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

Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

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

  • #31
    Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Truthfully, I just want to watch some players I like and can then think about the future. I don't root for the team to lose, but a loss doesn't really bother me right now either.

    There are some things with coaching that I'm questioning, but it doesn't much matter this season. I suppose a part of me wonders if OBrien is instilling some bad habits in this team that the next coach will have to 'un-teach'... and make no mistake... there will be a next coach. Unless OBrien is a total fool, he was hired just to get the team scoring a lot of points. Otherwise, he'd be adjusting some things for our talent. I think TPTB were under the impression that seeing the scoreboard light up would give the fans a sense that we're heading down the right path. Apparently, either the losses negated that OR the fanbase is a little smarter than they give them credit for.

    -Bball
    I'm hoping that they let O'Brien walk after this season, bring in Skiles & let Tinsley take O'Neal out for a night on the town...... if ya know what I mean?


    I ain't sayin' nothing..... I'm just sayin

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

      Back to back loses for the franchise. I hate losing.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        Nobody else seems to be doing it. I came home right after the buzzer sounded, so I missed the whole game. Box is interesting.... lots of guys with good lines.

        Thoughts?
        For the first time in 2 years I ponied up for the high dollar seat. It's pretty hard not to get caught up in the game down that close. Plus I picked a great game to do this for.

        Defense was strong by several players, primarily Danny and Jeff. In close you could really see Jeff getting his hands on a lot of balls, stuff that doesn't always make the box but definitely disrupts the other team. Danny got called for a shot block foul that didn't look like a foul to me, but he was terrific all night regardless.

        Murph has the effort but he's just not a great individual defender. Aldridge was able to destroy him most of the time, often just using his reach to shoot over him.

        Webster gave Dun fits when he was in, you could see that JOB liked going with Rush over Dun tonight. Dun hurt his ankle but I don't think it was as simple as that, I think some defensive needs were affecting the rotation decision as well.

        Harrison had a really solid game. One foul was a bad call that got a lot of boos from the crowd, but even with that he stayed out of really bad foul trouble and still attacked the ball well.

        Rush couldn't find the basket most of the night, but he's such a contributor you can afford to keep him out there.

        Diener had one of his better games thus far. One of his assists was a PnR with Foster. The Blazers played it well and denied the look to Jeff. Travis was patient, showed the shot and that locked the help off of Jeff long enough to make the pass in for the easy score. It was very subtle, just a look away almost, but it was enough.

        Travis made some passing choices that surprised me and were pretty good quality. Tough to deny his likability. Weird thing with him was that after every play, including the really good ones, Travis would be muttering and shaking his head in frustration. I never noticed that before.

        Granger is the best player on the Pacers roster at this point. He was the guy you wanted to see involved in every play. That And-1 layup in the 2nd half was just fantastic. I was so inspired I went to the gift shop and got a Granger Swingman. I will be starting my "sorry I jinxed him" thread tomorrow.


        More thoughts tomorrow. I'm tired right now.

        Aldridge is a fantastic post player and carries a really upbeat, pleasant attitude to him.

        Originally posted by grace View Post
        I should save this for the next time someone asks me why we didn't get season tickets again. When we said we weren't enjoying the games everyone acted like we were crazy.
        I thought it was a great game myself. Also my buddy (who Mal met a few games ago) just happened to be sitting not far away thanks to his wife's work. We didn't know we were both there and just a section away. Anyway, I spotted him at the end of the game and naturally we talked, mostly stuff like "I didn't even know you were right there". But he and his wife also said that they really enjoyed the game. This is a guy who only saw Diener for the first time when I brought him to that Pistons game.
        Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-10-2008, 04:27 AM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          Williams seems like he's lost some confidence. His game seems uncertain and tentative.
          Big time. But you know Danny's had some rough spots the last couple of years too and look at him now. Shawne looked really lost out there at times. Hopefully he'll figure some things out and start getting enough PT to regain his composure.

          Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
          David scares me, because I don't know if he'd be able to stop himself if he gets angry enough. Hey, I just figured out why they call him HULK!
          As I've recounted before I was up close for an outburst easily 10 times worse than that one and my feelings were about the same as yours. For this game I was just on the other side of the basket from the writers and considered Hulk to be under control by his standards. I thought he would lose it on that bad foul call at the other end, but he kept his cool.

