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

Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

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

  • #61
    Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    Yeah, Brady was awful when he led the Patriots down the field late in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl vs. the Giants to what would have been a game-winning touchdown
    No one said Brady wasn't clutch, but I do think it's humorous that people act as if he is perfect.
    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
    , except that after that a scrub named Tyree, with one-tenth the receiving talent of Blair White
    Tough to say. White was a walk on at MSU and undrafted. He was on our practice squad. Is he that talented or does Peyton make him look good? His TD catch to make it 31-28 was spectacular, but so was Tyree's catch. White could be out of the NFL next season and the Colts wouldn't miss a beat. I love him and his attitude, but he's the 4th wideout on this team at best. Would have been interesting to see what kind of numbers Collie would have put up yesterday had his concussion symptoms not come back, he was torching everything New England threw at him.

    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham (Pacertom come back!)
    Two all-time great quarterbacks. We are lucky to see them compete. Forced to pick one, I'll take Brady every time. It's close but I will take the proven leader and clutch performer.
    And I'll take Manning. The guy with 35 4th quarter comebacks and 44 game winning drives against Brady's 21 4th Quarter Comebacks and 29 game winning drives. Just as you can make the case that Manning is not statistically superior to Brady, I can make the case that Brady is no more clutch than Peyton. Brady has blown huge leads to a Manning lead team twice. Last year alone, as the Colts somehow made the Super Bowl, Manning lead SEVEN 4th quarter comebacks and capped every single one off with a game winning drive. Say what you want about Manning lead teams, but much like Kobe in the NBA, Peyton has a killer instinct when it's crunch time in the 4th quarter. If he had finished that drive yesterday, and if he had not forced that throw believe me he would have because the Pats defense was absolutely dumb founded, we would be talking about him leading three of the most epic comebacks all against Tom Brady and Bill Belichick. He did it twice and he failed once. Overall, I'll take those odds. I hope we get to see the Pats again in the playoffs, I'd much rather see them than the Steelers, and I'd imagine Peyton might feel the same way. That secondary is a sieve.


    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

      Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
      SBs are a TEAM stat. You can't use those to evaluate QBs.
      (And the same applies to the Russell vs. Chamberlain debate in basketball.)

      So if I understand all this correctly, how have we gone this far without a Terry Bradshaw reference? Your Brady's, Montana's, Young's, Aikman's, and Roethlesberger's bore me.

      Manning, Marino, and Fouts are the three best passers of all time, no doubt about it. And it takes a lot more than a HoF/GoAT "passer" to win Super Bowls.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
        Two all-time great quarterbacks. We are lucky to see them compete. Forced to pick one, I'll take Brady every time. It's close but I will take the proven leader and clutch performer.
        Depends on perspective I guess, but I would pick Manning as the better leader and yes I would pick Brady as the better clutch performer. I think if you were to ask folks who had zero interest in either the Colts or Pats they would naturally compare Manning to Marino and Brady to Montana.
        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          (And the same applies to the Russell vs. Chamberlain debate in basketball.)

          So if I understand all this correctly, how have we gone this far without a Terry Bradshaw reference? Your Brady's, Montana's, Young's, Aikman's, and Roethlesberger's bore me.

          Manning, Marino, and Fouts are the three best passers of all time, no doubt about it. And it takes a lot more than a HoF/GoAT "passer" to win Super Bowls.
          I can't tell if J is being sarcastic or not...


          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            Forced to pick one, I'll take Brady every time. It's close but I will take the proven leader and clutch performer.
            If taking either of them means I need to short-change the rest of the roster, then I'll take a complete team with a league-leading defense, solid running game, and and a next-tier QB like Roethlisberger over either of them. But since that isn't a choice here, I'd take Brady.



