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.

    Yea, it is unreasonable. He's six games in. To expect a 70% competion rate, which is what the top veteran QBs running a top-flight offense (which is not what RG3 is), for a rookie in his first six games, and calling it "unacceptable" is pretty damn funny.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

    Comment


    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      Looking at some rookie QB's in recent history (Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, Sam Bradford, Colt Mccoy) there are a number of QB's who were able to complete passes at a rate close to or above 60% in their rookie seasons. Why shouldn't I expect a rookie QB who has been heralded as the best QB prospect in forever, to do the same?
      With the possible exception of McCoy (LOL) , how many of those guys actually had more than 1 WR to throw to or a great running game to lead the way? I honestly cannot fault Luck for throws that his wideouts not named Reggie drop.

      Let's not be afraid to be critical and say that Luck can improve on certain things. It doesn't mean that he sucks and that he'll never amount to what we want him to be. I know he's the golden boy around here, but given his pedigree, he should be held to a high standard. He has shown the ability to rally the troops and have a come from behind win, he's impressed in the no huddle offense, and he's shown to be a physical specimen. But that doesn't mean he doesn't need to complete a higher percentage of his passes in order for us to be successful.
      I don't think anyone here is afraid to be critical of Luck, but how many things that we would fault Luck for now will improve simply by the game "slowing down" for him? Ive said it before and I'll say it again, I remember what Manning's rookie year was like, and looking at the two side by side, I think Luck is better at this point in his rookie year than Peyton was at the same time. Keep in mind, when the game slowed down for Peyton, we ALL saw it happening, it was almost like he flipped a light switch one day in Baltimore near the end of the year.
      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

      Comment


      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
        Yea, it is unreasonable. He's six games in. To expect a 70% competion rate, which is what the top veteran QBs running a top-flight offense (which is not what RG3 is), for a rookie in his first six games, and calling it "unacceptable" is pretty damn funny.
        70%? I said 60%

        Comment


        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
          With the possible exception of McCoy (LOL) , how many of those guys actually had more than 1 WR to throw to or a great running game to lead the way? I honestly cannot fault Luck for throws that his wideouts not named Reggie drop.


          I don't think anyone here is afraid to be critical of Luck, but how many things that we would fault Luck for now will improve simply by the game "slowing down" for him? Ive said it before and I'll say it again, I remember what Manning's rookie year was like, and looking at the two side by side, I think Luck is better at this point in his rookie year than Peyton was at the same time. Keep in mind, when the game slowed down for Peyton, we ALL saw it happening, it was almost like he flipped a light switch one day in Baltimore near the end of the year.

          Who else did Cam have to throw to aside from Steve Smith? How about Sam Bradford (who did he even have to throw to period?)? His team was probably worse than this current Colts team.

          I was using those guys names to showcase that it isn't unreasonable at all to think that Luck could complete the same % of passes as these guys did.

          And I agree he will get better at it. Me stating that he needs to improve it doesn't mean that I don't think he will. Lol I'd just like to see the improvement by the end of the season.

          Comment


          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            Expecting close to 60% completion percentage is unreasonable?

            Elway played at a different time and in a different era. Luck even plays in a different era than when Peyton was a rookie. Due to the rule changes, QB's have been put in a position to succeed now more than ever. The rule changes give advanced QB's and receivers a huge advantage over defenses. Looking at some rookie QB's in recent history (Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, Sam Bradford, Colt Mccoy) there are a number of QB's who were able to complete passes at a rate close to or above 60% in their rookie seasons. Why shouldn't I expect a rookie QB who has been heralded as the best QB prospect in forever, to do the same?

            Let's not be afraid to be critical and say that Luck can improve on certain things. It doesn't mean that he sucks and that he'll never amount to what we want him to be. I know he's the golden boy around here, but given his pedigree, he should be held to a high standard. He has shown the ability to rally the troops and have a come from behind win, he's impressed in the no huddle offense, and he's shown to be a physical specimen. But that doesn't mean he doesn't need to complete a higher percentage of his passes in order for us to be successful.

            I get that the kid is a rookie, and that he's got some things working against him. But if anyone thinks that 53% is an okay number, then you're expectations weren't that high to begin with.

