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

Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 6
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 template Next
  • #1

    Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

    If you’re a glass full kind of person you can hang your hat on the fact that had we made just two of the free throws we missed in Charlotte we could be 3-0. You could even make the point that you are still 2-1 with your best player out with injury and your starting point guard injured while you are trying to integrate several new players into your system.

    If you’re a glass half empty person you will say that if it weren’t for a heroic effort by David West to lead a come from behind win you could easily be 1-2 with the one win being a double over time win vs. an 0-3 team. You could further state that the it wouldn’t matter how many people you were trying to work into the system because our offensive system is non functioning and is just a differing isolation play each time down the court.

    You would be right either way and thus we have the state of the Pacers 3 games into the season.

    I’m not going to lie, I see this as troubling. We have played some less than stellar teams so far & unless some miracle happens on Monday I fully expect a beat down of biblical proportions from the Spurs. In fact if we lose and lose less than double digits I will probably consider it a victory.

    Our offense is just a mess right now. There is no other way to say it, it is horrible & we are relying on one on one greatness to get us over the hump. Or at best we are trying to run a two man pick & roll game which other teams have scouted and are denying. Also it doesn’t help that we don’t really have any great one on one players out there either.

    I don’t want to belay the obvious but we miss Danny Granger far more than I ever dreamed we would. I mean he makes us a totally other team or at least he makes the starting five a different team.

    Can’t say that I’m thrilled with Frank so far this year. I want him to do well so bad that I am really going out of my way to not be overly critical but his offensive system is just abysmal so far.

    Also I know they are new and all but are Sam Young & Gerald Green the two single dumbest passers you’ve ever seen? I mean between Green throwing it between the players legs and Young thinking that an opponents arm & hand being in the way is no reason not to pass into an area we have been treated to some of the dumbest passes I’ve ever seen. EVER!

    Ok Paul George had a very good statistical game & yes he played superb defense to close out the game. But am I the only person who wonders if maybe he would play just a little better every now and then if he got angry? I mean in all of the games he’s played I’ve never seen him get upset about anything and I think it would do him a world of good to every now and then get offended by a hard foul or something. I mean Danny enters a game ready to fight, David West looks like someone spit on him every single min. he is on the floor even Roy on occasion gets fed up & gets emotional in a game. There just never appears to be any real fire there, maybe it’s just me. I mean I love the fact that he is rebounding at a very high level but I guess I just thought with Danny out he would somehow get his points up to the mid 20’s, maybe that’s just not his game and it may never be.

    Mahinmi played a total of 09:53 in a double overtime game. Not sure what I should think about that.

    Even more puzzling to me was that Gerald Green played a total of 24:18 in double over time when he appeared to be finally getting over the hump? He was taken out for Lance and never came back. This is kind of puzzling.

    Before I move on let me just say that Marcus Thornton is a far more sedate human being than I would be. If it were me & I hit that big three pointer in the corner with a man running at me to send the game into a second over time I'm afraid I would have have to tell everyone in the arena about it and do some form of dance at the mid court circle. Dude just ran off like it was nothing, he blew a real chance to self promote there and who would have blamed him.

    Anyway let’s just do grades tonight and move on.

    Gerald Green: C+

    He finally scored from the field after he decided to quit settling for the jumper and driving the baseline. But defensively he was having trouble & was getting into foul trouble. He did cut down on the dumb turnovers tonight. Not really sure why he was relegated to the bench for good in the beginning of the 4th quarter but I have a feeling Frank was testing the water to see how Lance fit in with the starters. Honestly I can’t say he was any better or any worse than Gerald but I think Gerald does not fit real well with the starting five. Not sure if Frank will make the switch but I wouldn’t be surprised either.

    David West: A

    Atrocious from the field for most of the night but once again when it counted he hit some big shots. But the most important thing he did all night long was block a three point shot attempt by Marcus Thornton sometime in the 2nd overtime. Also he took over the glass, which he should do on far more occasions than he does (no I don’t expect 18 every game but 10 would be nice). Very decent game from him.

