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

2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

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

  • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

    You guys are bad at Twitter.

    Anyway, Bjoren Werner retired. Says his knees are shot. Tend to believe him given the timing. if it was July it'd be a convenient excuse but there's a full offseason to go if he wanted to keep going and wait by the phone.

    Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

      It appears Pags is still the coach of the Indianapolis Colts.

      Comment


      • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
        You guys are bad at Twitter.

        Anyway, Bjoren Werner retired. Says his knees are shot. Tend to believe him given the timing. if it was July it'd be a convenient excuse but there's a full offseason to go if he wanted to keep going and wait by the phone.

        Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
        Well, it could be true werner's knees are shot however, even if they weren't, i doubt it would make any diff. He just wasn't an nfl caliber player.

        Comment


        • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

          If you are wondering who wrote this the guy's name is Jim Osbourne apparently he was a former Colts Bloger. Take with a grain of salt. Interesting read not sure how legit it is(the part of Irsay wanting to be Mr. Horseshoe I do buy).

          https://bluehqmedia.com/2017/01/17/b...-scenes-story/

          BREAKING: The Real Behind the Scenes Story
          I’m going to tell you a story. No, scratch that; I’m going to tell you the truth. Now in this instance, the truth is based upon news from my source, and only a handful of people can confirm any of this. Brace yourself…they won’t, and I won’t ask them to.

          Yes, I know exactly what you’re thinking. Who even are you? What do you know from anything, and whom exactly is this “source” of yours? Why do you carry any credibility, beyond that you’re just looking for attention?

          To be fair, all of those questions are perfectly legitimate. I would have the exact same questions if I was in your shoes. I’m just an average guy with exceptionally little hair. However, I’m a guy who was flat-out lucky to be in the right place at the right time, when approached by someone who started to share information. Information that has proven to be absolutely correct.
          Of course, I will not identify my source. Will anybody identify their sources? No, they won’t. The reason I won’t identify mine is because livelihoods are at stake. Not mine, mind you. I’m not paid to share things with you.
          Why do I carry any credibility? That’s not something I can answer, nor will I attempt to influence you in any way. You are welcome to read my other articles recently posted, and see what came to pass. I welcome you to head to Twitter and read my timeline. I haven’t run with much on Twitter, however when I have, it oddly turns out to be accurate.

          There is one simple reason I’m going to share this with you, and I only ask for one thing in return. I’m sharing it with you because I want you to know the truth. I’ve seen all the national and local PR angles on this. I’ve seen the swell of gratitude toward Jim Irsay for “trying” to improve his franchise.
          I want you to know what happened behind the scenes the last several weeks. I want you to have the information at your disposal, and then you can decide to believe it, not believe, or to print this and use it as lining for a litterbox or birdcage.

          What do I want in return? I want you to be mentally flexible. I want you to read this and think. Really think. I want you to have the information and be in a position to make informed decisions, because in one way or another, you are a paying Colts customer.

          NFL: Indianapolis Colts-Press Conference
          Mar 7, 2012; Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning (left) speaks during a press conference as owner Jim Irsay looks on during a press conference to announce Manning’s release from the team at Indiana Farm Bureau Football Center. Mandatory Credit: Brian Spurlock-USA TODAY Sports
          Peyton Manning and Jon Gruden potentially taking roles with the Colts has been reported, or rumored, for a few weeks now, depending on where you choose to find information. The Peyton Manning executive role idea was born back in November, as the 2006 Super Bowl championship team reunited to celebrate at a home game.

          Manning and Jim Irsay began to informally float and discuss the possibility. Irsay surely was unhappy with his team and sought improvement. It sat in that state for the next several weeks.
          Then came the loss in Oakland on Christmas Eve, finally ending the Colts slim playoff hopes. Yes, cosmetically they made it look much closer than it was, however the Colts were dominated until Derek Carr was knocked out of the game with a broken leg. Following this loss, Irsay was beside himself.
          The way in which they lost, being battered for five straight touchdown drives and looking about as inept as possible, finally got to Jim Irsay. It got to him so much so that many of his senior executives spent the next several days at Irsay’s house. Yes, over the holidays. From the time the executives returned to Indianapolis on Christmas Eve, save for a very brief break or two, there was a sequestering. What exactly happened during that time is known only is small circles. However, an invited guest to Irsay’s home at some point during that time was Peyton Manning.
          Why his home? Quite simply, the helipad made it very easy for high-profile individuals to come and go without the attention it would garner at West 56th Street; high-profile people such as Manning. It is not confirmed if Gruden actually was an attendee, however the idea of his candidacy was known and discussed.

