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

Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

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

  • Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

    I don't think I really buy this but lets say its true the irony considering Eli didn't want to play for SD

    http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/01/how-...eyton-manning/


    Leigh Steinberg was once the most powerful agent in the NFL. He represented the No. 1 overall pick in the NFL draft eight times — more than any other agent in history. Steinberg’s fame and power as the NFL’s preeminent super agent crumbled in the 2000’s, when he fell into bankruptcy and battled alcoholism.

    The inspiration behind Jerry Maguire, Steinberg is now penning a tell-all book about his career representing stars like Troy Aikman, Steve Young, and Bruce Smith, and Ben Roethlisberger. He’s also represented duds, like Ryan Leaf. In his book, The Agent, Steinberg details how Leaf manipulated the Indianapolis Colts into taking Peyton Manning instead of himself with the No. 1 draft pick in the 1998 draft.

    Leigh Steinberg (Kelvin Kuo , Gannett)Share this image:
    Leigh Steinberg (Kelvin Kuo , Gannett)
    As Steinberg notes in the following excerpt from The Agent, courtesy of Thomas Dunne of St. Martin’s Press, it’s a decision the Colts surely don’t regret.

    *********

    It was not until several months before the draft that I realized Ryan might present challenges I didn’t anticipate. By then, it was too late.

    “No way do I want to play in Indianapolis,” he told me, refer- ring to the Colts, who owned the No. 1 pick. Instead, because of the exceptional weather and the more laid-back lifestyle, he preferred the San Diego Chargers, who would go second.

    “That’s fine,” I warned him, “but the way to achieve this is not exactly going to help your image. You’ll get a lot of criticism.” Ryan didn’t care about his image, though, only his destination.

    Making his wish come true would not be easy. The Colts leaned toward choosing Ryan. Many scouts also saw him as a better pros- pect than Peyton Manning. Hard to believe now, isn’t it?

    I told Ryan it would do no good to approach Colts GM Jim Ir- say. Irsay saw the sport the same way he viewed his other passion, rock ’n’ roll. Just as musicians tended to be a bit eccentric, so did football players, and that did not stop him from drafting Jeff George or trading for Eric Dickerson. “Leigh,” he used to say, “it’s about the freaking talent.” If someone is that gifted, in Irsay’s opinion, you simply find a way to deal with his personality.

    Instead, the case needed to be made to the Indianapolis coach,

    Jim Mora, and it couldn’t come from anything Ryan said. It had to come from what he did, or, rather, did not do.

    “If you go to the combine,” I told Ryan, “but fail to show up for a meeting with Mora, that should do it. Jim is a real prideful person who has a tendency to explode. I am not recommending you do this, but if you are desperate to go to San Diego, this is the way.”

    Ryan approved, but I first cleared the idea with Chargers gen- eral manager Bobby Beathard, lest San Diego also question my cli- ent’s reliability. Beathard went along with the ruse. If he’d had a problem, Ryan would’ve shown up for his meeting with Mora. Some purists argue players should not have the right to dictate where they start their pro career, but aren’t college graduates who don’t play football allowed to choose where they want to work and live? The draft was not handed down by Moses as part of the Ten Command- ments. The draft, let’s be honest, is a control mechanism designed to prevent college athletes from exercising the same freedoms ev- eryone else takes for granted and to limit their leverage in contract negotiations. It is important to separate the honor of being selected from the concept of not being given the freedom of choice. Just because athletes are well compensated doesn’t change the underly- ing principle.

    Once Ryan was a no-show, Mora, as anticipated, went ballistic. I defended my player, naturally, dismissing the coach’s response as another Mora meltdown. As I’d anticipated, Ryan was criticized, but the plan achieved its purpose. The Colts took Manning. Some- thing tells me the folks in Indianapolis have never regretted that decision.

    The Agent By Leigh Steinberg with Michael Arkush is in stores January 21 and can be purchased here.

  • #2
    Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

    Thank god lol.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

      What a tool Ryan Leaf is. This story just cements it. How did that decision work out for you Ryan?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

        Not hard to believe at all after watching John Elway and Eli Manning whine their way out of going some where they did not like. Hard to blame Ryan for not wanting to come here at the time either.

        Him weaseling his way out is the best thing that happened to our franchise. Who knows where we would be had we took Leaf and he busted like he did in San Diego. You whiff on the first overall at that time and it sets you back for years to come. We were still new in the city at that time and needed Peyton to really cement our franchise in this city.

