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

Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

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

  • #16
    Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    Yes, injuries happen that's now what he's saying.

    But we're talking about the number of serious injuries is high even for NFL standards.
    A lot of Injuries happen to my Bears last yr i didnt get mad . You have to bear down and play with who you have. Luckly this year we have not been nearly as injured just part of the NFL.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
      A lot of Injuries happen to my Bears last yr i didnt get mad . You have to bear down and play with who you have. Luckly this year we have not been nearly as injured just part of the NFL.
      You do realize that the Colts have had more injuries than any other team in the league this year right? And Powers just went out so that makes even more.

      Injuries happen. I understand. But injuries very rarely happen at this level, in terms of how many. It's not an excuse. It's reality. That's the whole reason why I'm not too upset this year. I don't expect them to be able to win with unsigned rookies, practice squad players, and players they cut at the very beginning of the season. It's not just like they're in uniform they're STARTING.

      I heard more *****ing last year from Bears fans when just Urlacher went down. ESPN pretty much gave them a pass right when it happened.

      Blair White, a starting WR, didn't even get a scholarship to play in college. Let alone was he drafted.

      Again, I understand injuries happen. We all know Bob Sanders. But at some point in time it goes from "normal" to "extreme." The Colts are in the extreme camp, and have been for a while now.

      Don't waste your time replying with the same message. I get it.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

        Since, I feel like we have had more injuries then any other team.

        Then again, half of our first stringers are not NFL caliber players, so downgrading for them was like downgrading from a car with 200,000,000,000,000 miles to a car with 201,000,000,000,000 miles

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
          Boombaby, I think you underestimate some of the talent of your top players. My argument is not lack of front-line talent (when healthy), it is the lack of talent for players 40-53+ and also the severe lack of talent on both lines, except for pass rushers.

          -Reggie Wayne was a 1st round pick and if anything slid some. Lots of teams wanted him.

          -Gonzolez was a 1st round draft pick, and maybe he was a little high since most sites gave him a 2nd round grade. Still he was a guy lots of teams wanted. http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...2007&genpos=WR

          -Collie was a 4th rounder, right in line with draft projections after an amazing college career. http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...2009&genpos=WR

          -Tamme was a 4th rounder, maybe a little high with his 5-6 round grade http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...2008&genpos=TE

          -Blair White was undrafted, and that was somewhat surprising since many sites had him as high as round 3: http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...2010&genpos=WR In fact, he was thought to be a "steal" and was a lot more or a known quantity than less-heralded undrafted guys like Woodhead and Green-Ellis: http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2...-in-the-draft/

          Donald "bust" Brown and Joesph Addai- 1st round picks that lots of other teams wanted too.

          Manning has talent to throw to and perhaps even to hand the ball off to (who would know? Seen any holes?). Everything else is lacking, especially linemen and depth
          The Colts haven't signed one big time WR for Manning. Even the Cheap Patriots went out and got Brady some players. Wayne is basically our Deon Branch.

          Gonzo went incredibly high that year I don't care what he is predicted at. Who was going to take Gonzo besides us? Sidney Rice went 2nd round that year, I remember vividly.

          You never know about draft picks, I'm more concern about them not trying to get him a very good WR. There have been MANY great WRs available and they didn't go after any. Now we are suffering dearly.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
            Manning calls the play so u cant blame jim for not running the football
            Have you seen the Colts run blocking the past three seasons?? (Or the blocking all together this season).

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

              I keep hearing that Peyton is surrounded by skill players that nobody wanted, castoffs appearing off the street.

              They seem to have invested a fair amount of draft picks in so-called castoffs.

              current active players only:
              WR#1: Wayne-1st round pick in 2001
              WR#2: Garcon-6th round pick
              WR#3: White-Undrafted free agent
              TE #1: Tamme-4th round pick
              TE#2: Eldridge- 5th round pick
              RB#1: Javarris James- Undrafted free agent
              RB#2: Donald Brown-1st round pick

              compare to a certain other team:

              WR#1: Welker-Undrafted free agent
              WR#2: Deion Branch-2nd round pick in 2002
              WR#3: Brandon Tate- 3rd round pick
              TE#1: Rob Gronkowski- 2nd round pick
              TE#2: Aaron Hernandez- 4th round pick
              RB#1: BJGE-Undrafted free agent
              RB#2: Danny Woodhead-Undrafted free agent

              To make the analysis quantifiable, I'll call an undrafted free agent an 8th round draft pick.

