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

Broncos waive Kyle Orton

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

  • Broncos waive Kyle Orton

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/72...ter-kyle-orton


    Broncos waive QB Kyle Orton








    ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Kyle Orton has gone from Jay Cutler's replacement to Tim Tebow's backup to the unemployment line.

    The Broncos released the 29-year-old veteran quarterback Tuesday, six weeks after benching him following a 1-4 start.

    "I spoke with Kyle earlier today and thanked him for everything he did for the Broncos. He was a true professional throughout this season. I've got a great deal of respect for him as both a player and as a person," coach John Fox said in a statement.

    "This was the right decision for our football team. We feel good about our quarterback group, and this gives Kyle an opportunity to help another team and showcase his talents."







    Orton shouldn't stay unemployed for long.

    Although he's a vested veteran with seven NFL seasons under his belt, Orton is subject to the waiver rules because he was released after the trade deadline. If another team claims him, it will be responsible for about $3 million in salary, which is what remains of his roughly $9 million contract for 2011. If nobody claims him, he'll be free to sign with anybody.

    Two intriguing possibilities are the Chicago Bears and Houston Texans. Both are in the thick of the playoff race at 7-3 but have problems under center, and another potential destination is AFC West rival Kansas City.

    Cutler broke the thumb on his right throwing hand last weekend and might miss the rest of the regular season. His backup is Caleb Hanie. The Bears visit the Broncos on Dec. 11.

    Matt Schaub of the Texans is out for weeks with a right foot injury and he's been replaced by previously underachieving Matt Leinart.

    Matt Cassel hurt his throwing hand in the Chiefs' 17-10 loss to Denver on Nov. 13 and had season-ending surgery the next day. His replacement, Tyler Palko, threw three interceptions in his first start, a 34-3 loss at New England on Monday night.

    John Elway, the Broncos' executive vice president of football operations, called Orton an "absolute pro," and said he decided against keeping him on the roster through the remainder of the season.

    "We thought it was best for the Broncos at this time as well as for Kyle to catch on with a different team," Elway said. "Kyle is going to have more options in the NFL. He'll get an opportunity to play somewhere else, and we wish him the best of luck."

    The Broncos didn't announce a corresponding roster move, but one possibility was the promotion of rookie quarterback Adam Weber from the practice squad.

    Orton was acquired in 2009 in the Cutler trade with the Bears and he won his first six starts in Denver before going 6-21. He passed for 3,000-plus yards in each of his first two seasons in Denver after spending his first four seasons in Chicago.

    The Broncos tried to trade Orton after the NFL lockout ended in July but talks with Miami broke down and Fox threw open the quarterback competition, something for which Tebow proved ill-prepared.









    Orton decisively outplayed Tebow in training camp for a second straight season but he turned ordinary when the games started to count, turning the ball over nine times and losing a string of winnable games and the organization's confidence.

    Orton's slide hit bottom Oct. 9 when he went 6 for 13 for 34 yards in the first half against the Chargers and threw his seventh interception, tied for most in the league at the time.

    Fox sent in Tebow to start the second half and after a slow start, the former Florida star sparked a listless offense to within a last-gasp pass of coming back against San Diego.

    "I'm disappointed with everything," Orton said at the time. "I wish I could have played better, I wish we had a better record, I wish a lot of things, but the reality is what it is."

    The next day, Fox pulled Orton aside before team meetings and informed him he had decided to go all-in on Tebow.

    Orton pledged to be a good teammate and stay ready in case his number was called again, but Tebow has gone 4-1 with the Broncos tailoring their offense to his unique skill set and reintroducing the option to the NFL.

    When the Broncos were walloped by the Lions in Tebow's second start, Brady Quinn leapfrogged Orton as the primary backup and appeared close to getting his shot under center. But Fox stuck with Tebow, albeit with the caveat that it was a week-to-week proposition.

    Since then, Tebow has won all three of his starts and engineered fourth-quarter comebacks against the Raiders and Jets to go with his miracle in Miami, when he led the Broncos back from a 15-point deficit in the closing minutes for a win in overtime.

    On Monday, Elway said on his weekly radio show, however, that he wasn't sold on Tebow as the long-term answer at quarterback, saying the second-year pro has to become a better passer and improve on third downs.

    Tebow is completing just 44.8 percent of his passes and Denver was 1 for 11 on third downs last week before its game-winning, 95-yard touchdown drive that stunned the Jets 17-13.

    Several teammates said Orton was anything but a cancer in the locker room in recent weeks, even though it had become obvious he was biding his time until his first foray into unfettered free agency as a healthy QB in his prime and with a .500 record as a starter.

    Yet, his demotion did create some awkward moments. He kept his captainship after losing his starting job and would help lead the team during warm-ups before watching the less accurate but more mobile Tebow take the bulk of the snaps during the week.