        Not having him and the success that followed would have been devastating.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

          This is why I have nothing but respect for Peyton. He embraced the challenge of turning a Mickey Mouse small market Colt franchise into a powerhouse. Elway, MEli, and Leaf (if story is true) are selfish players who made a mockery of the process. I think that the Colts should have held firm with Elway though. He wasn't going to go play AA baseball instead of quarterbacking in the NFL.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
            This is why I have nothing but respect for Peyton. He embraced the challenge of turning a Mickey Mouse small market Colt franchise into a powerhouse. Elway, MEli, and Leaf (if story is true) are selfish players who made a mockery of the process. I think that the Colts should have held firm with Elway though. He wasn't going to go play AA baseball instead of quarterbacking in the NFL.
            Personally I have never been bothered by what any of them did its their careers that they have to consider. The same teams that draft them are the same teams that will dump them when they are no longer useful. I mean Elway and Eli both have 2 SBs so I really don't think they have anything to be ashamed of. Leaf OTOH(if true) was an epic fail and I don't think anyone here hates him for not wanting to be here.

            There are no guarantees I mean it was a perfect storm that Bob Irsay died before Peyton was drafted and Jim has enough sense to hire someone who knows what they are doing where you are drafted matters and in the end the Colts dumped him.

            Now Peyton a #1 Colts draft pick is reunited with Elway a #1 Colts draft pick in Denver on the verge of possibly winning an SB together I guess some Colts do grow up to be Broncos funny how that works out.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

              Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
              Personally I have never been bothered by what any of them did its their careers that they have to consider. The same teams that draft them are the same teams that will dump them when they are no longer useful. I mean Elway and Eli both have 2 SBs so I really don't think they have anything to be ashamed of. Leaf OTOH(if true) was an epic fail and I don't think anyone here hates him for not wanting to be here.

              There are no guarantees I mean it was a perfect storm that Bob Irsay died before Peyton was drafted and Jim has enough sense to hire someone who knows what they are doing where you are drafted matters and in the end the Colts dumped him.

              Now Peyton a #1 Colts draft pick is reunited with Elway a #1 Colts draft pick in Denver on the verge of possibly winning an SB together I guess some Colts do grow up to be Broncos funny how that works out.
              I agree that Eli certainly doesn't have any reason to have regrets. He has won two Super Bowls with the classic New York Giants and will always be a legend in the biggest sports market in the country. Obviously he can sleep well at night. But I look at it through the prism of what's good for the league as a whole, not what's good for an individual player. The league has a draft process which is designed to reward the worst teams. It's not perfect as it opens the door to teams completely tanking a season like the 2011 Colts, but it is what it is. The Chargers had the Number 1 pick in 2004 because of a system set up by the NFL, and Eli and Papa Archibald gave it the middle finger. Sure it has obviously worked out well for Eli over the last ten years, but it was still a classless thing to do. I'm sure that plenty of players have been drafted by teams that they don't want to play for, but most respect the process. I'll always have the utmost respect for Peyton since he embraced the opportunity to turn around a bottom feeder franchise.

              Good point about the Manning-Elway Colt/Bronco connection. Another interesting Manning-Elway connection is that Elway's final season was Manning's rookie year (1998).

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                I agree that Eli certainly doesn't have any reason to have regrets. He has won two Super Bowls with the classic New York Giants and will always be a legend in the biggest sports market in the country. Obviously he can sleep well at night. But I look at it through the prism of what's good for the league as a whole, not what's good for an individual player. The league has a draft process which is designed to reward the worst teams. It's not perfect as it opens the door to teams completely tanking a season like the 2011 Colts, but it is what it is. The Chargers had the Number 1 pick in 2004 because of a system set up by the NFL, and Eli and Papa Archibald gave it the middle finger. Sure it has obviously worked out well for Eli over the last ten years, but it was still a classless thing to do. I'm sure that plenty of players have been drafted by teams that they don't want to play for, but most respect the process. I'll always have the utmost respect for Peyton since he embraced the opportunity to turn around a bottom feeder franchise.

                Good point about the Manning-Elway Colt/Bronco connection. Another interesting Manning-Elway connection is that Elway's final season was Manning's rookie year (1998).

                Elway doesn't have any regrets either he ended up on the Broncos and won 2 SB's to end his career there. Besides we should be glad Elway did that we wouldn't have had Manning and Luck otherwise and the Colts wouldn't be here in Indy.

