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 15: vs Texans

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

  • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

    And ya.... Cinci gettin blitzed.
    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 15: vs Texans

      Originally posted by Natston View Post
      If a quarter and half is the differece between our offense getting better then we're ****ed, and reps against the Texans doesn't really do much for preparing for the Chiefs or whoever...
      I am not saying that time would have magically turned us into the 2006 Colts offense, but having time with your WRs against a real defense will be more helpful than getting Trent carries. Our passing game has been lackluster almost all season and any time be practice or a live game would be helpful.

      It is just a different philosophy. I hate when coaches go into prevent offense and prevent defenses. Just run your system and do what you do. If the opposing defense or offense cannot stop then that is their problem.

      I mean if they are just going to try and get out of there as soon as possible at least just take Luck out of there and let Matt get some reps handing the ball off.

      Comment


      • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

        Originally posted by thewholefnshow31 View Post
        I am not saying that time would have magically turned us into the 2006 Colts offense, but having time with your WRs against a real defense will be more helpful than getting Trent carries. Our passing game has been lackluster almost all season and any time be practice or a live game would be helpful.

        It is just a different philosophy. I hate when coaches go into prevent offense and prevent defenses. Just run your system and do what you do. If the opposing defense or offense cannot stop then that is their problem.

        I mean if they are just going to try and get out of there as soon as possible at least just take Luck out of there and let Matt get some reps handing the ball off.

        Exactly. And it's not an either/or thing. We could have still handed the ball off to T-Rich plenty in an overall passing attack. Those of us who wanted to see the team throw more in the second half aren't saying that we wanted to literally throw on every down.

        For once, I just wanted to see us completely blow a team out. That is something that has hardly ever happened with this team over the last two years. Sure, a 25-3 win can definitely be considered a blowout, but it didn't really feel like it in the second half when we only put up 5 points (only 3 on offense). For once, I just wanted to see this team play two complete halves and completely massacre an opponent.

        Aside from when Polian ordered us to pull starters and quit, you would never see anything like this back in the day with Manning. Manning's timing with his receivers is as close to perfect as it can be, yet our offense with him would always try to put up points in the second halves of games even when we were winning by a large margin. The coaching staff understood that real games are the most valuable practice that one can have. Look at the Broncos now. They try to put up as many points as possible because they understand that practicing the repetition makes them a better team.

        That Texans defense is still pretty decent. I liked our scheme and play calling in the first half, but seeing them play so ridiculously cautious in the second half was maddening. Luck had a great first half with T.Y., but we needed to keep that going in the second half (though he did drop that pass). For the most part, T.Y. was ignored in the second half. Furthermore, Luck could have definitely used more chemistry with Whalen in the second half. Also, where was Fleener? Not a single catch all day. We definitely should have made a point to get him going in the second half since he is such a vital part to this offense. There is one 3rd and 5 in the fourth quarter that particularly stands out. Do we throw and try to get the first down? Of course not. We run the ball, get a couple of yards, and then punt.

        I'm happy about the win and I liked the play calling in the first half, but this team still has a lot that it needs to work on in the offense. We aren't good enough to just completely blow off an entire half. We need repetition repetition repetition. We had a golden opportunity for another half of practice against a solid defense, but just seemed content with getting out of there. I just think that this coaching staff is always going to handcuff Luck to an extent and that we are never going to see his full potential as long as they are here. I remember the Seattle game where he could have put the game away on something like 3rd and 9, but we didn't allow him to pass and instead took the FG and gambled on the defense. Our mentality is just too conservative. Pagano is a good coach to lay a winning foundation and culture, but I think that Luck is ultimately going to need a different coach to take him to the next level, just like Manning needed Dungy over Jim Mora, even though Mora did a pretty decent job.
        Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-16-2013, 10:35 AM.

        Comment


        • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

          Of course if we keep throwing and Da'Rick sprains his foot everyone freaks out over unnecessary passing. If we stop running it people say we are just letting Luck get hit. If we score 50 points in the 2nd half it's because Pep Hamilton is an evil sorcerer.