            Idc what anyone says, 53% completion percentage by a starting QB in the NFL is unacceptable.
            I don't think its unreasonable but its also not taking into consideration that Luck has gone against 2 great defenses on the road.

            I think everyone expects him to improve including himself but this isn't a sign or a real concern IMO.
            Last edited by Gamble1; 10-25-2012, 02:28 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Who else did Cam have to throw to aside from Steve Smith? How about Sam Bradford (who did he even have to throw to period?)? His team was probably worse than this current Colts team.
              But Cam and Sam both had pretty good running attacks that could keep defenses honest. Luck doesn't have that here (and thats speaking as a fan of Donald Brown). If I'm an NFL defensive coordinator, I'm gameplanning against the pass and DARING the Colts to beat me on the ground.
              "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

              "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

              Comment


              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                Who else did Cam have to throw to aside from Steve Smith? How about Sam Bradford (who did he even have to throw to period?)? His team was probably worse than this current Colts team.

                I was using those guys names to showcase that it isn't unreasonable at all to think that Luck could complete the same % of passes as these guys did.

                And I agree he will get better at it. Me stating that he needs to improve it doesn't mean that I don't think he will. Lol I'd just like to see the improvement by the end of the season.
                Huh?
                Two veteran TE's in Greg Olsen and Jeremy Shockey and his second leading reciever was his RB Stewart.

                Comment


                • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  Making generalized comparisons between Newton, Bradford and Luck is ill-advised, we're talking a big difference in pedigree. It's not like I didn't watch Newton and Bradford.... I watched all of them. They are not even close to Luck.

                  I don't know what else to tell people like you and Blu. Consistently being the proverbial "antagonist" or devil's advocate just to "provide the opposite side of the argument" ultimately doesn't do a whole lot for me, because I'm not easily tricked or persuaded by false stats and gimmicks. I know exactly what I'm looking at. I know the bad traits to look for in QBs, and I've seen them in many many quarterbacks --- Luck lacks most of those traits. In fact, he lacks almost all of them. The only flaws in his game right now is that he's just inexperienced, and every snap/throw he's involved in will reduce that. I know what teams do to try to cover things up, which is what we're seeing with RG3 right now.

                  I've been obsessed watching football for 20 years with a particular eye on QB mechanics (born out of the fact that when I first became a Colts fan, what we needed was a damn quarterback) --- Luck is by far the best QB I've seen as a prospect. Making comparisons about who his receivers are, and making comments that make it clear that people aren't taking into account the systems they play in, the opponents, what their respective teams are trying to do, not looking at his mental make-up --- all that leads to people just not knowing what they're talking about. I'm looking directly at Luck and Luck alone --- he's got *everything* you could ask for in a quarterback. Been saying that for months now. I never gush like this about a player, because I'm usually pretty critical.

                  He's physically ideal. He's mentally ideal. He's emotionally ideal. He's mechanically ideal. I've never seen a player come into the league who, across the board, possessed the entire plethora of ideal traits. I'm telling you all, when this kid puts it all together, settles down, we get a team around him, we're in for a real treat. In the meanwhile, we're gonna hafta put up with these silly week-to-week "who's the hottest fire" ******** that we're being subjected to from players like RG3. Dude lost his game last week, and all we've heard about since then is RG3 for MVP. That, my friends, is called hype, and it *always* comes down eventually. Luck wins his game while not even really making any huge mistakes and making the plays necessary to win, and we get fools on here talking about why he's not as good as RG3. Just three weeks ago when Luck beat Green Bay, the media hopped off RG3 and onto him. You can't follow the media, you can't allow yourself to get sucked up into that crap, because the media 1) doesn't know what they're talking about, and 2) flip-flop almost on a daily basis. You need to watch for yourself, every movement, every decision Luck makes instead of staring at the damn stat sheet. When you put everything into context, which is what I've been harping on forever now, you *should* be able to make the differentiation yourself about who the real gem of this draft was. It's Luck. I feel pretty damn depressed that I have to defend this kid on a weekly basis to my own fellow fans. If you really get easily sucked up into hype then perhaps you should go root for RG3. We'll see you again in a year or two when the bandwagon breaks down and reality dawns on you.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-25-2012, 02:48 PM.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                    Here's what it boils down to for me at 6 games in...
                    RG3 could be the greatest QB ever to play the game. He plays for the Redskins and I'm not a Redskins fan so then I don't much care. Meanwhile, Luck shows many solid signs of being the real deal at QB himself and he plays for the Colts. I'm a fan of the Colts so I am much more interested in what Luck does and how he progresses. It's 6 games in and neither has done enough to write any guarantees about how their career will go.... either way.

