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

LT = MVP

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

  • LT = MVP

    Ladanian Tomlinson is the NFL MVP.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2719845

  • #2
    Re: LT = MVP

    Most anti climactic MVP award ever?


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: LT = MVP

      And apparently 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.
      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: LT = MVP

        Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
        And apparently 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: LT = MVP

          Didn't our boy Manning throw for as many TD's as LT ran/caught for this season? I know LT threw for 2 also, so he was involved in 33 and Manning only threw for 31....of course he also rushed for 4, so that puts him at 35.

          Didn't Manning break or set a couple different NFL records this season?

          Why on earth did LT win this award and not Manning, let alone in a landslide? I guess since it is the most VALUABLE player award, maybe the rationale was that LT meant more to the Chargers than PM meant to the Colts, but I can't see that being much of a reality. Hard to have a very good season if Jim Sorgi (or anyone else for that matter, no offense intended, Jim) was the Colts QB.

          Manning led the league in TD's thrown and QB rating. He was second in the league in yards passing by 21 yards, but threw 5 more TD's and 2 less INT's than Brees with 3 more pass attempts. His two top receivers finished 2-3 in the league in yards also, and all that with a rookie and a journeyman sharing the running duties and having one of the worst defenses in the league.....

          Just because he has already won the award twice doesn't mean he didn't deserve the award again.

          Sorry LT, PEYTON MANNING IS MY MVP. He's only made the Pro Bowl every year of his career except when he was a rookie....Call me crazy....



          RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: LT = MVP

            I don't have a problem with LT winning, but I don't think he should have. It's not an award that goes to the best player, or MJ would have won it every year. It's about who means the most to their respected team, and to me that's Drew Brees.

            The Saints wouldn't be anywhere without him, even if they still had Reggie. He was a lift not to just some random team, but for a team that had the weight of a whole city on it's backs, and he gave them a season to remember.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: LT = MVP

              Originally posted by heywoode View Post
              Didn't our boy Manning throw for as many TD's as LT ran/caught for this season? I know LT threw for 2 also, so he was involved in 33 and Manning only threw for 31....of course he also rushed for 4, so that puts him at 35.

              Didn't Manning break or set a couple different NFL records this season?

              Why on earth did LT win this award and not Manning, let alone in a landslide? I guess since it is the most VALUABLE player award, maybe the rationale was that LT meant more to the Chargers than PM meant to the Colts, but I can't see that being much of a reality. Hard to have a very good season if Jim Sorgi (or anyone else for that matter, no offense intended, Jim) was the Colts QB.

              Manning led the league in TD's thrown and QB rating. He was second in the league in yards passing by 21 yards, but threw 5 more TD's and 2 less INT's than Brees with 3 more pass attempts. His two top receivers finished 2-3 in the league in yards also, and all that with a rookie and a journeyman sharing the running duties and having one of the worst defenses in the league.....

              Just because he has already won the award twice doesn't mean he didn't deserve the award again.

              Sorry LT, PEYTON MANNING IS MY MVP. He's only made the Pro Bowl every year of his career except when he was a rookie....Call me crazy....
              LT broke records this season too. Mosts TDs in a year, didn't just break it, but shattered it IMO. LT was the most dominant player in the league this year. Peyton's year while very good, was really nothing more than just another year for him.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: LT = MVP

                Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                LT broke records this season too. Mosts TDs in a year, didn't just break it, but shattered it IMO. LT was the most dominant player in the league this year. Peyton's year while very good, was really nothing more than just another year for him.
                I knew and understand that LT broke the touchdowns record, but it was a record that Shaun Alexander set LAST SEASON. Don't think he shattered it either. The award isn't for the most dominant player, it is for being the most VALUABLE player. Just because a year that Manning throws for over 4,000 yards and 31 TD's, runs for 4 more TD's and has a 102 passer rating is "just another year" for him means nothing. It is still an MVP year.

