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

I told you so!

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

  • #16
    Re: I told you so!

    Originally posted by BoomBaby31 View Post
    Nicely wrote, I don't understand why people keep writing/saying Peyton looked bad. This was the Ravens he was playing, not only was he playing the Ravens they literally looked better defensively then they have all season and that is amazing. The second int by Peyton was a force and he knew even if it was picked off it was okay because it was just as good as a punt. I haven't heard/read one bad thing about McNair and he threw an int in the endzone. Anyway, Go colts!!! I had NO doubt they were going to win, now next week is iffy because it is a 3-4 defense despite who wins the NE/SD game. I'd perfer NE to win so Peyton can silence ALL of his critics this year.
    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...nnsi&type=lgns

    "Stats mean nothing in a game like this,'' Indianapolis quarterback coach Jim Caldwell said. "Peyton controlled this game.''

    This sums it up beautifully, if you look at just QB rating Peyton has stunk, but looking at just QB rating is STUPID. Peyton was excellent except for 2 Miscommunications that only Ty Law could have capitalized on in the KC game, and here for the amount of pressure he was under he was excellent.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I told you so!

      Originally posted by Destined4Greatness View Post
      http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...nnsi&type=lgns

      "Stats mean nothing in a game like this,'' Indianapolis quarterback coach Jim Caldwell said. "Peyton controlled this game.''

      This sums it up beautifully, if you look at just QB rating Peyton has stunk, but looking at just QB rating is STUPID. Peyton was excellent except for 2 Miscommunications that only Ty Law could have capitalized on in the KC game, and here for the amount of pressure he was under he was excellent.
      I completely disagree. Peyton could very easily have thrown 5 picks today. The Ravens simply failed to capitalize on three of them.

      At least twice he threw into double coverage when he had a man on the other side of the field with single coverage.

      I know he's Peyton Manning, but let's be realistic here. He sucked big time tonight. A lot of credit to the Ravens defense, but still...S-U-C-K-E-D.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I told you so!

        Shade, you are the most negative Colts fan ever, man! Gosh! We're winning!!! Be happy!
        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I told you so!

          Shade WTF, you are saying he stunk because he threw 2 INTS but could have thrown 5, EVERY QB that throws the ball 5 times CAN throw 5 Interceptions, but Manning was good enough not too. And hell one of those INTs was basically a punt.

          I can take any QB that plays a whole game and find 3 times he threw the ball somewhere it could have been picked off and probably shouldn't have been thrown there. The point is that Manning is good enough to throw it places and not get it intercepted that less QBs couldn't do.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I told you so!

            I was gonna start a new thread on this but I'll throw it in here.

            If you think Indy Sports reporting is bad, you should check out the Baltimore Sun. Crap articles to start, blasting Baltimore's coaching staff and giving the Colts no credit. I could give details but you guys can read 'em as well as I can. There was a column on Baltimore needing to beat Indy to heal the city and for catharsis that had a good premise but was badly done.

            Weak.
            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I told you so!

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              I completely disagree. Peyton could very easily have thrown 5 picks today. The Ravens simply failed to capitalize on three of them.

              At least twice he threw into double coverage when he had a man on the other side of the field with single coverage.

              I know he's Peyton Manning, but let's be realistic here. He sucked big time tonight. A lot of credit to the Ravens defense, but still...S-U-C-K-E-D.

              Shade,

              I just want to let you know that you aren't alone brother! It has been a joke the last couple of games between me and my family to do a "quick kick" right when we hit about the 35 yard line. We may as well kick the field goal before we allow Peyton a chance to turn the ball over.

              I mean seriously... how can we defend how this guy is playing in the playoffs? We have clearly won the last two games b/c of the defense and I would go as far to say in spite of Peyton rather than b/c of Peyton. He has thrown some picks that have put us in an extremely bad way and the defense has gotten a turnover or a stop almost every time.

              Let me list some points that just can't be ignored.

              1. No matter how good a defense is, a good offense should prevail. I always liked playing offense in football b/c you have every advantage. You know the count, you know where the ball is going, and it is impossible to defend the perfect pass and catch. A good defense will make it harder to score, and Baltimore is certainly worthy. However, that is no excuse for putting up zero touchdowns on the board.
              2. The Ravens were playing safetys deep. With both safetys playing extremely deep, they were taking away the long ball. However, that also means that there should have been some additional holes underneath. If the defense takes something away, there is also something they are giving you, and we didn't take advantage of it.

              3. Time Overall I think Peyton had ample time to throw. Sure he was pressured, but he didn't take near the amount of hits that McNair did. McNair was sacked more, but he was also drilled a lot more on plays he completed passes.