                    But at the end of the day no matter what RG3 does it's of little concern to me. Tom Brady has done some incredible things in his career too. I can respect when players on other teams do incredible things but that doesn't degrade what players on a team that I root for do (unless of course the other team is playing my team ).
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                      Making generalized comparisons between Newton, Bradford and Luck is ill-advised, we're talking a big difference in pedigree. It's not like I didn't watch Newton and Bradford.... I watched all of them. They are not even close to Luck.

                      I don't know what else to tell people like you and Blu. Consistently being the proverbial "antagonist" or devil's advocate just to "provide the opposite side of the argument" ultimately doesn't do a whole lot for me, because I'm not easily tricked or persuaded by false stats and gimmicks. I know exactly what I'm looking at. I know the bad traits to look for in QBs, and I've seen them in many many quarterbacks --- Luck lacks most of those traits. In fact, he lacks almost all of them. The only flaws in his game right now is that he's just inexperienced, and every snap/throw he's involved in will reduce that. I know what teams do to try to cover things up, which is what we're seeing with RG3 right now.

                      I've been obsessed watching football for 20 years with a particular eye on QB mechanics (born out of the fact that when I first became a Colts fan, what we needed was a damn quarterback) --- Luck is by far the best QB I've seen as a prospect. Making comparisons about who his receivers are, and making comments that make it clear that people aren't taking into account the systems they play in, the opponents, what their respective teams are trying to do, not looking at his mental make-up --- all that leads to people just not knowing what they're talking about. I'm looking directly at Luck and Luck alone --- he's got *everything* you could ask for in a quarterback. Been saying that for months now. I never gush like this about a player, because I'm usually pretty critical.

                      He's physically ideal. He's mentally ideal. He's emotionally ideal. He's mechanically ideal. I've never seen a player come into the league who, across the board, possessed the entire plethora of ideal traits. I'm telling you all, when this kid puts it all together, settles down, we get a team around him, we're in for a real treat. In the meanwhile, we're gonna hafta put up with these silly week-to-week "who's the hottest fire" ******** that we're being subjected to from players like RG3. Dude lost his game last week, and all we've heard about since then is RG3 for MVP. That, my friends, is called hype, and it *always* comes down eventually. Luck wins his game while not even really making any huge mistakes and making the plays necessary to win, and we get fools on here talking about why he's not as good as RG3. Just three weeks ago when Luck beat Green Bay, the media hopped off RG3 and onto him. You can't follow the media, you can't allow yourself to get sucked up into that crap, because the media 1) doesn't know what they're talking about, and 2) flip-flop almost on a daily basis. You need to watch for yourself, every movement, every decision Luck makes instead of staring at the damn stat sheet. When you put everything into context, which is what I've been harping on forever now, you *should* be able to make the differentiation yourself about who the real gem of this draft was. It's Luck. I feel pretty damn depressed that I have to defend this kid on a weekly basis to my own fellow fans. If you really get easily sucked up into hype then perhaps you should go root for RG3. We'll see you again in a year or two when the bandwagon breaks down and reality dawns on you.
                      Please do not EVER compare me to OlBlu because me and him are nothing alike. Just because I don't think Luck is the greatest thing since sliced bread just yet doesn't mean I'm purposely trying to p*** everyone off. When Luck plays well, I'm genuinely happy and I comment on the things he's done.(look at my comments from the GB game) I think Luck is good but just because I'm not satisfied with 11 TO's and 53% completion percentage, doesn't mean I hate Luck or anything of the sort.

