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

Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

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

  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

    Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
    Blah, blah, blah..... When I point out examples of QBs who were as highly thought of as Luck at the time, they just didn't have the talent. Well, has it occurred to you that Luck just doesn't really have the talent or the arm either. Put Luck on Washington and he would not produce what RGIII has. Put RGIII on the Colts and he will make the other players better and you would have a better team immediately. There is that much difference. Cam Newton took over a team that was just about as bad as the Colts last year and look at the season he had and how many more wins they got than were predicted. He is off to a shaky start this year playing some very good teams but his numbers will be great by the end of the year. Why won't you just admit that Luck is not the NFL ready QB and talent that everyone (but a few of us) thought that he was. He will be an adequate but not great QB. He might even become Phillip Rivers type good but he will never be a Brady, either of the Mannings, Rogers or Brees kind of good.... ... By the way, Big Ben has never had to have great protection to be a very good superbowl winning QB. Luck would never be able to win playing behind the lines that Big Ben has.... ...
    Just seeing some of this stuff and I will just make a few comments, neither Couch or Carr was ever thought to have as much talent as Luck, he is considered the best prospect to come out of college since John Elway, so anyone between those two guys does not matter.

    Even if Luck didn't have top arm strength football is a lot more than that, a QB really only needs to have above average arm strength I think to eventually become elite, other traits are needed to separate them, unless you think Luck has below average arm strength which no one does or even average, then he should be just fine.

    As far as who he will become no one knows, so far he has had better a better rookie season than all those guys you have listed.

    Eli passed fore 48% and had 6TD's and 9 picks, Brees really did not take of til he got to the Saints, Rodgers set multiple years and had to work on a lot, Rivers didn't start until his second year, Brady set his first year and during his second was not very special, better than most but not anything that makes you say he would be a hall of famer, and we all know about Peyton who through for 56% and had more picks than touchdowns in his first year.

    But if you would like to hear something positive right now about Luck that comes from an outside party here you go...

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

    http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/pos...qbs-measure-up

    Currently Luck has the highest score in this ranking scale out of ALL quarterbacks in the NFL, every ranking system has its shortcomings but, I think this says something about what Luck has done so far this season.
    Why so SERIOUS

    Comment


    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      Originally posted by RWB View Post
      Because you told us to...

      Again just point out how ridiculous his post are and move on. Theres no need to get personal about it with him. He's an old guy with a lot more time to be bitter about Irsays/Peytons decision.

      So basically know a lost cause and move on. Refute his point with Facts (cats) and just laugh at how pathetic his points really are.
      IIRC that was to one poster who was getting a little caught up in his web. Most of the PDers here don't have that problem. Certainly his comparisons of Luck don't even deserve a response though I did like xBulletproofs post.

      Comment


      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        No one really thought David Carr was going to be an elite pro QB Not even really the Texans, my memory from that draft is that they kind of threw their arms up in the air and said well we NEED a QB as a franchise team and we're going to be terrible anyway. Carr has the great senior season and the rest is history. I don't necessarily dislike Carr either, I do think his line was detriment to him, and I think he's a good serviceable QB, but he can't be compared to Luck IMO. I'm pretty sure that's the exact same thing that happened to Tim Couch. Comparing either one to Luck's situation is a huuuuuuuuge stretch.

        I mean Carr struggled to win the job at Fresno until his junior year. Couch through 36 INTs in his junior and senior seasons. 36!
        Last edited by Trader Joe; 10-05-2012, 02:42 PM.


        Comment


        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          No one really thought David Carr was going to be an elite pro QB Not even really the Texans, my memory from that draft is that they kind of threw their arms up in the air and said well we NEED a QB as a franchise team and we're going to be terrible anyway. Carr has the great senior season and the rest is history. I don't necessarily dislike Carr either, I do think his line was detriment to him, and I think he's a good serviceable QB, but he can't be compared to Luck IMO. I'm pretty sure that's the exact same thing that happened to Tim Couch. Comparing either one to Luck's situation is a huuuuuuuuge stretch.

