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

Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

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

  • #31
    Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

    Originally posted by vapacersfan
    No, but we can blame him for his actions which cost him to be suspended for the season which did help ruin the Pacers season
    Yeah, didn't you see the trophy presentation to the Spurs last Nov. 23rd? I mean who honestly thinks that the pacers can make the playoffs, let alone win a series. Just write this whole season off for them.


    Excuse my sarcasm.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

      Originally posted by Hicks
      Many of us can and will because he ****ed up. Ron was the only player to run into the stands without having a player to go up there to get in the first place; his error was the worst judgement of the night. Throwing a beer cup at a player doesn't guarantee a brawl nearly as much as an opposing player charging into a crowd of people does, and that's what he did. The Pacers' consequences stemmed mainly from his actions. Yes also from JO and Jack, but Ron first and foremost. JO and Jack don't do what they do unless Ron does what he does first. That one bone-headed mistake was the most responsible for costing us 73 regular season games without one of our best players, 30 without two of them, and 15 without 3 of them, and the playoffs without one.
      I love your logic on "if Ron did not go up there the brawl wouldn't have happened and J.O. and S. JAX would not have gotten suspended...."

      None of this would have happened if the Referees controlled the game and did not let it get out of control...none of this would have happened if Ben Wallace did not hit Ron Artest for no reason when Ron did not even foul him that hard...none of this would have happened if Ben Wallace did not keep cussing at Ron and throwing a towel on him...none of this would have happened if the referee would have immediatly kicked Ben Wallace out of the game....none of this would have happened if the Detroit security or police were near the fans where Ron Artest was....none of this would have happened if....

      come on give me a break! Ron is not responsible for the actions of others. What Ron and the Pacers did on 11/19 was make me proud...it made me proud the Pacers stood together as teammates and brothers and defended each other...they showed the world that they are men. Unfortunately, it happened....but David Stern should have acted with precedent and failed to do so. Also......Artest would not have been suspended this long if the game was not shown on ESPN...

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

        As I said in my previous point, I am not going to elaborate.

        It is none of your business on what I may know or I may not.

        It is not about me being a "ron lover", it's about me loving the Pacers and understanding without Ron we do not have as good as a chance as doing well with Ron. Ron is going to come back stronger than ever and will make sure he will not do anything like what he did (it did cost him 5 million dollars). I am not here talking about rumors, I am talking about reality which you seem to lack. Reality is, 90% of Pacer fans do not share your sentiment that the "suspensions were light or just"...and surely no one in the Pacers organization does. David Stern used Ron as a scapegoat and Stern is nothing but a piece of trash who has ruined the Pacers organization over and over throughout the years because of the Pacers "small-market" status.

        Do you really think Shaq or Kobe would have gotten 72 games?!??!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

          I try to make a point of staying out of Sassooon's threads, but I've got two points to make.

          1) Bravo to Geezer for his post.

          Although I'll admit that Ron is a helluva player, I can't figure out why anyone that is a Pacers fan, first and foremost, would want that clown on our team.

          Hey, for the fun of it, lets make two lists. All of the boneheaded and destructive things that any Pacers player has ever done. And Ron's list. Really, once you get past Carlos Rogers and his strange disappearance, and I guess you could even include Kenny Williams thinking he didn't have to pay his cellphone bill or when Chuck Person stuffed Conrad Brunner into a trashcan over at NIFS even though I think that actually helped make that particular team's "bond" tighter, the "rest of the team" list isn't all that long, at least not compared to Ron's list. He's an unprecedented trouble-maker on a team that has always taken pride in not having trouble-makers. Hey, there's a reason John Williamson and Adrian Dantley didn't stay in Indianapolis very long...

          2) Second, I don't like to blame losses on one player or a single play, and I generally don't like to attribute wins to a single player. It *is* a team game. And, of course, its easy to see when a single player really elevates his game and carries a team to victory (like JO did in NJ the other night). So should Ron be blamed for the Pacers' fourth quarter meltdown in Game #6? I say yes, but you guys haven't even addressed the real reason why. During the fourth quarter, Jim Gray reported that Rick Carlisle was on the sidelines, going berzerk, yelling at the team to give the ball to JO in the post. What did Ron do. First, he tried to dunk over four Pistons (perhaps they should've been called for Illegal D?) including his good, personal friend and defensive standout, shotblocker extraordinaire Ben Wallace. *Then* he took the forty-footer with something like 16 seconds still on the shotclock. What did he do then, that's worthy of saying, "Ron cost the team the game." - he became selfish, broke away from the gameplan, tried to play one-on-five.

