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 or Chargers?

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

  • #16
    Re: Jags or Chargers?

    I also voted after SD won their game, but my answer also would've been the same before as it is now.

    I think it is a no-brainer that you want to avenge a BS loss to SD. After we made so many mistakes and Peyton has the worst game of his career, it STILL takes a blown chippie by the most clutch kicker in NFL history to lose......AT SAN DIEGO.

    I'm not trying to overlook the Bolts and take it for granted that we will win. I WANT to play them so we have the opportunity to show them that we are the superior team. We beat Jax twice already; we've got nothing to prove to them. We owe SD, and that is how I would approach the game.

    I know Dungy will be preaching business-as-usual, let's just play our game regardless of the opponent, but I guarantee the players want some payback. They at least want to redeem themselves for their horrible performance. I hope Manning comes out gunning and throws for 500 yards!

    Also, I don't care who the Patriots play, I don't want them to be banged up and I don't want them to lose. Until the AFC Champ. game. I want the best that they've got, and I hope we get the opportunity to beat a healthy, 17-0, record-setting, most-prolific-team-ever, MVP-having Patriots team at Foxboro.

    If things happen to play out like I want them to, and we make it to the Super Bowl again, I also relish the opportunity to play a quality opponent in a non-rain game. IMO, the season the Bears had this year makes me feel less good about SB XLI. I know it shouldn't, but a little splinter in the back of my mind lets it tarnish it for me just a bit. I want a no-excuses, recognized-across-the-board run to another Super Bowl title. I want to hang a WORLD CHAMPIONS banner the first year Lucas Oil Stadium is open.

    That's what I want.

    Oh, and we need to find a good name for that stadium. It will be way too cool of a place to keep calling Lucas Oil Stadium. I'm not calling it the Oil Can either....How about "Tha Luke"?



    RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Jags or Chargers?

      Originally posted by heywoode View Post
      I also voted after SD won their game, but my answer also would've been the same before as it is now.

      I think it is a no-brainer that you want to avenge a BS loss to SD. After we made so many mistakes and Peyton has the worst game of his career, it STILL takes a blown chippie by the most clutch kicker in NFL history to lose......AT SAN DIEGO.

      I'm not trying to overlook the Bolts and take it for granted that we will win. I WANT to play them so we have the opportunity to show them that we are the superior team. We beat Jax twice already; we've got nothing to prove to them. We owe SD, and that is how I would approach the game.

      I know Dungy will be preaching business-as-usual, let's just play our game regardless of the opponent, but I guarantee the players want some payback. They at least want to redeem themselves for their horrible performance. I hope Manning comes out gunning and throws for 500 yards!

      Also, I don't care who the Patriots play, I don't want them to be banged up and I don't want them to lose. Until the AFC Champ. game. I want the best that they've got, and I hope we get the opportunity to beat a healthy, 17-0, record-setting, most-prolific-team-ever, MVP-having Patriots team at Foxboro.

      If things happen to play out like I want them to, and we make it to the Super Bowl again, I also relish the opportunity to play a quality opponent in a non-rain game. IMO, the season the Bears had this year makes me feel less good about SB XLI. I know it shouldn't, but a little splinter in the back of my mind lets it tarnish it for me just a bit. I want a no-excuses, recognized-across-the-board run to another Super Bowl title. I want to hang a WORLD CHAMPIONS banner the first year Lucas Oil Stadium is open.

      That's what I want.

      Oh, and we need to find a good name for that stadium. It will be way too cool of a place to keep calling Lucas Oil Stadium. I'm not calling it the Oil Can either....How about "Tha Luke"?
      Last years we played a tough Baltimore team on the road, biggest AFCCG comeback against the Patriots at home and then beat the Bears in a rainy Dolphins stadium.

      We earned that Super Bowl last year, especially with the quality opponents we faced. The Bears defense was pretty good, the Patriots were...the Patriots, Ravens were 13-3 with one of the best if not, the best defense in the league last year and then Kansas City was just the warm-up where Larry Johnson was supposed to run for 53654376536538768475 yards and we didn't allow them a first down until the 3rd quarter.

      Never feel less about a Super Bowl win.
      Last edited by Lord Helmet; 01-06-2008, 10:59 PM.
      Super Bowl XLI Champions
      2000 Eastern Conference Champions




      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Jags or Chargers?

        Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
        Last years we played a tough Baltimore team on the road, biggest AFCCG comeback against the Patriots at home and then beat the Bears in a rainy Dolphins stadium.

        We earned that Super Bowl last year, especially with the quality opponents we faced. The Bears defense was pretty good, the Patriots were...the Patriots, Ravens were 13-3 with one of the best if not, the best defense in the league last year and then Kansas City was just the warm-up where Larry Johnson was supposed to run for 53654376536538768475 yards and we didn't allow them a first down until the 3rd quarter.

        Never feel less about a Super Bowl win.
        I wrote that I know I shouldn't...



        RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Jags or Chargers?

          Originally posted by heywoode View Post

          If things happen to play out like I want them to, and we make it to the Super Bowl again, I also relish the opportunity to play a quality opponent in a non-rain game. IMO, the season the Bears had this year makes me feel less good about SB XLI. I know it shouldn't, but a little splinter in the back of my mind lets it tarnish it for me just a bit. I want a no-excuses, recognized-across-the-board run to another Super Bowl title. I want to hang a WORLD CHAMPIONS banner the first year Lucas Oil Stadium is open.
          Thing is, a good amount of SB losers tank the next year. You'd have a lot of fans feeling this way if people held to this.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Jags or Chargers?

            Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
            Thing is, a good amount of SB losers tank the next year. You'd have a lot of fans feeling this way if people held to this.
            Maybe you do have a lot of fans feel this way.....

            I'll try to put the issue to rest by stating that I am a Colts fan first and foremost and that I'm very proud of them for winning the Super Bowl. They went on an incredible run in the playoffs last year and earned everything they got. The defense stepping up with Sanders' return got it done for them and when they had finally won the Super Bowl it was the proudest moment of my Colt fan life.

            I wasn't making a statement as though I was a fan of another team who was trying to belittle the Colts fantastic season.



            RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Jags or Chargers?

              I didn't see this until after the Chargers won but I voted anyway and would have voted for them even before. I'd rather play the Chargers, simply because I want to see New England have to play the Jags. Even in New England, Jax will give them a good game. They are good enough to beat the Pats, but I don't think they will. I do think they will give them all they can handle, especially if the weather is bad. Maybe we can get lucky and win our game and also have Jax beat them up just enough to make them more vulnerable.

              Now with the Chargers, you have a team that the Colts will want to beat badly to prove that the loss to them was a fluke. I think the chargers are hot, but I don't think they are hot enough to beat the Colts in the dome. Plus, the Chargers are still in the process of climbing their mountain, and I don't think they get to the top this year. Maybe they can beat the Colts, but there's no way they are going through New Engalnd too to get to the Superbowl. One of those two teams will beat them.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Jags or Chargers?

                Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                Maybe you do have a lot of fans feel this way.....

                I'll try to put the issue to rest by stating that I am a Colts fan first and foremost and that I'm very proud of them for winning the Super Bowl. They went on an incredible run in the playoffs last year and earned everything they got. The defense stepping up with Sanders' return got it done for them and when they had finally won the Super Bowl it was the proudest moment of my Colt fan life.

                I wasn't making a statement as though I was a fan of another team who was trying to belittle the Colts fantastic season.
                I know. I think the same thing, sometimes. Actually the Patriots are the only team we beat that is even decent this year. But you just gotta remember that they were all pretty great teams last year (sans KC), and that last year was actually the first time a team beat the top 3 defenses to win the SB.

                -----

                We just gotta hope for bad weather in the Jax/NE game. I'd like to see another Colts/Pats matchup, but I'd like tix to another AFCCG even more. I want one last championship game at the dome!
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Jags or Chargers?

                  Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
                  I know. I think the same thing, sometimes. Actually the Patriots are the only team we beat that is even decent this year. But you just gotta remember that they were all pretty great teams last year (sans KC), and that last year was actually the first time a team beat the top 3 defenses to win the SB.

                  -----

                  We just gotta hope for bad weather in the Jax/NE game. I'd like to see another Colts/Pats matchup, but I'd like tix to another AFCCG even more. I want one last championship game at the dome!
                  A noble goal, for sure. But wouldn't you feel just a little bit better about beating NE at their house, and not after they got beaten down the previous week by Jax?

                  If the Colts don't have to go through NE and a healthy Patriots team to win the Super Bowl, I can already hear the excuses coming from other teams' fans who don't like the Colts....

                  "well, the Patriots got beat up and then there was bad weather, so...."

                  or if we don't have to face NE at all,

                  "Well, the Pats were the best team all year and then lost a fluke game, or the Colts wouldn't have won the SB."

                  I want to hear none of that, so bring on the hardest road we could possibly have to make it back to the Super Bowl. It will mean that much more anyway....



                  RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Jags or Chargers?

                    Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                    A noble goal, for sure. But wouldn't you feel just a little bit better about beating NE at their house, and not after they got beaten down the previous week by Jax?

                    If the Colts don't have to go through NE and a healthy Patriots team to win the Super Bowl, I can already hear the excuses coming from other teams' fans who don't like the Colts....

                    "well, the Patriots got beat up and then there was bad weather, so...."

                    or if we don't have to face NE at all,

                    "Well, the Pats were the best team all year and then lost a fluke game, or the Colts wouldn't have won the SB."