                      IN FACT--I've even said that I think that RGIII will eventually be better than Luck. EVENTUALLY. But RGIII is playing better right now. It doesn't make me a troll by saying that when there are plenty of factors that backup my claim. Am I right in everyone's eyes? No. But I'm not just stating my opinion for the hell of it nor am I stating my opinion to pi** off you or any other poster.

                      Andrew Luck the number one overall pick should be able to complete 58-60% of his passes. If that's unreasonable, then I'm unreasonable.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        I respect RG3, too, but when I watch him, and I put everything into context about him, there are holes, and some things I don't find conducive to long-term success, both physically and mentally. I think what we're seeing is the proverbial "taking the league by storm and then they come down to earth when teams figure him out and just never see that level again." I'm not trying to be a homer or just a poor sport in regards to him --- I see some great abilities by him, but I also genuinely see flaws, and I know the reasons for *why* he's put up the stats he has so far. It's a pretty obvious puzzle to put together.

                        Luck has done absolutely nothing to send up flags for me.

                        RG3 has already:
                        - *****ed about the physicality of the NFL.
                        - Gotten a concussion and missed playing time
                        - Done a million commercials
                        - Has developed a rep around the league's defenders to become a target. He's made a lot of comments about how guys are hitting him hard after plays and saying stuff. That is only going to make things worse.
                        - Ran the ball wayyy too much.
                        - Has that overcockiness in his interviews.

                        His game will be a lot easier for defenses to gameplan against down the road.

                        He's certainly fast, and can zip the ball. He does a good job not turning the ball over in Shanny's oversimplified offensive system of short dinks and dunks and getting a lot of YAC. He's not being pushed to develop his game like Luck is in terms of reading defenses, absorbing the playbook.

                        To me, it's just adding up to a predictable outcome in a year or two. You can get by early on like he is because teams just haven't gameplanned for a QB like him, but all they need is one game against him and the next time they see him, things change.
                        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-25-2012, 03:17 PM.
                        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/pos...-luck-its-good

                          A progress report on Luck (it’s good)

                          The gushing can be a little much at times, which is surely a part of why Andrew Luck avoids it.

                          He’s not particularly interested in what is said about him. Luck will not see this progress report, and that will save him a couple of minutes -- and do nothing for getting this blog known by the division’s headline player.

                          Nevertheless, we forge ahead.

                          Six games into his rookie season, Luck has done fine work as the quarterback of the rebuilding Colts. He has just the poise and presence we talked about leading into and out of the draft and training camp. He has command of the offense and the huddle. He quickly understands his mistakes and gets ticked off at himself if he repeats them.

                          “I’m very impressed,” ESPN.com's Matt Williamson said. “He’s poised. He gets it. All the physical stuff is there. The supporting cast is bad -- he makes it look better than it is -- and he has made his share of rookie mistakes. But I have no doubt that he is all he was cracked up to be.”

                          While Washington’s Robert Griffin III has been more dynamic and drawn more attention, the case can be made that Luck has played just as well or better. As Chase Stuart points out in a New York Times blog entry, Luck is generally throwing further downfield than Griffin and hardly checks the ball down, which explains a lot about the difference in their respective numbers.

                          And it’s Luck’s team, not RG3’s, that currently qualifies as a viable playoff contender. It’s not his fault the AFC has so many average teams. Sunday he will lead the Colts into Nashville for a matchup that’s far more important than any of us imagined it could be.

                          The winner will have four wins. If it’s the Colts, they’ll be 4-3, already doubling last season’s win total in the first year of a rebuild that includes new management, a new coaching staff, new schemes and a new quarterback who was the draft’s top pick.

                          That’s some accelerated rebounding for a team whose coach, Chuck Pagano, is battling leukemia, and who has an offensive coordinator, Bruce Arians, filling in by wearing the big headset. While a lot of people have contributed to the success so far, nothing is more important to the health, direction and vibe of a franchise than its quarterback.

                          [+] Enlarge
                          Joe Robbins/Getty Images"He's light-years ahead of where we thought he would be," Bruce Arians said of Andrew Luck.

