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

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

  • #31
    Re: Peyton Manning

    And the argument can easily be made that both cities' completely overreact. They are not even close to the example of how Indy and the Star should handle the Colts, or any of the players.

    We might treat them with kid gloves around here, but NY/Philly are on the far end of the spectrum.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Peyton Manning

      And in both cases, the overall teams are much better than the Colts - except for the Colts passing offense personnel.

      In those cases, the QB is more likely to screw up "an already good thing" than to carry them on his back. And so he should be criticized for that.

      Same in Pittsburgh, especially since Ben now has the huge contract...
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Peyton Manning

        Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
        Is the most overrated player in the NFL. Nowhere near as clutch as Tom Brady. It is nice to throw for 4,000 yards a season. It is nice to have 12 victories a season. It is common to continually lose your first game in the playoffs.

        He has a losing record in the playoffs. 7-8. He only has one game winning drive in 15 playoff games. The year we won the super bowl the defense got the job done.

        He pads his stats by doing dink and dunk passes on first down and not establishing the run game.
        i'm sorry, but did you realize that peyton manning ranks 12th all time in the nfl as far as yards/pass attempt? so much for your dink and dunk theory. yes, this year was his third lowest season in his career as far as y/a, but do you understand the colts' rushing game nearly ranked last in the nfl in all rushing statistics?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Peyton Manning

          Holy cow, the post that started this thread is some of the most silly thing's I've heard a person say (type).

          And man, when you get ChicagoJ talking about something other than the Steelers he seems on point. Just need to steer clear of those Steeler discussions

          -- Steve --

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Peyton Manning

            Originally posted by Pacers#1Fan View Post
            I want to know where the hell Addie went this season. Yeah he was injured but I'm still shocked he disappeared like he did.
            It wasn't just this year, it started in 07. Week 10 to be exact. Look at his game log from that year .... it's quite a identifiable week that it happens ... first 7 games he has only 1 game with a YPC under 4 yards. After that he had 3 days of a 4 YPC average or higher, but those were also his 3 games with the lowest total carries in the game as well. Pretty pathetic.



            http://www.databasefootball.com/play...kid=ADDAIJOS01

            -- Steve --

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Peyton Manning

              Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
              Holy cow, the post that started this thread is some of the most silly thing's I've heard a person say (type).

              -- Steve --
              This is exactly what I am talking about. I criticize Manning & his play calling for losing year after year in the playoffs and people get real upset. The dude makes over 20 million dollars a year in salary and endorsements and has never bought me a drink or given me a free ticket. He is not Jesus! He does have a losing record in the playoffs.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Peyton Manning

                Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                This is exactly what I am talking about. I criticize Manning & his play calling for losing year after year in the playoffs and people get real upset. The dude makes over 20 million dollars a year in salary and endorsements and has never bought me a drink or given me a free ticket. He is not Jesus! He does have a losing record in the playoffs.
                Strangely enough, THIS is what I'M talking about. Peyton Manning doesn't have a losing record in the playoffs at all. The INDIANAPOLIS COLTS do.

                Your right, he isn't Jesus. Yet you're the one wanting to hold him up on the pedestal like he is. How can you denounce him by claiming something like that, but then stick him with ALL the blame? It's silly, and contradictory. So which is it? Is he Jesus and should carry the whole team to victory all the way to the Super Bowl, or is he not Jesus and he needs his teammates to do their job? Make some sense, please.

                Exactly my point. Thanks for making it for me. In case you haven't watched football much (maybe from Europe) ... there are ELEVEN players on the field at a time. Last I checked, there's only ONE Peyton Manning. Of course, Peyton doesn't play defense, or even special teams. So that is 33 different jobs on the NFL field ... and shockingly only 1 of them belongs to ... *gasp* Peyton Manning.

                But of course .... if the Colts lose it's ALL his fault.

                -- Steve --
                Last edited by Pacersfan46; 01-09-2009, 03:36 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Peyton Manning

                  Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                  This is exactly what I am talking about. I criticize Manning & his play calling for losing year after year in the playoffs and people get real upset. The dude makes over 20 million dollars a year in salary and endorsements and has never bought me a drink or given me a free ticket. He is not Jesus! He does have a losing record in the playoffs.
                  I thought that was Dungy.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Peyton Manning

                    Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                    Strangely enough, THIS is what I'M talking about. Peyton Manning doesn't have a losing record in the playoffs at all. The INDIANAPOLIS COLTS do.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Peyton Manning

                      Strangely enough, though, Peyton Manning is heaped praise for "carrying" his team to victory in the regular season but then when he fails to carry his team to victory, over the same opponent, with the same teammates, in the playoffs, then no part of it is his fault. His teammates suddenly got much worse and caused his average playoff passer rating to drop 16 points from his regular season average, his TD/INT ratio to trend toward 1, his completion percentage to go down, his yards per attempt to go down, etc. etc.

                      I know that all these statistics normally do diminish somewhat in the playoffs, since you are only playing good teams, but not to this extent. Most years (not this one) you also hear yourself thinking "what sort of a throw was that? What was he thinking? He would never have thrown that pass in the regular season!"

