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

Peps plan for the offense

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

  • Peps plan for the offense

    Hi,

    This is a article that was posted on ESPN, I thought it was kind of interesting what the new OC has planned for us in the coming year.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/nfl/rumors/post?id=475

    Colts' changes with Hamilton - January, 21, 2013

    By Tim Kavanagh | ESPN.com

    In an intriguing twist of fate over the past week, Indianapolis Colts QB Andrew Luck lost the architect of his offense from his phenomenal rookie campaign -- Bruce Arians, who took the HC job in Arizona -- but gained the man who had guided him at the tail end of his career at Stanford -- Pep Hamilton, who left his job as the "Andrew Luck director of offense" with the Cardinal to take on the OC post under Chuck Pagano. So what changes should we expect out of Indy's offense as a result of that substitution?

    Hamilton explained his offensive strategy on Saturday, per Peter King of Sports Illustrated: "It'll be a variation of the West Coast -- the West Coast principles, the short, efficient passing game, a high completion rate, but I enjoy watching our guys come off the ball, the guys up front and try to knock the opponent back. I'm a big believer in the power running game, running gap schemes and I think ultimately that opens up your passing game, play-action passes ... and get free access outside on the perimeter and find ways to get Reggie Wayne the ball. I want to be flexible schematically and make sure that we find ways to get the ball into our dynamic playmakers' hands."

    This could, potentially, reduce the amount of deep-ball chances that Luck takes in 2013, which could result in a higher completion percentage and fewer interceptions. King notes, for example, that Luck was a 71 percent passer at Stanford in 2011, a figure that dropped to 54.1 percent with Indy in 2012. In addition, there could be a lot more work for TEs Dwayne Allen and Coby Fleener, as Hamilton's offense has greatly involved the TEs as receivers in recent seasons (in 2012, two of the top three receivers by yardage were TEs).
    From this I would say that targeting the O-line heavy in the draft and in FA is a definite, also I wonder how this affects us having TY Hilton, he is more of a deep threat and if he does not increase his route running skills as well as pass catching he will not have the best time next season, maybe we can trade him for a guy like Rueben Randle, we will defiantly need more possession WR's seeing that right now all we have is Wayne and Allen who are really possession guys.
    Why so SERIOUS

  • #2
    Re: Peps plan for the offense

    Originally posted by Really? View Post
    Hi,

    This is a article that was posted on ESPN, I thought it was kind of interesting what the new OC has planned for us in the coming year.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/nfl/rumors/post?id=475



    From this I would say that targeting the O-line heavy in the draft and in FA is a definite, also I wonder how this affects us having TY Hilton, he is more of a deep threat and if he does not increase his route running skills as well as pass catching he will not have the best time next season, maybe we can trade him for a guy like Rueben Randle, we will defiantly need more possession WR's seeing that right now all we have is Wayne and Allen who are really possession guys.
    I wonder who will be the full back in the new offense? I could see Allen getting some h back duties but we need him at the TE position in a two TE set.

    Hilton will be fine IMO. He has a strong work ethic and I could see him adjust his game to fit the offensive system.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Peps plan for the offense

      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
      I wonder who will be the full back in the new offense? I could see Allen getting some h back duties but we need him at the TE position in a two TE set.

      Hilton will be fine IMO. He has a strong work ethic and I could see him adjust his game to fit the offensive system.
      Not sure, but he better be able to run the Y-banana... lol

      Also, I think he could, but might not be as efficient, as in the last season, my thinking would be get guys who fit your system, possession WRs are typically bigger, taller, and can take hits across the middle, but hey I guess Wes Welker has been successful doing it so I guess we will see, but he has really good route running and knows how to find holes in coverage as well.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Peps plan for the offense

        Originally posted by Really? View Post
        Not sure, but he better be able to run the Y-banana... lol

        Also, I think he could, but might not be as efficient, as in the last season, my thinking would be get guys who fit your system, possession WRs are typically bigger, taller, and can take hits across the middle, but hey I guess Wes Welker has been successful doing it so I guess we will see, but he has really good route running and knows how to find holes in coverage as well.