                The reason why I look at it individually because not all of these players stay with the same team that drafted them. In fact its rare so even if they were drafted as soon as something better comes along they either leave on their own or are kicked to the curb.

                There are no guarantees.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                  Interesting. This is the first time I've ever heard of an NFL player publicly wanting to go somewhere because the market has better weather. You hear about the crap in the NBA all the time, but never the NFL.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                    Thanks, Ryan!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                      This dude is an idiot. I have no doubt that Indy wanted Peyton from square 1. Just because you "skipped on the meeting" doesn't mean you had a hand in their decision to choose Peyton --- if anything you only cemented it. It wasn't like Polian and Co. were heavily leaning towards Leaf and then when he didn't show, reversed course.

                      Stupid to "reveal" this. And pointless.
                      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


                      • #12
                        Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        Stupid to "reveal" this. And pointless.
                        Drunken Steinberg has to create controversy so he can sell his book. Besides, this isn't the first time Steinberg tried to turn a player against the Colts.... see Duane Bickett from earlier years.
                        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                          Back in the day the talk was always Peyton... although the Colts never confirmed that. It was much like a couple of years ago and the Luck/RG3 debate. Most everyone believed the Colts were picking Luck but there was always the 'what if' surrounding the pick and not a total 100% lock that it would be Luck. Fans and media expected Manning though with just a shade of 'they couldn't go wrong with Leaf either' floating around.

                          Of course (insert Polian hate here) there's always the possibility that with everyone expecting Manning that Polian was prepared to draft Leaf instead just so he could again show us his genius by not doing what everyone regarded as the obvious move.

                          But, honestly, I see this article as a lot of one-sided memories mixed in with an interesting story that probably does not now nor ever mean what Leigh is claiming it means. The Colts were taking Manning. At best the interview was Leaf's chance to sway them his way. Maybe by missing the meeting he all but guaranteed the Colts wouldn't pick him... but it was all but guaranteed the Colts were picking Manning anyway. So the meeting was more likely a waste of Leaf's time to have went in the first place.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

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

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                            Snippet from NBC Sports. Full story at link (below):
                            ....“I first cleared the idea with Chargers general manager Bobby Beathard, lest San Diego also question my client’s reliability. Beathard went along with the ruse,” Steinberg writes.....

                            Polian did confirm that Leaf had skipped a meeting with the Colts at the Scouting Combine, and Polian said that Steinberg lied about it afterward and claimed that the Colts had given Leaf the wrong time.

                            “I remember Leigh telling the press that we had blown it because we hadn’t given him the right time,” Polian said. “I knew that was false because I made the call. I’m glad after 16 years he’s finally told the truth.”

                            Beathard also appeared on Mike and Mike and seemed confused about the whole story, saying he didn’t remember much about it. But he said that the Chargers liked Manning better than Leaf, and so the Chargers wouldn’t have gone along with a plan to manipulate the Colts into drafting Leaf.

                            “We absolutely wanted to draft Peyton,” Beathard said.

                            Beathard says he realized at Leaf’s first practice that he had made a huge mistake by drafting Leaf with the second overall pick.

                            “He was in terrible shape — he couldn’t even complete the jog around the field at the start of practice,” Beathard said. “It was a disaster from the start and I’m responsible for it.

                            Ultimately, what’s really extraordinary about this is that we’re still talking about the Manning-Leaf decision, all these years later. Leaf is sitting in a jail cell, while Manning is preparing for a Super Bowl that may be the crowning achievement for the greatest quarterback of all time.
                            http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ted-the-colts/
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

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

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Peyton Manning was the #1 pick because Ryan Leaf sabotaged the process

                              Polian and Mora were old school disciplinarian types. I don't think they were ever overly serious about taking Leaf. Of course, the final decision rested with Irsay since it was a franchise-altering decision like releasing Manning/drafting Luck, but it sounds like he always wanted Manning too. I was pretty young in 1998 and don't have a great memory of all of the pre-draft build up, but everything I've ever read since then makes it seem like Irsay/Polian/Mora were all three in general agreement about Manning. I think Peyton really helped seal the deal when he told Polian/Irsay, "I'd actually like to play here, but if you don't pick me I'm going to kick your *** for the next 15 years." When Manning was released two years ago, I wonder if he said something like, I'd actually like to finish my career here, but if you cut me I'll stick it to you by throwing 55 touchdowns and going to the Super Bowl with a different team."

                              That's what I always loved most about Peyton. He wanted to play in Indy from day 1, even we were a joke franchise in flyover land.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X