          Comment


          • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

            Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
            Of course if we keep throwing and Da'Rick sprains his foot everyone freaks out over unnecessary passing. If we stop running it people say we are just letting Luck get hit. If we score 50 points in the 2nd half it's because Pep Hamilton is an evil sorcerer.
            In the Manning era, would you have ever heard anyone say, "let's quit throwing because Marvin might sprain his foot"???? No, he actually hurt his knee when he was blocking on a RUNNING PLAY and Addai collided with him, IIRC.

            It's football. Reggie Wayne got hurt bending down to get a pass without anyone laying a finger on him. Freakish stuff happens sometimes. The passing game is going to be the key to any success that we have this season. We had a golden opportunity to build on a great first half and continue to nail down our timing, but we completely threw it away. It's poor coaching that was symbolic of the type of handcuffing that Luck is going to always suffer with this coaching staff.

            Comment


            • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

              Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
              Of course if we keep throwing and Da'Rick sprains his foot everyone freaks out over unnecessary passing. If we stop running it people say we are just letting Luck get hit. If we score 50 points in the 2nd half it's because Pep Hamilton is an evil sorcerer.
              You do not worry about injuries as Sollozzo pointed out they can happen at any time. What happens if Luck plants wrong when turning to hand off to Trent and tears his ACL. Injuries can happen at any point in the game. You just cannot worry about it and just do your thing. My view is our passing game is what is going to win games for us and we should have used that time to work on getting Rogers, Whalen and TY more time during the live game.

              I hate any kind of prevent offense/defense as it typically prevents you from winning. Thankfully, us going into that mode after halftime did not come and bite us in the butt because we were playing a horrible offense. Even in the first half we had issues because we left to many points on the field because we settled for field goals instead of touchdowns. It would have been nice to see them make some adjustments to correct that in the second half and get a few more touchdowns out of it.

              I just do not like the conservative approach. To each their own I guess.

              Comment


              • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

                I would agree the Colts might have shut it down a little early, but it wasn't that early. In the 3rd quarter, the Colts called 13 pass plays to only 5 running plays. Four of those passing plays ended up being Luck scrambles or sacks, but that isn't the fault of a conservative gameplan. One of the runs was called to a wide receiver, and then they tried a fake punt at the end of it. Most of the passes were short, but that's what they were doing in the 1st half as well. I don't see any evidence they were backing off at that point.

                The possession they started at 12:56 they really took the gas off. I'm not sure I agree with the assertion that Manning's teams never took the gas off. They frequently did in the 4th quarter. I think Manning's teams would have gone for one more score with that time/score situation, but then they would have shut it down later in the 4th. I think the difference is really only one or maybe two possessions worth.

                Comment


                • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

                  Yea, I understand that taking the foot off is not much fun, but I think it was the right thing to do. The real problem was the fact that we didn't convert some first downs on those drives. We fell a yard or two short a few times, ending drives. Our D also couldn't stop them from converting a few 3rd-and-longs. But we sort of came out throwin the 3rd, and we just didn't convert. I also think it *is* good to get our run game going. It makes it harder for upcoming defenses to key on the pass. TRich had about 60 rush yards in the second half, after getting basically blanked in the first. It was a good thing to get him going. He had only 2 negative plays in 11 carries, and averaged 5.5/carry in the second half.

                  25-3 is a blow-out. I think most people expect a blow-out to have 30-40 points in offense, but it was a 22 point win. That is a team blow-out. We really beat them in all phases pretty handily. About the only thing they didn't do quite well yesterday was convert on 3rd down.

                  But we did accomplish a few things... we had a very good defensive performance. Our secondary made amends. We reversed our recent trend of zero production in the first half. We came out throwing the ball and doing no huddle. We had a few nice STs plays. TRich had 100 yards and a TD. It was a good outing in terms of just building some confidence and momentum in key areas.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 12-16-2013, 12:45 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 15: vs Texans

                    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                    In the playoffs, though, I tend to go with other factors.... who has the better quarterback... which team moves the chains... which team is executing better, who's at home. That's my problem with KC... they don't have a QB that I consider better than Luck, and it will be in Indy. I'm not entirely sold on KC.
                    A better QB doesn't mean much I mean Flacco beat teams lead by Manning and Brady in the playoffs do you think he's better than them? But on those days he played them he was.

