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

Non-Colts thread

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

  • Re: Non-Colts thread

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    Watched last night's 49ers/Patriots game from a bar in Dallas. For better or worse, I knew I wouldn't get to town in time to see the Steelers play (but given the way our season has derailed, that's okay.) The bar at the hotel ended up with about 400 people in it after the stadium emptied out, and was about 50% Steelers jerseys and 50% Cowboys jerseys.

    Interestingly enough, everybody got along fine after the game. And everybody gathered together to cheer for SF. It was quite hilarious how everybody wanted NE to lose. Not sure that many Cowboys fans in one place have ever agreed to cheer for the 49ers before. I get the Steelers dislike... Spygate actually did involve the Steelers, we've lost too many AFC Title games in Pittsburgh to those guys. But Dallas... they're not even in the same conference. What do they care?
    What do you think about Florio's comment in today's power rankings?

    15. Steelers: The franchise has had three coaches since 1969. More and more locals are ready for No. 4.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...er-rankings-3/

    I don't pay much attention to the Steelers, but that comment surprised me a bit. Are there really Steelers fans who want Tomlin gone? I wouldn't want to ditch a coach that had taken my team to two Super Bowls in his six year tenure. It's not Tomlin's fault that Ben was hurt a couple games or that the defense is getting some age on it.

    Comment


    • Re: Non-Colts thread

      I've only seen one Pittsburgh game all year but given how they're doing now in addition to how they finished 2011, they strike me as a team in decline.

      Comment


      • Re: Non-Colts thread

        Originally posted by LuckSwagger View Post
        I've only seen one Pittsburgh game all year but given how they're doing now in addition to how they finished 2011, they strike me as a team in decline.

        I would think their aging defense and injuries would be more of a factor in that than Tomlin. They have still been a solid defense, but they aren't as dominant as they used to be. Rivers and Romo fared off pretty well against them because of Taylor being out. Then there is the Ben injury too. He missed a few games and I doubt he's 100% yet.

        Comment


        • Re: Non-Colts thread

          Let's see. We're #1 in overall yards against. We're #1 in passing yards against. We're #4 in rushing yards against. We're #2 in defensive time of possession. We've given up fewer than 30 plays longer than 20 yards and 3 defensive plays longer than 40 yards all season, and while we've struggled against the run by our standards (being #4 and all), we force a lot of 3-and-outs but we aren't forcing turnovers and we aren't getting sacks.

          Overall, I'm pretty happy that this is what we call a down year for our defense. Smith and Farrior retired. Harrison is finally getting back into game shape after a knee procedure. We've barely had Troy all season and Woodley has missed a lot of time and now Taylor has his broken leg. We've done this with our young backups and young starters playing a lot on the defensive side of the ball.

          Our biggest problem is not defense, and its not offense, and it isn't even lack of turnovers, sacks, or big plays from the defense. (Hey, those guys force 3-and-out before they can make a turnover. Is that so terrible?). Our problem has been playing down to the level of inferior opponents. We're 7-7 with two quality losses (Baltimore, but at home and Denver on the road) and 5 that are tough to take: Oakland, Cleveland, San Diego, Dallas, Tennessee.) We've only got one quality win (@ Baltimore... I don't count wins over the Jets or Giants as "quality".)

          Tomlin has never been as popular as Cowher. He basically admitted the team was unprepared for the SD game and that he quit on them when he didn't go for two (yes, it was over, blah blah...) And I thought they looked unprepared for the Cleveland game. Not pulling Leftwich with the broken rib against Baltimore probably cost them that game. I don't know what happened to Mendenhall but his suspension last week was alarming. This team is dysfunctional right now.

          We've been poorly coached this season.

          Do I want Tomlin replaced? I can only answer that with a question: is Cowher available?

          This was going to be a transition year. You don't lose Aaron Smith, Hines Ward, and James Farrior without any consequence at all. And have Mendenhall, Hampton and Starks all tear ACLs in week #17 or the playoffs the previous January. And miss Troy, James and Ben (clearly our three best players) for multiple weeks of the season. And have your top three draft picks earn starting spots and then undergo serious injuries (DeCastro at RG, Adams at RT, Spence at ILB).

