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 Gamble1 View Post
    The interesting thing about those stats is that I would classify the Panthers run defense as terrible and I am not sure why they didn't run more. I mean the way the Redskins offense has been explained to me is that many of those plays fall on the QB not the OC. RG3 is the one who decides where to run and when to pass the ball. So I can't understand why they didn't torch the Panthers on the ground game unless RG3 was trying to do too much in the game.
    I've got no idea, didn't watch the Redskins game. With that said though, I certainly wouldn't put much blame on RG3. For a team now with a legitimate franchise QB to be calling some of the plays they have been, particularly all the designed runs and option plays, is hard to believe. Luck really only runs when he has to, and puts himself at risk really only in critical spots in the game. That's what RG3 and his coaches should have him doing. It's not like he's lacking in the ability to throw the ball.

    Comment


    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      Can we re-name this thread to Luck vs Tannehil? They are the best 2 rookie QB's
      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

      Comment


      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
        Can we re-name this thread to Luck vs Tannehil? They are the best 2 rookie QB's
        Outside of their secondary, Tannehill probably has the second best team around him, this side of Seattle.

        Also he's only thrown for like 5 td's I think. I think he is a lot better than I thought he would be (along with Weeden) but Griffin and Luck are clearly the best out of this bunch.

        Comment


        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          Andrew Luck gives himself C grade

          INDIANAPOLIS -- Andrew Luck is a fine quarterback and a pretty tough critic.

          Less than 24 hours after leading the Colts to their fifth win while breaking one rookie record and tying another, the No. 1 overall draft pick walked into the Colts' locker room Monday and promptly described himself as average. Really.

          "A 'C' is average, so I think I'd give myself a `C'," Luck said when asked for a grade.

          Had Luck used a similar standard in the classroom, he might not have an architectural design degree from Stanford yet.

          But there's nothing average about Luck's fast start.

          After spending the previous two seasons being billed as the NFL's next big thing, the two-time Heisman Trophy runner-up has exceeded the hype over his first eight pro games.

          He's already won three more games than Indy did last season with three veteran quarterbacks. On Sunday, against a good Miami defense, Luck broke Cam Newton's single-game record for yards passing (432) by throwing for 433 in a 23-20 victory. He also tied the rookie record set by his predecessor, Peyton Manning, for most 300-yard games in a season (four) and continues to maintain the pace for a historic season.

          Through eight games, he is 190 of 336 for 2,404 yards with 10 touchdowns and eight interceptions. At this rate, he would shatter Sam Bradford's rookie marks for completions (354) and attempts (590) and Newton's record for yardage (4,051). With a slightly stronger second half, he may even challenge Manning's rookie record for TD passes (26) and he's still a long way from approaching Manning's first-year record for interceptions (28).

          He's already beaten two of the other five rookie starters (Brandon Weeden and Ryan Tannehill) and has surprisingly pushed the Colts into the playoff discussion.

          Numbers alone can't tell the tale. Despite being under heavy pressure, Luck has managed to elude defenders and even shake off Green Bay's Clay Matthews to make a key pass in a game-winning drive, and he's rallied the Colts to three fourth-quarter wins.

          To teammates, Luck has been everything they expected -- and more.

          "That guy is mature far beyond his years," defensive end Fili Moala said. "You can't say enough good things about him, from him as a human being to him as a football player to him as a teammate. He's the kind of guy you really want your kids to grow up and become. He's a professional, he does it with class and he'll be a good one for years to come."

          The toughest part of this season was supposed to be the endless comparisons to Manning. So far, Luck has had little trouble measuring up.

          Manning has exactly the same amount of wins and yardage as Luck this season, though Denver's quarterback has thrown for twice as many touchdowns and leads the NFL with a quarterback rating of 108.6.

          But Luck has had a better rookie season than Manning did.

          Luck has thrown and completed more passes in his first eight games, has thrown for 531 more yards, completed a higher percentage of passes than Manning (56.5 percent to 55.1), thrown half as many interceptions (16 to eight), just one fewer touchdown (11 to 10) and has a better quarterback rating than Manning did at that time (79.0 to 64.5).

          Of course, the game has changed over the last 14 years. There's now a bigger premium on passing, rookie quarterbacks play earlier and are expected to win earlier than they did then, too.

          While some now contend Luck has more talent around him than Manning did then, they might forget that in '98, Manning had Hall of Fame running back Marshall Faulk, receiver Marvin Harrison, two veteran tight ends and two tackles who became longtime cornerstones in the Colts' offense.

          Luck, in comparison, has relied primarily on the sure hands of Reggie Wayne; Donnie Avery, who is trying to come back from two lost seasons, an offensive line that is finally rounding into form and a large cast of other rookies.

          He's also had to learn more than Manning did then. Interim coach and offensive coordinator Bruce Arians, Manning's position coach in '98, has said the Colts' didn't use the no-huddle offense extensively until Manning's second season. Luck is already running that this season.

          "There are probably only a few throws he'd like to have back," said Arians, a 20-year NFL assistant. "He's kept us in games. He's won games. The way he's played in the two-minute phase and now the no-huddle phase has been excellent. He's been dynamite on third down the last two games."

