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

Week 12: @ Cardinals

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

  • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

    While I'm at it, I'd also be interested in seeing Delano Howell back starting. Also need to involve Havili more in the offense (once healthy). Too bad Brazill effed up and missed all those games. I guess he was practicing and did get camp, but I thought he looked like he had reasonable potential last year. Can't say I'm seeing it now though.

    How can a first-place team looks so emotionally disengaged? Isn't this supposedly Pagano's strong suit? Another no show next week and the Titan's are right back breathing down our necks.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

    Comment


    • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

      This is a systemic breakdown, pointing fingers to individual players is asinine. I know TRich hasn't blown it up, but this team has sucked for about a month now. And when an entire team sucks, the individuals look even worse. And make fun of the "o line" comments alll you want, but the o-line was where the cracks in this team's armor first showed, and now the entire team has just followed suit.

      It was a promising start to the season, but we are fizzling down the stretch hard. The loss of so many players has finally taken its toll. Very disappointing, but it's hard to imagine this ship getting righted this year. We've been playing some very bad football, and for a while now. It's no longer an outlying performance... it's become the norm. We're not a good football team anymore.
      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-24-2013, 10:28 PM.
      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

      Comment


      • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

        Changes have to be made. Irsay screwed up by buying into this "run first" philosophy. Great QBs and passing offenses win in this league- not run oriented teams with game managing QBs.

        Comment


        • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

          Landry, RJF, Woerner, Toler, Walden - the acquisitions aimed at improving the D talent have been dreadful. I'd actually say Walden has been the most effective, surprisingly given how much criticism that particular move got.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

            Francois hasn't been dreadful. Landry has given us little. Toler hasn't played a lot cause he is still injured, something they knew when they were getting him.
            Finally Werner, i don't have something against the kid bit they picked him up in the first round and then we learn they see him as prospect? Really? Your 1st round pick?

            This team is falling apart and the fact that they keep coming unprepared is really embarrassing.
            Never forget

            Comment


            • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

              Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
              Changes have to be made. Irsay screwed up by buying into this "run first" philosophy. Great QBs and passing offenses win in this league- not run oriented teams with game managing QBs.
              I agree. Great QB's and passing offenses win in this league. The key is that you must be able to run the ball when you have to in tough playoff situations (a huge weakness in Manning's later years), but you don't need to revolve your offense around the running game in today's NFL. The Colts have just been completely stubborn this year. They don't have the ability to have a nasty running game, yet they insist on trying it just so they can pound their chests and say that they try to play smash mouth football.

              Like I said, Pep is one of the least adaptive and creative offensive coordinators I've ever seen. Would it kill him to roll Luck out of the pocket every once in a while? I'm tired of seeing Luck get bulldozed in the pocket. I'm tired of the same predictable formations. Arians's style might have led to a lot of interceptions last year, but it also won us a lot of games. Arians was far more suited to develop a talent like Luck than the Pagano/Pep tandem. Though in fairness, the team last year did have much better offensive weapons than this depleted bunch. We honestly might have the worst receiving group in the NFL right now. Hilton is talented, but he just isn't good enough to compensate for being the number 1 focus of a defense. Also, he seems to just get too easily out-muscled by defenders on routes. Needs to get tougher. Fleener has been a bright spot this year. Outside of those two guys, our receiving corp is absolutely pitiful.

              The Wayne injury was unfortunately the straw that broke the camel's back. It completely dissolved us of our swagger. The offense has been a shell of itself since then and you can tell that it's affected the entire team. We were able to overcome most of the early injuries, but this one is just too much.

              We obviously peaked in the Denver game. That game was the highest of highs. I thought that was a team that looked like it could be competing for a Super Bowl appearance. But we are a shell of ourselves now. We could still get lucky and win a playoff game at home, but I doubt it.

              I don't think we are going to blow the division. We still have all three division teams at home. At worst, we will go 2-1 against them.
              Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-24-2013, 11:21 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                Next week is a must-win. If we lose that games things start to get tight.