                    Alex Smith also outplayed Drew Brees in the playoffs so yes he's capable.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

                      Trent showed up for a solid game and Pep called a good game as well. If we can get the defense rest with some long, methodical drives, we'll be in good shape
                      Smothered Chicken!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

                        Thank you Colts, didn't look forward going into the playoffs with a .500 record.
                        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


                        • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

                          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                          A better QB doesn't mean much I mean Flacco beat teams lead by Manning and Brady in the playoffs do you think he's better than them? But on those days he played them he was.

                          Alex Smith also outplayed Drew Brees in the playoffs so yes he's capable.
                          Wait, I thought it was a QB league? Flacco had a decent year last year, and he played better than both of those guys in the playoffs. I'd put money on Flacco over Alex Smith. I like Smith... but he's had some really good defenses the last few years and some pretty incredible offenses, too, don't think we'd be talking about him in the same way if otherwise. You stick Luck in San Fran or KC's offense and you know where I'm goin with that... hell, even throw Flacco in those offenses.
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 12-16-2013, 12:41 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 15: vs Texans

                            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            Wait, I thought it was a QB league? Flacco had a decent year last year, and he played better than both of those guys in the playoffs. I'd put money on Flacco over Alex Smith. I like Smith... but he's had some really good defenses the last few years and some pretty incredible offenses, too, don't think we'd be talking about him in the same way if otherwise. You stick Luck in San Fran or KC's offense and you know where I'm goin with that... hell, even throw Flacco in those offenses.
                            In the regular season yes but in the postseason its still the same you need a defense and run game I have no issue with the Colts wanting to be a ground and pound team but that doesn't mean we have to hinder Luck's growth and development as a QB to do it. Which is what this coaching staff is intent on doing for some reason.

                            Flacco backed into the playoffs but in the regular season he's not that impressive you could say he's the AFC version of Eli Manning. Do you think overall he's a better QB than Manning or Brady? If the answer is no then being the better overall QB doesn't matter just on that day.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Week 15: vs Texans

                              So then it's not a QB league, it's a team league, which is basically what I've been saying since day 1. I get so many different stories on this board, it cracks me up, lol...

                              Either way, my point still stands. I'm not going be peeing in my pants if we line up against KC. If Baltimore can "back into the playoffs" and then dismantle Denver, who looked unstoppable, on the road, then why can't Indy.
                              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 15: vs Texans

                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                So then it's not a QB league, it's a team league, which is basically what I've been saying since day 1. I get so many different stories on this board, it cracks me up, lol...

                                Either way, my point still stands. I'm not going be peeing in my pants if we line up against KC. If Baltimore can "back into the playoffs" and then dismantle Denver, who looked unstoppable, on the road, then why can't Indy.
                                That Baltimore team was just a hair away from the Super Bowl the previous year. Despite their rough stretch at the end of 2012, that was a team that had been knocking on a Super Bowl door for a long time. It's not like they came out of nowhere.

                                Personally, I'm not going to get high on the Colts chances to make serious noise until I see them compete against a non-AFC South opponent, which is something that they haven't done since Denver two months ago. Beating a team at home with a scrub QB which had lost 11 straight doesn't tell me too much. I'm confident that our team can smack around the putrid AFC South foes, especially in our building. I'm sure we will handle Jacksonville pretty good in two weeks. But it's been the same story since the Denver game. We beat AFC South teams, yet look absolutely awful against everyone else. The Chiefs game on Sunday will be a good bar. If we're improving, then we should at least go in there and compete. No, I'm not saying that we have to win, but I don't want to see Smith torch us like Dalton did in Cincy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X