                      Manning should not take all the blame for the big disparity in regular season & postseason success for the Colts in seasons other than 2006-2007. But the contention that he may have some role in it is not unreasonable.

                      His role in the disappointments is a lot less than the coaches and player personnel people, in my opinion, who seem to have their priroties on entertaining offenses and quarterback sacks on defense rather than balanced rosters with less star power and more good-by-not-great players providing depth and competence at all positions. Little weaknesses are exposed in the playoffs, even if they were hardly noticeable in the regular season.
                      Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-09-2009, 11:53 PM.
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Peyton Manning

                        Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                        I know that all these statistics normally do diminish somewhat in the playoffs, since you are only playing good teams, but not to this extent.
                        I have not done enough research to argue this point, but I would also doubt you have done enough to truly claim it either. I would bet this is more of a perception than well done research and knowledge of fact.

                        Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                        then when he fails to carry his team to victory, over the same opponent, with the same teammates, in the playoffs, then no part of it is his fault. His teammates suddenly got much worse
                        How did they suddenly get 'worse', if he needed to carry them in the first place? Granted, I'm not saying he ever does 'carry' them, just going off of your choice of words.

                        However in the first game the running yardage difference was 29 yards for SD. In the playoffs the difference was 103 yards. Since Peyton doesn't run or block, I would say yes, that's a sign of his teammates not doing their job as well as they did in the regular season. Peyton isn't on defense or special teams where they kept repeatedly getting pinned inside their own 10 yard line, I would say yes, a sign of teammates not doing their job as well. Granted it was the single greatest game I've ever seen a punter have in his entire life, in any game or at any level.

                        In fact, without SD making key mistakes (fumble at the 1, interception) this game isn't close, or even in overtime. Which would be without Peyton making any major mistakes and in fact playing better than he did in the regular season. So if he plays at or above the level he does in the regular season and still loses .... how is the difference NOT on the teammates?

                        -- Steve --
                        Last edited by Pacersfan46; 01-10-2009, 08:55 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Peyton Manning

                          Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                          In fact, without SD making key mistakes (fumble at the 1, interception) this game isn't close, or even in overtime. Which would be without Peyton making any major mistakes and in fact playing better than he did in the regular season. So if he plays at or above the level he does in the regular season and still loses .... how is the difference NOT on the teammates?

                          -- Steve --
                          Well, if we're going to go down this road a lot of the difference was SD being a much better team and playing much better than they were when they played during the season.

                          This wasn't a powerhouse Colts team that got taken out early a couple of other times - it was a flawed team that was one play away from losing a lot of games.

                          In this case the one play was Gijon Robinson not knowing the snap count on 3rd and 2. You don't want to blame one player but that was THE key play - and the fault for that particular play is 100% on the guy who never got out of his stance to block, not Manning (unless Manning didn't tell him a changed snap count when he went up and down the line which I doubt we'll ever know).
                          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Peyton Manning

                            Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                            Well, if we're going to go down this road a lot of the difference was SD being a much better team and playing much better than they were when they played during the season.

                            This wasn't a powerhouse Colts team that got taken out early a couple of other times - it was a flawed team that was one play away from losing a lot of games.

                            In this case the one play was Gijon Robinson not knowing the snap count on 3rd and 2. You don't want to blame one player but that was THE key play - and the fault for that particular play is 100% on the guy who never got out of his stance to block, not Manning (unless Manning didn't tell him a changed snap count when he went up and down the line which I doubt we'll ever know).
                            I know you quoted me, but I was going off of someone else's inferred position that it's the same team in the same year so it should always merit the same result. However none of what you said contradicts the point I was making either way.

                            -- Steve --

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Peyton Manning

                              Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                              I have not done enough research to argue this point, but I would also doubt you have done enough to truly claim it either. I would bet this is more of a perception than well done research and knowledge of fact.
                              with websites like profootballreference.com, the research is trivially easy to do.

                              http://www.pro-football-reference.co...0_playoffs.htm

                              just looking at passer ratings, for example,

                              Manning's regular season passer ratings drops 9.8 points in the playoffs. In the same analysis, Brady's drops 4.9 points. Montana's went up by 3.9. Elway's drops 0.1. Warren Moon's goes up 3.6.

                              There are much bigger drops in thing like TD/INT ratio for PM, campared to the alltime greats.

                              I'm not saying PM is Gary Hogeboom or Jeff George. I am saying that among the top 15 or so QBs of all time, first ballot HOF locks, his playoff dropoffs are a consideration when placing him among the elite of the elite
                              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Peyton Manning

                                I do not expect the Colts to win the Super Bowl every year. I do expect Manning and our offense to have better numbers in the post season b/c we cater to that side of the ball each draft. Instead of taking a LB or DT we take WR & OL. With our team doing this year in and year out our offense with the Messiah at QB should be able to put up more than 17pts in a playoff game. I hold Manning accountable for this loss. He is the one who called an audible and went with an empty backfield on third and 2.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X