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

Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

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

  • Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

    NEW YORK -- Add Most Valuable Player to all the other accolades Tom Brady has been collecting.

    Tom Brady rewrote the NFL record book in 2007 and earned all but one MVP vote.

    The New England Patriots' record-setting quarterback drew all but one vote Saturday in romping to The Associated Press 2007 NFL MVP award in the same manner his team romped through its schedule, going 16-0. On the way to the first unbeaten regular season since Miami went 14-0 in 1972, Brady put on a performance for the ages.

    "I have always been a huge football fan and will always have great respect for the history of this game," Brady said. "I am grateful to all of the voters for any consideration I was given. It is a tremendous honor and I am sure it is one that my family will one day look back on with great pride."

    The eight-year veteran who already has won three Super Bowls helped the Patriots tear through the record books by throwing for 50 touchdowns. He beat Peyton Manning's league mark by one, and also threw 23 of those TD passes to Randy Moss, which lifted the receiver past Jerry Rice's record of 22.

    New England scored 589 points, another record, as was the Patriots' 75 touchdowns. Brady led the NFL with a 117.2 passer rating -- no, not another record, but close to Manning's 121.1 in 2004. Only one full-time AFC starter, Jacksonville's David Garrard, had fewer than Brady's eight interceptions. And Brady threw 253 more passes than Garrard.

    Brady also was tops with a 68.9 completion percentage, and his 4,806 yards were 383 more than runner-up Drew Brees of New Orleans.

    Nothing Promised

    Winning the AP NFL MVP does not guarantee postseason success. Since the turn of the century, no AP NFL MVP has won a Super Bowl, with only three advancing to the title game. The last to win both the MVP and the Super Bowl was Kurt Warner in 1999.
    Year

    MVP

    Postseason Result
    2007 Tom Brady ?
    2006 LaDainian Tomlinson L, Divisional Rd
    2005 Shaun Alexander L, Super Bowl
    2004 Peyton Manning L, Divisional Rd
    2003 Peyton Manning L, AFC Champ.
    Steve McNair L, Divisional Rd
    2002 Rich Gannon L, Super Bowl
    2001 Kurt Warner L, Super Bowl
    2000 Marshall Faulk L, Wild Card

    Brady joins a roster of AP MVPs that includes quarterbacks John Unitas, Bart Starr, Fran Tarkenton, Dan Marino, Joe Montana, John Elway and Steve Young -- all Hall of Famers.

    "I am flattered to join such an esteemed list of players, many of whom I consider the greatest of all time," he said. "I hope that I can set as great of an example for kids around the world as the previous MVPs did for me."

    There also was plenty of praise to go around from teammates, Patriots owner Robert Kraft and coach Bill Belichick.

    "To be honest, I'm surprised it took so long for him to get this recognition because he's sort of been our MVP since he stepped on the field in '01, in my mind, and the way he just took over," Kraft said. "He treats everyone in that locker room the same way he treats me or the coaches.

    "And the thing that I've found most interesting is if you talk to role players or backups how he talks to them and motivates them. He treats them like they're going to the Pro Bowl, with that kind of respect."

    Added Mike Vrabel, who has gone from a role player to a Pro Bowl linebacker over the years:

    "He's our MVP. I think we've known that for quite some time. I think his work ethic day in and day out [is most impressive]. We get to practice against him so I think that makes us better. I think it makes us a better defense. He puts a lot of time into it. It's important to him. Going out there every week and then trying to play his absolute best is a priority for him."

    Brady is the first Patriot selected NFL MVP. He drew 49 of the 50 votes from a nationwide panel of media members who regularly cover the NFL. Green Bay quarterback Brett Favre, the only three-time MVP, got the other vote.

    "He deserves it," Belichick said. "I have thought for a long time that there is no past or present quarterback I'd rather coach than Tom Brady, and I am more certain of that every year he plays."

    Only in one game, a 20-10 win over the Jets, did Brady not throw for a touchdown. He had 12 games with at least three TD passes.

    Those are great stats, but they hardly tell the entire story. Brady's leadership skills overshadow just about everything.

    "Tom's one of those guys that goes out there and tries to perform and compete every week," center Dan Koppen said. "He gives maximum effort on every play and every game. What he did was outstanding, but I know he wants more than that. That's what you need in your quarterback."