          Thereafter, the Colts finished their season with a not-so-rousing last-second win over the terrible Jacksonville Jaguars. The same Jaguars who beat the Colts in London, and at that time “convinced” Irsay that he had to make changes. Media camped out at the Colts facility for Black Monday and was treated to an uncomfortable and generally awkward Chuck Pagano diatribe.
          Between now and then, many things have been reported. Irsay’s plane being tracked to Houston following the Wild Card game, which happened to be broadcasted by Jon Gruden. Irsay, Manning and Gruden meeting together during that time.

          img_0022
          Espn.com
          The resulting storyline is that Jim Irsay made a “serious run” at Peyton Manning, and he sure tried to land Jon Gruden. Gruden declined, however Irsay remains hopeful of working things out with Manning. That is the PR feel good story that the Colts are floating, anyway.

          Yes, those are the end results. The reasons as to why that happened are not public information, and the Colts don’t want that to be public. That would cast some shade on the PR story that they’re trying to get out in front of people.

          Back to the pursuit. Two members of the Colts executive staff were called back early from their vacations last Wednesday night. They were to return to Indianapolis by Thursday, which led to speculation that it was to review and potentially finalize deals for Manning and/or Gruden.
          That’s true, in part. A main reason for that executive recall was to run models on franchise valuation under various scenarios. Those models would be the basis of the equity “negotiations” with Peyton Manning.

          The Peyton Manning deal died on the table, reportedly last Friday the 13th. I am by no means a financier and will note this in as simple of terms as I can. Irsay and his daughters could not come to an agreement that met Manning’s desires to convey equity. Manning wanted a small piece of ownership upfront in lieu of a sign on bonus, and then wanted what are called “warrants,” or an option to buy an additional minority stake down the road at a price tied to current value. Based on experience in mergers and acquisitions and creative finance, my source confirms that this is a very fair structure.
          However, the Irsays wanted Manning to buy in upfront, at least in part, based upon a fairly inflated future forecasted value. A value which Peyton himself would be largely responsible for creating. Further, they wanted him to buy more equity later on, once again at an additional premium.

          In other words, Irsay wants Peyton Manning as a partner, but only on his terms. Let’s say that I own a company and I want you to join as my partner. However, I’m not letting you buy in at current value or giving you a tiny piece of equity upfront. I want you to buy into my company, right now, at a much higher price than current value. A price that I’m demanding based on anticipated future company performance; performance that you would be largely responsible for creating and delivering.

          But wait, there’s more! Instead of letting you buy in at current value down the road, after you helped drive my profits even higher, I want you to buy more ownership stake based on an additional premium. Sounds great, no?
          No shrewd businessperson is taking that deal. Under those terms, the Irsays reap all of the upside of Manning’s efforts. Not surprisingly, Peyton said no, and the deal died. Sure, Jim Irsay is “still hopeful” of something coming together. Man, he made a serious run, didn’t he? Barring a miracle, like the Irsays making Manning a reasonable equity offer, Jim can hope all he wants. It’s not going to happen.

          Now, this is where it gets even worse. Had the deal for Peyton Manning been successful, Manning would have unceremoniously offloaded Ryan Grigson. That’s right; Manning would have been allowed to fire Grigson. It didn’t come to pass.

          This does not mean that the Gruden deal was tied to Manning. In fact, Irsay still could have secured Jon Gruden. All he had to do was part ways with Ryan Grigson. It has leaked that Gruden wanted total control, which is a bit of a misnomer. Gruden simply wanted Irsay to secure his own approved GM. Irsay declined, choosing to stick with Grigson.
          Let that sink in for a minute. If the Peyton Manning deal was successful, it was fine to dump Ryan Grigson, hire Gruden as coach and get to the business of turning around the Colts.

          Instead, the Irsay family pinched their pennies and tried to squeeze Manning into a deal he wasn’t comfortable accepting. This will prove to be even more ridiculous because some other franchise will ultimately give Manning his deal, namely Cleveland or Tennessee, and I fully believe that he will have great success.

          Even after the Manning failure, Jim Irsay still had Jon Gruden; however, Irsay wouldn’t trust his end personnel judgment on his own, without Peyton Manning. It was full-speed ahead with Gruden combined with Peyton Manning; it just wasn’t going to fly with “only” Gruden and a GM he would have chosen.

          Now I know what you’re thinking. This is too far-fetched! There is no way Jim Irsay would try to railroad Peyton Manning and let Jon Gruden walk. It is mind-numbing, to be sure. I expect you to believe that firing Ryan Grigson was perfectly fine with Peyton Manning on board, but it wasn’t ok with Gruden alone?

          Yep. That’s exactly what I’m telling you. Jim Irsay clearly doesn’t trust Gruden’s personnel ability, and simply wasn’t willing to source another GM if it wasn’t Manning. Jim Irsay literally passed on Jon Gruden and another GM in favor of Ryan Grigson and, most likely, Chuck Pagano.