              Colts current skill position players average draft round: (1+6+8+4+5+8+1)/7 = 4.7
              Patriots current skill position players average draft round: (8+2+3+2+4+8+8)/7 = 5.0

              Now when you consider the players out but expected to return: Collie- 4th round pick would replace White, Joseph Addai- 1st round pick would replace James,

              Colts skill position players average draft round: (1+6+4+4+5+1+1)/7 = 3.1

              bottom line: If the current players suiting up are not good enough to perform, maybe the people to question are the people who drafted them.
              Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 12-08-2010, 09:34 AM.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                Our first, second, and third rounders since the SB win:

                Anthony Gonzalez
                Tony Ugoh
                Daymeion Hughes
                Mike Pollak
                Phillip Wheeler
                Donald Brown
                Fili Moala
                Jerraud Powers
                Jerry Hughes
                Pat Angerer
                Kevin Thomas
                Quinn Pitcock


                Aside from Powers, is there a quality pick in there? I haven't watched Angerer very closely.

                It doesn't really matter what the presiding philosophy is (invest in skill players or lineman, or whatever), picking that poorly in the top rounds will kill any team.

                I think I agree w/ what Bball's been calling for for a long time - Peyton's proven he can make do with a crappy offensive talent level (even if it's not incredible, it's enough for most teams to win - even with this sadsack O-line he's making do); we need to bring in some playmakers on D, and some depth.

                And honestly, a four-year stretch like that should lose any GM his job. It'll be disappointing if Polian is still here next year.
                Last edited by SoupIsGood; 12-08-2010, 09:56 AM.
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                  Angerer could be good, but IMO the Ugoh pick/trade was such a bed ****ting/panic induced mistake that Polian could be fired for that alone. Oh the Donald Brown pick was a joke too.


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                    I keep hearing that Peyton is surrounded by skill players that nobody wanted, castoffs appearing off the street.

                    They seem to have invested a fair amount of draft picks in so-called castoffs.

                    current active players only:
                    WR#1: Wayne-1st round pick in 2001
                    WR#2: Garcon-6th round pick
                    WR#3: White-Undrafted free agent
                    TE #1: Tamme-4th round pick
                    TE#2: Eldridge- 5th round pick
                    RB#1: Javarris James- Undrafted free agent
                    RB#2: Donald Brown-1st round pick

                    compare to a certain other team:

                    WR#1: Welker-Undrafted free agent
                    WR#2: Deion Branch-2nd round pick in 2002
                    WR#3: Brandon Tate- 3rd round pick
                    TE#1: Rob Gronkowski- 2nd round pick
                    TE#2: Aaron Hernandez- 4th round pick
                    RB#1: BJGE-Undrafted free agent
                    RB#2: Danny Woodhead-Undrafted free agent

                    To make the analysis quantifiable, I'll call an undrafted free agent an 8th round draft pick.

                    Colts current skill position players average draft round: (1+6+8+4+5+8+1)/7 = 4.7
                    Patriots current skill position players average draft round: (8+2+3+2+4+8+8)/7 = 5.0

                    Now when you consider the players out but expected to return: Collie- 4th round pick would replace White, Joseph Addai- 1st round pick would replace James,

                    Colts skill position players average draft round: (1+6+4+4+5+1+1)/7 = 3.1

                    bottom line: If the current players suiting up are not good enough to perform, maybe the people to question are the people who drafted them.

                    Solid points that are hard to argue with.

                    I too don't think the skill players are the problem. It's the O-Line. I think the O-Line has been the problem. They've been so bad that it's in Manning's head to the point where it is causing him to make reckless decisions.

                    I'm not too worried about Manning. It seems to me the problems are mental and I think he'll fix those. If his poor play looked like it were too to declining physical skills then I'd be a lot more worried about the future.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      You do realize that the Colts have had more injuries than any other team in the league this year right? And Powers just went out so that makes even more.

                      Injuries happen. I understand. But injuries very rarely happen at this level, in terms of how many. It's not an excuse. It's reality. That's the whole reason why I'm not too upset this year. I don't expect them to be able to win with unsigned rookies, practice squad players, and players they cut at the very beginning of the season. It's not just like they're in uniform they're STARTING.

                      I heard more *****ing last year from Bears fans when just Urlacher went down. ESPN pretty much gave them a pass right when it happened.

                      Blair White, a starting WR, didn't even get a scholarship to play in college. Let alone was he drafted.

                      Again, I understand injuries happen. We all know Bob Sanders. But at some point in time it goes from "normal" to "extreme." The Colts are in the extreme camp, and have been for a while now.

                      Don't waste your time replying with the same message. I get it.

                      I would argue that the injury situation of three years ago was worse.

                      Tarik Glenn retired right before the season. He our pro bowl LT that Manning had played with his entire year.

                      Harrison went down in late September and never returned. That's a guy Manning relied on his whole career.

                      Freeney went down in the San Diego game and was out for the season.