          We'll be fine for quite a while down the road so I'm not about to panic. We've got a lot of young talent we're injecting - in the OL with Pouncey, Adams, DeCastro (debut last week), and Gibson. Young money receiving core. Good young DL with Heywood and Hood. Still need to find a NT instead of Ta'amu but okay. Woodley, Timmons and Worilds will keep up the LB reputation after Harrison retires. We need young help in the secondary but we always need help in the secondary and we're still #1 against the pass. And we need help at RB. We're a decent draft in the offensive and defensive backfields away from being back in the top 4 in the AFC.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • Re: Non-Colts thread

            I don't think that a Dallas team with DeMarco Murray and a hot Tony Romo is inferior to a Pitt team with a battered Ben and without Ike Taylor.

            Sure the D is still high in overall stats, but they've had way too many lapses against crappy teams to still be considered the elite defense that they used to be. Oakland put up 34 against them, Tennessee 26, Cleveland 20, San Diego 34, Dallas 27. I think Dallas is actually a decent team now, but those other teams aren't. Call it playing down to the opponent or whatever, but it looks to me like this is a defense that doesn't shut teams down like it used to, regardless of still being ranked high in overall statistics.
            Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-19-2012, 10:41 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: Non-Colts thread

              Tomlin seems to me to be in no way part of the problem in Pittsburgh. Injury, discord between Ben and the offensive coordinator, and some depth issues are at the top. Plus, isn't there the expectation that Dick Lebeau (now 75) is about to retire? It seems I remember hearing that there is an heir-apparent on the staff, but still... how do you replace one of the best D coordinators in history?
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • Re: Non-Colts thread

                It is shutting them down in a different way, and a less effective way overall. I guess you'd say the stats are somewhat misleading because the defense hasn't been on the field long enough to create disruptive turnovers and on an in-game basis they are losing the field position battles. Net punting has been a problem for us and our offense has its own share of 3-and-outs.

                In spite of great defensive yard statistics, we're only #8 in points against. The lack of turnovers means that teams are getting more points out of fewer yards against us this season.

                That's primarily because Troy and James have been hurt.

                We're in the top-10 for touchdowns given up, but the bottom-10 for FGs given up. Those bad losses? Oakland by 3 (gave up two FGs in 4Q, including game winner as time expired), Tennessee by 3 (game winner as time expired), lost at home to Baltimore in which their only TD was a punt return, and the 8-turnover game against Cleveland.

                Of those bad losses, I'm only blaming the defense for SF and Dallas, and that's in part because Ike Taylor was out. Yes, he drops a lot of potential interceptions. With hands like his, no wonder he's on the defensive side of the ball. But he can shut down anyone he wants.

                This is a frustrating season, but I'm more concerned about lack of preparation and lack of focus against so-called inferior opponents than the defense per se. We've been reminded that the talent difference across the league really is small, and if you're not ready to play you'll lose to a "bad" team. Because the "bad" teams aren't really that bad.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • Re: Non-Colts thread

                  Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                  Tomlin seems to me to be in no way part of the problem in Pittsburgh. Injury, discord between Ben and the offensive coordinator, and some depth issues are at the top. Plus, isn't there the expectation that Dick Lebeau (now 75) is about to retire? It seems I remember hearing that there is an heir-apparent on the staff, but still... how do you replace one of the best D coordinators in history?
                  Keith Butler is the current LB coach and DC in waiting. He didn't join Steelers-West last winter because he was promised the DC position if Dick ever retires (which I doubt, he's still going strong.)
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • Re: Non-Colts thread

                    I just get so tired of all of the national talk about the Jets. They are a pathetic team who doesn't warrant national discussion. I stop listening every time ESPN does a segment on them. I realize they play in New York and have a large fan base, but no one outside of NY cares about them. Talk about them in March when they are making personnel decisions, but not now. December is when you talk about teams who are either in the playoffs or competing for a playoff spot. You shouldn't waste your time talking about a bad team with the worst QB in the league.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Non-Colts thread

                      Funny thing is if they were some top club who had a supreme history of success or a recent Super Bowl win and they failed miserably this year,I would kinda get it.But it's the Jets at the end of the day.
                      Never forget

                      Comment


                      • Re: Non-Colts thread

                        http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/pos...t-as-packers-c

                        Surprise: Jeff Saturday out as Packers' C



                        There has been considerable debate in recent weeks on whether or not the Green Bay Packers should replace place-kicker Mason Crosby. To this point, the Packers have stood behind him. It appears we were focused on the wrong veteran player.