              4. Interceptions Sometimes interceptions happen and they are not the fault of the quarterback. For example, a receiver tips a catchable ball or there is a mis-communication on a route. However, in this game most interceptions were thrown b/c Peyton threw into double or triple coverage. I was scratching my head thinking, "this is the best available option?" Especially considering the play of the deep backs on defense, this was surprising. And has been duly noted, Peyton threw a lot more passes that should have been interceptions.

              5. Run In crunchtime, with the exception of perhaps the Dallas Clark amazing grab, our run game has saved our bacon not Peyton's arm. Any QB can hand off, and Addai/Rhodes and the offensive line have been our offensive heroes both weeks.

              Let's face it, Peyton's name has to go way low on the list of people who are winning these games for us. The defense, Vinateri, the offensive line, and the running backs are getting the nod from me first.

              I still love Peyton and I'm hopeful he comes out of this... someday, but he has done nothing to shed his image as being a choke artist in the playoffs. I mean we couldn't score one freaking touchdown today? I'm not asking for miracles, but the number one QB in the league should be able to score a touchdown against anybody.

              On a positive note, just think if Peyton shows up one day and the other players maintain their level of play! Boo Yah!

              “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
              motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
              Reggie Miller

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I told you so!

                Oh and let us not forget all of the arguments about posessions. I didn't calculate them, but if we are going to use them in Peytons aid, let's also use them when he isn't playing well. How many posessions did Peyton give up with turnovers vs. the opportunities created by the defense? How many 3 and outs did the Ravens have? How many times did they score? What was the time of posession out there?
                “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                Reggie Miller

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I told you so!

                  Originally posted by Destined4Greatness View Post
                  Shade WTF, you are saying he stunk because he threw 2 INTS but could have thrown 5, EVERY QB that throws the ball 5 times CAN throw 5 Interceptions, but Manning was good enough not too. And hell one of those INTs was basically a punt.

                  I can take any QB that plays a whole game and find 3 times he threw the ball somewhere it could have been picked off and probably shouldn't have been thrown there. The point is that Manning is good enough to throw it places and not get it intercepted that less QBs couldn't do.
                  No, Peyton actually threw five interceptions. The Ravens failed to capitalize on three of them out of sheer luck, not because Peyton put them where they couldn't get them. Peyton put them RIGHT IN THE DEFENDERS' FACES, but they bobbled them away.

                  Like was mentioned by others, these weren't interceptions due to tipped balls or the receiver failing to pull the ball in. These were due to throwing into double and triple coverage and just hoping for the best. The three that weren't officially picked were thrown RIGHT TO Ravens defenders. There's just no excuse for that from someone like Peyton Manning. He makes the most money, gets the most accolades, and must also get the most criticism when he isn't getting the job done. The Colts won today despite Peyton, not because of him.

                  I'm giving Peyton some credit, because the Ravens' defense was outstanding. But this is no an aberration. This is just par for the course when it comes to Peyton in the playoffs. We've sunk the vast majority of our time and money into the offense, and it needs to produce in the postseason.

                  This is on the offense's shoulders now. If the defense continues to play the way they have the last couple games (and I see no reason they shouldn't), and the offense can get it together, we have the best team in football now. But if the offense can't produce in the playoffs, we have to ask ourselves; why the hell are they making all that money?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I told you so!

                    there are too many "negative nancies" around here, were 1 game away from the superbowl!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I told you so!

                      And people wonder why several years ago Polian decided to emphasize offense because he thought Indy fans wouldn't appreciate a team built around defense ...

                      Not sure why, after the last 4 years, some people don't understand how the best defense will control the best offense.

                      Even if you didn't follow Miami for the Marino years, the way the last few Colts seasons ended should provide just a little bit of a clue.

                      Manning didn't play very well vs KC but he did yesterday.
                      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I told you so!

                        Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                        And people wonder why several years ago Polian decided to emphasize offense because he thought Indy fans wouldn't appreciate a team built around defense ...

                        Not sure why, after the last 4 years, some people don't understand how the best defense will control the best offense.

                        Even if you didn't follow Miami for the Marino years, the way the last few Colts seasons ended should provide just a little bit of a clue.

                        Manning didn't play very well vs KC but he did yesterday.
                        I was about as biased as one could be watching that game, but I fail to see how anyone can say he played a "good" game.

                        He threw two picks, and as others have said it would have been 5 if not for Ray Lewis tipping those passes.

                        I have no problem admitting sometimes its better to be lucky then good, but I fail to see how anyone can say he played a good game yesterday.

                        As for the Ravens making him look bad, they do that to everyone, but at the end of the day all that matters is you won.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I told you so!

                          HOLY CRAP LOL at the people blaming Manning for the Interceptions that never were.

                          QUIT LOOKING AT QB RATING.

