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

Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

    Yeah whatever Bill...

    http://sportsradiointerviews.com/201...line-position/


    Bill Polian Defends The Colts Draft And Says The Criticism Of Their Running Game Comes From “Stat Geeks” And Is Off Base
    May 4, 2011 – 7:45 am by Steven Cuce
    For the past few years, the Indianapolis Colts have done a disservice to Peyton Manning by putting together a patchwork offensive line consisting of undrafted free agents and lower round draft picks. It’s almost like the Colts organization has taken Peyton Manning for granted assuming his quick release and football smarts will overcome the deficiencies of the offensive line. And for the most part, they’ve gotten away with this. Well, he’s not getting any younger and the window of opportunity for the Colts to win another Super Bowl is getting smaller. Picking offensive lineman in the first two rounds to keep Peyton Manning’s jersey extra clean was a smart move.



    Bill Polian joined 1070 the Fan in Indianapolis with Grady and Big Joe (Staysniak, former Colts offensive lineman) to discuss the draft selections of Anthony Castonzo and Benjamin Ijalana improving the Colts running game, Anthony Castonzo and Benjamin Ijalana being run blocking type lineman, an update on Austin Collie and Anthony Gonzalez, how much thought put into selecting a quarterback in this year’s draft to groom for the future and if the lockout add any extra wrinkles or chaos to the draft process.

    What do Anthony Castonzo and Benjamin Ijalana bring to help improve the Colts running game?

    “Well first of all let me say that I think the discussion about the running game is way off base. This is stat geeks looking at a stat and saying ‘oh gee Indianapolis has a problem’. We finished first in the conference and I believe second in the league in total offense. We’re always among the top four or five in scoring every year. The object of the game is to score. It’s not to make stat geeks happy in terms of yards per carry. I’m criticizing people, make no bones about it, who deal only in statistics. The object of our running game because we are high scoring, high powered, offense is to run effectively, i.e. run in the red zone, which we do very, very effectively. And run in four minutes and short yardage, which we have not done effectively. The improvement there I believe has to come from the back. That’s not the responsibility of the offensive line. You get a body on a body and a back has to either make somebody miss or more likely in short yardage you as know Joe run through a tackle. You know the idea of the idea of the statistical analysis of the running game is about as far off base as it possibly could be, in my opinion.”

    How would respond to the critics saying Anthony Castonzo and Benjamin Ijalana aren’t run blocking type lineman?

    “I got news for you (Grady) and Joe I think will corroborate this offensive lineman have to do both. They have to run block and they have to pass block. We don’t substitute. This isn’t hockey. We don’t have a checking line and a scoring line. We have only one line and their job is to run block and pass block. Both men are pretty adept at that. I think they’ll adjust pretty well to the National Football League. As Joe would tell you the most difficult adaption from college to the NFL is passing blocking because the NFL defensive lineman are so much better by a factor of a hundred than those who they play against at the college level. So the most difficult part is not run blocking, is pass blocking because the defenders are so much quicker, so much more adept at moves, study so much more film, recognize various sets by offensive lineman much more quickly and the stunts, which are difficult to pick up are executed much more crisply than they are the collegiate level, so the tougher part is pass blocking and that’s what you focus on in terms of the ability, the skill set that people bring. Do they have quick feet? Do they have long arms? Can they position themselves? Can they recover? Can they so called ‘bench press’ a defensive lineman when at some point in time you simply have to sit down and anchor and stop that man in his tracks? Those are the things we look for and there is so much more emphasis on those. We can see whether a guy can run block right off the bat. I can look at five plays on a tape and tell you whether or not a guy can run block. It’s more difficult to ascertain whether he can pass block because you’re not looking at the same talent level playing against you.”

    There was some criticism by the national guys over the Delone Carter selection, but we understand it due to the injuries at wide reciever position and there being a lack of depth on the roster. Can you give us an update on Austin Collie? Will he be ready to comeback this season? What about the Reggie Wayne contract situation and will you be able to get him resigned?