          Lookee there, I've blamed Ron and I haven't even mentioned the play/ flop? at the other end of the court.

          And I don't want to hear that "JO was hurt/ struggling/ etc." Rick wanted JO to get the ball. If he does, and he doesn't deliver... well I can live with that. JO *is/was* the Pacers best player, he's the go-to guy, he's the guy Rick wanted to depend on the fourth quarter of an elimination game. Ron's selfishness denied the rest of his teammates an opportunity to prove that Rick and JO could lead this team to The Finals. Yes there were injuries, but everybody has injuries in the playoffs. Because of the injuries, I don't think we could've won Game #7 but I believe we should've won Game #6.



          And for the record, let me apologize for spending this much time in this thread.
          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


          • #35
            Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

            It's starting to come to the point that Ron Artest is as important to winning to this team as J.O. is...and I truly believe that will happen next season. Ron is just too good of a player and next year will be an MVP Candidate.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

              Originally posted by vapacersfan
              I never said we couldnt make the playoffs. Hell, I hope we do. but IMO we were a championship team on and before 11/19 and as it stands we will be lucky to get to the finals.

              So no, I never said anything about writing the season off, but yes, I do think certain player(s) action cost us a chance at winning a title.

              Oh, and in case you didnt know, when you are suspended for the season, you cant play at all, not even in the playoffs, so yes, that not only hurts yourself but you also hurt your time
              FYI, I know that he can't play in the playoffs. Where did I say he could?

              So the pacers can make the playoffs, but the season is ruined? So what do they need to accomplish to make the season worth something? Even with Artest, the rings weren't being sized for the pacers.

              I'm not questioning the part about his suspensions, nor the part about being a "good" fan. It's just plain dumb to say one player lost an entire series, and ruined an entire season. The east is still weak. It's not even close to impossible for the pacers to make it to the finals in the east.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                Originally posted by XXSASSXX31
                I love your logic on "if Ron did not go up there the brawl wouldn't have happened and J.O. and S. JAX would not have gotten suspended...."

                None of this would have happened if the Referees controlled the game and did not let it get out of control...none of this would have happened if Ben Wallace did not hit Ron Artest for no reason when Ron did not even foul him that hard...none of this would have happened if Ben Wallace did not keep cussing at Ron and throwing a towel on him...none of this would have happened if the referee would have immediatly kicked Ben Wallace out of the game....none of this would have happened if the Detroit security or police were near the fans where Ron Artest was....none of this would have happened if....
                They all deserve blame for their actions in leading to this mess. All of them. Including Ron Artest, who did one of the worst parts in leading to it. Only running into the stands creates the mob, not Ben being an idiot earlier, or the refs being incompetent.

                What Ron and the Pacers did on 11/19 was make me proud...it made me proud the Pacers stood together as teammates and brothers and defended each other...they showed the world that they are men.
                You have a strange sense of pride.

                Unfortunately, it happened....
                You're proud of what they did, but think it's unfortunate they did it?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                  Originally posted by vapacersfan
                  Ok, Im really confused.

                  I was refering to last season when I said he cost us game 6. Now that is debatable, but thats my opinion. I could have been more thurough, but Jay basically summed up what i had to say.

                  As for this year, while the rungs werent bein measured for the Pacers, it was pretty damn close. We beat the Pistons by 17 on there court.

                  I can tell you are new here, cause what makes a season a success for me is a championship. I love all the regular season awards and I love the playoffs, but IMO a success is winning a ring. Now you have to change taht gauge (sp) based on your team, but with this team I felt a success would be a NBA championship.

                  Like I said, I dont think this season is a wash, but I dont think we are going to have a harder time without Artest, better yet the games we had to go without JO and S-Jax
                  Either you run your company, or have your own business, or youre not a successful worker then huh? A lot better teams than this one have lost in the finals, i.e. last year.

                  Yes, the ultimate goal is the ring. But if you measure success by trophys than youre going to be disappointed 90% of the time by all of your teams.

                  Jay made good points, but if you win game 2 theres a game 7. The season never rests on one game. You can always go back and find a moment where someone screwed up and it hurt a lot. Yes, I'll agree that RA screwed up the most, but it's still a team effort. If he was playing that badly in RCs eyes, don't you think he would of pulled him. Obviously he thought he would do better than someone sitting on the bench. So JO gets the ball, and misses the shot. Do you blame it on him? Where do the excuses stop? They (the pacers) didn't get it done. Thats all that matters.