                        Even after wrapping up the NFC North title, the Packers have taken an unexpected and curiously-timed action: Jeff Saturday won't be the Packers' starting center Sunday against the Tennessee Titans and perhaps beyond. Instead, third-year player Evan Dietrich-Smith -- who has been considered Saturday's heir apparent for 2013 -- will make his first career start at center.




                        Saturday Saturday didn't practice Wednesday and Thursday because of neck and shoulder injuries, but he returned Friday and coach Mike McCarthy said he was available to play against the Titans. But McCarthy confirmed that Dietrich-Smith will start, and Saturday told reporters that he didn't think his health was the reason for the change.

                        The Packers still have plenty to play for in their final two games, including a first-round playoff bye and possibly home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. So it wouldn't make sense to start experimenting at such an important position to evaluate future personnel needs. Mostly, the surprise nature of this move illustrates how difficult it is for outsiders -- at least fans and the media -- to judge offensive line play.

                        Saturday is 37 and we all smirked a bit when he finished atop fan voting for the Pro Bowl this week. But there is a big difference between a veteran who has perhaps slipped from his peak performance and one who is needs to be benched two weeks before the playoffs begin.

                        To be clear, Dietrich-Smith could be a long-term answer for the Packers. We knew that Saturday, signed as a free agent last winter after Scott Wells' departure, was always a stopgap answer. And there is support for Dietrich-Smith from some of the most important players in the locker room, most notably quarterback Aaron Rodgers.

                        Last month, Rodgers said on his ESPN 540 radio show: "I think [Dietrich-Smith] has a very good approach to the game and he's a guy who’s going to be -- I'm not going to make any bold, crazy predictions -- but I do feel pretty certain that he's going to be with us for a long time and eventually be the starting center."

                        The Packers clearly have decided that time has come. But no matter how much potential Dietrich-Smith has displayed in practice, or during seven spot starts at guard over the past two seasons, I doubt the Packers would have made this move so late in the season if Saturday were playing better.

                        I won't pretend that my amateur eye had noticed an obvious deficiency in Saturday's performance over the previous 14 games. Nor had I heard many rumblings from football people who know a lot more than me. Our friends at Pro Football Focus have Saturday rated as their 30th-best center in the NFL, based on run and pass blocking, but sometimes centers are valued more for their ability to make calls and set protections than pure blocking.

                        Historically, the Packers have more often than not made the right decision when elevating a young player into the starting lineup. That transition usually occurs in the offseason, but the Packers apparently didn't want to wait on this one.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Non-Colts thread

                          Yeah, well I think we all saw this last year when he was with the Colts, he lost it a while ago, so ridiculous that he got voted to the pro bowl game, it is basically just a popularity contest, especially with o lineman. I guess he will be back in indy next year with a front office position.
                          Why so SERIOUS

                          Comment


                          • Re: Non-Colts thread

                            The Giants are such a major disappointment. They win epic playoff games against the likes of the Packers and Patriots, yet they can't even put together a solid regular season.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Non-Colts thread

                              Giants suck!!!!!

                              As much as the haters don't like r, RG3 has us one win away from winning the NFC East.

                              Damn Rex Grossman, RG3 and Cousins are our foutree


                              RG3 for MVP

                              Comment


                              • Re: Non-Colts thread

                                Patriots-Dolphins has been flexed to 4:25, so the Pats will know by kickoff if Houston has won or lost to the Colts.

                                A Houston win may cause them to rest banged-up starters from their long injury list, because they will probably assume Denver beats KC in Mile High. The Patriots are known for NOT resting people, but if a bye is not a realistic option they have done so in the past. I could see Welker, Hernandez, Talib, Dennard, and maybe even Brady sitting after a series, and Gronk not playing at all again. Miami's D is tough.

                                The relevance? A Ravens win and a Patriots loss vs. Miami gets the Pats a #4 seed and a playoff game vs. the Colts.

                                So... beating Houston may just help you avoid the Patriots and play the Ravens instead, while handing the Patriots a bye. All of New England is pulling for you!
                                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X