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

  • Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

    I'm going to start out by going way out on a limb and say that neither of these guys will turn into the next Ryan Leaf. Fair enough ??

    #1 & #2. These guys will be linked thru their entire career. Comparisons will always be made. Stats, wins, Super Bowls ........ everything. And yes - it is certainly quite early in their NFL careers, but it's not too early to start.

    Luck - 26-41 (63%), 363 yards, 8.9 yds per attempt, 2 TDs, 2 INTs, 87.8 rating.

    Griffin - 9-14 (64%), 119 yards, 8.5 yds per attempt, 1 TD, 0 INT, 114.8 rating.

    Stretch Griffin's numbers out and all the numbers are really similar. In Luck's defense, one of those picks should really be a TD (a completion at the worst), but things are what they are and it goes down as an INT for Luck.

    I guess at this point my only question is why Griffin hasn't played that much and Cousins is getting as many reps as Luck is. I haven't read or heard anything about it, but if they're calling him the starter already, shouldn't / wouldn't he be getting a little more time ?? No, I'm pretty sure he doesn't have it all figured out and doesn't need the reps. Hell, Manning still needs reps at this point of the season. Anyone know what the deal is ??

    We can add more fuel to this after Saturday's game.

  • #2
    Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

    I was a bit shocked that RG3 got so little playing time in the first game, but it seemed he played the right amount last week.

    I think we see him play 2....maybe 3 quarters this weekend, and then we see Grossman et al play Wednesday. Wednesday will be a junk game where I doubt the starters play more then 1 series, if that.

    To be 100% honest I think part of why they are not playing RG3 much is because A. He seems to be grasping the system pretty well and is progressing at a rate they like. and B. perhaps more importantly, and especially against a good Bears defense, our line was crap. To be fully fair we got hit with some injuries, but the line was beat on every series. RG3 was forced to tuck the ball and run way more then I cared to see, granted that is why I was happy he "fell" to us. I think that bad O-line will be a problem he will have to face for a season, or two, though maybe Heyer and some of the higher draft picks prove me wrong.

    Cousins has played well, and I dont think you were implying it, but Cousins will not start over RG3.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
      Luck vs. Griffin - let it begin.
      No, don't.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        I could see RG3 turning into Ryan Leaf. Instead of studying the game, he is out there making commercials. Doesn't seem dedicated to me
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          I don't think RG3 will be Leaf 2.0, but I still don't think he's on the same level as Luck, been saying that for months, while most of America bought into the RG3 hype. I see RG3 being.... Randall Cunningham 2.0, which is still not a bad thing.
          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


          • #6
            Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            Here's an article from the Washington Post.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...s=rss_homepage

            Reading that, it almost seems like the RG3 honeymoon is already starting to dwindle... pretty nuts when a writer in your own city writes this:

            Yet while Griffin is seemingly everywhere, endorsing everything, Luck has yet to star in his first commercial as a professional. He is considered the surest quarterback prospect in more than a decade, but his efficient throws, superb footwork and cerebral approach to the game often draw a ho-hum response — a marked contrast to the Griffin mania in Washington.
            Sound a lil' somewhat like envy?

            The entire article, written by a Washington writer, does nothing but glow about Luck.

            Here's another Washington Post article, documenting RG3's "struggles" thus far:

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...l?tid=obinsite

            Not a very glowing review.

            Very curious the utilization of RG3 vs Kirk Cousins, can't quite figure that one out.
            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-23-2012, 10:17 AM.
            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


            • #7
              Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              Redskins fans want so badly for RG3 to be better than Luck. They, like SD years ago, actually believe that they got the better guy. I'm really hoping this debate ends emphatically on Saturday
              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                Took a few years for the Manning/Leaf thing to shake out, 'geek, and the gulf between those two was wider than the one off Mexico. Probly not happening in the 3rd preseason game.
                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


                • #9
                  Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                  I was a bit shocked that RG3 got so little playing time in the first game, but it seemed he played the right amount last week.

                  I think we see him play 2....maybe 3 quarters this weekend, and then we see Grossman et al play Wednesday. Wednesday will be a junk game where I doubt the starters play more then 1 series, if that.

                  To be 100% honest I think part of why they are not playing RG3 much is because A. He seems to be grasping the system pretty well and is progressing at a rate they like. and B. perhaps more importantly, and especially against a good Bears defense, our line was crap. To be fully fair we got hit with some injuries, but the line was beat on every series. RG3 was forced to tuck the ball and run way more then I cared to see, granted that is why I was happy he "fell" to us. I think that bad O-line will be a problem he will have to face for a season, or two, though maybe Heyer and some of the higher draft picks prove me wrong.

                  Cousins has played well, and I dont think you were implying it, but Cousins will not start over RG3.

