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

Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

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

  • Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

    Kravitz draws connecting line between departure of scouts and coaches, Chris Polian (and strained relations), and the Colts' bad drafting these past few years.

    Kravitz: Who's to blame for 0-8 Colts? Chris Polian, for one

    Written by
    Bob Kravitz



    If I'm properly reading between the lines, Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay is more committed to staying the course with the Family Polian than he is coach Jim Caldwell.

    Asked this week about both, Irsay thought it was "pretty radical'' to even ask the question about the Polians' future, but when asked about Caldwell, he said, in part, "When it comes to changes and Jim's status, it's something that eight games going forward, more will be revealed. This situation is always changing. But it's really going to be always what's best to give us a chance to win."

    Which leads me to this question: What has Chris Polian done to assure his long-term security?

    I've spoken to several former Colts people in recent weeks, and while none of them will go on the record -- many have non-disclosure agreements and fear public comment will hurt their NFL job prospects -- virtually all of them told me Chris Polian has been a toxic force who has brought this franchise to its knees for reasons other than Peyton Manning's injury.

    This may be Chris Polian's first full year with complete control over the team's daily operations, but since he started moving up the organizational ladder in the early 2000s for no apparent reason other than being a Polian, he has been instrumental in hastening the exits of scouts and assistant coaches who led the Colts to previous greatness.

    The following men were here in 2004 and are no longer here in 2011.

    Scout Tom Gamble, gone after the 2004 season.

    Scout Paul Roell, out after the 2006 draft.

    Director of college scouting Mike Butler, out after the 2006 draft.

    Scout David Caldwell, out in 2007.

    Coordinator of player personnel John Becker, out in 2008.

    Area scout Ryan Cavanaugh, out in 2008.

    Assistant general manager/scouting Dom Anile, pushed out in 2009. Anile was a precious resource as one of the few men who would tell Bill Polian things he didn't want to hear.

    A fairly direct line can be drawn between some of those departures and the decline in the quality of the Colts' drafts.

    In 2007, they drafted (in order): Anthony Gonzalez, Tony Ugoh, Daymeion Hughes, Quinn Pitcock, Brannon Condren, Clint Session, Roy Hall, Michael Coe and Keyunta Dawson.

    In 2008: Mike Pollak, Philip Wheeler, Jacob Tamme, Marcus Howard, Tom Santi, Steve Justice, Mike Hard, Pierre Garcon and Jamey Richard.

    In 2009: Donald Brown, Fili Moala, Jerraud Powers, Austin Collie, Terrance Taylor, Curtis Painter, Pat McAfee, Jaimie Thomas.

    In 2010: Jerry Hughes, Pat Angerer, Kevin Thomas, Jacques McClendon, Brody Eldridge, Ricardo Mathews, Kavell Conner, Ray Fisher.

    Then there are the longtime assistant coaches who left, in some part because of troubled relationships with the Polians, specifically Chris.

    Howard Mudd, the offensive line coach, who left Indy after the 2009 season, returned to the Colts briefly, retired after the Super Bowl loss and then came out of retirement to join Philadelphia. Mudd was thinking about leaving for some time, but when Bill Polian blamed the offensive line for the Super Bowl loss, he knew he wasn't welcome to return.

    Gene Huey, the running backs coach, who was shown the door in 2010.

    Tom Moore, the offensive coordinator, who was gracelessly cast aside without notice or fanfare after the 2010 season. Over time, Moore was cut off at the knees, his voice no longer audible.

    Tell me, what has Chris Polian actually done besides win the genetic lottery? If the Colts were doing a national search for a new general manager right now, would Irsay even glance at Chris Polian if his name was Schwartz or Smith?

    All Colts decisions are made by the entire front office, but I'm told the Ugoh draft, the decision to get rid of Ryan Lilja, the failures to reconstruct the offensive line, the doomed Corey Simon signing, all of them had Chris Polian's fingerprints all over them.

    Give him credit for what appears, at least now, to be a pretty solid 2011 draft class. Before they got hurt, Anthony Castonzo and Drake Nevis looked like keepers.

    But beyond that?

    As Chris' star rose in recent years, others in the organization bristled at what they viewed as clear nepotism. Bill would stroke his son in staff meetings, remind everybody what a huge impact he made. Meanwhile, scouts and others saw Chris getting raises and promotions without doing what they perceived to be the necessary legwork.

    I can appreciate Irsay's commitment to continuity. On the face of it, there wouldn't seem to be a reason for panic, even after a horrible season that was hastened, in large part, by Manning's injury.

    But Irsay has to look as long and hard, and as critically, at Chris Polian and the Polian regime as he does his coaching staff.

    It wasn't Caldwell who chose to start the season with a paper-thin secondary. It wasn't Caldwell who woke up one day and said, "Gosh, I'd really like to start the season with four offensive linemen who are either starting for the first time or playing a new position.'' It wasn't Caldwell who held on to Curtis Painter, then showed so little faith in the quarterback he went out and spent $4 million on Kerry Collins.

    If Caldwell is going to be judged on this season after going 26-10 his first two years, shouldn't Chris Polian?
    Kravitz: Who's to blame for 0-8 Colts? Chris Polian, for one
    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

  • #2
    Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

    They aren't saying anything a lot of us are thinking right now.

