and behavioral problems ON the court and OFF the court.

                That's a big difference for me.

                -Bball
                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, thatís teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                  Can I just say that I really don't care about either the Pacers or the Colts players issues that happen outside the Arena/Stadium.

                  The unfortunate thing about the whole Rhodes situation was when I was listening to a local morning radio show (Stuck and Gunner on X103)...they were saying that since D. Rhodes was a free agent that was "in trouble", he might NOW eligible to be getting a look from DW and LB.

                  I guess I was the only person on my jobsite this really pissed off, because all I could hear was laughter.
                  ...Still "flying casual"
                  @roaminggnome74

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                    I hope Dallas Clark is kicked off that team for yelling at a ref and posing for pictures and signing autographs.
                    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Nice. Maybe that's VAPacersFan just spreading your word to the masses?

                      BTW, since Frank has clearly missed my point (which I thought "bitter sarcasm" mixed no words about), it's not that I think those things about the Colts, it's that Goldfoot, myself and a few other posters who said "back off the crap 'Colts are clean, Pacers are thugs because it's BS' were right.

                      I used the phrasing that some PD posters (including some long time posters) have put up in regards to the Pacers off-court issues - "I won't support them till they trade Tins, Jack, JO, Quis, Boomer and anyone else that looks at me funny or calls me Francis...you just made the list". They love the "clean" Colts and hate the "thug" Pacers.

                      Turns out they aren't all that different. We all saw the brawl and we all saw a crowd that was out of control and throwing things BEFORE any Pacer did anything wrong.

                      The Rio case isn't done yet, but we know that at least one of the people against the Pacers was already convicted (Dino).

                      8 Seconds has apparently turned out to be a non-story at this point.

                      And using those 3 items it's the PACERS who have been turned into the Bengals by their own "fans". The Colts have dealt with just as many issues in the same time frame and frankly it's just as meaningless to me.

                      I'm not even upset at the Rhodes DUI. Freaking .09 wasn't even illegal a couple of years ago (and fatalities associated with DUI wrecks don't even rise above the sober fatal wreck rates till you get out to about .12 or so). And I go 81 in a 55 on I-65 EVERY day, along with 1000's of other Hoosiers.
                      Ahh. very well then, I was thinking to myself usually Seth is one of the rational one's I agree with, I saw the sarcasm noted.

                      I thought the point you were tring to make was "see the Colts are just as bad as the Pacers right now:"

                      If you are saying see the Colts are not without blemish they're human too, of course I can agree with that

                      I was not one to think or say the Pacers are thugs but , i certainly have heard my share of that opinion around the "watercooler".Which upsets me, but it is hard to defend some of the players actions, to my casual Pacer fan friends. So I can see if you're trying to make a certain point on how unfairly the Pacers are portrayed vs the Colts.

                      My only concern was let's not look for any small oppurtunity to reveal the Colts' dirt just to deflect the criticism from the Pacers, when it comes to specific incidents. And yes right now the Colts do get a free pass to some degree, based from perception, continued success, and now a SB win to boot.

                      Why Not Us ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                        Nope. I'm with Gnome in general here. Some outside issues might put me off of a player, as a Yanks fan I love Gehrig, lukewarm only on Ruth, for exactly the personality/good guy aspect.

                        But I just think the Pacers are WAY WAY over the top in terms of how they are portrayed. Like Gnome mentioned, Rhodes DUI makes him "Pacers" eligible.

                        I heard Tony Bruno (who I think is great btw) even throwing the Pacers out as a Bengals type of franchise. It's been 3 things, 2 of which seem clearly to not really have been a Pacers issue.

                        We all know that ESPN went from "Detroit fans" to "Pacers gone wild" in 24 hours.


                        There is something about this market to be honest, it's like any hype is good hype and they press these stories to the national level. Because really since when did a freaking .09 DUI become a scandal?

                        I could DUI test Colts fans leaving the dome and pull in I'd bet at least 30% of them for a DUI that high. Rhodes messed up only by speeding to get pulled over in the first place or by not leaving perhaps just 30 minutes later when his level was down to .08.

                        And as for 80 on I-65, you could yank down another 20% of drivers everyday on 65, 70, 465 for the same infraction (in a 55).

                        Yet this got the pub on par with Jamal Lewis. We all remember him right, jail time Lewis, major DRUG DEAL Lewis.

                        I mean how are the Pacers more infamous than the RAVENS right now. No MURDER, no DRUG DEALS. And neither of those were alleged incidents, those things happened. Guys that fled with Ray Lewis and those guys interacted physically with guys that ended up dead because of it. And both Ray and Jamal are still KEY players on that team even.

                        The Pacers have a bunch of sleepy-town non-issues that the locals try to pretend are on par with the big time stories in the nation. They aren't.

