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

Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

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

  • Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

    Call it the Curse of Schottenheimer

    By Billy Witz

    Way back when on Sunday, just as the Colts were preparing to spiral down that old familiar Foxboro rabbit hole, coach Tony Dungy made a decision.

    Here it was, early in the second half, and the Colts had been outplayed decisively and already wore their not-this-again looks.

    Yet as unfortunately as events had unfolded, they still had plenty of good fortune. Thanks to Patriots tackle Matt Light jumping offside, which cost his team a touchdown, and safety Eugene Wilson dropping a sure interception in the end zone just before halftime, the Colts trailed just 6-3.

    And here they were, after Peyton Manning completed a third-down pass to Brandon Stokley, sitting at fourth-and-a-short-1 at the Patriots' 49-yard line with 9:54 left in the third quarter.

    It was their first opportunity to seize momentum, if not control, from New England, and give themselves and everyone else in the stadium an idea that this time might be different.

    Even Manning, who was slump-shouldered most of the day, perked up. As he eyeballed the short yard the Colts had to make, he motioned to the sideline that he wanted to stay on the field.

    True, if the Colts go for it and don't make it, the Patriots have just half the field to cover. On the flip side, if the Colts convert, they have an opportunity not only to tie the score or take the lead, but to change the tenor of the game.

    What Dungy's decision boiled down to was this: Do you trust the most prolific offense in the NFL to gain 1 yard on one play, or do you believe your defense, which was 29th in the league in yards allowed, can keep New England pinned in its own end?

    In other words, where do you place your faith?

    It's the same question that Jets coach Herman Edwards faced Saturday after kicker Doug Brien missed by inches a 47-yard field goal that would have sent New York to the AFC title game.

    The Jets, by their own good fortune, had another crack with a first down at the Pittsburgh 25 and 56 seconds left. They ran Curtis Martin over left guard for no gain, LaMont Jordan over left guard for 2 yards, then had Chad Pennington kneel down to run off a few seconds for a loss of 1.

    This left Brien with a 43-yard field goal.

    Or precisely 3 yards more than Nate Kaeding was left the week before, when Chargers coach Marty Schottenheimer ran LaDainian Tomlinson into the line three times for no gain.

    The result for Brien was the same as it was for Kaeding, which was the same as it was for the Colts, who punted and then watched New England drive 87 yards on 14 plays in eight-plus minutes for a touchdown.

    They all kissed their seasons goodbye.

    These decisions were made nine days apart, in three different cities, by three different coaches -- and the lipstick marks are all the same.

    Call it the Spawn of Schottenheimer.

    Schottenheimer may be the reigning NFL Coach of the Year, and he has won more games than any other active coach, yet when the playoffs roll around, any instinct to go for the jugular or simply give his players the freedom to make plays is suppressed with Dr. Strangelove-like resolve.

    Perhaps it dates to 1980, when Schottenheimer, then an assistant with the Browns, watched as Cleveland quarterback Brian Sipe, his team well in field-goal range in the final seconds, threw an interception in the end zone to Oakland's Mike Davis, sealing a 14-12 playoff loss.

    It was the first playoff game of Schottenheimer's 28-year NFL coaching career, and whether it scarred him or simply served as a harbinger of other painful playoff losses, this much seems clear: It's contagious.

    It's no coincidence that Edwards' first six seasons in coaching came under Schottenheimer in Kansas City. Or that Dungy spent three years on that same staff. Or that Jets offensive coordinator Paul Hackett coached under Schottenheimer with the Chiefs and with him in Cleveland.

    What is telling is that when in came down to it, Schottenheimer and Dungy -- who had two of the three highest scoring offenses in the league -- couldn't betray their nature as defensive coaches and let their playmakers make a play.

    Neither could Edwards, despite the fact that Pennington has never thrown an interception in the red zone his entire career .

    All three coaches have proven themselves consistent winners because their teams play hard, are fundamentally sound and rarely beat themselves. If you do these things consistently, playing it safe is a fine strategy over the long haul.

    It's also hard to get to a Super Bowl that way, let alone win one. When there's so little separating the best teams -- and there's never been less in the NFL -- the ones who win playoff games can't be the ones who are afraid to lose them. And don't think players don't feed off that vibe.