                I can at least relate to Since86's opinion about Drew Brees. When you talk about VALUE to a team, he makes a good point about where the Saints would be without him. San Diego would still be a damn good team without LT, and they could've had a couple different backs tandem to get the same or at least close to what LT gained. To me, that is a wash. Kinda like letting Edge go and then having Rhodes/Addai cover the void.

                I like LT. Don't get me wrong at all. He is close to the most dominant back I've ever seen play. He just isn't an MVP. Especially not this season, records broken or not. Brees meant more to the Saints and Manning meant more to the Colts.

                I think that giving the award to someone else because they didn't want to give it to Manning again for a 'ho-hum' ProBowl season, and they didn't want to give it to Brees for the deserving reasons that Since86 listed, it loses meaning for the award. If I was Manning or Brees, I would want to win the award less for how it is being dished out.



                RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: LT = MVP

                  This year, the Steelers held him to 70 total yards, including 19 on one pass play.

                  Last year, the Steelers held him to 130 total yards, including 41 on one pass play.

                  He's obviously very, very, very good against the other 30 teams, but he hasn't looked like an MVP candidate when I've seen him.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: LT = MVP

                    LT= maybe Most Outstanding Player 2006
                    Manning = Defintely Most Valuable Player 2006



                    Polian through out a stat this morning on Mike and Mike.

                    The Colts this year average 3 less posessions per game then the League Average. And yet Manning was still able to put up the numbers he did.

                    I think there is a bias at times against Manning, like heywoode said, in not wanting to give Manning the MVP award again.

                    Why Not Us ?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: LT = MVP

                      Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                      I knew and understand that LT broke the touchdowns record, but it was a record that Shaun Alexander set LAST SEASON. Don't think he shattered it either. The award isn't for the most dominant player, it is for being the most VALUABLE player. Just because a year that Manning throws for over 4,000 yards and 31 TD's, runs for 4 more TD's and has a 102 passer rating is "just another year" for him means nothing. It is still an MVP year.

                      I can at least relate to Since86's opinion about Drew Brees. When you talk about VALUE to a team, he makes a good point about where the Saints would be without him. San Diego would still be a damn good team without LT, and they could've had a couple different backs tandem to get the same or at least close to what LT gained. To me, that is a wash. Kinda like letting Edge go and then having Rhodes/Addai cover the void.

                      I like LT. Don't get me wrong at all. He is close to the most dominant back I've ever seen play. He just isn't an MVP. Especially not this season, records broken or not. Brees meant more to the Saints and Manning meant more to the Colts.

                      I think that giving the award to someone else because they didn't want to give it to Manning again for a 'ho-hum' ProBowl season, and they didn't want to give it to Brees for the deserving reasons that Since86 listed, it loses meaning for the award. If I was Manning or Brees, I would want to win the award less for how it is being dished out.
                      I don't know how we can say that the Chargers would still be a very good team without LT as they were with LT. To me the Chargers remind me of the Colts team that lost Edge and preceded to go 6-10 that year. The only difference is that the Chargers have a better D, but quite honestly I don't see how you can say oh without LT this is still a pretty good team. Sure Turner and Co. could maybe replace production similar to how Rhode and Addai have, but there is no way they would have defenses game planning to stop them, just like we no longer have defenses thinking how to stop our running game anymore. The Colts are two games worse without Edge, I would be willing to be that the Chargers are 5 to 6 games worse without LT. I just think LT was a no brainer this year personally. He WAS the Chargers offense. I would bet good money that Rivers wouldn't look nearly as good as he does now if Turner was in the backfield over LT.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: LT = MVP

                        Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                        I don't know how we can say that the Chargers would still be a very good team without LT as they were with LT. To me the Chargers remind me of the Colts team that lost Edge and preceded to go 6-10 that year. The only difference is that the Chargers have a better D, but quite honestly I don't see how you can say oh without LT this is still a pretty good team. Sure Turner and Co. could maybe replace production similar to how Rhode and Addai have, but there is no way they would have defenses game planning to stop them, just like we no longer have defenses thinking how to stop our running game anymore. The Colts are two games worse without Edge, I would be willing to be that the Chargers are 5 to 6 games worse without LT. I just think LT was a no brainer this year personally. He WAS the Chargers offense. I would bet good money that Rivers wouldn't look nearly as good as he does now if Turner was in the backfield over LT.
                        I didn't mean that the Chargers would be the same team without LT, but they would still be a good team capable of beating anyone. If you think people are game planning to stop LT, what do you think they do about Manning?