          Wait a minute. Irsay still hasn’t said that Pagano is safe! No, he hasn’t. He hasn’t said anything publicly since Black Monday. I also know that there are rumors that Chuck Pagano will be fired, and Irsay continues to search for replacements.

          Two problems with this. First, if Pagano was gone, and Irsay was as displeased with him as we all want to believe, he could have already been fired at any point in time. He hasn’t been. Second, I know that nobody in their right mind wants to believe that the franchise is that big of a cluster. It just can’t be, can it?

          Yes, it absolutely is that big of a cluster. Irsay can’t be stubborn enough to come back with Grigson and Pagano and pretend that none of this happened, can he? Yes, he absolutely can.
          It makes less than zero sense, I know. Here’s the thing about Jim Irsay: right or epically wrong, once he sets his mind to a course of action, he doesn’t change.
          I can’t say with 100 percent certainty that Chuck Pagano won’t be fired. After all of this fallout, maybe Jim Irsay sacrifices Pagano to try and save some face. Yeah, maybe he does. That doesn’t cure the problem.

          Ryan Grigson isn’t going anywhere, folks. Irsay’s unexplainable loyalty to Grigson does have an upper limit: Peyton Manning could have fired him. Jon Gruden? Absolutely not. If only Irsay was serious about offering Manning a fair deal.
          I can’t pretend to know why exactly Ryan Grigson has ingratiated himself so dearly to the Irsay daughters and Jim. My source has attempted to get that very answer, and in the end, it seems to be insanely simple. It seems that Jim Irsay sees Ryan Grigson as the son he never had. He always desperately wanted a son that played football that he could pass along the family business to, however had three daughters.
          That is an insane reason to cloud your business judgment to the point that you ignore horrible job performance. Again, the franchise is a cluster under the Irsays.
          I’m going to shoot you straight. Well, not that I’ve been sparing details anyway. Here is the ultimate truth: Peyton Manning isn’t coming. You really want to know why? Jim Irsay’s ego can’t tolerate bringing Manning in as a partner. Jim is Mr. Horseshoe, and not Peyton Manning, Bill Polian or Unitas himself is going to change that.

          How can I say that? He had Peyton Manning at the table, requesting a very fair equity model, and balked. Not only did he balk, they tried to force Manning into a completely ridiculous deal. Now Irsay is falling back on the “serious run” PR angle, and what’s worse, I already see people buying it on Twitter.
          Jim Irsay went into this without a net. He set his sights on Peyton Manning and Jon Gruden, and had them both at the table. However, when it finally came down to closing, Irsay wouldn’t make the extremely reasonable accommodations to secure either man.

          There you go. There is the truth that you will not see printed anywhere else. You won’t see it confirmed by anyone, either. After all, that makes the franchise look even worse, no?

          Now I know, you still find it hard to believe I’m doing this for absolutely no gain. Maybe I get a few new Twitter followers out of the deal? Maybe people think I’m nuts and unfollow or block me? I am more than comfortable with any of that. It’s not as if Twitter gets me anything.

          I also know that some people just refuse to believe anything that isn’t confirmed by an Adam Schefter or even a Bob Kravitz. That’s fine by me. From the start I told you I’m not trying to convince anyone. Both men owe their livelihoods to their profession, and do great jobs. They also both can lose sources at any time.

          In the end, Ryan Grigson is here to stay. Whether they replace Chuck Pagano or not, you have Ryan Grigson instead of Peyton Manning and/or Jon Gruden. I don’t need to convince you of anything. That fact alone should tell you all you need to know about the Colts franchise.

          Comment


          • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

            Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
            It appears Pags is still the coach of the Indianapolis Colts.
            Sounds just like last season but with more drama this time around.

            Comment


            • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

              Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
              As the Horseshoe Turns.... (Not sure how reliable this is)





              T(he)y promised to delete the account tonight if nothing happened, and that account is gone...
              Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
              I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

              Comment


              • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                Originally posted by Natston View Post
                T(he)y promised to delete the account tonight if nothing happened, and that account is gone...
                Even better, a parody account...

                https://mobile.twitter.com/letknockemdown
                Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

                Comment


                • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                  Let me play Devil's advocate here. Let's assume this guy's facts are mostly correct, but some things have been spun or misunderstood along the way. For one thing, why wouldn't Irsay try and get the best deal possible in bringing Manning back into the fold? The key would simply be not making any offer, or any counter-offer insulting, and then working to close the gap. It doesn't necessarily sound like the door has been shut, only that the offer on the table has been declined. In fact, if the door had been slammed shut then I would expect and assume Irsay would change directions and we'd start hearing from him in some form.

                  And with that in mind, why would Irsay let Gruden hire a GM when he (Irsay) is still trying to get Manning and find a deal that works for both of them? You can't fill the slot you see Manning taking until you're ready to give up on Manning. And maybe Irsay still has angles to probe in making counteroffers to Manning?

