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

NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns

    THE WINNERS
    Vernon Davis, TE, Maryland – Davis produced the jaw-dropper moment of the combine, running a 4.38 in the 40-yard dash – a ridiculous feat for a guy who checked in at 6-foot-3 3/4 and 254 pounds. In terms of sheer shock, it rivaled Matt Jones' 4.38 time in the 40 last year. According to some scouts, Davis' physique was the most impressive, too. Davis did well in pass-receiving drills and actually looked dominant at times in pass-blocking drills. His 42-inch vertical jump amazed, and he won the broad jump for his position (10-8) by almost 10 inches over the next best effort. Davis likely pushed himself into the draft's top eight selections.

    Manny Lawson, DE, North Carolina State – He's been overshadowed by Mario Williams, but he could be a spectacular 3-4 outside linebacker in the NFL. Lawson, who may have moved himself into late first-round consideration, will have to make that move with his current size (6-5, 241). He played some linebacker as a freshman and sophomore for the Wolfpack, but after seeing his performance in Indy, Lawson might be a star in the making. He ran 4.43 seconds in the 40, had a vertical of 39½ and had great times in the shuttle and cone drills. Remember Lawson's name.

    Ohio State and USC – While not all of their best players worked out, the Buckeyes and Trojans practically owned the combine with 26 total invitees (14 for USC and 12 for Ohio State). Most of those who did participate in drills were very impressive and also seemed to have scored high marks in team interviews. When it's all said and done, there could be as many as 10 first-round picks from these two schools.

    Jay Cutler, QB, Vanderbilt – He had the potential to have a big week and really delivered. Cutler's passing drills weren't flawless, but they were very good. He showed he could make any pass asked of him and had the best arm. He finished second overall in ball speed (60 miles per hour), ran a 4.77-second 40 and then showed his competitive nature by volunteering for the weight lifting portion and putting up a very impressive 23 reps. With USC's Matt Leinart and Texas' Vince Young taking voluntary passes on workouts, Cutler walked out of the combine having delivered a great argument why he should be the draft's No. 1 quarterback.

    Chad Jackson, WR, Florida – Jackson had to come in and run fast if he wanted to challenge for the draft's top receiver spot. He posted the fastest 40 time of the week (4.32) and had a good round of drills as well. It helps that Ohio State's Santonio Holmes skipped the workouts, giving Jackson the stage. It remains to be seen if he has supplanted Holmes as the No. 1 wideout, but the door is now wide open.

    San Francisco 49ers – The 49ers won the coin toss with Oakland to determine the owner of the sixth overall selection. They should be in position to take the guy they covet – Ohio State linebacker A.J. Hawk.

    Teams with top-10 picks – Unlike last year, there is a wealth of "elite" players at the top of this draft. It's also a very diverse group of both defensive and offensive players. There is at least one dominant player from almost everywhere on the field – quarterback, defensive line, offensive line, linebacker, tight end and the secondary. There is a lot of help waiting for needy NFL teams.

    Second-tier quarterbacks – With Clemson's Charlie Whitehurst deciding to throw (and looking very sharp), there now appears to be three second-tier quarterbacks who could be very worthwhile projects. Along with Whitehurst, Alabama's Brodie Croyle and Bowling Green's Omar Jacobs looked like guys who have the skills to be quality investments in Rounds 2, 3 and 4.

    Tight ends – Davis wasn't the only impressive tight end. Personnel people say this is the best tight end class they have seen in several years, and as many as three could be drafted in the first round: Maryland's Davis, Georgia's Leonard Pope and USC's Dominique Byrd.

    Offensive linemen – There is always one position that stands out as having the combine's best group of characters. This year, it was the offensive line. Virginia's D'Brickashaw Ferguson and Auburn's Marcus McNeill were two of the best interviews, while several others had media members buzzing with their charisma.

    Tamba Hali, DE, Penn State – His escape from war-torn Liberia and struggle to get his mother out of that country captivated everyone when he interviewed with the media. But it didn't end there. Several personnel people said they walked out of their individual talks with Hali simply amazed.

    Broderick Bunkley, DT, Florida State – Bunkley's physique had a lot of coaches buzzing about the athletic-looking tackle. Then he pumped out 44 reps at 225 pounds and ran a 4.95 in the 40. In a relatively weak defensive tackle class, he secured himself in the first round.

    NFL Network – The network was a winner for the second straight year, even though the festivities lacked the Maurice Clarett drama. While 26 hours of live coverage seemed excessive, it actually came off well. The analysts, player interviews and news updates kept the shows from being too bland, and the on-field cameras during drills gave fans a chance to hear what the coaches were teaching. One suggestion for next year, though: a handful of Hollywood-style feature stories – like those on typical pregame shows during the regular season. They would definitely add to the entertainment value.

    Running backs – This looks like a deeper position than originally thought with the quality times posted by LSU's Joseph Addai, UCLA's Maurice Drew and several others. Addai (4.4 seconds in the 40) may sneak into the first round, but if he ends up in the second round, someone may have found a steal. Drew (4.39) – who has the most muscular lower body of all the running backs – could be another one who surprises. More than likely, we'll see another productive NFL running back plucked after the first round.

