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

2013 offseason

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

  • #91
    Re: 2013 offseason

    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
    Also here is the link to PFF's 2013 FA list.

    https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...gency-tracker/

    There are some Colts on that list with pretty poor ratings who got a lot of playing time in 2012.
    Thanks for the link!!!
    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


    • #92
      Re: 2013 offseason

      Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
      Also here is the link to PFF's 2013 FA list.

      https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...gency-tracker/

      There are some Colts on that list with pretty poor ratings who got a lot of playing time in 2012.
      These guys are underrating our receiving corps big time.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: 2013 offseason

        Originally posted by Really? View Post
        Yeah defense played really key in that game, especially early, stopping Baltimore consistently on 3rd downs, we had a couple of big let downs on defense as well, things I think will be easily fixed in the future.

        Next year I know the offense will look good, but it will be interesting to see how the defense comes along, with the right moves I think we could be pretty good.
        I think Grigson will sign some defensive players in free agency and get some nice draft picks
        Smothered Chicken!

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: 2013 offseason

          Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
          I think Grigson will sign some defensive players in free agency and get some nice draft picks
          Yeah I am thinking Kruger or Barwin will be a Colt next year, whichever we can get at the better deal. If it were me I would go for Barwin since he is in our division, take away one of Houstons weapons and use it against them.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: 2013 offseason

            Originally posted by Really? View Post
            Yeah I am thinking Kruger or Barwin will be a Colt next year, whichever we can get at the better deal. If it were me I would go for Barwin since he is in our division, take away one of Houstons weapons and use it against them.
            We may get Tracy Porter from Denver
            Smothered Chicken!

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: 2013 offseason

              Just saw this also:

              The Colts led the league in drops on 3rd down with 20. 20 drops on 170 attempts was also the league's highest percentage at 11.8%. T.Y. Hilton had 6 drops on 28 passes which was good enough for the highest dropped ball percentage in the league on 3rd down. Donnie Avery dropped 3rd down passes 5 times in 37 attempts. The two least reliable 3rd down WR's in the NFL this year.

              But yes, our WR corps was vastly underrated.

              Seriously though, this makes our 7th ranked 3rd down conversion rate all the more impressive in my eyes.
              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

              -Lance Stephenson

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: 2013 offseason

                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                Just saw this also:

                The Colts led the league in drops on 3rd down with 20. 20 drops on 170 attempts was also the league's highest percentage at 11.8%. T.Y. Hilton had 6 drops on 28 passes which was good enough for the highest dropped ball percentage in the league on 3rd down. Donnie Avery dropped 3rd down passes 5 times in 37 attempts. The two least reliable 3rd down WR's in the NFL this year.

                But yes, our WR corps was vastly underrated.

                Seriously though, this makes our 7th ranked 3rd down conversion rate all the more impressive in my eyes.
                Our QB is pretty good. So is our number 1 WR. Damn.


                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: 2013 offseason

                  I'd bet Dwayne Allen had a hand in that, too.

                  But outside of Wayne, Hilton and Allen, this team seems to drop off pretty rapidly. Donnie Avery has his moments.... both good and bad.
                  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


                  • #99
                    Re: 2013 offseason

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    Our QB is pretty good. So is our number 1 WR. Damn.
                    No question.

                    When you throw in the nugget that if you doubled the 123 times that Peyton was pressured this year, you'd still be 43 behind Andrew Luck, it's pretty amazing that people think he's somehow worse than either RGIII or Russell Wilson. They're both very good players. But Luck is something else. QB pressure and drops were the story of the season. He basically got no help from his line, running game, and 2/3 of his wide receivers all season. And yet the Colts still won 11 games. If he's not in the top-5 QB group within 2 years, I'll be very surprised.
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2013 offseason

                      Been sayin' it all along.
                      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: 2013 offseason

                        I mean all other things about teams being equal, he's top 10 already right?

                        If you had completely equal teams and were picking a QB to win the game for you, he's on that list in the top 10 IMO.

                        Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...that's your top 4 in some order probably.

                        Then you've got a guy like Matt Ryan, Eli, Roethlisberger.

                        Filling out 8, 9, and 10 you could make the argument at the end of the season that it would have been the three rookies, Luck, Wilson, and RGIII of course RGIII's injury changes things a bit (or a lot).