            (Strangely enough, though, I'd still take Marino over Montana. Its not Dan's fault that the rest of the Dolphins' roster over most of his career was awful. Put Marino with Peyton's roster -- while still not a great surrounding cast -- and he would have won three or four SBs.)
            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
            And life itself, rushing over me
            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

              All this being said, I'm really not trying to be negative on Brady. As I've said countless times in this thread, they're both incredible. It's like picking between a Ferrari and a Lamborghini, can you really go wrong? I don't think you can.

              I do honestly think that over the course of their careers, the Patriots have been the much better constructed TEAM, and if you don't think it pains me to admit that as a Colts fan, well then I don't know what else to say. I don't mind Brady (I mind his haircut), but I absolutely HATE the Patriots, but for the past decade they have had the better TEAM.

              Sorry that I don't sip the Polian kool-aid like a lot of people, but my opinion is that he's done a ****ty job of building a super bowl contender pretty much since 2002. He was doing ok up until that point, but has been taking a perpetual dump on Manning's career since then. How many linebackers has he let walk only to have them sign somewhere else and become a pro bowler? But hey at least we poured all that money into Bob Sanders after his one healthy post season! Also, let's give him a big round of applause for the Donald Brown selection in 1st round and of course who can forget the brilliant move of giving up a future first rounder for Tony Ugoh! Bill Polian everybody! Let's give him a round of applause!

              My point in all this, my opinion is that Peyton Manning won 1 Super Bowl and got to another one in spite of Bill Polian, not because of him.


              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                I can't tell if J is being sarcastic or not...
                A little bit because I think the discussion of both current and all-time QB's is artificially narrow.

                I don't think Super Bowls rings is an appropriate measure of the greatness of a QB. But if it is, then the conversation still starts and ends with a guy who couldn't throw a spiral but was a great leader, threw good blocks after handing the ball to Franco Harris, and could complete clutch passes, spiral or not.

                Mostly, I continue to think that the position of QB is overrated.

                I think Manning has done a great job of making an underwhelming roster into a playoff contender.

                I think Brady does a better job of just being another football player on a very good team, and in a circular way that makes him a better leader.

                If Manning would have handed the ball to Edge 30 times (instead of 13) in that famous January 2006 game at the Hoosier Dome, you'd have another Super Bowl title. And if he handed the ball off yesterday, you probably would have won that game, too. But Cowher and LeBeau knew they didn't need to worry about shutting down Edge, that Manning would shut down Edge himself while trying to play the hero.

                The difference I see between them is that Brady will hand off the ball, (and Ben will hand off the ball and then look for someone to block, which is even better.)

                Being disinterested in either team, the difference I see is that with the Colts, its all about Manning, and with Brady, its all about the team.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                  Man, if we kept handing the ball off to Donald Brown yesterday, I might have started murdering people in the streets.

                  I don't think there is any chance we would have won yesterday's game by running more. The fact Manning was giving Brown the ball at all in the 4th quarter was surprising to me.

                  Can't disagree about Edge tho, he was woefully under used. And I feel the same about Addai often, but Addai ain't out there right now and Mike Hart is hurt too.

                  So it's either Donald "I got drafted in the 1st round to push Addai for the starting spot, but now I'm the 3rd stringer, go figure" Brown or Javarrus "I'm just here because I'm Edgerrin's cousin, I never though I'd actually play" James. And that's not even considering the fact that they are behind the second worst line of the Manning era.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-22-2010, 11:36 AM.


                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    Being disinterested in either team, the difference I see is that with the Colts, its all about Manning, and with Brady, its all about the team.

                    Yep, you're right Jay. Peyton should have handed the ball off to Brown in the 4th quarter more, you know because they were down 10pts with 14mins left in the game.

                    Yep, everyone knows when you're getting short on time, and you're down double digits, the way to win games is to hand off to a player who had 16 carries for 32freaking yards.

                    Yep, you're right. It's just Peyton being selfish.