    The last two MVP awards went to running backs LaDainian Tomlinson (2006) and Shaun Alexander (2005). Before that, quarterbacks won four in a row: Manning in 2004 and in 2003, when he shared it with Steve McNair; Rich Gannon in 2002; and Kurt Warner in 2001.
    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3182557


  • #2
    Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

    It should be Co-MVP with Randy moss.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

      Originally posted by Irk Woodsman View Post
      It should be Co-MVP with Randy moss.
      Only argument I have with that is Brady can win without Moss. Moss couldn't win without Brady. Some will argue that because Brady plays QB he has a greater impact on the offense, and that is true..but you can't penalize him for that. I am surprised that Moss got no votes though.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

        I only skimmed the article so maybe it says this, but who got the other vote(s)?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

          Originally posted by Mal View Post
          I only skimmed the article so maybe it says this, but who got the other vote(s)?
          John Maddens favorite player. (Favre)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

            Guess Peyton will have to settle for Super Bowl MVP. Oh well.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

              Originally posted by Moses View Post
              Only argument I have with that is Brady can win without Moss. Moss couldn't win without Brady. Some will argue that because Brady plays QB he has a greater impact on the offense, and that is true..but you can't penalize him for that. I am surprised that Moss got no votes though.
              I'm just letting my "anti-patriot" feelings bleed through. Brady is a bad boy, I have to say. But I doubt they go undefeated without Moss.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                Originally posted by Irk Woodsman View Post
                I'm just letting my "anti-patriot" feelings bleed through. Brady is a bad boy, I have to say. But I doubt they go undefeated without Moss.

                Patriots would still go undefeated without Moss. Line up Stallworth on the right, keep Welk in the slot. Those are still the best Receivers Brady has ever had. There game would change a bit, with the run be used more but that is it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                  I'm really surprised this is Brady's first MVP.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                    Originally posted by BoomBaby31 View Post
                    Patriots would still go undefeated without Moss. Line up Stallworth on the right, keep Welk in the slot. Those are still the best Receivers Brady has ever had. There game would change a bit, with the run be used more but that is it.
                    No way, not with some of the miracle catches he has made to keep them in games.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                      Originally posted by Irk Woodsman View Post
                      No way, not with some of the miracle catches he has made to keep them in games.
                      To keep them in games? lol I'm telling you Moss goes down to injury or throws a fit, that team isn't going to change that much. Stallworth can be a heck of a weapon too. If he becomes Brady's primary weapon he's going to have some spectacular catches.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                        They came real close to losing a few and it took everything they had to get through those. I don't know for sure what would've happened without Moss and neither do you, we're both assuming. But some of those one-handed catches that Moss pulled out of the air aren't gonna be completed by their other receivers (probably no other receiver in the league), and if those catches aren't made, they lose one or two, seemingly.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                          Originally posted by Irk Woodsman View Post
                          I'm just letting my "anti-patriot" feelings bleed through. Brady is a bad boy, I have to say. But I doubt they go undefeated without Moss.
                          I do agree with you here. It is highly unlikely that they go undefeated without Moss. I do think they would still win 14-15 games though. One thing that has bothered me all year is how the Pats have incorrectly utilized Donte Stallworth. The guy is much better then many think. He was a complete stud on the Eagles. They should use his deep speed more often when you consider how often he faces man to man coverage.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Brady near unanimous choice for MVP

                            Originally posted by Moses View Post
                            I do agree with you here. It is highly unlikely that they go undefeated without Moss. I do think they would still win 14-15 games though. One thing that has bothered me all year is how the Pats have incorrectly utilized Donte Stallworth. The guy is much better then many think. He was a complete stud on the Eagles. They should use his deep speed more often.
                            Stallworth would absolutely toast people when he played for the Eagles and the Saints, it was incredible. When the Eagles played the Saints, his other former team, in the playoffs last year he made the NO DB's look silly, although NO did end up winning that game.

                            I am sure BB is aware of this, but if you're 12-0, 13-0, and you're still winning, why not wait and utilize that weapon in the playoffs, since other teams haven't seen it on film this year? I wouldn't be surprised to see Stallworth toast 3 or 4 DB's during the playoffs this year.

                            I'm a huge Colts fan, but I've always liked the Stallworth. Yes, Moss is amazing, but Stallworth too is 10 times better than any WR you had last year.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X