                        Freaking Pac Man Jones has more issues by himself than the Pacers do. Payton, Sam Cassell just now got cleared on their own strip club fight...and isn't it odd that NO ONE IN THE COUNTRY even noted the connection between the Pacers at Rio and the pending strip club "out of control brawl" involving Payton/Cassell?

                        Why is that? Why do we still hear about DET even after Ron was gone, even after Jack was gone, but when something the Pacers are involved in is oddly similar to something that happened to some other NBA players just a few years before (and wasn't resolved yet) we heard nothing?


                        That's why Pacers fans feel the way they do about the team, because everyone is saying over and over "oh, they are awful". Not according to their rap sheet they aren't. They are at best a .500 ball club in terms of incidents, same as on court.



                        And BBall, its about time you watched some NBA besides the Pacers...Denver Nuggets, NY Knicks mean anything? How about Raja Bell? How about Bruce Bowen? And on and on and on....

                        Any fan (ANY FAN) that thinks even the Ron/Jackson Pacers were over the top on complaints to the refs or any of that other crap does not know what they are talking about, because it isn't true. It's just isn't.

                        They track TECH FOULS you know, so we can get some idea. I notice that Piston fans aren't throwing Sheed under the bus. They didn't throw Ben under the bus either, and his reaction got the brawl started off in the first place and was clearly out of control.

                        Celtics fans didn't throw Pierce under the bus after he blew up and got tossed in the playoffs vs the Pacers. Pretty critical and stupid emotional on-court screw-up.

                        Raja got tossed for a game for his intentional foul of Kobe in the playoffs as well. Suns fans loved the guy rather than hate him.


                        And in no way did DALE or ANTONIO or DETLEF ever scrap with anyone during games, lose their temper, jaw with refs instead of getting back and so on.

                        It was an illusion when Detlef punched Patrick Ewing during a PLAYOFF game, right?

                        And the Heat/Knicks never were involved in a series changing playoff brawl. I mean the teams weren't broken-up, coaches weren't fired because of it, so it must not have happened.



                        This is why I rant. Complaining about stuff that isn't complaint worthy in the grand scheme of things, comparing to other teams and situations, comes off as bitter or whiney or at the very least flat-out unrealistic.

                        Memories cleared of the dirty truths are fun, but make for poor gauges of current situations.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                          This isn't that hard to figure out.

                          The major faces of the Colts as a whole are viewed as being squeaky clean, and all class. The major faces of the Pacers aren't.

                          Who pops into mind when you think of the Colts? Manning, Harrison, Dungy, all viewed as being class.

                          O'Neal, Jax, and Artest were 3 starters for the Pacers at the time of the brawl. Faces that everyone knew and were familiar with. Tinsley: another starter who is easily recognizable to fans.

                          Dominic Rhodes: Definitely a vital player to the Super Bowl Run, and a guy who has been here for 6 years, but certainly not a guy who immediately pops into peoples minds when they hear "Indianapolis Colts"

                          O'Neal and Artest, players who were both allstars and arguably the 2 best players at the time of the brawl were major faces. Jax and Tinsley are major faces. All of these guys are starters. When the most recognizable players of a team get in trouble, it taints the franchise.

                          The Colts main faces are still viewed as clean and classy. Dungy, Manning, Harrison: all untainted. Those are without a doubt the 3 biggest faces of the franchise.

                          That's the difference in how the teams are viewed. The big faces of the Pacers are the ones who have been involved in incidents. The major faces of the Colts haven't. Rhodes is obviously an important player, but certainly isn't the first guy to pop in someones head when they think of the Colts.

                          Whether Rhodes stays or go is of little difference to how the Colts are viewed by people as far as class/etc. He isn't an integral face to the team in the manner of how O'Neal, Jax, Artest, Tins are/were.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

                            And BBall, its about time you watched some NBA besides the Pacers...Denver Nuggets, NY Knicks mean anything? How about Raja Bell? How about Bruce Bowen? And on and on and on....
                            You ever been just walking along and someone starts yelling your name and you think "What did I do?".
                            That's kinda how I feel here.
                            I guess I need to re-read this thread to see what you are talking about.

                            -Bball
                            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, thatís teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Okay, I'm ready to hear some people say "we were wrong about the Colts"

                              Ahhhh... I think I see your point. You're saying other teams in the NBA have ON the court and OFF the court problems no differently than our beloved Pacers!

                              Well here's the difference- I don't give a flying **** about those other teams. I don't care if they open each game with a sacrifice, hold an orgy at halftime, and fight more than any 2 hockey teams. They aren't my teams. I want my teams to be held to, and uphold, a higher standard than simply raising to the lowest common denominator.

                              Clear enough for you?

                              -Bball
                              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, thatís teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X