                      That season we compensated. This season we haven't been able to.
                      Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-08-2010, 01:15 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                        Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
                        I would argue that the injury situation of three years ago was worse.

                        Tarik Glenn retired right before the season. He our pro bowl LG that Manning had played with his entire year.

                        Harrison went down in late September and never returned. That's a guy Manning relied on his whole career.

                        Freeney went down in the San Diego game and was out for the season.

                        That season we compensated. This season we haven't been able to.
                        He was our pro bowl left tackle not our left guard.

                        It is really hard to blame the coaching staff for this entire mess. I know it has been beat to death, but we have suffered an insane amount of injuries this year and that has really limited what this team can do offensively and defensively.

                        Defensively we have reverted back more to the bend but do not break philosophy because we have lost two out of three starting linebackers for a good amount of time, we lost our starting SS and then we lost his back up as well. Our two starting corners have missed some time and one just got put on IR. So you are not going to run a more aggressive system with back ups and free agents you sign off the street.

                        Offensively we are really crippled without Clark and Collie. Losing Clark shows how important he really is to this offense. He is truly Peyton safety valve out there. Sure last year we could not run the ball, but that was covered up by a pretty healthy receiving core. Now that we are missing Clark and Collie the lack of a running game makes things that much worse.

                        I do not think Caldwell is a great coach, but I do not think he will run this team in the ground either.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                          I know technically Welker is an undrafted FA, but let's not forget that he was a damn good reciever in Miami, and he was a FA signing by the Pats to get an established name. They shouldn't get credit saying they took a no name reciever and ran with him. They got a guy who had already made his name and showed the entire league he was worthy before he ever landed in Mass.

                          To sum it up, he's no Blair White.

                          -To Adam-

                          I'd trade Harrison for Clark any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Freeney
                          And Glenn wasn't an injury, so he can't be included in the discussion. They had an entire offseason to find a replacement and work with him to get him ready. They're making these adjustments on the fly, this season which is a hell of a lot harder to do.

                          While more big names, as opposed to the entire NFL were lost 3 years ago, this is by far the worst season they've had injury wise. Losing Clark hurt Manning big time, but losing Collie who is his next possession reciever makes it even worse.

                          That's the problem. The Colts don't have that reciever who can read the zone and sit down for a 5-8yd gain. Against Dallas when Manning threw one of his INTs him and Blair White jogged off the field together and I could clearly read Peyton's lips and he said "No God damnit" then when you see the replay you see that Peyton wanted to deliever the ball into the inside but Blair faked and went outside. It caused Peyton to actually pump fake and then throw the out route which was picked. That's a cause of the double read system. Manning is having a hard time with his recievers because they aren't making the right reads against the defense. He doesn't know what his recievers are going to do and it's causing him to not make the throws he wants and should make, it's also causing him to stare at recievers and throw the ball late. Defenses are eating it up, obviously.

                          With Reggie/Dallas/Austin he knows he's on the same page as them. He can make his read and throw the ball before they make their break and before they even turn their head around. We've seen more bad throws, and I mean off target throws, out of Peyton this year than I can remember ever watching him make. Probably going back to his rookie or second/third year in the league.

                          I don't think he's the one confused. Ultimately he's the one in charge of taking care of the football, so the picks are on him, but it's a guessing game out there on what his recievers are going to do.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            I know technically Welker is an undrafted FA, but let's not forget that he was a damn good reciever in Miami, and he was a FA signing by the Pats to get an established name. They shouldn't get credit saying they took a no name reciever and ran with him. They got a guy who had already made his name and showed the entire league he was worthy before he ever landed in Mass.

                            To sum it up, he's no Blair White.

                            -To Adam-

                            I'd trade Harrison for Clark any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Freeney
                            And Glenn wasn't an injury, so he can't be included in the discussion. They had an entire offseason to find a replacement and work with him to get him ready. They're making these adjustments on the fly, this season which is a hell of a lot harder to do.

                            While more big names, as opposed to the entire NFL were lost 3 years ago, this is by far the worst season they've had injury wise. Losing Clark hurt Manning big time, but losing Collie who is his next possession reciever makes it even worse.

                            That's the problem. The Colts don't have that reciever who can read the zone and sit down for a 5-8yd gain. Against Dallas when Manning threw one of his INTs him and Blair White jogged off the field together and I could clearly read Peyton's lips and he said "No *** damnit" then when you see the replay you see that Peyton wanted to deliever the ball into the inside but Blair faked and went outside. It caused Peyton to actually pump fake and then throw the out route which was picked. That's a cause of the double read system. Manning is having a hard time with his recievers because they aren't making the right reads against the defense. He doesn't know what his recievers are going to do and it's causing him to not make the throws he wants and should make, it's also causing him to stare at recievers and throw the ball late. Defenses are eating it up, obviously.