                    I want to hear none of that, so bring on the hardest road we could possibly have to make it back to the Super Bowl. It will mean that much more anyway....
                    I don't think we need to worry about what the other fans think. What does that get them any way? When we lost the Chargers game during the season most Chargers fans weren't saying well Peyton threw 6 INT's, they are thinking what a nice win. The Chargers didn't get an asterisk by that win because of sloppy and un-characteristic Colts play.

                    Neither will we if we advance to play the Jaguars at home instead of having to play the Patriots.
                    Super Bowl XLI Champions
                    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Jags or Chargers?

                      Let them say what they want. If NE couldn't even show up that's not our fault.

                      That's like saying the Patriots should feel ashamed because they only beat the Colts to get to the Superbowl two different times. Or that all they did was beat the Panthers/Eagles. I mean after all, those Colts teams had no D and were just "chokers" lead by Peyton "can't win the big one" Manning. Let's dismiss their runs.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Jags or Chargers?

                        Originally posted by Mal View Post
                        Let them say what they want. If NE couldn't even show up that's not our fault.

                        That's like saying the Patriots should feel ashamed because they only beat the Colts to get to the Superbowl two different times. Or that all they did was beat the Panthers/Eagles. I mean after all, those Colts teams had no D and were just "chokers" lead by Peyton "can't win the big one" Manning. Let's dismiss their runs.
                        Yeah, I hate that kind of thinking. Who the hell cares what the other fans think.
                        Super Bowl XLI Champions
                        2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Jags or Chargers?

                          Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
                          I don't think we need to worry about what the other fans think. What does that get them any way? When we lost the Chargers game during the season most Chargers fans weren't saying well Peyton threw 6 INT's, they are thinking what a nice win. The Chargers didn't get an asterisk by that win because of sloppy and un-characteristic Colts play.

                          Neither will we if we advance to play the Jaguars at home instead of having to play the Patriots.
                          Well, speak for yourself. I will personally feel like we didn't get tested as hard as we could have if we don't have to go through the Patriots to win the Super Bowl. There's just no getting around it. It'd be like being a tennis star and going up against the world number one ranked player, and he pulls a hammy in the Final and has to withdraw. Yeah, you won, but everybody knows you didn't earn it.

                          My example is a little extreme and the two aren't a very good analogy, but the point is still there.

                          I want to beat the best of the best. I want the Colts to be considered the best team in the NFL. Regardless, that won't be the case if they win the Super Bowl without having to beat the Patriots, especially this season when the Pats have been so dominant and have been executing at such a high level.

                          Oh, and if I was a Chargers fan, and my team won a game against a superior team (scratch that, make it ANY team) because they (and the two-time league MVP QB) played the worst game they played all season with a bunch of starters out to injury, and arguably one of the top two QB's of the decade throwing 6 INT's, with two runback TD's, and the most clutch kicker in history missing a chippy in the final minute to dodge the bullet.......I wouldn't feel too good about it. Not at all.

                          And I'm just talking about the FANS. I can't imagine how the Chargers players must feel. They probably want to play us and get a shot at redemption just as much as the Colts want to play them for the same reason. San Diego doesn't want to be the team that beat the Colts, but with those circumstances. Trust me, they don't.



                          RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Jags or Chargers?

                            Originally posted by Mal View Post
                            Let them say what they want. If NE couldn't even show up that's not our fault.

                            That's like saying the Patriots should feel ashamed because they only beat the Colts to get to the Superbowl two different times. Or that all they did was beat the Panthers/Eagles. I mean after all, those Colts teams had no D and were just "chokers" lead by Peyton "can't win the big one" Manning. Let's dismiss their runs.
                            That doesn't sit right either. I simply want to beat the best team in the game en route to a SB title....I mean, if we are going to aspire to be great, aspire to be GREAT.

                            I'm not saying I won't love it if the Colts repeat as champs, even if they don't have to face the Patriots, but it won't mean as much to me personally (and I doubt the Colts also) if they don't prove they can beat Mr. MVP and the unbeatables this season. They are ultimate-level competitors. I will not believe that they don't feel that way.

                            Even when I played high school sports, we always wanted to be the best, and beat the best competition we could face. We always relished games against tough competition much more than somebody we knew we would beat down.

                            The ultimate stage is what it is.



                            RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Jags or Chargers?

                              So if the Colts were 10X better than any other team (part because they're as good as they are this year, but the other past is the rest of the league is no better than this years' Falcons), you'd have no problem? I mean we'd beat the best teams we could?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Jags or Chargers?

                                Originally posted by Mal View Post
                                So if the Colts were 10X better than any other team (part because they're as good as they are this year, but the other past is the rest of the league is no better than this years' Falcons), you'd have no problem? I mean we'd beat the best teams we could?
                                Now it seems like you are reaching.

                                For argument's sake, I guess, yeah? I mean, what choice would I have?

                                I suppose I could wish the Colts could trade them some good players for some of their bad ones just to create a little more parity?...makes as much sense as us being ten times better than the rest of the league.........



                                RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X