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:
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

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

Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

    Coach to retire after pension change

    The only assistant coaching tandem that Peyton Manning has ever known in the NFL is on the verge of a break-up because of a recent change in the league's pension program for non-playing personnel.

    Offensive line coach Howard Mudd has informed the Colts he is planning to retire immediately because of the pension-plan changes, according to team and league sources.

    "It's a dilemma we're trying to work through," said Bill Polian, the team's president and general manager. "I don't think Howard has turned in his [retirement] papers yet but it's a difficult situation and a very personal choice for Howard."

    Mudd has served as the Colts line coach for 12 years with Tom Moore as offensive coordinator under two head coaches, Jim Mora and Tony Dungy, who retired in January. Manning has been the quarterback for 11 of those 12 years, having been drafted a year after they arrived in Indianapolis, and has credited the Moore/Mudd pairing as vital to both the team's success and his own elite status.

    The Colts have allowed the fewest sacks during Mudd's 12 seasons, with just 218 sacks allowed in 182 games, including just 14 in 585 pass attempts in 2008.

    Mudd could not be reached for comment, but sources indicated it is almost a certainty that he is stepping down and that assistant line coach Pete Metzelaars will assume his duties.

    During the league's meetings in March, owners passed a resolution to revise its pension program for non-players.

    Mudd, 67, believes he has to take his entire lump-sum pension payment now because if he does not exercise that right at 65 under the revised plan, he will be allowed only to accept annuity payments upon retirement that will be reduced to 50 percent value for his immediate survivors if he dies, according to sources.

    Mudd has already maximized his pension because he has surpassed the formula that requires a coach's age and league tenure to equal 75. He has been an NFL assistant for 36 consecutive seasons.

    Many assistant coaches are upset with the recent pension revisions and have complained the new program not only reduces their retirement income but also lacks clarity.

    There are other long-tenured coaches older than 65 in the NFL who face the same dilemma, including the 70-year-old Moore, who was also unavailable for comment.

    A league source said there were several factors that motivated owners to change the pension program, including a loophole that enabled a tenured assistant coach who hit the 75 formula to retire and take a lump sum only to return to a team as a high-paid consultant.

    Chris Mortensen is ESPN's senior NFL analyst.

  • #2
    Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

    I'd have doubts about next season if they are without Dungy, Mudd and Moore.
    Edit Signature


    • #3
      Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

      It's a sad day for the Colts when a penny pinching decision drives a great coach like Mudd into retirement because he wants the best for his family.


      • #4
        Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

        Colts coaches among those retiring

        Confusion and mistrust over changes in the league's pension program is wreaking havoc with some NFL teams' coaching staffs, including the pending retirement of Indianapolis Colts offensive coordinator Tom Moore and offensive line coach Howard Mudd, according to Larry Kennan, executive director of the NFL Coaches Association.

        Kennan confirmed that Mudd has "already filed his retirement papers" and added that he believes Moore is "just about there."

        "What a travesty it would be that two of the most successful coaches in the history of this league feel compelled to retire because of the owners' greed and the state of confusion by recent changes in the pension plan," said Kennan. "And let me tell you something: They don't want to bail on the Colts but they just may feel like they have no other choice."

        Mudd has coached 35 consecutive seasons in the NFL and Moore has been an assistant for 32 years. Both are considered among the finest assistant coaches in league history and their 12-year Indianapolis union as offensive coordinator and line coach has been considered a major factor to the success of the Colts and quarterback Peyton Manning.

        NFL owners passed a resolution at the league meetings that allowed the 32 teams to opt out of a uniformed pension plan, which has been a generous incentive for coaches to remain at the pro level. Many teams have yet to decide on their specific plans for non-playing employees but Kennan painted a picture of betrayal.

        "Howard was already researching the strategy of when to take a lump sum payment when the owners pulled this fast one," said Kennan. "Let me tell you something: The owners did this at the league meetings and they never informed me of anything. They didn't notify the [coaches] within their own organizations, with the exception of two classy organizations -- the Atlanta Falcons and Baltimore Ravens -- that there were changes coming. No advance warning and no information after the fact.

        "So you take a guy like Howard Mudd, who is pretty diligent about everything, and he was already concerned about losing some money because the market index was going to change in July. Then you throw this at someone like that -- and he finds out that several teams have not fully funded their pension plans at an 80 percent level, the mark they need to hit for any employee to take a full lump sum payment. ...Well, Howard Mudd's not waiting around to see what happens with all these signals. And he's a guy that a lot of other coaches respect -- especially Tom Moore -- so they could follow his lead."

        Kennan said he was only authorized to speak for Mudd and not Moore, who was unavailable for comment.