    THE LOSERS
    Vince Young and Major Adams – Hardly anything positive came out of this week for Young, who skipped workouts and then had a plethora of personnel people question his ability to fit in a conventional offense. But the real blow came when his Wonderlic test issues got leaked out. Not only did almost 48 hours pass before Adams (Young's agent) started damage control, but it highlighted what has seemed to be utter mismanagement of one of the draft's elite players. No matter what Young's score is revealed to be, he clearly wasn't prepared for the test – which is unfathomable. Everybody is saying something different, and nobody knows who's telling the truth. This will rank as one of the worst public relations jobs ever for a top-five pick at the combine.

    National Scouting – Wonderlic test results always fall into the hands of the media, but those typically get leaked through team channels a few days after the combine concludes. Because of the environment of rumor-mongering at the combine, it's a disaster when scores get out before the combine is finished. And having Young's testing issues become news this week – no matter what those issues really were – is a black eye for the scouting service that runs the combine.

    Quarterbacks moving to receiver – There are at least three quarterbacks that are going to be forced to wide receiver because of accuracy issues: Texas A&M's Reggie McNeal, Penn State's Michael Robinson and Missouri's Brad Smith. But none of those guys took reps at the position, despite being encouraged to do so by coaches. Robinson didn't even work out, severely agitating a number of teams. These passers may not like the reality that they can't be NFL quarterbacks, but that's exactly what it is – reality.

    Marcus Vick, QB, Virginia Tech – Vick ran fast, but a handful of team sources said he failed to put his character issues to bed in individual interviews. While his physical talents will get him a look in the draft, he needed to come off as a saint when he met with teams. Apparently that didn't happen.

    New York Jets coach Eric Mangini – He was by far the most boring interview. If you could bottle what Mangini was dishing out, you could cure insomnia worldwide. You don't have to puke personnel information, but at least say something when you have a national platform. After all, your fans are watching.

    Charles Robinson is the national NFL writer for Yahoo! Sports. Send him a question or comment for potential use in a future column or webcast.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

    Cutler walked out of the combine having delivered a great argument why he should be the draft's No. 1 quarterback.
    Kiper was on Mike & Mike this morning, and he really ripped into this talk. He feels there's no way you can dramatically increase a guy's standing from workouts. If he wasn't at Leinhart and Young's level during the season, there's no way he should be now.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

      Originally posted by Kegboy
      Kiper was on Mike & Mike this morning, and he really ripped into this talk. He feels there's no way you can dramatically increase a guy's standing from workouts. If he wasn't at Leinhart and Young's level during the season, there's no way he should be now.
      Things must have changed a bit from the days when Jeff George manipulated his position from a non-descript collegian to the #1 overall pick. Somebody learned from that comedic escapade.
      I think dramatically would be the operative word here, though. Yeah, I don't see it trumping 3 or 4 years of college, but things can and do change from the combine.

      edit: The thing about Cutler is, he didn't really have much around him in college, so teams might feel he didn't have any chance to demonstrate his skills at Vandy. I wouldn't be shocked if he bypassed VY.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

        I watched Vernon Davis. That guy is a workout monster and he was tearing it up on the field with his athleticism..I think he could develop into a very very good tight end. I could easily see him going in the middle-backside of the first round now. Moreso, he's one of the better blocking tight ends coming out of college.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

          Originally posted by vapacersfan
          Like I have said all along, Vince Youngs agent is a ****ig moron.

          He has made stupid mistake after stupid mistake...
          He's not even an "agent." He's a family friend who happens to be an attorney. I forget where I saw the quote, but he basically said that being his agent isn't going to be all that hard because of the structured deals that certain picks get from the league.

          Come to think of it, I do know where I read it.


          Young, however, does not have a traditional agent. He's represented by Major Adams, a criminal attorney in Houston and a friend of the Young family. When asked by Chip Brown of the Dallas Morning News why he chose Adams as his agent -- and his uncle, a middle school teacher and coach, as his business manager -- Young said, "They know what I want, the things that I believe in. They know where I'm trying to go, the things I want to do for the community."

          In that same interview with the Dallas Morning News, Adams was asked whether he was qualified to negotiate Young's contract. "I don't think it will be that much different because in the NFL, the contracts are pretty much slotted," Adams said. "Being a contract adviser, you get the contracts of the top picks and the top quarterbacks. They give you that information. It won't be that difficult."

          Huh?

          Who are "they"?

          If it's as easy as that, we should all go to agent school.

          If salaries were really slotted like that, players wouldn't get to training camp late. If it were that easy, teams at the top of the draft wouldn't feel the need to negotiate with players before the draft. And surely contracts wouldn't be full of wrinkles, clauses, incentives, voidable years, roster bonuses and a bunch of other things that sound complicated to folks who work by the hour. If negotiating any NFL contract were that easy, agents would be the Maytag repairmen of the legal profession.
          http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...e=jones/060301
          “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

            Originally posted by McClintic Sphere
            Things must have changed a bit from the days when Jeff George manipulated his position from a non-descript collegian to the #1 overall pick.
            Kiper is fond of saying that he had George 89th on his board.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: NFL Combine: Winners and Losers

              Originally posted by vapacersfan
              Wow. Just wow.

              So you want to go take the NFL agent class with me this weekend, Since?
              I'd love too.

              I mean it can't be that hard.
              “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment

              Previous template Next
              Working...
              X