                Comment


                • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                  This is still a work in progress. Luck and the vets have made us forget this a tad, when they come out and beat Super Bowl favorites this year and good teams, like Green Bay last year.

                  All the comebacks. The big wins.

                  We're only 2 years removed from basically cleaning house.

                  We're going to have games like these. We're going to be the enigma of the NFL until we get really solid on both lines and hopefully stay healthy.

                  That being said. This is a game we could have won, and being blown out for the 2nd time in 3 weeks is absolutely pathetic.

                  Did I almost turn the game off at halftime? Yes. Did I force myself to watch one of the most boring games of football ever? Yes. I don't think we'll lose the division. But the question is, will it be because of our play in the future or the fact that our division includes the likes of the Jaguars, Titans and Texans? Honestly, I don't know.

                  But we are damn lucky to be in the AFC South right now and still having a 2 game lead in it. But I guess, the luck of being in the South comes with a price.....

                  Losing Wayne really, really, really ****ed us. Dude was our rock. It sucks because if we hadn't lost all those offensive weapons we probably could have made a deep run in January.

                  I think besides the lack of talent on offense, we have lost our confidence. Rams dominate us AT HOME, barely beat the Titans, and then get smoked by the Cardinals.

                  Good for Bruce Arians, though. He'll always be loved for what he did here in 2012. I'd certainly rather have him than Pep right now. I'm sure as much as he loves getting an easy win, he probably hated it being the Colts that it came against.

                  On to the next one, I suppose, though. Titans at home. Got to win that. Win that and we basically have the division.
                  Super Bowl XLI Champions
                  2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                  Comment


                  • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                    The sad thing is I think the Colts need an epic collapse in order for Irsay to actually do something here. I mean the irony here is he wants this team to not be dependent on Andrew Luck the problem here its history repeating itself but with a younger version.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                      I'm watching the postgame interiews on channel 13 and I know Rich Nye's tall, but holy crap TY Hilton is a tiny dude

                      Comment


                      • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                        Cards were averaging just 85 yds per game rushing. Sunk a lot of dough into this D in free agency for this level of putrid.
                        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                        -Emiliano Zapata

                        Comment


                        • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          It's time to admit that Richardson is a bust. There's been enough time for both player and team to understand each other and it's just not happening. MAYBE with some line improvement and training camp... and a full complement of offensive weapons for Luck... it would help. But Richardson isn't the 2nd coming of pre-injury Edge.
                          Here is a great observation from the poster GoBigBlue88 at coltfreaks.com:

                          Look, Trent Richardson just isn't a good RB. I'm sorry some of you need this spelled out for you every week, but he's not. Great example today -- off-tackle run where TE drives his man wide, Castonzo seals off the interior defender. Wide open hole for Richardson. He hits it running hard in one direction, he goes 10 yards before he encounters a defender. Instead, he stutter steps in the hole. There is no reason for doing this, no defender around. He just stutter steps because he's unsure. And he's so slow, he gets tripped up from behind. Gain of 2. This guy is slow, and turns 10-yard gains into 2-yard gains. It was a terrible trade. No amount of practice, coaching or offseason will make it a good trade. At best, his future is a 3rd down or goal line back.

                          http://coltfreaks.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=508

                          Perfectly said.

                          That's not the first time where he has stutter stepped and turned a potential long gain into a 2 yard one. This guy is just not any good. Yes, we all know the line is bad, but Ahmad Bradshaw and Donald Brown each have/were able to have a couple of shinning moments this season. T-Rich hasn't. He's slow and is not a good running back.

                          I tried to sip the Koolaide on this. I supported the trade when it first happened because I was under the impression that we were getting a somewhat decent RB, so I guess I'm guilty of some Monday morning quarterbacking. But who cares what I think? I'm just some Joe Schmo on a message board. Those who run this team should be held accountable for trading a first round pick for a bad running back. I'm not even going to watch the draft next year. It's going to be too irritating when we see Cleveland picking for us.