          Now can he keep it up? The second half of this season begins Thursday at Jacksonville (1-7).

          Arians remembers that's when Manning really took off in 1998, and Luck knows there's plenty he can improve upon, too.

          "The victories are what I judge things on. I think I've got to cut down on the turnovers and putting touchdowns on the board," Luck said. "I think perfect would be to win every game, and not have any incompletions or interceptions."

          If that's the grading scale, good luck.

          But Arians has no problem giving Luck an "A."

          "That doesn't surprise me," Arians said with a chuckle when asked about Luck's own grade. "He's comparing him to himself. I'm comparing him to all the other guys I've ever had."

          Copyright 2012 by The Associated Press

          Comment


          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
            Can we re-name this thread to Luck vs Tannehil? They are the best 2 rookie QB's
            Nah, although Tannehill has definitely surprised, I go Luck, then RG3, then a pretty decent gap, and then Tannehill, Wilson, Weeden.

            Comment


            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              All 5 of the rookie QBs are very good.

              Comment


              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                Originally posted by bunt View Post
                Nah, although Tannehill has definitely surprised, I go Luck, then RG3, then a pretty decent gap, and then Tannehill, Wilson, Weeden.
                Heck at this point, if I had the choice, I'm not sure I wouldn't take Tannehill over Cam Newton. Part of that might just be the shiny new toy syndrome though. But the way Newton has carried himself this year, all the pouting. I think Luck and RG3 are clearly well ahead of Newton at this point.

                Comment


                • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  Analyzing offensive ROY race
                  Is Andrew Luck the front-runner over RG3 and Doug Martin?

                  http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8595360/nfl-handicapping-rookie-year-race-robert-griffin-iii-andrew-luck-doug-martin

                  It was only two months ago that Robert Griffin III made a grand entrance to the NFL, torching the New Orleans Saints for 320 yards passing and two touchdowns while completing 73 percent of his passes. In one game, the No. 2 pick in April's draft became the No. 1 rookie on everyone's mind, and he did little to change that over the next several weeks. In Weeks 6 and 7, the Washington Redskins passer put up a combined 667 yards of offense (passing and rushing) against the Minnesota Vikings and New York Giants, and he seemed destined to win the rookie of the year award.

                  Yesterday, all that changed.

                  As Griffin underwhelmed in a loss to Carolina, two other rookies made history in wins. Indianapolis Colts quarterback Andrew Luck set a rookie record with 433 passing yards against Miami, while running back Doug Martin set a Tampa Bay franchise record with 251 yards rushing. Halfway through the 2012 season, the race for offensive rookie of the year seems wide open, but a closer look reveals a clear pecking order.




                  WEEK 9 DYAR BEST AND WORST
                  DYAR is Football Outsiders' proprietary metric that measures performance on every play against expected performance for that situation. For a deeper explanation and a full breakdown of the numbers, visit Football Outsiders.
                  QB | RB | WR/TE
                  THE GOOD
                  Andrew Luck IND 218
                  Tony Romo DAL 183
                  Matthew Stafford DET 129
                  Peyton Manning DEN 121
                  Matt Ryan ATL 107
                  Russell Wilson SEA 102
                  Matt Schaub HOU 99
                  Cam Newton CAR 95
                  Andy Dalton CIN 87
                  Ryan Fitzpatrick BUF 79
                  THE BAD
                  Christian Ponder MIN -66
                  Brandon Weeden CLE -49
                  Eli Manning NYG -40
                  Robert Griffin WAS -28
                  Blaine Gabbert JAC -25


                  It's fairly simple to compare Griffin to Luck because they both play the same position. Griffin's raw stats (65.6 percent completion rate, 7.6 yards per attempt, eight touchdowns, three interceptions) are clearly superior to Luck's (56.5 percent, 7.2 ypa, 10 TDs, 8 INTs), but when Football Outsiders' passing rankings are updated Tuesday afternoon, you'll find Luck's name above Griffin's by a significant margin. That's largely because Luck has thrown a lot of deep passes, while Griffin has mostly thrown small stuff.
                  Nearly half of Griffin's passes (48 percent) have been thrown to receivers within five yards of the line of scrimmage. That's 10 percent higher than Luck's rate of short passes. On the other hand, 23 percent of Luck's passes have traveled at least 16 yards past the line of scrimmage, while only 16 percent of Griffin's throws have gone that far. As a result, while Luck has completed 18 more passes than Griffin, Griffin actually has 24 more failed completions -- completions that failed to gain significant yardage toward a new set of downs -- than Luck.

                  That's not the only reason Luck outranks Griffin at FO. Although Luck has dropped back 73 more times than Griffin, RG3 has given up 20 sacks to Luck's 19. Luck has also played a more challenging slate of defenses, especially in Week 1. While Griffin began his professional career against the Saints (last in FO's pass defense rankings), Luck premiered against the Chicago Bears, far and away the league's best defense. If we throw out Week 1, Luck leads Griffin in yards per pass play (including sacks), 6.5 to 6.2.

