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

Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

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

  • #61
    Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
    Not to kick you when you're down Jay, but I figured since this is the official Steelers thread...

    I've got a client where the manager is a huge Steelers fan, the kind of guy who goes around and changes people's desktops or screensavers to Pittsburgh stuff. Well, I was out their Friday, and his guys were saying, "Well, at least you shouldn't lose this week, right?" Then, one of them whispers to me to take a look at the manager's car when I leave. They put a Colts license plate on the front of his car a week ago, and he still hasn't noticed yet.


    On a side note I walked into a bar at New York New York Sunday just in time for the last play of the Pittsburgh/Oakland game. Boy do I wish I'd been there to see more of it.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

      Steelers fans still have a slight sense of humor.

      Today's "Ask the expert" question:

      Question: In order to keep the score of the Denver game down to where it is manageable, should the offense always punt on first down?

      Clark Henshaw, Fredericksburg, Va.

      BOUCHETTE: That was a famous suggestion by quarterback Bubby Brister, who made a speech in New Kensington, Pa., for a beer company during the 1988 season, one in which the Steelers started 2-10 and finished 5-11, the most pathetic season I've ever covered. Perhaps the Raiders never would have scored Sunday had the Steelers punted on first down every time the offense got the ball. At least they would not have scored their only two touchdowns the way they scored them, on interception returns.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

        Six turnovers today. Five in the red zone.

        And one that put the Broncos on the ten yard-line.

        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

          Oh man, Big Ben needs his crutches back. He hasn't looked good without Bettis and Randle el.

          Should they start Batch?
          STARBURY

          08 and Beyond

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

            Why does everyone make such a big deal about a franchise quarterback?

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

              Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
              Oh man, Big Ben needs his crutches back. He hasn't looked good without Bettis and Randle el.

              Should they start Batch?
              Are you this clueless about QB's?

              Roethlisberger on pace to set Steelers records
              Tuesday, November 14, 2006
              By Ed Bouchette, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

              One of the seven or so players who stood up at the Steelers' Saturday morning meeting was quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. It should come as no surprise considering that he stood up to everything thrown at him all year, from emergency medical procedures to calls for his benching.

              Now it's Roethlisberger's turn to do the throwing, and he has done a much better job of it lately. In the past five games, he has compiled a more Big Ben-like passer rating of 101.4 compared to his overall 78.1. During that time, he has 1,474 passing yards, 10 touchdowns, 7 interceptions and completed 70 percent of his throws.

              Clouded by the team's record and his high interception total, Roethlisberger is on target to produce the most prolific season by a passer in club history.

              He has thrown for 2,043 yards in eight games, an average of 255.4 yards per game. Over the course of 15 games, that would produce 3,830 yards. Terry Bradshaw holds the team record with 3,724 yards in 1979.

              Roethlisberger also is tearing through the personal standards he set in his wildly successful first two seasons as a pro. He has thrown for 998 yards the past three games, by far the most he has produced in a three-pack. This, after he threw for 433 yards against Denver Nov. 6, the second-highest total in club history.

              It also marked the first time in his career he had consecutive games of more than 300 yards -- he had just two such games in his first two seasons. He has gone over 200 yards in his past seven games. He did it six times last season before the playoffs, and topped 200 four times as a rookie.

              Also, for the second time in four games, Roethlisberger threw three touchdown passes. He had one three-touchdown game before this season.

              All in all, coach Bill Cowher is happy with his quarterback's performance.

              "It was good to see him accurately throwing," Cowher said after Sunday's 38-31 victory against New Orleans at Heinz Field. "He's played pretty well throughout the year except for those one or two throws."

              Roethlisberger's high total of 14 interceptions this season is perplexing to Cowher and his offensive staff because it's something Roethlisberger did not do his first two seasons in the league, when he threw a total of 20. He started the season by throwing seven interceptions and no touchdown passes in three games, all losses.

              He followed that with two nearly perfect games against Kansas City and Atlanta, before he was knocked out of the Falcons' game with a concussion in the third quarter. He threw for a lot of yards -- 734 -- against Denver and Oakland but also had seven interceptions. Cowher absolved him of two of his three interceptions against Denver and Roethlisberger followed that with none against the Saints.

              Roethlisberger, though, has readily accepted blame all season and he did it again Sunday.

              "This is a team and a franchise that's used to winning games. For us, not winning and for me to not play well and to think it's been my fault -- it was important to come out and get this win and not turn the ball over."

              He also refused to take credit for Sunday's victory, refusing even to say it was his best performance of the season.

              "I think it was just a good game all around for all of us," Roethlisberger said. "I think our line played great -- they gave us a lot of time. There were maybe one or two sacks, but the one sack was my fault. I should have gotten rid of it.''
              Ben certainly had a turnover problem the first few weeks, recovering from his accident, appendectomy, and ATL concussion.

              But - other than turnovers - Ben has been playing good football and moving the team quite well.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                Another pick returned for a score.

                Another red zone interception.

                All three interceptions were passes that were in the hands of the receivers first. Maybe the one pass was too high but it wouldn't have been picked off if the receiver (Holmes) didn't bat the ball right into the hands of the defensive player.

                Thank goodness we were playing the Browns.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                  Dear God, that was a dominant performance.

                  The Ravens look like a Super Bowl team, now that they're generally competent (or better) on offense.

                  They're probably the most "balanced" team I've seen in a long time.

                  Even Alan Faneca played poorly, and with Hines Ward and Troy Polyolyalyolyamu injured, this team is in disarray.

                  I've held off on saying this, but the Steelers are famous for letting their linebackers go right before they turn into average players. When the Steelers didn't give Joey Porter an extension last summer, that told me something.