    Orton was still held in high esteem in the Broncos locker room, especially by veterans such as Champ Bailey and Andre' Goodman, who said at the time of Orton's benching that they felt he was being unfairly singled out as the reason for the team's bad start.

  • #2
    Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

    If Orton is signed by the Bears or Texans the Broncos did him a favor.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

      It was good for everyone that he was let go.

      Tebow wasn't hitting the bench anytime soon and they knew Orton wasn't their guy so it worked out well.

      Looks like he'll be heading back to where he started. Whether he starts there or not is all up to Caleb Hanie. Looks like it'll be his job to lose.
      In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
        It was good for everyone that he was let go.

        Tebow wasn't hitting the bench anytime soon and they knew Orton wasn't their guy so it worked out well.

        Looks like he'll be heading back to where he started. Whether he starts there or not is all up to Caleb Hanie. Looks like it'll be his job to lose.
        Its definately his preference but I could see the Skins picking him up

        Orton vs Grossman the sequel... D.C. edition

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
          Its definately his preference but I could see the Skins picking him up

          Orton vs Grossman the sequel... D.C. edition
          The Real Mediocre Quarterbacks of D.C.?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

            Elway needs to lay off Tebow. He has better stats and won more games than Elway did his first year. You got rid of Orton so quit throwing Tebow under the bus in the media. He will develop in time I believe if he gets a chance.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

              He'd be a perfect fit for Chicago. That way Cutler does not have to return too early or they can IR him if it is gonna be a long time table. Orton knows the system and would be a good replacement for Cutler and it gives him an opportunity to show the other NFL teams in the league that he can play so another team may take a chance on him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
                He'd be a perfect fit for Chicago. That way Cutler does not have to return too early or they can IR him if it is gonna be a long time table. Orton knows the system and would be a good replacement for Cutler and it gives him an opportunity to show the other NFL teams in the league that he can play so another team may take a chance on him.
                Agree. How did Chicago get so lucky if they end up with Orton.
                From what I remember Caleb Hanie didn't look too bad though.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                  Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
                  ...Orton knows the system...
                  Actually the system has changed since Orton left Chicago. He never played for Mike Martz, who took over before the 2010 season, nearly a year after Orton left the Bears in the trade for Cutler before the 2009 season
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                    Actually the system has changed since Orton left Chicago. He never played for Mike Martz, who took over before the 2010 season, nearly a year after Orton left the Bears in the trade for Cutler before the 2009 season
                    yes the system cant be any different. I mean now we dont even have audibles Hanie is a better fit for the system as he has mobility and a strong arm. Orton doesnt have a strong arm which is key for the Martz system. But rumor is he wants to come here to be the backup to Hanie. They even went as far as saying his agent made a powerplay saying he will only play for the Bears and ask for his release to come back to Chicago. We put a wavier claim on him he will backup Hanie and come back next year at least that is what it sounds like. He will only play if Hanie gets hurt.

                    Jeff really overrates Orton IMO Hanie will be a better QB if given a chance than Orton was IMO my only fear is he is turnover prone in the preseason hopefully he isnt the rest of the season.

                    Kurt Warner would be the ideal guy but no way he comes out of retirement.
                    Last edited by pacer4ever; 11-23-2011, 05:06 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                      I mean now we dont even have audibles
                      ???

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                        ???
                        We don't have audibles Mike Martz forbids it it really pisses Jay Cutler off and me for that matter. It waste so many timeouts and is just stupid.

                        Orton literately has 0 chance to play in Martz system it is really complex you have to have so much trust one reason Cutler was awful his first year in it.


                        "**** you" he said talking about Martz because he didnt like the play call

                        his presser on Bears Blitz the day after was classic. First presser of his that was good.
                        Last edited by pacer4ever; 11-23-2011, 05:41 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                          ^that is crazy...so if the defense is giving a look that says they are going to blow up a play, they run it anyway?...wow...anyway, looks like he is going to the Chiefs...not a great spot for him...

                          EDIT: the internets say that the Cowboys claimed him too...so he would not have made it to da Bears anyway...better he play in KC than bench in Dallas...
                          Last edited by dal9; 11-23-2011, 05:58 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                            Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                            ^that is crazy...so if the defense is giving a look that says they are going to blow up a play, they run it anyway?...wow...anyway, looks like he is going to the Chiefs...not a great spot for him...
                            I mean Martz has won superbowls doing that so hard to ***** about but yes it does frustrate me.

                            Im not gonna lie I would say **** it and change the play anyway.


                            kind of wish he didnt go to the Chiefs we should still beat them with Orton but he is an upgrade over Pelko.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Broncos waive Kyle Orton

                              The Chiefs spoiled the party
                              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

                              Working...
                              X