                  So my guess is the silence is still Irsay trying to find an acceptable deal to reel in Manning, and then the other pieces of the puzzle can fall into place (Manning can fire or reassign Grigson. Manning can interview Pagano and keep or fire him. Irsay can finally have a solid picture to present to Gruden (if Manning is in agreement with Gruden should Manning take the football operations position).

                  So we're not getting anything until Irsay is sure the Manning deal is dead and he has no other angle to offer, or he has Manning signed. That's my guess... make that big GUESS... as to what is currently going on.

                  If this has really been going on since November then it's not something that's going to die quickly after one offer.
                  Last edited by Bball; 01-17-2017, 07:41 PM.
                  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


                  • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                    What gets me is that its okay for Manning to fire Grigson but he's too gutless to do it himself (supposedly) What logic is that?

                    I have no doubt Irsay thinks he can bring Manning in but its disturbing to think he feels that's his only option or Gruden for that matter but will remain status quo despite not thinking much of Grigano's abilities.

                    You don't need a "big name" just one that actually fits. Sometimes you can find a hidden gem out there.

                    I just don't see anyone of merit wanting to be around if Grigson is going to be there too.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                      Interesting read, but probly just ********.
                      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: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                        Pretty much set in stone that Grigano/Pagrigson is returning next season. Yuck.

                        Wonder what RB or WR Grigson will draft in the first round. Heard it's a deep class for both positions.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          Let me play Devil's advocate here. Let's assume this guy's facts are mostly correct, but some things have been spun or misunderstood along the way. For one thing, why wouldn't Irsay try and get the best deal possible in bringing Manning back into the fold? The key would simply be not making any offer, or any counter-offer insulting, and then working to close the gap. It doesn't necessarily sound like the door has been shut, only that the offer on the table has been declined. In fact, if the door had been slammed shut then I would expect and assume Irsay would change directions and we'd start hearing from him in some form.

                          And with that in mind, why would Irsay let Gruden hire a GM when he (Irsay) is still trying to get Manning and find a deal that works for both of them? You can't fill the slot you see Manning taking until you're ready to give up on Manning. And maybe Irsay still has angles to probe in making counteroffers to Manning?

                          So my guess is the silence is still Irsay trying to find an acceptable deal to reel in Manning, and then the other pieces of the puzzle can fall into place (Manning can fire or reassign Grigson. Manning can interview Pagano and keep or fire him. Irsay can finally have a solid picture to present to Gruden (if Manning is in agreement with Gruden should Manning take the football operations position).

                          So we're not getting anything until Irsay is sure the Manning deal is dead and he has no other angle to offer, or he has Manning signed. That's my guess... make that big GUESS... as to what is currently going on.

                          If this has really been going on since November then it's not something that's going to die quickly after one offer.
                          For what it's worth, I 100% buy that person's story. I've been that person before...someone just incredibly lucky and in the right place at the right time to receive inside info.

                          It's interesting to get a small peak at the details. Peyton Manning wanted what a lot of CEOs/high-level executives get at large companies: stock (ie ownership) options at current value.

                          I'm also with Bball on this, and this is where I think the author of the story might be wrong. I don't believe a deal is dead, or at least, I think Irsay is holding onto hope that Manning will change his mind.

                          Let's hope Irsay can come up with a reasonable counter that would make both parties happy. I'm glad to hear that he's open to the equity idea.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                            If we can get Manning in the fold, then Manning can do the dirty work of telling Grigson to clean out his office. It's first on the list in the 100 day plan.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!

                              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                              For what it's worth, I 100% buy that person's story. I've been that person before...someone just incredibly lucky and in the right place at the right time to receive inside info.

                              It's interesting to get a small peak at the details. Peyton Manning wanted what a lot of CEOs/high-level executives get at large companies: stock (ie ownership) options at current value.

                              I'm also with Bball on this, and this is where I think the author of the story might be wrong. I don't believe a deal is dead, or at least, I think Irsay is holding onto hope that Manning will change his mind.

                              Let's hope Irsay can come up with a reasonable counter that would make both parties happy. I'm glad to hear that he's open to the equity idea.
                              That's probably on how this deal is dead assuming any of this is true it doesn't sound like Irsay was going to change his mind about the equity thing (and he's within his rights to do so after all he has three daughters who are going to inherit this when he's gone) what could change on that front? But I'm sure he thinks he can wear Manning down regardless of that...

                              Amp Harris was on JMV earlier today and doesn't think it will ever happen because Manning is more interested in ownership than the GM part and that Irsay will never really want anyone to be part owner because if he couldn't deal with the Polians how would he be able to handle Manning? There may be truth to that.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2016 Indianapolis Colts regular season thread - Here comes the pain!


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X