                          “I think Bruce has done a great job of giving Andrew things he is familiar with and can operate well,” said Bill Polian, who was vice chairman the Colts from 1998 through last year and is now an ESPN analyst. “Andrew has done a terrific job of preparation and study on both opponents and his own people. In addition, like RG3, he has that special ‘something’ that all great ones have. I said in the spring that I believed both were can't-miss, and I still feel that way.”

                          “You would never think [Luck] is a rookie,” Titans coach and Pro Football Hall of Famer Mike Munchak said. “I think he looks very comfortable. He looks like Peyton [Manning] on the play-action stuff. He’s very comfortable in the pocket. He moves around it very nicely. His eyes stay down the field. He’s not looking to run, he’s not looking to throw the quick pass.

                          “He’s going to give his receivers time to get open. I think he’s done a good job with that. He’s getting rid of the ball. He’s not taking the sack, but he’s taking hits because he’ll hold on to it to make a bigger play. You don’t see many rookies that will do that.”

                          Luck cites two things when asked about the biggest adjustment from Stanford to the Colts: The speed of the linebackers is so much better, and many more protections are far more complicated because of the vast variety of blitzes he faces.

                          Where he can improve the most is with more accurate deep balls. Per ESPN Stats & Information, he’s at 51.5 percent on balls thrown from 11 to 20 yards, 39.4 percent on throws more than 21 yards and 12.5 percent (just one of eight) on balls thrown more than 31 yards. Deep-threat receiver Donnie Avery has been targeted 54 times, tied for 17th in the NFL, and should have more than 25 catches and a bigger average than his 12.2.

                          Luck's response to mistakes is super-healthy and a big part of why his growth curve is so steep.

                          “I think I realized, you throw an interception, bad deal, but if you have another chance to go out there, you better get rid of that thought on the interception and worry about the next play, or else you’ll be doing your team a bigger disservice,” he said. “That’s sort of the approach I’ve tried to take. It’s worked out all right.”

                          The Colts’ patchwork offensive line isn’t great at protecting Luck, but some of his 16 sacks are not on the guys in front of him.

                          “A couple of hits and sacks [against Cleveland] were 100 percent on me, and that is something I hope to get better at, and not repeat the same mistakes twice,” Luck said. “The line has done a great job all year of blocking their butts off. They know that I appreciate what they’re doing. A couple of those are on me.”

                          Arians has no issue putting Luck and the offense into no-huddle situations, and the quarterback has excelled with it. It’s something that Arians, who was also offensive coordinator for the Colts when Manning started his pro career, didn’t install until Manning’s second year.

                          At times, Arians has to be conscious of slowing things down for the five other rookies on that side of the ball getting regular playing time.

                          “I think nothing surprises me with [Luck] anymore,” Arians said. “He’s light-years ahead of where we thought he would be. There’s nothing really left to put in the playbook that we haven’t installed, and he’s been extremely good in clutch situations."

                          Indianapolis is a team with holes for sure.

                          The run effort in the win over the Browns was better and set a new standard, but there is no reason yet to expect a consistent run game. While safety Tom Zbikowski is coming off his best game, he has not been consistent. The team is recovering from a slew of injuries along the defensive line and to both of its premier ends turned outside linebackers, Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis.

                          But this whole rebuild that started with general manager Ryan Grigson and Pagano is keyed on Luck. Grigson will continue to try to surround his star quarterback with talent that can help him excel. Pagano and Arians will continue to shape schemes that are most favorable to him. The fan base should be thrilled that there is tangible progress in the present, and it should have great optimism about the future.

                          Already, teams like the Titans know that to beat a team that dissolved into a 2-14 mess a year ago, they’ll have to limit Luck.

                          “He is unfazed by rushers," Titans defensive end Kamerion Wimbley said. “I think he’s a tough quarterback, he’s taken hits. He’s not going to get panicked or anything like that. He’s making big-time throws. I think he’s faster than a lot of people think. You definitely have to be aware as a rusher of staying in your lanes and making sure you can contain him.”

                          Finally, how does Luck judge his own progress?

                          “What I’ve learned in this short time is that it’s hard to get a win,” he said. “Everybody is good. I think as an offense, we’re getting better, improving. We have to get better if we want to start getting wins, and being a winning football team.