                        Comment


                        • Re: 2013 offseason

                          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                          Just saw this also:

                          The Colts led the league in drops on 3rd down with 20. 20 drops on 170 attempts was also the league's highest percentage at 11.8%. T.Y. Hilton had 6 drops on 28 passes which was good enough for the highest dropped ball percentage in the league on 3rd down. Donnie Avery dropped 3rd down passes 5 times in 37 attempts. The two least reliable 3rd down WR's in the NFL this year.

                          But yes, our WR corps was vastly underrated.

                          Seriously though, this makes our 7th ranked 3rd down conversion rate all the more impressive in my eyes.
                          Just wondering did the numbers get better or worst as the season went along? And yeah that is pretty impressive but at the same time I wonder how our 3rd down pass efficiency was.
                          Why so SERIOUS

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2013 offseason

                            Drops are a tricky stat to make sense of. Some of the best teams with the best QBs and good WRs are near the top with the most drops, and some of the worst are too. Few drops = bad teams, usually, but some good ones are there too.

                            http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/t...e=NFL&rank=232

                            rank team # drops
                            1 Detroit Lions 45
                            2 New England Patriots 41
                            3 Jacksonville Jaguars 41
                            4 New Orleans Saints 39
                            5 Oakland Raiders 38
                            6 Denver Broncos 37
                            7 Green Bay Packers 36
                            8 Indianapolis Colts 36
                            9 Dallas Cowboys 33
                            10 Cleveland Browns 32
                            11 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 32
                            12 Washington Redskins 31
                            13 Tennessee Titans 30
                            14 New York Giants 30
                            15 San Francisco 49ers 30
                            16 Chicago Bears 29
                            17 Atlanta Falcons 28
                            18 Buffalo Bills 27
                            19 Houston Texans 27
                            20 Kansas City Chiefs 27
                            21 Miami Dolphins 27
                            22 Pittsburgh Steelers 27
                            23 Arizona Cardinals 26
                            24 St. Louis Rams 25
                            25 New York Jets 25
                            26 Philadelphia Eagles 25
                            27 Cincinnati Bengals 24
                            28 Seattle Seahawks 23
                            29 Carolina Panthers 20
                            30 Minnesota Vikings 19
                            31 Baltimore Ravens 19
                            32 San Diego Chargers 16
                            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-10-2013, 06:25 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


                            • Re: 2013 offseason

                              Step 1: Help the offensive line through free agency. Sign Andy Levitre for guard, Gosder Cherilus for RT, and Ryan Lilja for guard or center. Lilja is a good option because he won't require more than a 2 year contract, and in 2 years is when we will need to re-sign Luck, Hilton, Fleener, Allen, and Chapman.

                              Step 2: Find some low priced vets for D. Sign Paul Kruger for OLB and Sheldon Brown for CB. Brown should be a short contract like Lilja and Kruger fits the system well enough that he will be pursued hardest by us.

                              Step 3: Re-sign Pat McAfee, Darius Butler, and Fili Moala. All 3 of those guys are good enough to play. If they are cheap, re-sign Fokou, Karim, Justice, and Powers. They aren't great as starters but for cheap they are acceptable back-ups.

                              Step 4: Draft Matt Elam in round 1, Marcus Davis in round 3, Joe Kruger in round 4, Braxton Cave in round 6, and Johnny Adams in round 7. There you've got a Bob Sanders clone, a big receiver with a bunch of potential, a solid backup 3-4 DE, and a project center and project cornerback. This helps build for the future.

                              If this is not enough to reach the cap floor, sign Peyton Hillis, Aubrayo Franklin, and Ryan Harris.

                              I'm not counting on Bowe, Long, Clady, Vollmer, Wallace, or any of those huge names. These make sense for more fiscal reasons. We can't have a bunch of big contracts on the books in 2 years because of the stellar 2012 class we will need to re-sign.

                              With all of this we are looking at a rebuilt offensive line, more young talent, and a veteran defense. It keeps cap room open yet improves us more than splurging on free agents would.

                              I am sure that 0% of these things will happen now.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2013 offseason

                                I'm still way less concerned about exactly who this organization brings in and way more interested in how they build a team.

                                Andrew Luck is your playmaker and will be the difference when it comes to winning in this league. Build an offense that keeps him upright, has a running game he can depend on and can get mean and convert 3rd & short. Build a defense that is big, physical, balanced and can get the other team off the field on 3rd down so your playmaker gets back on the field. Think Patriots pre-2005 and forget the old Colts formula of surrounding a 4-5 stars with bargain basement talent.

                                Build through the draft but once the foundation is in place manage the cap well and give the organization the opportunity to hit a homerun in free agency. Special teams matter, make it a priority.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X