    That being said I also think the IndyStar is kind of enjoying piling it on(even though I agree with them) after how the FO has treated the local media.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

      Kravitz just showed how the last few drafts were horrendous with virtually few starters since 2007. Somebody is dropping the ball.The top of our drafts have been especially abysmal.
      Last edited by speakout4; 11-06-2011, 12:57 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

        I think it is time to completely clean house. Especially if Peyton is done or not here.
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

          Not worth it's own thread, but...

          Losing is a lousy feeling. Confronting criticism of one of your children is even less appealing than losing. Yet if you are the vice chairman of an NFL franchise – and someone who has promoted his son to the position of general manager, and whose team has the worst record in football – you should probably develop an ability to absorb said criticism without sounding like a cross between Tony Soprano and Tommy DeVito from “Goodfellas.” In that regard the Colts’ accomplished talent guru Bill Polian has some serious work to do. After highly respected Indianapolis Star columnist Bob Kravitz examined the role of Polian’s son, Chris, in creating 0-9 Indy’s current predicament (with numerous unnamed sources describing the younger Polian as a “toxic force who has brought this franchise to its knees for reasons other than Peyton Manning’s(notes) injury”), Daddy Polian classed it up in an interview with the team’s radio announcer following Sunday’s defeat to the Falcons. “Some people are just rats who lie about people,” Polian said, in what I’d guess was a shot at Kravitz, his sources or all of the above. The team’s job, Polian continued, is to “throw the rats in the sewer.” Riiiiiiggggghhhhttt. Or, perhaps, the team’s job is to avoid complete embarrassment in the wake of an injury to a single player, to draft and develop players more successfully than they have in recent years, and/or to be a little less Stalinist in its public presentation. Then again, maybe Kravitz and the ex-Colts employees who believe Chris Polian slid into his GM job because of his surname are getting off easy by being compared to rodents. When the elder Polian gets really mad, people have been known to become closely acquainted with stadium walls. My favorite Polian story: I’m told he once became angered by the presence of non-team employees in the dining hall at the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, where the Colts held their training camp from 1999-2009, and demanded that they leave. He was informed that one of the offending intruders was the dean of the school. Polian was unmoved and had the dean booted. The dean! Speaking of deans, I wish owner Jimmy Irsay would put his vice chairman on double-secret probation, but I’m not holding my breath.

          Michael Silver / Yahoo Sports
          This is the darkest timeline.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

            This is what you get when you have a team with an absentee owner. There is not even a little bit of a threat of a higher power to check either of the Polians.
            Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-08-2011, 11:12 AM.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

              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


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                This is what you get when you have a team with an absentee, drug using owner. There is not even a little bit of a threat of a higher power to check either of the Polians.


                How is Irsay an absentee owner? The guy is all over the place and is involved in many important decisions, i.e. hiring Dungy, the new stadium, the Super Bowl, etc. He seems to legitimately care about winning, something you certainly cannot say about every professional owner.

                Irsay gave Polian control of the football decisions because Irsay himself is not a football expert. But that doesn't make him an "absentee owner". And who is to say Irsay wouldn't check either of the Polians if he felt he had to?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                  Jim irsay cannot be called absentee.

                  I honestly don't care about the old drug part.

                  http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playof...ght&id=2751833

                  I love this article.
                  Last edited by Stryder; 11-07-2011, 08:43 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                    Originally posted by Stryder View Post
                    Jim irsay cannot be called absentee.

                    I honestly don't care about the old drug part.

                    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playof...ght&id=2751833

                    I love this article.
                    That was then this is now.. the fact it has gotten to this point shows he's not been tending to the team.

                    When everyone around you tells you that the Polians are toxic(employees that have been with the Colts for years only to claim retirement but go elsewhere for work just to get away from this place) then maybe he should get a clue and realize something is wrong.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                      Hiring Dungy took place what, 8 years ago?

                      Getting the super bowl and a new stadium? In what way do those two things make the Colts better on the field?

                      What more proof does Irsay need that a check needs to happen than a team that is 0-9?

                      Irsay doesn't need to make the football decisions of the franchise necessarily, but he at least needs to have the presence that you don't feel like the guy below him is running the whole franchise, and honestly, how can you not get that feeling from Polian at this point?
                      Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-08-2011, 02:21 AM.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                        Irsay does drugs? Any proof of this or are you guys talking out of your ***?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                          And a dissenting, predominately fact based rebuttal. If the Star'd give Nate Dunlevy a Sunday column I'd get a subscription again. I have absolutely no problem with people bashing whoever, the franchise has clearly made mistakes, but Kravitz is just Skip Bayless kinda stupid. It's all emotion based with no legitimate introspection, knowledge, or research. We've seen what he writes about the Pacers, the vast majority of us think he's an idiot when it comes to our beloved roundball. Kravitz doesn't know anything about a sport but intramural hockey.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                            Irsay gives the injury report every day for practice. He continually is tweeting movitational tweets, continually tweeting about how this losing is unacceptable, etc.

                            The personal attacks by some of you is down right despicable. You can disagree with their decisions all you want, that's your right, but taking the conversation to a personal level, when you have no clue what goes on during their daily lives is ignorant at best.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz takes aim at Chris Polian

                              Perhaps my comments were a bit overtly personal, but I don't think Irsay does a good job running the team right now. Tweeting? I mean seriously? Who cares.

                              If I had to guess, again just a simple guess, Polian doesn't view Irsay as his boss, and he should.


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X