        They are still going to take shots down the field so I see Hilton as the play action deep man. Bowe is probably the only worth while guy as far as possesion recievers go in FA's.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Peps plan for the offense

          Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
          They are still going to take shots down the field so I see Hilton as the play action deep man. Bowe is probably the only worth while guy as far as possesion recievers go in FA's.
          Yeah, I think that makes Hilton more of a 3rd WR in the system then, I was hoping he could be a #2, but I guess I can not count him out until after the offseason. As far as top guys, yeah Bowe would be the only one I would take a chance on, another guy that I would be interested in bringing in would be Ramses Barden, I think he has some upside, and really has not had a chance to break into such a deep rotation.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Really? View Post
            Hi,

            This is a article that was posted on ESPN, I thought it was kind of interesting what the new OC has planned for us in the coming year.

            http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/nfl/rumors/post?id=475



            From this I would say that targeting the O-line heavy in the draft and in FA is a definite, also I wonder how this affects us having TY Hilton, he is more of a deep threat and if he does not increase his route running skills as well as pass catching he will not have the best time next season, maybe we can trade him for a guy like Rueben Randle, we will defiantly need more possession WR's seeing that right now all we have is Wayne and Allen who are really possession guys.
            Hilton can still be a good yards after the catch guy

            Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Peps plan for the offense

              Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
              Hilton can still be a good yards after the catch guy

              Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2
              He will be used a lot in the bubble screens and short slants. What I don't want to see is a a lot of Whalen next year.

              As for full backs it looks like Jerome Felton is the best free agent available.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Peps plan for the offense

                I just hope Pep doesn't reign in Luck too much. I like cutting down the down-field throw yardage a bit, but I still think Luck can be an absolute beast in the 15-30 yard range if he has time to throw the ball.
                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: Peps plan for the offense

                  Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                  I just hope Pep doesn't reign in Luck too much. I like cutting down the down-field throw yardage a bit, but I still think Luck can be an absolute beast in the 15-30 yard range if he has time to throw the ball.
                  Yes, if he has time to throw the ball and practices working with the receivers on the timing/routes, then I think he can be a beast down field as he gets more experience.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Peps plan for the offense

                    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                    I just hope Pep doesn't reign in Luck too much. I like cutting down the down-field throw yardage a bit, but I still think Luck can be an absolute beast in the 15-30 yard range if he has time to throw the ball.
                    It goes both ways. For his overall progression I would like him to sustain drives and have a beefed up running game to wear opposing teams down. I think everyone feels comfortable that when it comes time to have a game winning drive luck is capable of running that no huddle to perfection.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Peps plan for the offense

                      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                      He will be used a lot in the bubble screens and short slants. What I don't want to see is a a lot of Whalen next year.

                      As for full backs it looks like Jerome Felton is the best free agent available.
                      Not as worried about FB though, we could get a guy who is not too bad at blocking, but also can catch out of the backfield, I would not be surprised if we just got a UDFA.
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Peps plan for the offense

                        I am just looking forward to Luck running a little No-Huddle, I also think that he should have time to complete some of the short passes, often the longer ones were what caused trouble. Luck waited and waited for routes to develop and guys to get separation, but often times that took a while, which combined with an iffy lines at times, caused him to get hit more often.
                        Why so SERIOUS

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Peps plan for the offense

                          Originally posted by Really? View Post
                          Not as worried about FB though, we could get a guy who is not too bad at blocking, but also can catch out of the backfield, I would not be surprised if we just got a UDFA.
                          It sounds like Pep is going to go to a more power running game and that requires a hard nosed guy who can also catch which is not easy to find. I certainly don't want a UDFA blocking or trying to catch a pass on a third and short from Luck. I haven't seen a ton of Jackie Battle but I know he is phenomonal athlete. IN his proday he ran a 4.42 and had a 41 inch vertical.

                          Leach and Kuhn our household names because they make plays. I want Luck to have the same luxury and what worries me is that the Colts don't have a running back that has reliable hands.

                          A smart guy with a hard nose and soft hands are hard to come by in the NFL and if he is going to be a part of the staple of the offense then I want the best and smartest guy on the field.

                          Thats one of the reasons I bring up Jerome Felton. He would give Andrew Luck a run for his money in the smarts departement. As a 7th grader he took the ACT and got accepted into college. I don't think he would miss a blitz pickup and he was a big reason AP had the best season of his career.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Peps plan for the offense

                            Why did the Colts let him go?
                            Never forget

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Peps plan for the offense

                              Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                              Why did the Colts let him go?
                              My assumption here is that we didn't run a base offense with a fullback anymore. Certainly Grigson adjusted to what BA wanted and a fullback is only used in goal line situations IIRC. Combine that with veteran pay minimal vs a guy like Hughes and I think its a combination of special team play and salary cap. This is why I think we traded our only FB to the Broncos last year. We simply didn't run an offense that utilized one very often unlike what we will be running in 2013. Certainly Vaughn was used much more on defense than a fullback under BA.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X