                          “I didn’t really know what to expect coming into this season. I didn’t put up benchmarks of 'I want to have thrown this many yards by this date,' or have limited interceptions to this number by this date. I do think we’re improving, and I’m improving.”
                          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.

                            Also:

                            http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat...-paul-kuharsky

                            Matthias (Indianapolis)

                            With the Mnning era over in Indy, how would you rate Luck's performance so far?.. on an A-F scale, I give him about a C+...Honestly,..there are games where he looks Brillant, (GB comeback), games where he looks like a game manager QB ( Browns), and games where he looks God awful ( Jets)..Will he ever get better and more consistent?..Your thoughts Paul?

                            Paul Kuharsky (12:32 PM)

                            "Will he ever get better and more consistent?" Seriously? He's played SIX GAMES. He's been very good for a rookie quarterback on a bad team. I give him a B-plus, easily.


                            James (Indianapolis)

                            For as highly touted as Andrew Luck has been do you find his completion percentage to be concerning?


                            Paul Kuharsky (12:51 PM)

                            I do not. He throws the ball further down the field than anyone, and you complete fewer of those.Here's the big column on him.A progress report on Luck (it's good)
                            Last edited by Suaveness; 10-25-2012, 03:26 PM.
                            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.

                              Well since we all know how highly OlBlu thinks of The Maestro Bill Polian....


                              “I think Bruce has done a great job of giving Andrew things he is familiar with and can operate well,” said Bill Polian, who was vice chairman the Colts from 1998 through last year and is now an ESPN analyst. “Andrew has done a terrific job of preparation and study on both opponents and his own people. In addition, like RG3, he has that special ‘something’ that all great ones have. I said in the spring that I believed both were can't-miss, and I still feel that way.”

                              So Polian thought Luck is a can't miss prospect. Polian think's he has that special "something" that all the greats have.

                              He feels the same way about RGIII.

                              I also think RGIII is very good now and likely to be good for a long time. I do think his hype machine is a bit out of control. After losing that game to the Giants, it's like the national media just completely glossed over the fact that he did just as much to lose that game as he did to win it. He just happened to come out on the wrong side of it. Why? BECAUSE HE'S A FREAKING ROOKIE. Just like Luck.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                I respect RG3, too, but when I watch him, and I put everything into context about him, there are holes, and some things I don't find conducive to long-term success, both physically and mentally. I think what we're seeing is the proverbial "taking the league by storm and then they come down to earth when teams figure him out and just never see that level again." I'm not trying to be a homer or just a poor sport in regards to him --- I see some great abilities by him, but I also genuinely see flaws, and I know the reasons for *why* he's put up the stats he has so far. It's a pretty obvious puzzle to put together.

                                Luck has done absolutely nothing to send up flags for me.

                                RG3 has already:
                                - *****ed about the physicality of the NFL.
                                - Gotten a concussion and missed playing time
                                - Done a million commercials
                                - Has developed a rep around the league's defenders to become a target. He's made a lot of comments about how guys are hitting him hard after plays and saying stuff. That is only going to make things worse.
                                - Ran the ball wayyy too much.
                                - Has that overcockiness in his interviews.

                                His game will be a lot easier for defenses to gameplan against down the road.

                                He's certainly fast, and can zip the ball. He does a good job not turning the ball over in Shanny's oversimplified offensive system of short dinks and dunks and getting a lot of YAC. He's not being pushed to develop his game like Luck is in terms of reading defenses, absorbing the playbook.

                                To me, it's just adding up to a predictable outcome in a year or two. You can get by early on like he is because teams just haven't gameplanned for a QB like him, but all they need is one game against him and the next time they see him, things change.
                                this thread has gone in circles and gone no where fast, so this will be my last post.

                                RG3 *****ed because of cheap shots by the Rams, not because of the physicality.

                                Why let facts get in the way of a good story though.

                                He did take a big hit to the head, but the very next game he also proved he lear rd andactually started sliding.

                                I actually think he sounds humble in his invrerviews, but thats about as relevant as how many commercials he does (clearly hes a slacker. Since he spent days and weeks if his time voluntarily before he was signed learning the playbook and working out with he WO's and TE's)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X