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

Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

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

  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-of-the-month/

    Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III is the is the recipient of the NFL’s September Rookie of the Month Award.

    Comment


    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
      http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-of-the-month/

      Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III is the is the recipient of the NFL’s September Rookie of the Month Award.
      RGIII is a superstar right now. Luck may not be in the top three or four of his draft. I know the line is causing some of this but Luck is causing some of it too. I think everyone knows that I thought the Colts should have taken a boat load of picks and moved down taken RGIII. I thought that before the season started. I am sure of it now......

      Comment


      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
        RGIII is a superstar right now. Luck may not be in the top three or four of his draft. I know the line is causing some of this but Luck is causing some of it too. I think everyone knows that I thought the Colts should have taken a boat load of picks and moved down taken RGIII. I thought that before the season started. I am sure of it now......
        It's been 3 games man, you can't be sure of anything. You are being ridiculous thinking someone's career is decided so early. Peyton was terrible his first 3 games. Tell me, when he was that terrible, how can you justify him being so great and Luck's career over while Luck is doing 10x better than Peyton? Your arguments are inconsistent.

        And feel free to answer my other comment in the other Luck thread.
        Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

        Comment


        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
          It's been 3 games man, you can't be sure of anything. You are being ridiculous thinking someone's career is decided so early. Peyton was terrible his first 3 games. Tell me, when he was that terrible, how can you justify him being so great and Luck's career over while Luck is doing 10x better than Peyton? Your arguments are inconsistent.

          And feel free to answer my other comment in the other Luck thread.
          I was not speaking about Luck so much as I was RGIII. Until Luck gets a line that can give him some time and keep him from running for his life, we won't know what he really has. That won't be this year and probably not next year either. That will be a lot of losing and a big beating for him to take. It ruined David Carr and others. We can only hope for the best and wonder why we went after a franchise QB when we couldn't protect him.....

          Comment


          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
            I was not speaking about Luck so much as I was RGIII. Until Luck gets a line that can give him some time and keep him from running for his life, we won't know what he really has. That won't be this year and probably not next year either. That will be a lot of losing and a big beating for him to take. It ruined David Carr and others. We can only hope for the best and wonder why we went after a franchise QB when we couldn't protect him.....
            I think you can figure a lot of what Luck has based on what cards he has been dealt. We all agree the offensive line is horrendous, but in spite of that he's been able to play pretty well. I agree RG3 has been terrific but your argument that Luck is taking a beating is shallow considering RG3 is getting a much worse beating than Luck is. Luck has only been sacked 5 times and has been able to avoid getting hit unlike RG3.

            And 99% of the league would go after a franchise QB rather than a line. It's poor form to pass on exceptional talent just because you don't have a line.
            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

            Comment


            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
              I think you can figure a lot of what Luck has based on what cards he has been dealt. We all agree the offensive line is horrendous, but in spite of that he's been able to play pretty well. I agree RG3 has been terrific but your argument that Luck is taking a beating is shallow considering RG3 is getting a much worse beating than Luck is. Luck has only been sacked 5 times and has been able to avoid getting hit unlike RG3.

              And 99% of the league would go after a franchise QB rather than a line. It's poor form to pass on exceptional talent just because you don't have a line.
              Washington has needed a QB for a long time. They thought they had enough in hand to go after one when they did. Many teams have taken the QB first and several were ruined because of it. David Carr, Couch and a host of others are an example. Won't do you much good to have a franchise QB who has a career ending injury because there was not offensive line to protect him. That doesn't even take into account players who just never developed after taking that kind of beating....

              Comment


              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                Washington has needed a QB for a long time. They thought they had enough in hand to go after one when they did. Many teams have taken the QB first and several were ruined because of it. David Carr, Couch and a host of others are an example. Won't do you much good to have a franchise QB who has a career ending injury because there was not offensive line to protect him. That doesn't even take into account players who just never developed after taking that kind of beating....
                I think the QBs you consider ruined were not good to begin with. David Carr and Couch had good college careers but just did not do a great job in the NFL because of talent, not because of lack of protection. I do agree Carr got absolutely mauled in the beginning, but the good QBs can overcome bad protection and create opportunities. Roethlisberger has never had great protection, yet year after year he's been able to get Pittsburgh's offense moving down the field. He gets hit and sacked a ton. Those 2 QBs needed all the help they could get because they were not great to begin with. If they had protection, they might have survived a bit longer, but they still would not be good. Luck does not have protection, but he's able to feel pressure better than 90% of the Qbs in the league already and avoid the sack/hit. I have every confidence right now that we will continue to address the offensive line and will get better, and I think that will happen next year itself.
                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                Comment


                • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                  Washington has needed a QB for a long time. They thought they had enough in hand to go after one when they did. Many teams have taken the QB first and several were ruined because of it. David Carr, Couch and a host of others are an example. Won't do you much good to have a franchise QB who has a career ending injury because there was not offensive line to protect him. That doesn't even take into account players who just never developed after taking that kind of beating....
                  Luck doesn't take beatings. He makes people whiff all the time. You don't watch Colts games.
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                    Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                    I think the QBs you consider ruined were not good to begin with. David Carr and Couch had good college careers but just did not do a great job in the NFL because of talent, not because of lack of protection. I do agree Carr got absolutely mauled in the beginning, but the good QBs can overcome bad protection and create opportunities. Roethlisberger has never had great protection, yet year after year he's been able to get Pittsburgh's offense moving down the field. He gets hit and sacked a ton. Those 2 QBs needed all the help they could get because they were not great to begin with. If they had protection, they might have survived a bit longer, but they still would not be good. Luck does not have protection, but he's able to feel pressure better than 90% of the Qbs in the league already and avoid the sack/hit. I have every confidence right now that we will continue to address the offensive line and will get better, and I think that will happen next year itself.
                    Blah, blah, blah..... When I point out examples of QBs who were as highly thought of as Luck at the time, they just didn't have the talent. Well, has it occurred to you that Luck just doesn't really have the talent or the arm either. Put Luck on Washington and he would not produce what RGIII has. Put RGIII on the Colts and he will make the other players better and you would have a better team immediately. There is that much difference. Cam Newton took over a team that was just about as bad as the Colts last year and look at the season he had and how many more wins they got than were predicted. He is off to a shaky start this year playing some very good teams but his numbers will be great by the end of the year. Why won't you just admit that Luck is not the NFL ready QB and talent that everyone (but a few of us) thought that he was. He will be an adequate but not great QB. He might even become Phillip Rivers type good but he will never be a Brady, either of the Mannings, Rogers or Brees kind of good.... ... By the way, Big Ben has never had to have great protection to be a very good superbowl winning QB. Luck would never be able to win playing behind the lines that Big Ben has.... ...

