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

2012 NFL Draft

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

  • #16
    Re: 2012 NFL Draft

    Originally posted by Really? View Post
    Brody is a Blocking TE, the Colts need a TE that can give mixmatches in the passing game as well as stretch the field at times.

    I do not think it is one of their biggest areas right now, but if Dwayne Allen falls to the 2nd I think it should be a no brainer, he can do all the above as well as block, he is probably one of the best blocking TE's I have seen in college. With how Luck likes to use the run as well as our tackle blocking issues he would be a excellent addition to this team.

    I think the wideout class is pretty deep so we should be able to get one of those in most rounds. I do not think we will really worry about the LB group much, I think we could go after DE but not sure how early we will do that. I think that we have a lot of young CBs that showed some promise with the new system, and with a new DC we could see them blossom. Safety is a area of concern but we will have Bulliet back and they seem to like Caldwell.

    Doubt we will touch the RB position. The only other real concern for us would be securing the line, which actually had a lot of good games last year, but got plagued with injuries, but most still are not starters.
    The combination of Tamme and Brody is not that bad IMO so with Clark in the mix I just doubt we go TE in the second round..

    As far as DE's are concerned this draft isn't too bad as far as depth. Certainly not great but you can get an impact guy in ealry second for sure and maybe in the third. Vinny Curry wouldn't be a bad in the third round. He can play either DE position and looks like he has the speed and strength to get it done in the NFL.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA-gRqSoSxg I love the 3:40 mark hussel play.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 2012 NFL Draft

      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
      The combination of Tamme and Brody is not that bad IMO so with Clark in the mix I just doubt we go TE in the second round..

      As far as DE's are concerned this draft isn't too bad as far as depth. Certainly not great but you can get an impact guy in ealry second for sure and maybe in the third. Vinny Curry wouldn't be a bad in the third round. He can play either DE position and looks like he has the speed and strength to get it done in the NFL.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA-gRqSoSxg I love the 3:40 mark hussel play.
      Curry looks pretty nice.

      One thing I will say is that it seems we are in a rebuilding mode so we will see what happens with the team. Pretty soon we should know what we will be looking for in the off-season.

      I still feel none of those TE's offer what Allen offers, when Eldrich is in the game it is pretty much assumed he will be blocking, Tamme catching, and Clark catching (when healthy).

      I am just happy that we are in the position to really add a lot of young depth to our team, I am really excited to see which way this team heads.

      P.S. I do not think the Peyton will be back, I don't think that he should either with his neck issue. I would rather him retire a Colt as well as have a long productive life after football.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: 2012 NFL Draft

        Here is my draft philosophy for needs:

        1st QB- Luck
        2nd DT or CB- Stephon Gilmore or Josh Chapman
        3rd WR or OLB- Nick Toon or best available OLB?
        4th WR or OLB Not gotten last round Chris Givens or OLB
        5th S or DT- best available S or DT
        6th Most athletic defensive player left
        7th Best fullback available or WR that may be a project

        Once we get closer to the draft and the combine we'll see who is best fitting after Luck.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: 2012 NFL Draft

          If you want a TE that can create mismatches...look no further than Orson Charles out of UGA.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: 2012 NFL Draft

            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
            The combination of Tamme and Brody is not that bad IMO so with Clark in the mix I just doubt we go TE in the second round..

            As far as DE's are concerned this draft isn't too bad as far as depth. Certainly not great but you can get an impact guy in ealry second for sure and maybe in the third. Vinny Curry wouldn't be a bad in the third round. He can play either DE position and looks like he has the speed and strength to get it done in the NFL.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA-gRqSoSxg I love the 3:40 mark hussel play.
            Also keep in mind that Tamme is a FA, so that could play into it also.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: 2012 NFL Draft

              Originally posted by swifty1812 View Post
              Also keep in mind that Tamme is a FA, so that could play into it also.
              True but you still have Clark and we could easily use a 4th round pick on a TE. Of all the positions to fill its one of the last I would consider personally.

              This year we need a DE, WR, CB, DT, C and thats ranking based on what I think the priority is for the Colts as well.

              Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
              Here is my draft philosophy for needs:

              1st QB- Luck
              2nd DT or CB- Stephon Gilmore or Josh Chapman
              3rd WR or OLB- Nick Toon or best available OLB?
              4th WR or OLB Not gotten last round Chris Givens or OLB
              5th S or DT- best available S or DT
              6th Most athletic defensive player left
              7th Best fullback available or WR that may be a project

              Once we get closer to the draft and the combine we'll see who is best fitting after Luck.
              I think we combine the fullback and backup TE into one pick like maybe Rhett Eillsion from USC in the 6th round.
              Last edited by Gamble1; 01-13-2012, 03:58 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                Here is the thing, I may have rushed to the idea that we should take a TE in the 2nd if one of them slips, but her is the thing, one of the best friends for a young QB is a good TE and Allen offers that in many ways as far as blocking, route running, mismatches, I would not mind if the Colts grabbed him in the early 2nd.

                What I do think will happen is that the Colts seem to be in a rebuilding stage from many of Irsay's comments so I think that a good player will slip out of the first round and the Colts will most likely pick him up.

                I see the need for various positions on this team and all can be targeted with the 2nd round pick.

                Picks that I would not mind.

                1. Kendall Wright from Baylor WR, this is assuming Wayne is not signed back.
                2. Melvin Ingram from SC if we do not get Mathis back
                3. Zach Brown from UNC, although I doubt he will slip that far he is a OLB that can cover
                4. Quinton Couples UNC DE Different type of DE but he has a lot of talent
                5. Janoris Jenkins CB UF/DII, lots of upside could slip due to various reasons.
                6. Vontez Burfict OLB could slip as well
                7. Alshon Jefferies SC WR, not all the way sold on him yet in the NFL, but he definitely has talent.

                I think all of these guys have 1st rd potential and I think at least 1 if not more will slip to us and we will have our choice.

                Again, there is so much that will happen between now and draft day, much of this will change and people that were projected to be 1st rounders will slip, and those who weren't will take their spots.

                I think the Colts will have a lot of people fall to them this year, I hope we have productive picks.

                Also I will add DT is interesting position for this team, not sure what I would do if I were the GM, we have a lot of young guys there who have shown some positive signs but are not where I expect them to be, there should be a lot of DT help near the beginning of the 2nd as well.
                Why so SERIOUS

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                  Originally posted by Really? View Post
                  Here is the thing, I may have rushed to the idea that we should take a TE in the 2nd if one of them slips, but her is the thing, one of the best friends for a young QB is a good TE and Allen offers that in many ways as far as blocking, route running, mismatches, I would not mind if the Colts grabbed him in the early 2nd.

                  What I do think will happen is that the Colts seem to be in a rebuilding stage from many of Irsay's comments so I think that a good player will slip out of the first round and the Colts will most likely pick him up.

                  I see the need for various positions on this team and all can be targeted with the 2nd round pick.

                  Picks that I would not mind.

                  1. Kendall Wright from Baylor WR, this is assuming Wayne is not signed back.
                  2. Melvin Ingram from SC if we do not get Mathis back
                  3. Zach Brown from UNC, although I doubt he will slip that far he is a OLB that can cover
                  4. Quinton Couples UNC DE Different type of DE but he has a lot of talent
                  5. Janoris Jenkins CB UF/DII, lots of upside could slip due to various reasons.
                  6. Vontez Burfict OLB could slip as well
                  7. Alshon Jefferies SC WR, not all the way sold on him yet in the NFL, but he definitely has talent.

                  I think all of these guys have 1st rd potential and I think at least 1 if not more will slip to us and we will have our choice.

                  Again, there is so much that will happen between now and draft day, much of this will change and people that were projected to be 1st rounders will slip, and those who weren't will take their spots.

                  I think the Colts will have a lot of people fall to them this year, I hope we have productive picks.

                  Also I will add DT is interesting position for this team, not sure what I would do if I were the GM, we have a lot of young guys there who have shown some positive signs but are not where I expect them to be, there should be a lot of DT help near the beginning of the 2nd as well.
                  NOw that we know the Colts are going to a 3/4 scheme the NT is going to be really important postion to consider and let me say I don't think we plug a rookie in there and he gives us much right off the bat.

                  Personally I think the Colts need to sign a cheap veteran option and then draft a NT in the 4th or 5th rounds.

                  Here is a list of veterans I could see us going after.. All of these guys are 30 and above.

                  Antonio Garay - 6'4 320 lb, Last played for the Chargers
                  Shaun Rodgers- 6'4 350 lb, Last team saints
                  Sione Pouha - 6'3 325 lb, Jets

                  Late draft picks.

