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

Jags get second-most number of rushing yards in an NFL game

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

  • #31
    Re: Jags get second-most number of rushing yards in an NFL game

    Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
    In the Jaguars' defense, they moved Pittsburgh's front seven all over the field earlier this season, and that front-seven is much, much better against the run (ie, bigger) than the Colts.

    The Jags have one of the best run-blocking OLs in the league. This reaction would be appropriate if it were a small OL or an average running team. I can't explain the Jag's inconsistency and I thought their record would be better (I haven't watched them enough), but they're a HARD HITTING team.



    There's a lot of truth to that. Players in the trenches > "skilled" players when it comes to managing the salary cap. Let the skilled players make money in endoresements, but they are not more valuable on the football field once the ball is snapped each play. Lots of NFL teams get caught into this trap on the salary cap.



    But you went one step too far. The St. Louis Rams did that, when they had a fairy-tale postseason. Maybe Kurt Warner was a bargain, but they were still paying Trent Green a fortune to be injured. The Colts appear intent on trying to repeat that strategy instead of the more-successful run-game/ defense/ win-outdoors-in-January strategy.
    Good perspective on the Jags run blocking. While it should be taken into account, from a Colts perspective it doesn't really matter too much when taken in the context of the entire season and the abject ineptness of the run D.

    As far as The Greatest Show on Turf, the approach they used in building the team may be very much like the Colts, but regardless of what they had invested in their defense-and it was not a dominant one-I recall it being able to put up some reasonable resistance at times.

    So the philosophy can succeed but it seems that the margin for error on the other side of the ball is slight. This year the Colts have provided essentially no resistance on D. I'll chalk that up to personnel decisions and/or coaching. I simply disagree with the path taken and have for the last several seasons. Not just now b/c we've lost 3 of 4.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Jags get second-most number of rushing yards in an NFL game

      Originally posted by Eindar View Post
      I told you, I'm done defending the Colts. Nothing changes until Peyton re-negotiates and they trim down to 1 of the big 2 (either Harrison or Wayne, not both). There's no need to be more elaborate than that.

      My post wasn't a jab at long-time fans who represent probably 15,000 of the 55,000 who pack the Dome every weekend. The majority of fans are jumping off buildings and saying "all is lost" now, and all I have to say to that is wait until Peyton and Marvin retire and the team has a couple of inevitable 5 or 6 win seasons while they reload on defense...

      Keep in mind, as you well know, 6 years ago everyone in town was wearing blue and gold. Where do you think all those people went when they realized the Pacers were an average team and the Colts were going to be good? And where will they go when the Colts start sucking?

      It disgusts me. End of discussion.
      Eindar, I could not agree more with your first graph. That's precisely what I've suggested elsewhere. The Colts must realize that the approach they've taken is flawed or at least extremely challenging historically. Such lack of equilibrium in the offensive direction must be addressed.

      At the same time, I still wish you didn't feel the need to respond to some venting fans's overreaction by taking pot shots at an entire city's sports fans. I'm sure my previous post didn't lessen your want to do so. For that allow me to apologize for throwing fuel on the fire. Particularly since I believe we hold a similar opinion of the subject under discussion. I still can't understand what the bone you had to pick with B-ball is though.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Jags get second-most number of rushing yards in an NFL game

        Maybe I'm crazy, but wasn't Dungy supposed to be this all encompassing defensive strategist. That molded together that Bucs D. Or did he get too much credit for that. At what point, does he get scolded for continually throwing away the most important defensive position players, linebackers, away? I thought his only job was to build a defense and after five years, what do we have? The worst defense in football........yikes. I'm sorry but the guy just doesn't seem to have the gusto to motivate a nasty defense. I seriously believe you need to be a slightly crazy coach to win in this league. Look at the past Super Bowl winning coaches:
        Cowher = psycho
        Belichick = insanely passionate
        Gruden = one interception away from eating his quarterback whole
        Billick = ADHD
        I'm sorry but I've said it before and I'll say it again. Dungy is too nice of an individual to win in the most violent, roughest game in the world during the playoffs. Maybe he'll prove us all wrong and win it all this year and turn this D around....but I doubt it. Can you tell me straight faced that if the chips are down in the fourth quarter and Dungy has to motivate a stop of the Patriots to go to the Super Bowl this year, can you see him getting in the face of a defensive player and screaming bloody hell at them to crush Brady......I just don't see it happening, and frankly that's what you need at that time. I'm a big believer in that the team takes on the persona of the head coach and that this, more than anything else dictates playoff success. So basically, we have a lackadaisical, nice defense that opens up ten yard gaping holes and gives a cordial 'Peace be with you' as the running back passes. I mean come on Fred Taylor! I thought this guy would be a body part donor by now. As well, don't come on here and tell me I don't care about the Colts, because I think Dungy is doing a lousy job. In fact, I'd say that if you are looking the other way right now after these defensive performances, then you are the one that doesn't care.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Jags get second-most number of rushing yards in an NFL game