                          At this point, it's a massive flop of a trade. Even though not everything is T-Rich's fault, he's added absolutely nothing of value. At some point throughout a season, any good running back can find ways to sometimes compensate for a bad line. T-Rich never does, and he misses holes even when the line does their job. We could play one of the yellow jacket CSC event staff workers and have the same results.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                            Richardson was a great fit. He's terrible, just like everyone else on the team besides Luck and Mathis.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                              We've been outscored 93-9 in the last four first halves against Houston, St. Louis, Tennessee, and Arizona. That is one of the most astoundingly awful statistics I've ever seen. And it's not like any of these teams are that great. Arizona is the best of the four, but that's not saying much.

                              You have to look at coaching and preparation when you get your a** handed to you in four straight first halves like that. We're lucky as hell that we've managed to go 2-2 in that stretch. But you're not going to win many games against good teams when you start like that, much less a playoff game.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                                I agreed with this

                                http://www.stampedeblue.com/2013/11/...ying-so-poorly

                                Chuck Pagano At A Loss As To Why His Colts Are Playing So Poorly
                                By Brad Wells  @StampedeBlue on Nov 25 2013, 6:00a 37


                                Christian Petersen
                                Pagano doesn't seem to know how to fix his broken 7-4 team.

                                TWEET (8) SHARE (5)  SHARE 37 COMMENTS
                                It’s a broken record at this point.

                                Colts started slow, again. Chuck Pagano's defense was carved up by a mediocre-at-best quarterback. Coverage was spotty. Run defense nonexistent.

                                The Colts 40-11 Week 12 loss to the Cardinals was so bad that even attempting to analyze it makes me feel tired, useless, and ultimately soul drained.

                                For the second time in two weeks, the Colts got their asses handed to them by an NFC West team. This time, instead of a Rams team led by Kellen Clemson, it was Carson Palmer and the Bruce Arians-coached Cardinals.

                                Amazing. The Colts blew out the 49ers in Candlestick back in Week 3 and came back to knock off the Seahawks on Week 5. Both those teams are not only the top teams in their division, but two of the premiere teams in the entire league.

                                And yet, this same Colts team that bested SF and Seattle has gotten dismantled and humiliated by St. Louis and Arizona.

                                Yes, the season-ending injury to wide receiver Reggie Wayne has indeed severely affected the Colts’ offense, but that injury does not explain or excuse just how terrible Indianapolis’ defense has performed since the bye week. For the third time in four weeks, the defense has surrendered 14 points in the first quarter. Also for the third time in four weeks, the Colts’ defense has allowed the opponent’s offense to score with their opening possession.

                                And yet, despite these facts plainly available, Colts head coach Chuck Pagano continues to defer when he wins the opening coin toss.


                                In the first half of the last four games, the Colts have been outscored 93-9. Reggie Wayne isn’t a defensive back, a linebacker, or a defensive line. Blaming his injury as the reason why the Colts have played so poorly since their Week 7 win against the Broncos is laziness. A cheap narrative. Pagano water carrying.

                                The reality we must all come to realize is that, despite general manager Ryan Grigson spending tens of millions of dollars of owner Jim Irsay’s money to handpick players Chuck Pagano believed would thrive in his 3-4 "hybrid" scheme, this defense isn’t much better than last years.

                                And it’s the new players, the expensive free agent acquisitions, who are playing the worst.

                                After the game, veteran defensive lineman Cory Redding spoke to reporters and talked about how the players and coaches needed to do some "soul searching." This was Redding doing what he does well: Be a leader. Contrast this with Robert Mathis, who ducked reporters and left the locker room following the game without saying a word to the media.


                                Frustration is reaching the breaking point. It’s clear that Chuck Pagano doesn’t have any answers. He looked exacerbated and confused after his defense gave up over 100 yards rushing in the first half to a Cardinals team that was averaging 85 a game going in.

                                Blowout loses like this one and the Rams lose make the impressive early season wins against teams like the 49ers moot. The Colts are being embarrassed, and their coach seems dazed and without reasons to correct their many issues.

                                When the coach doesn't have the answers, that means things could spiral out of control quickly unless he finds some, and quick!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X