                  That's only passing numbers, and Griffin has brought a running element to the Redskins like few quarterbacks in league history. With the possible exception of Michael Vick's Falcons, Vince Young's Titans and Cam Newton's Panthers, Griffin's Redskins run more option plays than anyone has seen before, and Griffin leads all quarterbacks with 529 rushing yards. Luck, though, is no statue, with 148 rushing yards. Advanced stats have Griffin as the most valuable rushing quarterback this season, but Luck is third behind Griffin and Aaron Rodgers. In other words, Griffin has the edge in rushing, but that edge is not big enough to make up for Luck's superior passing ability.

                  Comparing Martin to Luck and Griffin is difficult because he plays a different position, but it's safe to say he stands out more among his peers. To put that another way, it would be hard to argue that either Luck or Griffin is a top-10 quarterback, but Martin is clearly a top-10 running back and should probably rank somewhere in the top five at his position. He is sixth in FO's rushing rankings and fifth in our combined rushing/receiving statistics. Conventional statistics like him even more. He is third behind Minnesota's Adrian Peterson and Seattle's Marshawn Lynch in rushing yards, and Martin leads the league with 129.9 yards from scrimmage per game.

                  (By the way, Martin's game against Oakland would be even more impressive if you remove his final three carries. Trying to kill clock, Martin ran three times against an Oakland defense that knew what was coming and lost yards each time. The strategy preserved the win but cost Martin 15 yards rushing. At FO, we've wiped these plays from the books just like we do quarterback kneel-downs.)

                  All three rookies are threatening historical benchmarks. Here is a partial list of some of the single-season records these players are approaching, along with the pace they're keeping and the current standards in the record book:

                  Andrew Luck

                  Passing yards, rookies 4,808 4,051 (Cam Newton, CAR, 2011)
                  Passing touchdowns, rookies 20 26 (Peyton Manning, IND, 1998)


                  Robert Griffin III

                  Rushing yards, quarterbacks 940 1,039 (Michael Vick, ATL, 2006)


                  Doug Martin

                  Yards from scrimmage, rookies 2,078 2,212 (Eric Dickerson, L.A. Rams, 1983)


                  As always, statistics are only part of the story. The goal of any player is to make the playoffs, and if the season ended today, only one of these rookies (Luck) would be playing in the postseason. Indianapolis probably won't challenge Houston for the AFC South championship, but Sunday's win over Miami earned the Colts a tiebreaker advantage over another wild-card contender. And they still have games against softies like Jacksonville, Buffalo, Tennessee and Kansas City on their slate.

                  In the NFC, Martin's Buccaneers are 4-4 and just a half-game out of the postseason, with a mix of easy games (Carolina, New Orleans, St. Louis) and hard ones (Denver, two against Atlanta) remaining. Washington, meanwhile, has the third-worst record in the NFC and will fall to second worst if New Orleans beats Philadelphia on Monday night.

                  If Luck and the Colts make the playoffs, the offensive rookie of the year award will probably be his. If something goes wrong in Indianapolis, Martin looks like the safest bet to take the lead. It's funny to say after his great game in Week 1, but Griffin looks like the longshot of the three.
                  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.

                    Luck will win ROY if the Colts go to the playoffs. He will probably win the award anyways
                    Smothered Chicken!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                      Luck will win ROY if the Colts go to the playoffs. He will probably win the award anyways
                      Not so fast.....


                      http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--20...le-honors.html

                      http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...sct=nfl_t11_a1
                      Last edited by OlBlu; 11-06-2012, 04:01 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        Did anyone mention the dumb Redskins play against Pitt last week?

                        On the play, Griffin flipped the ball to receiver Josh Morgan on a reverse to the right and then ran out of the backfield on a pass route. Morgan eluded a defender and heaved the ball downfield to Griffin along the left sideline.

                        http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ii-trick-play/

                        I would have been livid if I were a Redskins fan.

                        Ryan Clark gave him a nice hit at the end of the play. As a defensive fan, that's exactly what I like to see happen to QBs. I think they should eliminate the "can't touch him if he slides feet-first rule". That's for wimps and this is tackle football. Let the defensive players hit the ball carrier!!
                        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


                        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          Allowing defensive players to hit sliding QBs is pretty much the worst idea I have heard so far in November.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                            He wasn't sliding. You need to actually click the link and read, lol... He was sent out on a deep out route as a receiver. RG3 --- as a receiver. With Josh Morgan throwing a deep bomb to him. Yet another 'Skin gimmick. He tried to make a play on the ball, and the defenders came in and made a clean hit on him, but he got lit up. Again, just a stupid playcall, and I see it way too often with RG3. The jumping over 3 players and helicoptering into the ground play was pretty ugly, too. That's just a poor decision on behalf of Bob.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-06-2012, 04:27 PM.
                            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.

                              Here is video:

                              http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/...sent-him-deep/
                              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 Trader Joe View Post
                                Allowing defensive players to hit sliding QBs is pretty much the worst idea I have heard so far in November.
                                Allowing offensive players to slide instead of get tackled (or even the old-fashioned wimpy play of stepping out of bounds right before the hit) is one of the worst things to ever happen to tackle football.

                                Don't want to get tackled? Play flag football instead.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X