          At one point he slapped a ball out of someone's (Webster?) hands. To me it looked like it went off the other player before going out of bounds. And David could be heard saying "that ours, that went off of him, I didn't even touch it." I was worried when he didn't get that call but all he did was continue to say "I didn't even touch it" a few times and then went to the other end.
          Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-10-2008, 04:22 AM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

            Not 100% sure if this is the same play but there was a time David was about to go nuts about a ball being called off of him out of bounds but before he went totaly insane and said anything much to the ref. Diener actually took him by the arm and told him that his foot was out of bounds.

            This actually seemed to placate David.

            It was funny in the sense that it reminded me of the lion and the mouse.


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

              Originally posted by rcarey View Post
              Good post.
              Very insightfull!


              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                One thing that about Shawne I find hard to deal with is his shooting form. I cringe when I see it. I don't think it's a big deal as there have been some outstanding unorthodox shooters. Just seems he's in a little slump.

                You have to admit that Murphy's being playing good ball lately. His limitations are evident but he's found a way to contribute and the effort is consistently there. Sure, his contract sucks and he'll never be much on D but I could live with him, especially as part of the second unit.

                What was up with the D last night? One of our better, if not best, defensive performances in memory. There were periods of noticeable intensity. That's a big start since often we look like we're either confused, uninterested, or both. Other possible factors? Here's a couple that came to mind...

                -Dun on the floor less due to the injury so more Rush (as Seth notes).

                -Harrison had a good game by his standards and he can influence the defensive end when he's not inhaling fouls and going ballistic.

                -Quis looking unusually spry-two consecutive games now.

                -A couple days off.

                -No Roy and a subpar night for the Blazers O.

                -The Blazers penchant for a pick and fade/pop instead of a traditional pick and roll where the screen man dives hard to the lane. Thought this helped us when they ran it b/c our hedging big didn't have as much ground to cover to get back into the play and, therefore, it put less pressure on our rotations.

                -The guys are starting to pick up the system. (Could it be?)

                Whatever the reason, man was it refreshing to see some defensive energy! Jack still broke us down off the dribble plenty, but overall it was solid.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                  I disagree with everything in this post.

                  Originally posted by GrangerRanger View Post
                  I don't see anything coming from this team to want them to win. Danny Granger and Shawne Williams are not franchise caliber players. We need a lottery pick because of salary cap reasons to grab a player that can be a franchise player.


                  Screw "franchise calibur" players. They cost too much and they get injured and they demand to be traded and won't play defense andthey rape women and they won't accept free agency offers and they complain about practice.

                  To say the Pacers need more talent is right. To say they need a monster All-Star is evidence of lack of understanding or creativity.

                  Last night a group of moderately capable players went out and beat a better team by working harder. Diener had 15 points, 9 assists and no turnovers. Rush and Foster had double-doubles. That's good basketball!

                  I want the Pacers to get more talent, but I want them to develop and sustain a level of determination, too. They showed that last night. It was a great, great win.

                  Dunno why Hicks wasn't entertained, but maybe the fault lies in the NBA game experience that has been discussed so often. Maybe going to the game is not the best way to enjoy the game.
                  Last edited by Putnam; 02-10-2008, 09:00 AM.
                  And I won't be here to see the day
                  It all dries up and blows away
                  I'd hang around just to see
                  But they never had much use for me
                  In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                    Compared to what's happening on the floor, I don't care about the "game experience" of the arena if you mean the music, dead-ball acts, etc. I mean I like some of that some times, but that's not why I'm there. I'm there to see (hopefully good) basketball in person.

                    I felt like I was watching a 3-ball chuck-fest most of the night by us, and we won to a poor offense by them. Yes, there was some good D played, but I never felt like we were the big cause of their low output. I think they just didn't do very well.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                      D-Bone - totally agree with your full post. I was thinking all of those thoughts during the game even, so I guess it wasn't just me.

                      Great to see Quis getting back in form. He drove baseline at my end several times and let me tell you it was physical. When you can hear and feel it you realize the pounding he's getting on a "finesse" move. But it was classic Quis in traffic type of scoring or attempts.