                            With Reggie/Dallas/Austin he knows he's on the same page as them. He can make his read and throw the ball before they make their break and before they even turn their head around. We've seen more bad throws, and I mean off target throws, out of Peyton this year than I can remember ever watching him make. Probably going back to his rookie or second/third year in the league.

                            I don't think he's the one confused. Ultimately he's the one in charge of taking care of the football, so the picks are on him, but it's a guessing game out there on what his recievers are going to do.

                            Glenn retired in late July right before training camp, so they did not have an entire off-season to prepare. His retirement had the same effect as a season ending injury in training camp. It's not like he retired immediately after the Super Bowl giving us all off-season to compensate/prepare. I'd say the situation his retirement put us in caused to us to make a quick, unanticipated adjustment on the fly. We had to immediately give the role to Ugoh, a rookie, when our plan had been for him to learn under Glenn. Diem was also hurt some that year, adding to the 0-Line woes.

                            Granted, Polian did try to prepare for the day Glenn wouldn't be around with the trading of the 08 first rounder for Ugoh, which was obviously a complete misfire in hindsight.

                            And I'd take Harrison over Clark in a heartbeat. In Tamme, we've found somewhat of an adequate replacement for Clark. He's not as good, but 416 yards with 3 touchdowns in 4 games is nothing to sneeze at. But in the 3 years since Harrison has left, we haven't had anyone come in who can even come close to replicating the deep-ball threat that he was. I miss the days when you knew Manning had two pro-bowl deep ball threats on the outside.

                            In addition to Freeney, we also lost Morris during the season as well as McFarland right before the season started.

                            That was a horrible year. You can say this one is worse, though I don't think it's by much.
                            Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-08-2010, 01:29 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                              I don't know how you can say the Colts don't have two deep threats. Garcon has proven that many times, especially in the Jets playoff game last year.

                              Peyton doesn't need anymore deep threats. He needs possession recievers. And Tamme is in no way shape or form anywhere close to providing what Dallas Clark does. It's not even in the same universe.

                              We're talking about a season after Clark put up monsterous numbers for a TE. I don't know how many people need to say that Clark has been the teams MVP. Peyton saying it and Polian saying it (IIRC) are both huge endorsements for him. After Peyton, Dallas is the single most important piece to the offense, and it's not even close.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Serious question: How come Jim Caldwell hasn't been criticized by the national media?

                                Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                                I keep hearing that Peyton is surrounded by skill players that nobody wanted, castoffs appearing off the street.

                                They seem to have invested a fair amount of draft picks in so-called castoffs.

                                current active players only:
                                WR#1: Wayne-1st round pick in 2001
                                WR#2: Garcon-6th round pick
                                WR#3: White-Undrafted free agent
                                TE #1: Tamme-4th round pick
                                TE#2: Eldridge- 5th round pick
                                RB#1: Javarris James- Undrafted free agent
                                RB#2: Donald Brown-1st round pick

                                compare to a certain other team:

                                WR#1: Welker-Undrafted free agent
                                WR#2: Deion Branch-2nd round pick in 2002
                                WR#3: Brandon Tate- 3rd round pick
                                TE#1: Rob Gronkowski- 2nd round pick
                                TE#2: Aaron Hernandez- 4th round pick
                                RB#1: BJGE-Undrafted free agent
                                RB#2: Danny Woodhead-Undrafted free agent

                                To make the analysis quantifiable, I'll call an undrafted free agent an 8th round draft pick.

                                Colts current skill position players average draft round: (1+6+8+4+5+8+1)/7 = 4.7
                                Patriots current skill position players average draft round: (8+2+3+2+4+8+8)/7 = 5.0

                                Now when you consider the players out but expected to return: Collie- 4th round pick would replace White, Joseph Addai- 1st round pick would replace James,

                                Colts skill position players average draft round: (1+6+4+4+5+1+1)/7 = 3.1

                                bottom line: If the current players suiting up are not good enough to perform, maybe the people to question are the people who drafted them.
                                I am sorry but this is absolutely terrible anaylsis. For one the only reason why the current players are not good enough is do to the fact the real players are hurt. If Addai isn't hurt the running game and pass protection would be better. If Gonzo isn't hurt Blaire White isn't touching the field. If Dallas Clark isn't hurt he once again is our most targeted player.

                                This team is underachieving because the 0-line sucks (which I do blame Polain for) and the injuries that have occured.

                                If the Brady was under our 0-line you would see similar numbers to Manning and if you slap in Fred Taylor into your anaylsis that 5 goes to a 4.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X