                  I think this is his last year of being "good." I see somebody else really overpaying him this offseason.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                    The Steelers are cooked.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                      The Ravens are a Super Bowl team that lost to Cincy.
                      Play Mafia!
                      Twitter

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                        Originally posted by Pig Nash View Post
                        The Ravens are a Super Bowl team that lost to Cincy.
                        Actually, they came within a hairs breath of being shut out by Cincy.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                          I need to learn how to use that smilie.
                          Play Mafia!
                          Twitter

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                            The Ravens are hard to figure out, aren't they.

                            As for the Steelers...

                            Advancing to playoffs unlikely for Steelers; reasons abound
                            Tuesday, December 12, 2006

                            By Ed Bouchette, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


                            Winning four of their past five games has put thoughts of making the playoffs into many a Steelers fan's head, and, perhaps, even the Steelers believe they still have a shot.

                            More likely, they soon will think of what might have been.

                            The Steelers will be eliminated from playoff contention this weekend even if they win Sunday as long as Jacksonville and Cincinnati both win, according to the NFL. The Steelers would lose tiebreakers to either team in any scenario if all three finish 9-7. Two wild-card teams make the playoffs from each conference.

                            Even coach Bill Cowher wondered aloud about some of his team's close losses during his news conference yesterday.

                            "I can think of two or three games that probably a year ago we would have won," Cowher said. "Who can say what those two or three games would create, momentum-wise, and what that creates opportunity wise?"

                            Forget the momentum, two or three more victories would have given the Steelers a record of 8-5 or 9-4 and in the lead for at least a wild-card playoff berth or hot on the heels of Baltimore for the AFC North Division title. Instead, they are 6-7 and must win their final three games to have a small chance at making it as a wild-card team at 9-7.

                            "We understand where we are," Cowher said. "It's the same place we've been. We have no margin of error. We have three games left and three very tough opponents beginning this week with Carolina."

                            Three, possibly four losses, rank among the most galling to them this season:

                            The Bengals beat them, 28-20, Sept. 24 in Heinz Field, even though the Steelers outgained them in yards, 365-246. A turning point came early when, with a 7-0 lead and a first down on Cincinnati's 6, Ben Roethlisberger threw an interception in the end zone. That happened twice among his three interceptions. The Steelers also lost two fumbles, one by punt-returner Ricardo Colclough in the fourth quarter, when the Steelers led, 17-14, that set up a touchdown.

                            The Falcons beat them, 41-38, in overtime in Atlanta Oct. 22, although the Steelers outgained them, 473-399. There were no interceptions, but there were three lost fumbles by the Steelers, each of which the Falcons converted into touchdowns. The Steelers had a 17-7 lead in the second quarter.

                            Officials called a false-start penalty as the Steelers were spiking the ball near the end of regulation to try a 51-yard field goal and, by rule, 10 seconds were run off the clock to send the game into overtime. That prompted Dan Rooney to say, "These officials should be ashamed of themselves."

                            The Steelers never led in a 20-13 loss at Oakland Oct. 29, but they outgained the Raiders, 360-98. The Raiders returned two Roethlisberger interceptions for touchdowns, one for 100 yards, two of four interceptions he threw. Oakland has not won a game since and is 2-11.

                            Denver won, 31-20, in Heinz Field, although the Steelers outgained the Broncos, 499-336. Roethlisberger threw three interceptions, and the Steelers lost three of their six fumbles.

                            Most NFL teams can point to games they should have won. Even the Steelers could do so last season despite winning the Super Bowl -- 23-20 at home to New England, 23-17 in overtime at home to Jacksonville, 16-13 in overtime in Baltimore and 38-31 to Cincinnati at home, despite outgaining them 474-324.

                            That's why, when Cowher said that last season they might have won the close games they're losing this season, it is not necessarily so.

                            "Going into last week's game we were 5-7, and somebody asked what was the difference between last year," Cowher said. "Last year, we were 7-5. You're talking about a two-game difference."

                            Of course, they won a close game too, 24-20, in Cleveland.

                            "We are where we are and we're dealing with it," Cowher said. "We have the opportunity ahead of us now. We will need help.

                            "But we've got to take care of business, and those other things will take care of themselves."

                            They always do; there's just not much chance they will take care of themselves in the Steelers' favor this time.
                            If only ...
                            With their hopes for a playoff berth hanging barely by a thread it's easy to look back on what might have been. Here are four games that could have changed the Steelers' season.

                            Sept. 24 vs. Bengals

                            Lost, 28-20, but outgained the Bengals, 365-246. Ricardo Colclough muffed a punt in the fourth quarter with Steelers holding a 17-14 lead. Turnovers: 5.

                            Oct. 22 at Falcons

                            Lost, 41-38, in overtime, but outgained the Falcons, 473-399. A false-start penalty kept the Steelers from attempting a winning field goal. Turnovers: 4.

                            Oct. 29 at Raiders

                            Lost, 20-13, but outgained the Raiders, 360-98. Oakland returned two interceptions for touchdowns. Turnovers: 4.

                            Nov. 5 vs. Broncos

                            Lost, 31-20, but outgained the Broncos, 499-366. The Steelers fumbled six times, losing three. Turnovers: 6.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                              WhoDEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                              By the way......I went to school with lil Ben. He's an arrogant prick and a bad QB.

                              Carson>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.Ben

























                              no disrespect intended

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Jay's Official Super Bowl Champion Steelers thread

                                Why is every post of yours in this forum the same?

                                We get it, the Bengals are the best football's ever seen.

                                Super Bowl XLI Champions
                                2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X