                  Hebron Fangupo - 6'1 331 lb, BYU player but a USC transfer. He's short but has a solid motor.

                  Akiem Hicks - 6'5 324 lb, He was apart of LSU scandal so he went to Canada for college ball. He isn't a traditional NT but he has a massive frame and could be converted to one. He has a 35 1/2 arm length and even if he can't be a NT he will be a force next to one. Solid pass rusher as well and really athletic for his size.

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QjwR...layer_embedded

                  Alameda Ta"amu - 6'3 341 Washington

                  He could go in the 4th and although he doesn't offer much of a pass rush he will be tough to move.

                  The colts will have to get a solid rotation going so I can see them easily going after a veteran and drafting a guy. If Poe drops then you have to select him in the second round IMO.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                    Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                    NOw that we know the Colts are going to a 3/4 scheme the NT is going to be really important postion to consider and let me say I don't think we plug a rookie in there and he gives us much right off the bat.

                    Personally I think the Colts need to sign a cheap veteran option and then draft a NT in the 4th or 5th rounds.

                    Here is a list of veterans I could see us going after.. All of these guys are 30 and above.

                    Antonio Garay - 6'4 320 lb, Last played for the Chargers
                    Shaun Rodgers- 6'4 350 lb, Last team saints
                    Sione Pouha - 6'3 325 lb, Jets

                    Late draft picks.

                    Hebron Fangupo - 6'1 331 lb, BYU player but a USC transfer. He's short but has a solid motor.

                    Akiem Hicks - 6'5 324 lb, He was apart of LSU scandal so he went to Canada for college ball. He isn't a traditional NT but he has a massive frame and could be converted to one. He has a 35 1/2 arm length and even if he can't be a NT he will be a force next to one. Solid pass rusher as well and really athletic for his size.

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QjwR...layer_embedded

                    Alameda Ta"amu - 6'3 341 Washington

                    He could go in the 4th and although he doesn't offer much of a pass rush he will be tough to move.

                    The colts will have to get a solid rotation going so I can see them easily going after a veteran and drafting a guy. If Poe drops then you have to select him in the second round IMO.
                    Yeah I think that is a must do, I have really heard a lot of good things about Poe, If he did fall as you suggest, he would be wonderful to me.
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                      Originally posted by BigDawg44 View Post
                      If you want a TE that can create mismatches...look no further than Orson Charles out of UGA.
                      He'd be available in the 2nd round but I highly doubt the Colts are going to go TE at all in this draft. I'm not sure what Dallas Clark's contract status is, but I'm assuming he is still in Indy as is Tamme.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                        Watching the Senior Bowl, this NT from Washington is dominating, getting constant penetration.
                        Why so SERIOUS

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                          Originally posted by Really? View Post
                          Watching the Senior Bowl, this NT from Washington is dominating, getting constant penetration.
                          Ya he has been good outside of him the game has been a let down so far.

                          the 3 fumbled snaps in a row had me going.................

                          Couples is now playing great.
                          Last edited by pacer4ever; 01-28-2012, 06:07 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                            Originally posted by Moses View Post
                            He'd be available in the 2nd round but I highly doubt the Colts are going to go TE at all in this draft. I'm not sure what Dallas Clark's contract status is, but I'm assuming he is still in Indy as is Tamme.
                            At this point I have no idea what the Colts will do, with the new everything needs are vastly different. Heath Miller was the 3rd in receiving yards, but I doubt they use their TE's as much as the Colts did.

                            With this switch in defensive philosophy I think we will need to go defense in the 2nd round anyways, we are going to need versatile young guys who can grow with the defense.
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: 2012 NFL Draft

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              Ya he has been good outside of him the game has been a let down so far.

                              the 3 fumbled snaps in a row had me going.................

                              Couples is now playing great.
                              Yeah, way too many dropped passes, Vinny Curry has really showed up as well, and Carson Wiggs is looking good. Zach Brown is not physical enough to be a factor in the run game as a LB, which is kind of sad to see, I had higher expectations for him, he is way to easily blocked. He could possibly make the move to strong safety though, his pass coverage skills are top notch.
                              Why so SERIOUS

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Just want to confirm... I only saw highlights from Paganos interview... did he actually say we will go to 3-4 or is it still speculation?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X