                  I could be wrong, but after watching the first two preseason games, It didn't seem like Griffin was grasping the offense much at all. The Skins were running pretty basic plays, screens, deep ins, and curls. Also, I didn't see Griffin directing people at the line, etc. Now obviously he is a rookie so he shouldn't be expected to do so many things so early. And with that O-Line, they may not be able to run many exotic plays simply because Griffin wont have the time to scan down field.

                  Cousins has looked very impressive to me. I was surprised he lasted as long as he did in the draft, and he seems pretty NFL ready so far. Yes he was working against 2nd and 3rd stringers, BUT he was still throwing the ball on time, to the right receivers, etc.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                    Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                    I could see RG3 turning into Ryan Leaf. Instead of studying the game, he is out there making commercials. Doesn't seem dedicated to me
                    Is this a joke?

                    Dude was working out all summer, was studying the Redskins playbook, and came to every voluntary workout....even the ones the coaches told him he really did not need to show up for.

                    Lord forbid he have a life and make a commercial, or 3.

                    P.S. I have seen a few Luck endorsements since he was drafted. Surely this is a red flag as he should be spending 200% of his time studying the game
                    _________________________________

                    As for him, I think he has a lot of work to do, but he is also better then anything we have had in a long, long, long, long, long time. The fact he is mobile is a huge bonus, especially considering our crappy o-line (that is what happens when you ignore the link for 4-5 years of drafts). Of course, all of this is ignoring Luck also ran a pro system in college for 4 years. Luck has more experience running a pro system, and IMP so far has shown that
                    Last edited by vapacersfan; 08-23-2012, 10:36 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      What commercials would those be, va? I've seen a single one, the Nike one from before the draft.

                      And don't get mad at us -- your own Washington writer is the one who turned up the heat on this discussion.
                      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


                      • #12
                        Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                        Redskins fans want so badly for RG3 to be better than Luck. They, like SD years ago, actually believe that they got the better guy. I'm really hoping this debate ends emphatically on Saturday
                        Two points.

                        1. What Redskins fans do you talk to? Most fans I know (and since I live in DC I know quite a few....) respect Luck, hell must woulda loved to draft him. However, they want RG3 to pan out because guess what......we havent had a QB is over 2 decades. Lord forbid fans want a QB to pan out. I have yet to hear anyone say RG3 is better then Luck, though I imagine that debate is going on somewhere.

                        2. If you think pre-season success (by either QB) is the end all be all......then I do not know what to tell you. I would rather have a rookie QB win a few regular season games and progress and possible even make the playoffs, then have him go balls to the walls in pre season and look amazing and dwindle during the season

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          I could be wrong, but after watching the first two preseason games, It didn't seem like Griffin was grasping the offense much at all. The Skins were running pretty basic plays, screens, deep ins, and curls. Also, I didn't see Griffin directing people at the line, etc. Now obviously he is a rookie so he shouldn't be expected to do so many things so early. And with that O-Line, they may not be able to run many exotic plays simply because Griffin wont have the time to scan down field.

                          Cousins has looked very impressive to me. I was surprised he lasted as long as he did in the draft, and he seems pretty NFL ready so far. Yes he was working against 2nd and 3rd stringers, BUT he was still throwing the ball on time, to the right receivers, etc.
                          Cousins has impressed me. Very much so. But like you said he is working against 2nd and 3rd stringers.

                          This new "vanilla" offense is part of Shannys plan to not show our hand. Most fans I know seem to hate it so far. Open it up and get the kid experience.

                          Though to be fair, our line plain as day stinks. Not sure you can open the playbook when your line cant pass block to save their lives.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                            'Geek is probly just a tad annoyed because, frankly, Indy and it's fans have taken a lot of heat for drafting Luck, believe it or not. I'd say 60% of the nation believed we should've drafted RG3 before the pre-season started. Lotta idiots out there. But anyway, we've had to hear it a lot. Probly a bit of an overreaction on 'geeks part, but hey we're human.

                            Go to any Luck article or YouTube video from before the pre-season started, and you'll see mostly "shoulda taken RG3" comments. It's stupid. Tunes are changing quickly since they've actually seen Luck in action in the pre-season however. Even the "experts" who predicted Luck would struggle mightily this year and predict RG3 would have a strong campaign are starting to reverse course in the past two weeks.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-23-2012, 10:42 AM.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                              'Geek is probly just a tad annoyed because, frankly, Indy and it's fans have taken a lot of heat for drafting Luck, believe it or not. I'd say 60% of the nation believed we should've drafted RG3 before the pre-season started. Lotta idiots out there. But anyway, we've had to hear it a lot. Probly a bit of an overreaction on 'geeks part, but hey we're human.
                              Which is understandable, but IMO it was a close call but most people saw Luck was better.

                              Even if everyone was calling to draft RG3 over Luck, no need to bash him because others called you idiots. People said we shouldnt have drafted Reggie.....yet we know how that turned out.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X