        Colts president and GM Bill Polian released a statement through the team Wednesday, saying, "We have the highest personal affection and professional regard for Howard and it would be inappropriate for us to speculate at this time about any decisions he might eventually reach."

        If the Colts lost Moore and Mudd, it is believed current assistants Clyde Christensen (assistant head coach, receivers) and Pete Metzelaars (assistant offensive line coach), would become prime candidates to replace them.

        League owners have privately said the dramatic changes in the economic market was more than doubling the amount of contributions -- one owner suggested the league-wide contribution projected a hike from $40 million to $90 million -- that teams were required to make under the former uniformed plan. Consequently, owners passed the resolution in March that empowered teams to independently established their own pension plans.

        Mudd would like to remain as a "consultant" with the Colts but that is also one of the loopholes that owners wanted to close, sources said, citing the example of another renown line coach, Alex Gibbs, who met the league formula for cashing out fully on his pension, only to be hired back as a $800,000 to $1 million consultant.

        The coaches do have an associatio n but have failed to organize as a union, despite advice from Kennan and former NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw, who died suddenly last year, to form a union. Kennan said that the new NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith is determined to "protect the coaches" going forward.

        Kennan, as the leader of the Coaches Association, works out of the NFLPA offices. Upshaw enabled the coaches to use NFLPA counsel in various grievance hearings.

        But Smith, as the newly-elected NFLPA leader, has overwhelming and urgent issues with the current collective bargaining agreement that will expire after the 2010 season. Older coaches may be under the gun to make career decisions than can impact teams, like the Colts while younger coaches may look at their own alternatives down the road.

        "Over the course of time, I think you'll see the NFL lose some quality coaches, especially quality young coaches, because of this pension issue," Kennan said. "Look at how well colleges are paying coaches now; one of the factors that weighed in NFL favor for these coaches was the league pension plan. Now? That could change."

        One owner countered that teams that want to remain attractive to coaches will have to seriously consider the impact of a diminished pension plan when competing for their services. Some teams will value coaches more than others, this owner conceded.

        Chris Mortensen is a senior NFL analyst for ESPN.


        • #5
          Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

          The changes are coming fast and furious. Could this be the start of the next Indy sports transition, with the Pacers and IU basketball on the way up, and the Colts on the way down?


          • #6
            Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            The changes are coming fast and furious. Could this be the start of the next Indy sports transition, with the Pacers and IU basketball on the way up, and the Colts on the way down?

            That said, ****.

            Thankfully, Metzelaars has been around for 6 years. I'm not worried about Moore leaving. Clyde and Peyton can handle it. I'm more worried about the o-line. Hopefully Pete's been trained well.

            And of course, it's possible that Moore/Mudd could be brought as consultants.
            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.


            • #7
              Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

              When Cremmel and Weis left NE everyone was expecting them to fall off the map. But that was not true. If Bellicheat were to leave, do you expect the same outcome?

              Next year is going to be a transition year.


              • #8
                Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                Offensive line coaches in the NFL are mostly replaceable. Howard deserves much love and respect for what he has acheived as coach. He's a great coach ,but that doesn't install fear into me at all.

                I still blame him for the pop dual scheme disaster during the 2005 playoff loss to the Steelers. That and Nick Harper for faliing to outrun Big Ben.

                Besides, teams have really figured us out, and we need the change. Even Moore has become an inspiring gimmick. I mean that with an incredible amount of respect. We could use a little mixing up while our stars are still young. Manning mostly.


                • #9
                  Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                  The NFL made a big mistake by allowing teams to get off of the formerly required pension plan for assistant coaches..a big overreaction to the current economic state.


                  • #10
                    Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                    Well Moore is gone now...
                    Edit Signature


                    • #11
                      Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                      I'm less worried about Moore than Mudd, honestly.
                      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.


                      • #12
                        Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                        Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                        I'm less worried about Moore than Mudd, honestly.
                        I'm worried about losing Dungy, Moore and Mudd...
                        Edit Signature


                        • #13
                          Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                          My god, we've lost:

                          Our head coach, o line coach, offensive coordinator, defensive coordinator, special teams coach, and HOF wide receiver.

                          I'm not necessarily upset about a couple of those, but it's unbelievable to have that much change in one off season. Thank god we didn't lose Saturday.

                          I'm with Suaveness, the Mudd one probably concerns me the most. But I'm excited about getting new blood in here and am looking forward to the next era of Colt football. We'll have a healthy, training camp prepared Manning this season and as long as we have him behind center I will be confident in our chances. I feel 12-13 wins this year.


                          • #14
                            Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                            Its going to be a new Colts team this year
                            If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks


                            • #15
                              Re: Coach Howard Mudd to retire after pension change

                              Mudd gone hurts the Offensive Line has several young players and could have used his knowledge. The fact is these two men were forced to retire from coaching by the NFL and that stinks.