          But you went one step too far. The St. Louis Rams did that, when they had a fairy-tale postseason. Maybe Kurt Warner was a bargain, but they were still paying Trent Green a fortune to be injured. The Colts appear intent on trying to repeat that strategy instead of the more-successful run-game/ defense/ win-outdoors-in-January strategy.
          Here's Peyton's salary over the last few seasons:

          Year Team Base Salary Sign Bonus Other Bonus Total Salary Cap Value Position
          2005 Colts $ 665,000 $ 0 $ 3,520 $ 668,520 $ 8,435,186 QB
          2004 Colts $ 535,000 $ 34,500,000 $ 2,700 $ 35,037,700 $ 8,304,366 QB
          2003 Colts $ 9,824,000 $ 0 $ 1,503,500 $ 11,327,500 $ 15,360,833 QB
          2002 Colts $ 6,298,000 $ 0 $ 3,150 $ 6,301,150 $ 10,334,483 QB
          2001 Colts $ 4,452,000 $ 0 $ 2,560 $ 8,487,893 $ 8,487,893 QB
          2000 Colts $ 2,666,000 $ 4,033,300 $ 3,200 $ 6,702,500 $ 6,702,500 QB

          Now, here's Trent Green's numbers:

          Year Team Base Salary Sign Bonus Other Bonus Total Salary Cap Value Position
          2005 Chiefs $ 4,700,000 $ 0 $ 300,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 7,298,808 QB
          2004 Chiefs $ 1,795,000 $ 1,750,000 $ 350,000 $ 3,895,000 $ 4,443,808 QB
          2003 Chiefs $ 655,000 $ 0 $ 4,300 $ 659,300 $ 2,666,442 QB
          2002 Chiefs $ 650,000 $ 0 $ 100,000 $ 750,000 $ 1,400,000 QB
          2001 Chiefs $ 2,400,000 $ 0 $ 100,000 $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 QB
          2000 Rams $ 2,900,000 $ 1,125,000 $ 100,000 $ 4,125,000 $ 4,125,000 QB

          That doesn't tell the whole tale, because the cap has increased, but if you look at the 2005 Colts team, in terms of "money against the cap", you have Monte Reagor at #4, and then you have to go all the way down to #11 to find another defensive player, that being Dwight Freeney, the Colts best defensive player. Meanwhile, the 2000 Rams had 2 out of the top 6 on the defensive side, and a fairly good mix of defensive and offensive guys the rest of the way down. That's also reflected in the Rams' defensive play, which was roughly middle of the pack, and probably closer to the upper end of the middle of the pack.

          Sure, salary isn't the only indicator of a team's performance. You can have breakout players change everything for you, because they're playing at a level that isn't indicative of their salary. But if you look at where good teams spend their money, it's never as lopsided as it is for the Colts. I even looked for the defensive equivalent of the Colts, that being the Ravens' team that won the Super bowl in 2000, and while they were very defense-heavy in salary, they still had Jonathan Ogden at #1 and Jamal Lewis at #8, and also a QB and an Offensive Lineman at 6 and 7. So even the Ravens weren't that heavily stacked on one side of the ball.

          EDIT: for those that don't know, I'm a Kansas City fan, have been for a long time now. So keep in mind when I'm railing on the Colts and their fanbase, I'm not cannibalizing my own co-fans, and I'm not pointing fingers at myself as a "true Colts fan", nor was I pointing fingers at anyone in particular at being a "bad fan". In fact, I'm not the most diehard Kansas City fan in the world. I haven't yet broken down to buy Sunday Ticket. I've never been to Arrowhead (although I plan to as soon as I can afford it). And I'm not even as religious in following the team as I am the Pacers. However, I am dedicated. If the Chiefs go 3-13 for the next decade, I'll still be checking on scores and highlights, and planning my trip to Arrowhead. Contrast that to a good percentage, perhaps even a majority of this city, who will root for whichever team is chic to root for at the moment. This isn't a recent development, and anyone that doesn't recognize this quirk of my hometown has blinders on.

          What I'm upset about is Colts fans crying a proverbial river over something that's been a problem for at least the last 3 years, and has no real hope of changing in the near future. Accept it for what it is and move on, guys. You win some, and you lose some. Currently the Colts are on a pretty nasty skid, and I'm not sure why, because even with a bad D, they should have beaten the Titans. They'll still win the division, and likely have home field for at least one game. There's nothing to be upset about in that. I had Marty Schottenheimer as the head coach of my football team for about 6 years or so, so I know exactly what it's like to go into the playoffs hoping your team doesn't crap the bed in the first round after winning 13 games in the regular season. But I didn't call for Marty's head, either, because that's just who he is. I accepted that he's not a great playoff coach, and I enjoyed the season for what it was, a winning one, playing my style of football at a high level.

          Anyways, good luck on the rest of your season.

          Comment

          Working...
          X