          I mean Carr struggled to win the job at Fresno until his junior year. Couch through 36 INTs in his junior and senior seasons. 36!
          Yeah it is typically hard to really project how good a QB is going to be going from college to the pros, there is so much that is different, the speed, the plays, the defenses, and most importantly how they will adapt to adversity.

          I think Luck has done pretty good so far, but he is still early into his NFL career.

          As far as Carr, I mean they expected him to be a QB with potential, nothing wrong with that, but you are correct in the fact that they wanted to start out their franchise with at QB, and if it makes anyone feel any better he was the best QB to come out of that first round, lol the other two guys were Patrick Ramsey, and Joey Harrington, scary.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            No one really thought David Carr was going to be an elite pro QB Not even really the Texans, my memory from that draft is that they kind of threw their arms up in the air and said well we NEED a QB as a franchise team and we're going to be terrible anyway. Carr has the great senior season and the rest is history. I don't necessarily dislike Carr either, I do think his line was detriment to him, and I think he's a good serviceable QB, but he can't be compared to Luck IMO. I'm pretty sure that's the exact same thing that happened to Tim Couch. Comparing either one to Luck's situation is a huuuuuuuuge stretch.

            I mean Carr struggled to win the job at Fresno until his junior year. Couch through 36 INTs in his junior and senior seasons. 36!
            Couch also had a broken thumb, a broken leg, and a shoulder surgery in the matter of 4 years. That can pretty much derail anyones career.

            Comment


            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              Originally posted by Really? View Post
              Just seeing some of this stuff and I will just make a few comments, neither Couch or Carr was ever thought to have as much talent as Luck, he is considered the best prospect to come out of college since John Elway, so anyone between those two guys does not matter.

              Even if Luck didn't have top arm strength football is a lot more than that, a QB really only needs to have above average arm strength I think to eventually become elite, other traits are needed to separate them, unless you think Luck has below average arm strength which no one does or even average, then he should be just fine.

              As far as who he will become no one knows, so far he has had better a better rookie season than all those guys you have listed.

              Eli passed fore 48% and had 6TD's and 9 picks, Brees really did not take of til he got to the Saints, Rodgers set multiple years and had to work on a lot, Rivers didn't start until his second year, Brady set his first year and during his second was not very special, better than most but not anything that makes you say he would be a hall of famer, and we all know about Peyton who through for 56% and had more picks than touchdowns in his first year.

              But if you would like to hear something positive right now about Luck that comes from an outside party here you go...

              http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr

              http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/pos...qbs-measure-up

              Currently Luck has the highest score in this ranking scale out of ALL quarterbacks in the NFL, every ranking system has its shortcomings but, I think this says something about what Luck has done so far this season.

              Wrong!! The reason is strictly financial. Those people taking a QB at number one (perhaps the highest risk position to draft) were paying millions of dollars more for their QB than Indy is paying Luck. I think Sam Bradford got over $50 million guaranteed. At those amounts, you don't take a QB first unless you think he is a star. JaMarkus Russell, Jeff George, David Carr, Couch and others signed for a fortune. Those teams ALL thought they had the next great things just like the Colts do with Luck. Many more fail than make it and those that get beat up behind terrible offensive lines pay an even higher price. I have seen enough of Luck already to doubt that he is anything special. Perhaps Phillip Rivers with a lesser arm. Chad Pennington was actually a good comparison in my view...... ...

              Comment


              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                Your comparisons for Luck are the best. Rivers with a lesser arm? Chad Pennington? Where do you come up with this stuff? Neither of those guys even play the game like Luck does, even if you completely ignore talent level they don't make sense.