                    At one point in the first quater Brown had 7 carries for 6 yards. Man, hopefully that production will continue for the rest of the year. You might as well just hand over the Lombardi Trophy now........
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                      Other than the final, horrible, bad Farvish last throw, I thought Manning and the Colts collectively were total clutchBin the 4th, the Pats were not (not to say they choked, since they didn't turn it over). Manning carved up the D, and the Colts D stepped up and turned back their offense. Brady didn't even really need to score, just get a few first downs and no comeback.

                      The bad thing now is that this means a probable December game in the snow.

                      I do wonder if Boston fans look at the Brady/manning debate the same way as the Magic/Bird one. I mean, magic had more championships, so he's better right?
                      Last edited by Ransom; 11-22-2010, 01:15 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Yep, you're right Jay. Peyton should have handed the ball off to Brown in the 4th quarter more, you know because they were down 10pts with 14mins left in the game.

                        Yep, everyone knows when you're getting short on time, and you're down double digits, the way to win games is to hand off to a player who had 16 carries for 32freaking yards.

                        Yep, you're right. It's just Peyton being selfish.

                        At one point in the first quater Brown had 7 carries for 6 yards. Man, hopefully that production will continue for the rest of the year. You might as well just hand over the Lombardi Trophy now........
                        And yet a running play for no yards sets up the game-tying field goal attempt.

                        A draw play in that situation might pick up 10 yards for a chip-shot FG attempt. That doesn't even require good run blocking, you just let the Patriots apply pressure as if it were a pass and then run into whatever gap they give you. The Colts had two timeouts left, so you work the middle of the field and don't risk a turnover.

                        Clearly, I'm not talking about the entire fourth quarter when you're behind two (or 2+) scores. You've got to be able to pass in that situation. There's a time to run the ball and a time to pass the ball.

                        1st down on the 24 with 37 seconds left and two timeouts - that's a time to run the ball.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          If Manning would have handed the ball to Edge 30 times (instead of 13) in that famous January 2006 game at the Hoosier Dome, you'd have another Super Bowl title. And if he handed the ball off one more time yesterday, you probably would have won that game, too.

                          Oops, fixed. My bad.

                          I'm talking about 1st-and-ten at the 24 with 37 seconds on the clock and two timeouts remaining. That's a stupid time to throw a pass.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                            It was certainly a bad time to throw a long, reckless pass like he did. I wouldn't have had any problem with a safe short pass to pick up some extra yards though, especially the way our receivers were eating them up. I think we could have marched into the end-zone doing that.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

                              Sorry that I don't sip the Polian kool-aid like a lot of people, but my opinion is that he's done a ****ty job of building a super bowl contender pretty much since 2002. He was doing ok up until that point, but has been taking a perpetual dump on Manning's career since then. How many linebackers has he let walk only to have them sign somewhere else and become a pro bowler? But hey at least we poured all that money into Bob Sanders after his one healthy post season! Also, let's give him a big round of applause for the Donald Brown selection in 1st round and of course who can forget the brilliant move of giving up a future first rounder for Tony Ugoh! Bill Polian everybody! Let's give him a round of applause!
                              I tend to agree with this...
                              I cannot stand Polian's arrogance and I think his arrogance sometimes leads to bad decisions because he doesn't want to follow conventional wisdom. He has 'smartest guy in the room' syndrome. He won't do what he should sometimes, even when he probably knows he should, because he doesn't want to do what is predictable.

                              It's not like you can make the argument he's let players walk because he's not going to overpay and can let the system and coaching fill the gaps when he does things like pour money into Glass Bob or with everyone looking one way in the draft he goes another and doesn't take the best stab at filling a need.

                              I still say Manning's refusal to address his contract during the season has more to do with some demands he will make about the team than it does about discussing money during the season. Irsay would hand him a blank check.
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Indianapolis at New England - Game Thread - 11/21/10

                                Jay is making a late run for a funniest poster. Yeah, I can't take anything he says seriously regarding any team or player ever after he was trying to convince us that the Cincinatti Bengals MUST have been the best team in football last year because they beat that ****ty Steelers team twice.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X