                      I also wondered about not having Dun out there and the coincidental defensive improvement. There is no questioning his offensive skills, but to me he was giving as much as he took.


                      Mal, not the cause? Did you see that early strip steal by Jeff, or several of Danny's plays including the "foul"/block (checked the Tivo, still not a foul), or Harrison's shot block on Aldridge near the end of the 2nd qtr? It was stuff like this all night. At one point Pryz got driven under the rim and was FORCED to make a wild pass back toward the FT line, but instead it was all Pacers waiting. He didn't even bother to chase down the easy score Indy got from that.

                      I don't care about all the other stuff. I don't mind the stuff for kids, but my "game experience" was being at the game and seeing great effort.

                      I've ripped on 3 fests myself, but look, when it's Diener, Rush, Dun and Granger wide open you should be taking them. Frankly Rush left a bunch of points on the board on open 3s, something I've been critical of with him before. You put a Kapono type in Rush's role and the guy is MAKING 7 3s per night. Open is open.

                      Plus they got to the FT line fairly well, and that often came off the strong play of Diener. Not only the assist to Jeff I mentioned already, but another non-assist on score was his brilliant pass to Troy as he drove the lane that sent Murph to the FT line to end the first half.

                      The drove and cut a lot, they worked Dave in the post when they could, Quis went to the post a few times and Granger had perhaps 3-4 really impressive drives in the lane, including that late And-1 I mentioned.

                      Frankly this is what a person should pay to see I think. They looked inspired.


                      I love Shawne's shooting form. His problem is confidence and confusion. He's playing less and likely getting berated when he makes mistakes about where to go/be, and then he doesn't get the time to go back out and work on it.

                      He's young so I'm fine with this. Priority 1 has to be getting Danny into full-fledged starter awareness/confidence, and that does seem to be happening. Even Harrison has once again shown improvement in all areas.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                        Another reason Mal and I saw things differently? Because from here:




                        You don't see this



                        or this



                        and definitely not this




                        Just a theory, hard to say if it's right.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                          Seems to me the front office has taken a lot of criticism on the board for the Diener and Rush acquisitions. Getting integrated took some time but they seem to be playing major parts for this team. Have any of you changed your minds about either one of them?
                          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            I disagree with everything in this post.





                            Screw "franchise calibur" players. They cost too much and they get injured and they demand to be traded and won't play defense andthey rape women and they won't accept free agency offers and they complain about practice.

                            To say the Pacers need more talent is right. To say they need a monster All-Star is evidence of lack of understanding or creativity.

                            Last night a group of moderately capable players went out and beat a better team by working harder. Diener had 15 points, 9 assists and no turnovers. Rush and Foster had double-doubles. That's good basketball!

                            I want the Pacers to get more talent, but I want them to develop and sustain a level of determination, too. They showed that last night. It was a great, great win.

                            Dunno why Hicks wasn't entertained, but maybe the fault lies in the NBA game experience that has been discussed so often. Maybe going to the game is not the best way to enjoy the game.
                            It's arguable as to whether Portland, sans Roy, is a better team.

                            We already have plenty of GOOD players on this team. We need at least one GREAT player to go anywhere.

                            I didn't see the game last night (work again), but I wasn't too shocked we won, especially when I saw that Roy was out.

                            What it basically comes down to now this season is a choice of either (A) get a high draft pick and hopefully select a new franchise player, or (B) slip into the playoffs and get massacred by Boston/Detroit. I really don't think I could stomach getting swept by either of those teams. If we make the playoffs, I want a higher seed than #7.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                              Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                              Seems to me the front office has taken a lot of criticism on the board for the Diener and Rush acquisitions. Getting integrated took some time but they seem to be playing major parts for this team. Have any of you changed your minds about either one of them?
                              Yeah, I have. I was the most vocal against them earlier in the season, but they've been playing well. I'm still upset that they were our only off-season acquisitions (as you can see, we're still a below average team with them), but they're role players who are finally fitting well into their roles. Can't really expect more than that.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Um, Postgame? Pacers win?

                                I know this is something that has been discussed a bit lately on this board, but still.. every time I see something like this...

                                Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                                Back to back loses for the franchise. I hate losing.
                                it makes me sick.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X