                Comment


                • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  I would like an actual good discussion, not this drivel. Rah-rah'ing Cam Newton and RG3 while saying Luck is "Chad Pennington" is absolute nonsense.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                    I would like an actual good discussion, not this drivel. Rah-rah'ing Cam Newton and RG3 while saying Luck is "Chad Pennington" is absolute nonsense.
                    Alright how about some noteable games in the coming weeks.

                    One of my favorites will be when RG3 faces the Vikings on the 14th. One would think that game should be comparable and of course both teams face the Browns this year.

                    I also think RG3 against the Giants will be fun to watch. The front 4 should force RG3 into quick decisions and the Gmen don't need to blitz in order to create pressure.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                      Wrong!! The reason is strictly financial. Those people taking a QB at number one (perhaps the highest risk position to draft) were paying millions of dollars more for their QB than Indy is paying Luck. I think Sam Bradford got over $50 million guaranteed. At those amounts, you don't take a QB first unless you think he is a star. JaMarkus Russell, Jeff George, David Carr, Couch and others signed for a fortune. Those teams ALL thought they had the next great things just like the Colts do with Luck. Many more fail than make it and those that get beat up behind terrible offensive lines pay an even higher price. I have seen enough of Luck already to doubt that he is anything special. Perhaps Phillip Rivers with a lesser arm. Chad Pennington was actually a good comparison in my view...... ...
                      Lol, What, what area of my post were you trying to target?

                      1st picks get paid regardless, maybe a few million less

                      Most NFL qb's come from the first round, teams are willing to gamble just to get a potential starting caliber QB that can stay in the league

                      Making a judgment in either direction off 3 games of a rookie season shows how much you know about football, and football history

                      I can tell you are not serious by your comparisons and the smiley face, lol
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        Your comparisons for Luck are the best. Rivers with a lesser arm? Chad Pennington? Where do you come up with this stuff? Neither of those guys even play the game like Luck does, even if you completely ignore talent level they don't make sense.
                        Probably all stems from Luck under throwing receivers on out routes and deep routes at times, but these things are fixable, and he is also just going for the comic factor now.
                        Why so SERIOUS

                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          That was mostly in game 1, though. He even admitted it in the post-game interview, he tried to prepare and was aware of it, but still under-estimated game-speed. He's made marked improvement on his zip and velocity and accuracy in the subsequent two games. He's thrown some beautiful balls deep. Wasn't like he threw all bad balls in the opener, either, he just lofted a few.

                          He's thrown some absolute heaters this year, I have no doubt about his arm-strength.
                          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            That was mostly in game 1, though. He even admitted it in the post-game interview, he tried to prepare and was aware of it, but still under-estimated game-speed. He's made marked improvement on his zip and velocity and accuracy in the subsequent two games. He's thrown some beautiful balls deep. Wasn't like he threw all bad balls in the opener, either, he just lofted a few.

                            He's thrown some absolute heaters this year, I have no doubt about his arm-strength.
                            Yeah I was just saying where that thinking came from, and he has since thrown balls like that in his other games as well. It is not going to be a quick fix, he did it at Stanford as well, it won't be the last that we see of it.

                            Also he has thrown a bunch of good passes as well, short and deep, but if you watch the game tape there are still the occasional bad throws as well, I do feel that he is improving every week and will continue to get much better.
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                              I am seriously worried.

                              RGIII did not not what state he was in, what the score of the game was, or what down he got hurt on.

                              Plenty of QB's get hurt on scrambles, but that hit was nasty

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                                Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                                I am seriously worried.

                                RGIII did not not what state he was in, what the score of the game was, or what down he got hurt on.

                                Plenty of QB's get hurt on scrambles, but that hit was nasty
                                Yeah someone said he didn't know what the score was. Honestly, when I used to pitch I couldn't tell you what the score was. My job was to get the next hitter out regardless of anything else. Everything else was irrelevant so I didn't care. So I wasn't concerned when they told me that, but he didn't know what state he was in? Eh. Okay that's worrisome.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X