    Roy Hibbert: B+

    Frank has got to figure out a way to get Roy some more shots. Dude was 6-11 from the field and whenever he put a move on Cousins it was more often than not a success. Also 6 blocked shots is huge but I don’t think he played as well defensively as he could have against Cousins.

    Paul George: A

    Again I am going to give him an A for the actual game he played but once again he has yet to show that he can impose his will on a game on the offensive end. In fact he played the entire 1st quarter without scoring a point. But I don’t want to be unfair either. Anytime you grab 17 rebounds and your team wins you have done a good job. Also he did play killer defense to close out several Kings breaks in the over time periods. BTW I’m not trying to be unfair to Paul, I just think that we are looking for him to show us he is the next alpha male not just another good/great player on a very good team.

    George Hill: A-

    I can’t fault him for our lack of offensive cohesion because he is running the plays Frank is calling from the sidelines. He played much better tonight than he did vs. the Bobcats and while he may have gone over board with the shooting attempts in the O.T. periods what I like about him is that he has the mind of a killer, if not the talent of one. He is not afraid of big moments and frankly I can’t say that about all of our players. He didn’t let Isiah Thomas abuse him with speed like I was afraid he would either.

    Sam Young: F

    Just horrible all night long. Bad shot selection, stupid idiotic passing and defense that was some combination of tae kwon do and convulsions. Honest to God he passed the ball inbounds directly to a King player and acted surprised when he didn’t pass it along to the Pacer he intended to pass to. I want to like Sam but nights like this make it very hard.

    Tyler Hansbrough: B

    Why is it that Tyler is the one player this season who has not disappointed me? I think it’s because I had such low expectations of him that if he comes into the game and doesn’t proceed to throw his own defecation at his team mates I am happy with him. However not only has he not done that he’s been surprisingly active on defense and rebounding this year. His offense is about the same but God love him for making his free throws.

    D.J. Augustin: C-

    Meh, I’m not sure what to say about him. I guess at least he isn’t A.J. Price (sorry Sookie) but I’m not sure what else to say. He only merits 13:21 in a double over time game? Makes me think that Frank doesn’t have a lot of faith yet.

    Ian Mahinmi: D

    Ugh, this is not what I saw in pre-season at all. Frank obviously lost all faith in him tonight and went back to his security blanket of David West at the 5 for awhile. This is not good, not good at all because isn’t that what people wanted to eliminate from last year? At least he hit his free throws but that’s about all he did.

    Lance Stephenson: B+

    Watching Lance & Evans play against each other was fun to watch because he is the person I most closely associate Lance with body wise and even somewhat skill wise. I wonder if Lance isn’t being set up to move into a role with the front five? This really scares me because that might mean that Danny is out for a long time but if he is I’m not sure if I don’t think Lance wouldn’t be better with that unit where he can facilitate the offense and not be forced to try and be it with that second unit. He had a nasty habit of cherry picking on defense tonight creeping back to try and get a fast break when everyone else was still defending. It cost us a couple of rebounds probably but he did manage to get one break out of it.

    Ok one more overall complaint I have before I go and this one comes from Diamond Dave who complained the entire game about this.

    Our team sets faux screens & picks and other teams have this scouted and stop the action almost every time.

    In other words Tyler or David will come out and set a pick and then immediately slip the pick to get into shooting position without ever making contact with the defender and thus never giving the ball handler the clear space he needs to make a play. We need to just go out & set a solid pick and then see if they can get into position after contact has been made.

    Again I’m not going to complain to much several teams have lost to other teams that they weren’t expecting to so far this year. But we have to be very careful if we want to win the central because we have a very limited room for error because even though the Bulls lost tonight I don’t think they will fall to far and I still believe Rose will be back sooner than we think and if we don’t have a cushion between us I would be very afraid of what they will do once he is healthy.