                          Manning led his team down the field in FG range 5 times. QB rating 39.6
                          McNair led his team down the field in FG range 2 times. QB Rating 49.9

                          Manning has thrown for 45-68 in the Playoffs with 5 Interceptions against Ty Law and the Best D in the league. They had 26 picks they were exceptionally excellent at picking off the ball. For the Amount of pressure he had he did great not to throw 5, which he didn't do shade as much as you want to claim it. He threw one that was a true interception and the other one was basically a QB punt(Much more effective than the real punt)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I told you so!

                            Originally posted by Aw Heck View Post
                            Adam Vinatieri. WORTH. EVERY. DAMN. PENNY. Mike who?
                            I think the name you're looking for is Mike Vander-shank.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I told you so!

                              Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                              I was about as biased as one could be watching that game, but I fail to see how anyone can say he played a "good" game.

                              He threw two picks, and as others have said it would have been 5 if not for Ray Lewis tipping those passes.

                              I have no problem admitting sometimes its better to be lucky then good, but I fail to see how anyone can say he played a good game yesterday.

                              As for the Ravens making him look bad, they do that to everyone, but at the end of the day all that matters is you won.
                              Are you serious?

                              How do you beat the Ravens? You control the ball. Three times the team started at their own goal line - once at the 1, once at the 5 and once at about the 16. On none of those drives did the Colts have to give the Ravens the ball at midfield.

                              He got the ball back with 8 minutes on the clock and a 6 point lead. When he gave the ball back to Baltimore there were 15 seconds on the clock and a 9 point lead.

                              He was the person calling the plays, deciding what to run against the best defense in the league.

                              He controlled the game better than anyone I've seen control the game against the Ravens this year. He only had one pick that mattered - the other was on 3rd and 17 and gained 50 yards.

                              My one major gripe is that IMO Indy should have thrown out the hurry-up at halftime. It gave Baltimore more of an advantage because Indy couldn't figure out who to block. But this was a far better performance by Manning than vs KC. That game the defense bailed the offense out. In this game the offense did what I haven't seen a team do this season - by the end of the game, wear out the Ravens defense.

                              There were a couple of balls I'm sure he'd like to take back but I don't know as I've watched anyone do a better job of game management than Manning did yesterday. That was a defeated, deflated defense by the 4th quarter - and that doesn't happen to that team.
                              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I told you so!

                                Originally posted by Destined4Greatness View Post
                                HOLY CRAP LOL at the people blaming Manning for the Interceptions that never were.

                                QUIT LOOKING AT QB RATING.

                                Manning led his team down the field in FG range 5 times. QB rating 39.6
                                McNair led his team down the field in FG range 2 times. QB Rating 49.9

                                Manning has thrown for 45-68 in the Playoffs with 5 Interceptions against Ty Law and the Best D in the league. They had 26 picks they were exceptionally excellent at picking off the ball. For the Amount of pressure he had he did great not to throw 5, which he didn't do shade as much as you want to claim it. He threw one that was a true interception and the other one was basically a QB punt(Much more effective than the real punt)
                                Actually, I have not looked at any stats that relate to this game.

                                Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                                Are you serious?

                                How do you beat the Ravens? You control the ball. Three times the team started at their own goal line - once at the 1, once at the 5 and once at about the 16. On none of those drives did the Colts have to give the Ravens the ball at midfield.

                                He got the ball back with 8 minutes on the clock and a 6 point lead. When he gave the ball back to Baltimore there were 15 seconds on the clock and a 9 point lead.

                                He was the person calling the plays, deciding what to run against the best defense in the league.

                                He controlled the game better than anyone I've seen control the game against the Ravens this year. He only had one pick that mattered - the other was on 3rd and 17 and gained 50 yards.

                                My one major gripe is that IMO Indy should have thrown out the hurry-up at halftime. It gave Baltimore more of an advantage because Indy couldn't figure out who to block. But this was a far better performance by Manning than vs KC. That game the defense bailed the offense out. In this game the offense did what I haven't seen a team do this season - by the end of the game, wear out the Ravens defense.

                                There were a couple of balls I'm sure he'd like to take back but I don't know as I've watched anyone do a better job of game management than Manning did yesterday. That was a defeated, deflated defense by the 4th quarter - and that doesn't happen to that team.


                                Yes, I am serious

                                If any of you can watch the way he played yesterday (including the overthrow if his man wide open at the 10 yard line) and tell me that was a good game, esp. by Mannings standards, then I need some of whatever you all are smoking.

                                Did he do enough to lead them to a victory? Yes. Is that all that matters in the playoofs? Yes.

                                But to say he had a good game, sorry, Im not buying it. If your defense would have been as bad as it was the last 2 weeks of the season and Manning had that type of performance people in Indy would be calling for his head [again]

                                EDIT: I agree with you about the hurry up. That seemed to hurt the Colts more then it helped them. And I couldnt help but laught when he tried to run three plays up the middle inside the Ravens 10 yard line, but since you guys won that is moot.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X