                  Excuses are like a$$holes. Everyone has one, and all of em stink.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                    Hicks,

                    I'm not proud it happened, but I am proud how the Pacers defended each other from the mob. As Stephen Jackson said, "We Ride Together Baby"....and even J.O. proved that notion.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                      I always go after these issues. A few years ago in a regional game, I went for a dunk. Got fouled and missed because of it. I was a 80%+ FT shooter, so I was really pissed when I missed both FTs. I played horrible there on out, and we lost by 3.

                      Later I find out that I'm being blamed for losing by some seniors, and even my coach. From a recent players stand point, nothing feels as bad as being blamed entirely for a lose, especially in a playoff format.

                      On another note: I don't agree with if you don't support ron, you don't support the team. Personally I like Ron, but you don't always have to agree with their actions.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                        Originally posted by Since86
                        Jay made good points, but if you win game 2 theres a game 7. The season never rests on one game. You can always go back and find a moment where someone screwed up and it hurt a lot. Yes, I'll agree that RA screwed up the most, but it's still a team effort. If he was playing that badly in RCs eyes, don't you think he would of pulled him. Obviously he thought he would do better than someone sitting on the bench. So JO gets the ball, and misses the shot. Do you blame it on him? Where do the excuses stop? They (the pacers) didn't get it done. Thats all that matters.

                        Excuses are like a$$holes. Everyone has one, and all of em stink.
                        I understand the points you are making...

                        The best analagoy I can think of is the 1996 playoffs. Game 5. Reggie, wearing goggles. We're down by a point or two in the last minute, Reggie's been ice-cold and Rik is still in his prime as a post player. Brown calls for Rik to get the ball in the post. Jackson flat-out misses him with two consecutive passes. Was Rik held? From Aisle 20, I thought so on the first pass. But the second pass just sails out of bounds. So do you blame Larry for trying to make it a two-man game with Jackson and Smits when neither appeared ready 'for prime time' instead of tried-and-true Reggie? Do you blame Jackson for missing with the passes, and trade him to Denver for Jalen Rose before the dust settles? Do you blame Rik for not working hard enough to break free and get to the pass? I don't know what the answer is. There are lots of questions, and if I knew the answer I'd be a GM in the league.

                        BTW, what does "Since86" mean?

                        Signed,

                        Chuck Person's biggest fan.

                        PS - as for whether Rick should've pulled Ron - I'm not sure Rick realized the
                        "rebellion" was deliberate until it was too late. And its not like Al was playing well in that series. I think he was depending on Ron sticking to the gameplan.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                          Originally posted by Since86
                          I always go after these issues. A few years ago in a regional game, I went for a dunk. Got fouled and missed because of it. I was a 80%+ FT shooter, so I was really pissed when I missed both FTs. I played horrible there on out, and we lost by 3.

                          Later I find out that I'm being blamed for losing by some seniors, and even my coach. From a recent players stand point, nothing feels as bad as being blamed entirely for a lose, especially in a playoff format.

                          On another note: I don't agree with if you don't support ron, you don't support the team. Personally I like Ron, but you don't always have to agree with their actions.
                          I don't agree with his actions, I understand it. He should have been suspended, but not for 72 games. Not supporting Ron is not supporting the Pacers brass and franchise at this point. Case closed.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                            Originally posted by XXSASSXX31
                            Case closed.
                            I'm waiting for him to say, "Simple as That". Perhaps Sassooooon and NewYawk are related?

                            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


                            • #44
                              Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                              Ron is currently not a member of this team, he is suspended for a stupid reaction to a stupid act by a fan. His conduct over the past 3 seasons has been for the most part detrimental to the Pacers. The collapse of 02, his selfish and stupid play in the ECF last year, the retarded CD promotion, and 73 game suspension all point to the fact that this guy needs a change of scenery, the sooner the better.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Supporting Ron Ron= Supporting PACERS

                                In the heat of the moment, I yell. (I'm a very competitive person that yells a lot for some reason.) But I'm sure Jackson did a lot of good things earlier in the game. For me, they shouldn't have been in that situation, or theyre lucky to be in that situation. Depending on if they are better or not. I loved to watch tape, break down what should and shouldn't of happened, so I'm looking at that situation from a now point of view. At the time, I say he's an idiot that should of done better. It's been a long time since I've blamed one person for a loss.

                                Since86? Been a pacer/basketball fan since '86, just happens to be my birth year too.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X