                        The Colts are only two games worse without Edge for one reason. Their ability to play defense. They were three close games away from being 15-1. If San Diego's defense was as bad as ours and teams kept LT off the field as much as Manning was off it this season, he wouldn't have broken any records, I can guarantee you that.

                        The only no-brainer around here are the fools who landslided LT to a popularity contest because they are tired of Manning being the MVP of the league for his career. I'm fine with LT winning best offensive player, but he is most certainly not the most valuable player in the NFL.

                        Not trying to make you mad or anything else, I just think there is no argument for Manning's performance year in and year out. Until he steps on himself for a season and stops leading the league in several categories, he is the MVP.

                        People have differing opinions, and I can respect your right to have your own. I just don't agree with it!



                        RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: LT = MVP

                          Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                          I didn't mean that the Chargers would be the same team without LT, but they would still be a good team capable of beating anyone. If you think people are game planning to stop LT, what do you think they do about Manning?

                          The Colts are only two games worse without Edge for one reason. Their ability to play defense. They were three close games away from being 15-1. If San Diego's defense was as bad as ours and teams kept LT off the field as much as Manning was off it this season, he wouldn't have broken any records, I can guarantee you that.

                          The only no-brainer around here are the fools who landslided LT to a popularity contest because they are tired of Manning being the MVP of the league for his career. I'm fine with LT winning best offensive player, but he is most certainly not the most valuable player in the NFL.

                          Not trying to make you mad or anything else, I just think there is no argument for Manning's performance year in and year out. Until he steps on himself for a season and stops leading the league in several categories, he is the MVP.

                          People have differing opinions, and I can respect your right to have your own. I just don't agree with it!
                          Yeah, I feel we may have to agree to disagree on this. To me LT had a heck of a year and deserved the MVP, did Peyton and Drew also have huge years? Hell yeah but that doesn't discount what LT did any less. Really if you ask me I hate the MVP award at all levels. Its dumb to me to be able to say who is really the most valuable player to a team. You take a key player from any team in the league and they will be worse. I would not be opposed at all if sports got rid of the MVP award entirely.


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: LT = MVP

                            Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                            Yeah, I feel we may have to agree to disagree on this. To me LT had a heck of a year and deserved the MVP, did Peyton and Drew also have huge years? Hell yeah but that doesn't discount what LT did any less. Really if you ask me I hate the MVP award at all levels. Its dumb to me to be able to say who is really the most valuable player to a team. You take a key player from any team in the league and they will be worse. I would not be opposed at all if sports got rid of the MVP award entirely.
                            Yeah, you make a good point. It would be difficult in some situations to nail down a most valuable player on a particular TEAM, let alone which player in the entire league meant the most to his team, if that is what the award is really for anyway...

                            I can see that I was a little spirited in stating my feelings for Manning being MVP, and not acknowledging enough that LT had one hell of a year. He certainly did....



                            RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: LT = MVP

                              I'm not a big fan of the MVP either. Quarterbacks will almost always be in the best position to win an MVP because they are the ones who are the most involved in a game. I think LT kind of deserved the MVP just because he got so many TDs. Whether it was conservative play calling around the red-zone, LTs balance of power and speed, or a great O-Line; it doesn't really matter. He just simply had a phenomenal year. I don't think any other RB in the league could have put up the stats he put up, even in that offensive system.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X