    “Well the only person…there are no persons on our receiving core that have contract issues. Everyone has a contract for this coming year, so there are no issues. Secondly, in Austin Collie’s case and I spoke with him over the weekend. He’s feeling 100%. He’s working out. He’s having no symptoms, no repercussions, nothing that would lead anyone to believe that there is any long term issue with him, but in the case of a situation where he had two serious injuries you gotta be pretty careful and as a result we won’t know until he steps on the field and actually plays in a game and takes some hits, whether or not he will be capable of continuing at the high level he’s played beforehand, so that one is up in the air. Anthony Gonzalez is working out. He’s 100%. He could have come back for the playoffs, obviously we made a mistake in keeping him down, but you can’t be…you have to make those decisions on a week-to-week basis. You can’t be a soothsayer afterwards and say we made a mistake. Hindsight is 20/20. If we’d known he was going to be back obviously we would not have put him down. That was very much in doubt at the time that he was injured, but my point is there is no long term repercussions there. You know there are no contract issues in the receiving core. The question of Austin is an open question. We’re all hoping and praying that what we see now, which is 100% Austin Collie is what we are going to see during the regular season.”

    How much thought did you have in this draft in terms of selecting a quarterback to groom for the future?

    “We graded the quarterbacks that were in this draft. We thought there was one that had the capability of being a quality starter in the league that was not a developmental project and that opportunity to draft him did not come about and so we just moved on.”

    Did the lockout add any extra wrinkles or chaos to the draft process?

    “Well it’s been business as usual from the start of the lockout. Now the opening of the facility on Friday was definitely chaotic. We got word and admittedly a little bit late because we were so engrossed in the draft meetings, but we got word around 1:30 or 2 o’clock that we were to open the facilities I guess the following day. I’ve lost track of the days. In so doing we went scrambling and we ended our draft preparation and got into scramble mode in terms of trying to get in touch with players, opening the building, making sure that people that needed medical checkups got them, bringing them from far and long places in some cases, so that was clearly chaotic and then of course it ended as quickly as it started, but that’s the way these things go. You just have to…I’ve been through three of these things before and you just have to shrug your shoulders. Nothing really makes any operational sense. You just roll with the punches.”
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

    Polian really likes to insult stat geeks whenever he has the opportunity. You'd think he'd be looking for an advantage, however slight.
    Removed link to my website after a PM from Able.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

      The lack of an adequate line and the poor running game that came as a result of it left the Colts short of the performance that would have otherwise been expected.

      Admittedly, the significant injuries that plagued the Colts further reduced the effectiveness of the team overall and contributed to the poor finish, but for Polian to claim that the lack of a running game is not significant for the Colts is uncharacteristically misguided for him.

      Speed on the line is more important the further away from center that you get. Power in the middle stops the run defensively, and opens up running slots offensively in my opinion. The more effective the running game becomes, the easier it will be for Peyton to work his magic and lead the Colts to the playoffs and hopefully the Super Bowl.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

        I love how he takes a shot at stat geeks by using stats.....

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

          Stat geeks validate Polian's philosophy yet he continues to criticize them. I'm assuming that's because he's the most unlikable ******* ever.

          It's ok though. Thank you for the excellent job as a President Bill, but seriously, we all hate you.

          Edit- Without Tony here to shield Polian's assholeness from the public, I won't surprised if his son is the only Polian working for us soon...

          It's funny Bird and Polian have a lot in common, only Bird doesn't get on the radio and aimlessly rant about how he dislikes everyone...Bird is anti-social, yet does the smart thing by avoiding the public.
          Last edited by mattie; 05-16-2011, 06:59 AM.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

            Originally posted by mattie View Post
            Stat geeks validate Polian's philosophy yet he continues to criticize them. I'm assuming that's because he's the most unlikable ******* ever.

            It's ok though. Thank you for the excellent job as a President Bill, but seriously, we all hate you.

            Edit- Without Tony here to shield Polian's assholeness from the public, I won't surprised if his son is the only Polian working for us soon...

            It's funny Bird and Polian have a lot in common, only Bird doesn't get on the radio and aimlessly rant about how he dislikes everyone...Bird is anti-social, yet does the smart thing by avoiding the public.


            Yep although I can't believe assholeness got past the filter.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Polian defends Colts draft and says criticism of running game is from stat geeks and off base

              *******ness? Guess not everything with "ness" on the end gets past.

              Comment

              Previous template Next
              Working...
              X