    This may not be good news in Pittsburgh, where under Bill Cowher the Steelers have played host to the AFC Championship Game four times and won just once.

    Whether he was scarred, or whether it was simply a harbinger, it may be worth noting that 19 years ago, Cowher got his first job in coaching. Under a young, hard-nosed, defense-first coach. In Cleveland. A fellow named Schottenheimer.

    Billy Witz covers the NFL for the Daily News. He can be reached at (818) 713-3621 or billy.witz@dailynews.com

    http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1...659228,00.html
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  • #2
    Re: Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

    You know, when that decision was made by Dungy, I honestly did not give it much thought. Normally I'd have been all over Coach Dungy for making such a questionable move, but I think my brain was in shock from the previous 2 hours of mediocrity and I didn't realize what had happened until well after the game. Perhaps the coaching staff was undergoing the same state of stupor. I now feel dirty for admitting any similarities with that group.

    It was a key moment in the game, and the team should have gone for it. If you're going to let Peyton go for it on 4th and 6 from your own 25 against the Chargers, you sure as hell must let your team go for it on 4th and 1 at midfield in the playoffs.

    I'll admit I'm quite pissed at the entire Colts organization right now, especially Polian and the coaches. I think they threw an entire year away and simply shook their head stupidly while doing it. I want some results or they must go. I'm tired of the "awww shucks" attitude.
    Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

      Well, if we actually had a defense you could count on consistently and were a normal football team with a normal balance then the odds say kick it away and play field position.

      But we're not. We're a team made to overwhelm and outscore you... not stop you. We only try to slow you down and let you stop yourself with a TO, bad play, or occassional big play on our end. Who didn't think the Pats would be back at the 50 yrd line on their next drive? We needed to steal the momentum back and had little to lose with the way the game was going. We were lucky that they had their one TD called back. How many bullets could we dodge?

      It also goes back to last year. The Pats went for it on 4th down in a similar situation and made it. It was even less of a place to be going for it actually... and it showed a total lack of respect for the Colt defense. And it worked brilliantly for them.

      I agree with the tone of the article posted and I even more agree with it when you are a team built like the Colts are. We cannot play grind it out football and continue to put that defense on the field and expect them to get stop after stop.

      I'm not convinced that a football team built on the offensive onslaught theory is going to win January football (without a much better defense) but if that is the path you've chosen then that is the path the coaching staff needs to follow.

      -Bball
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

        I know only a small percentage of what you guys do about the game, but I was simply amazed and told my gf that at that specific moment the Colts lost the game, just a second after I saw Peyton walking of the field.

        Not only do I think it is a capital blunder by the coaching staff, it also shows that you do not believe in what you are doing, have no faith in that same offense that is out there and the same MVP QB that is handling the ball for you.

        Was there anyone really amazed that that precise moment was the deadknoll of the game?

        Any confidence the offense had picked up at that moment was killed by the coaching staff and never surfaced again during the game.

        It reverberates; not only if successfull you go ahead, and they have to come from behind, but your defense gains momentum as well since it is a difference whether you are defending a lead or trying to get back into a game from behind, not to mention they would have had more minutes to rest.

        But then again, hindsight etc........
        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

          Originally posted by obnoxiousmodesty
          You know, when that decision was made by Dungy, I honestly did not give it much thought. Normally I'd have been all over Coach Dungy for making such a questionable move, but I think my brain was in shock from the previous 2 hours of mediocrity and I didn't realize what had happened until well after the game. Perhaps the coaching staff was undergoing the same state of stupor. I now feel dirty for admitting any similarities with that group.

          It was a key moment in the game, and the team should have gone for it. If you're going to let Peyton go for it on 4th and 6 from your own 25 against the Chargers, you sure as hell must let your team go for it on 4th and 1 at midfield in the playoffs.

          I'll admit I'm quite pissed at the entire Colts organization right now, especially Polian and the coaches. I think they threw an entire year away and simply shook their head stupidly while doing it. I want some results or they must go. I'm tired of the "awww shucks" attitude.
          I agree I am pretty pissed at them also. They gave that game to the Pats. I'm sick of getting our asses beat by the Patriots every year. Its getting old, and it better stop.
          Super Bowl XLI Champions
          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who Cursed the Colts? Btown should enjoy this...

            I was furious when he made that decision.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment

            Working...
            X