    Oh well off to the Alamo to face Tim Duncan and Davey Crockett




    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

    I'm just happy that Tyler doesn't slip on EVERY SINGLE pick anymore.
    "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

      "In other words Tyler or David will come out and set a pick and then immediately slip the pick to get into shooting position without ever making contact with the defender and thus never giving the ball handler the clear space he needs to make a play. We need to just go out & set a solid pick and then see if they can get into position after contact has been made"
      i know what you are talking about with those useless fake screens and picks. i don't like them and think they are a waste of time. if you go out and set a screen- then do it. otherwise there isn't much of a point.
      thinking about augustin, i hope his shooting touch sharpens up or else he may make aj price look like a true sharpshooter.
      he has been laying bricks and not much else.
      Last edited by clownskull; 11-04-2012, 02:31 AM.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

        Someone superglue Danny's knee together and lets go.
        "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

        • #5
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          He was taken out for Lance and never came back. This is kind of puzzling.
          Not to me. We went on an 8-0 run when Lance was subbed in the 2nd quarter.

          He has a +34 for the season. The closest to that is Hibbert at +17. Everyone else is around or below 0.
          Last edited by McKeyFan; 11-04-2012, 12:59 PM.
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

            I seem to be the only one that was amazed by Paul George last night. I thought he imposed his will rebounding and with his defense. I thought for a lot of the 2nd half and overtime, his defense was artest like.
            Good is the enemy of Great


            We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
            -- Frank Vogel.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

              New big screen A++++++++++++++++++++++++

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                I agree with most except for Roy. He held Cousins to 9-27 from the field! But I agree he needs more FGA. And West needs less.

                Also it's funny that you said that about Paul. On his fadeaway J in the second OT, Thornton kept grabbing his jersey (leading to a no call of course) and sitting court side you could tell PG was annoyed. He simply made up his mind that he was gonna score, and score he did.
                Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-04-2012, 09:21 AM.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                  I don't understand how the Pacers can be the worst screen/pick setting team. So disappointing. The ball handler always has to dance his way out of a double team almost every time they try and set a pick. Good lord, how is it that hard??? Teams do it to us and look like geniuses cause we can't figure it out half the time. Can't they just watch the tape of other teams on how to set proper picks? F***!
                  First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    Not to me. We went on an 8-0 run when Lance was subbed in the 2nd quarter.

                    He has a +34. The closest to that is Hibbert at +17. Everyone else is around or below 0.
                    yeah, me neither. Lance gives another good ball handler. Gerald had a nice game, but he is a turnover waiting to happen. Putting Lance in the game allows Hill to post Thomas and Brooks. And let Lance run the offense. Thought Lance did a nice job of game management when he ran the offense.

                    It may just be me, but right now it looks like Frank really only trusts 5 guys right now. and Lance is one of them.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                      Also it doesn’t help that we don’t really have any great one on one players out there either.
                      How many times and years we have been saying the same thing? yep another year without a shot creator, Crawford and Mayo are looking good so far by the way.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                        Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                        yeah, me neither. Lance gives another good ball handler. Gerald had a nice game, but he is a turnover waiting to happen. Putting Lance in the game allows Hill to post Thomas and Brooks. And let Lance run the offense. Thought Lance did a nice job of game management when he ran the offense.

                        It may just be me, but right now it looks like Frank really only trusts 5 guys right now. and Lance is one of them.
                        It looks to me like Vogel decided to go with Lance because he trust that he is not going to throw the ball away unlike Green.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                          I totally agree with your point about picks.

                          However, a fake pick is an excellent play and usually successful, if used correctly. And that would be after setting 3-4 good, hard picks first. If used as one out of every 4-5 picks set, a false pick is very useful and takes the opponent by surprise.

                          But using a false pick on nearly every pick set is just plain lazy and bad basketball.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            How many times and years we have been saying the same thing? yep another year without a shot creator, Crawford and Mayo are looking good so far by the way.
                            Yeah no kidding. I bet had we known that Danny would be out for some time, we would've opened our wallets a little more and paid one of those guys in order to get more creativity in our offense

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Vogel could make his life easier on his self by just printing your 'Thoughts' and taping it to everyone's locker...

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 template Next
                              Working...
                              X