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                      Blah, blah, blah.... ...
                      That about says it all.
                      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        Originally posted by RWB View Post
                        That about says it all.
                        The man was asking for example and I gave them to him in Carr and Couch. He just said they were not good enough. Perhaps he is right. Perhaps I am right that Luck won't be more than an adequate NFL QB. I don't see him as a top ten any time soon.... ...

                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                          Blah, blah, blah..... When I point out examples of QBs who were as highly thought of as Luck at the time, they just didn't have the talent. Well, has it occurred to you that Luck just doesn't really have the talent or the arm either. ...
                          Your fixation on Luck's arm just won't quit. Once again let's go back to your favorite expert Phil Simms and what he thinks about arm strength... and here's the quote when talking about your favorite quarterback Peyton Manning just getting out of college.

                          My apologies in providing the proper link.... This was taken from a Peter King SI article (Peter King's Monday Morning Quarterback from 1998)..

                          * Simms was incredulous when the question about Manning’s questionable arm strength was posed. “His arm’s plenty good. You know how many times Drew Bledsoe really aired it out last year? I mean, 50, 60 yards in the air? Five. Ten, maybe. In the NFL, you make your living throwing the intermediate pass, and look at how many good intermediate throws we’re seeing Peyton make.”
                          Last edited by RWB; 10-05-2012, 10:33 AM.
                          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                            Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                            The man was asking for example and I gave them to him in Carr and Couch. He just said they were not good enough. Perhaps he is right. Perhaps I am right that Luck won't be more than an adequate NFL QB. I don't see him as a top ten any time soon.... ...
                            Your issue with thinking you're making good comparisons is you believe that all #1 drafted QB's are equal in expectations and scouting grades. Which just simply isn't the case. Here's an example. Here are the negatives from Pro Football Weekly on David Carr:

                            Negatives: Semi-sidearm, unusual, three-quarter throwing motion. Has a very low release point, about shoulder level. Will get balls batted down, which could be huge problem, since so many teams use so many three- and five-step drops. Is basically a line-drive passer and might be better off if he put more air under some of his throws. Is not quite as mobile as you would like and is not a super athlete and improviser. Average scambler and is no Donovan McNabb as a runner. Can be inconsistent throwing the ball. Will force some and make some bad reads. Was brought along beautifully by the Fresno State staff and has not faced a lot of adversity, so you cannot be sure how well he can handle it. Did bounce back from the Ohio State disaster in 2000. In Fresno State’s two regular-season losses in ’01, he was in a position to lead John Elway-type comebacks but did not do it.
                            Does that sound like a glowing review of someone they think will be a superstar QB? Not at all. I can vividly recall Couch having plenty of doubters out of college as well, including me. I couldn't find any old scouting reports on Couch. I'm know both had believers, but it certainly wasn't unanimous like it was with Luck this year.

                            They weren't victims of bad offensive lines, they were victims of being top picks that weren't very good. At a position that gets a ton of attention. In fact, if Luck continues his rookie season even anywhere remotely close to what he has done in his first 3 games, he will have a better rookie year then either of those guys had at any point in their career.

                            They just weren't good, they weren't ruined by anything.
                            Last edited by xBulletproof; 10-05-2012, 10:38 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                              Why are you guys arguing with him?

                              Its a lost cause. I mean he thinks Cam Newton was the QB of this generation and has faced a top notch defenses in 4 games. He has played one good passing defense in the Falcons and lost that game. Just look at the stats. Cam has lost to the 32nd ranked passing defense (ranked by yds per game). Want to guess who that was?

                              The tampa bay bucs who also gave RG3 his best statistical performance of the year this last weekend. You know the guy who fumbled in the redzone and was recovered by Garcon for a score. A game which was won by 2 points.

                              RG3 has yet to win against a team with a top 16 passing defense (yds/game).

                              Lets just say its only been 4 games, 3 in the case of Luck, and both have been lucky and unlucky in certain games.

                              A missed field goal here a fumble recover there and the game is totally different so lets hold off any judgements yet. Both IMO are good but the league has a way to make you look terrible overtime hence Cam Newton and Josh Freeman.
                              Last edited by Gamble1; 10-05-2012, 01:02 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Why are you guys arguing with him?
                                Its a lost cause. I mean he thinks Cam Newton was the QB of this generation and has faced a top notch defenses in 4 games. He has played one good passing defense in the both have been lucky and unlucky in certain games.
                                Because you told us to...

                                Again just point out how ridiculous his post are and move on. Theres no need to get personal about it with him. He's an old guy with a lot more time to be bitter about Irsays/Peytons decision.

                                So basically know a lost cause and move on. Refute his point with Facts (cats) and just laugh at how pathetic his points really are.
                                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X