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

Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

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

  • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

    Originally posted by CompACE View Post
    You can win... It's just difficult. Maybe not the Superbowl, but you can at least make the playoffs. Case and point: 49ers. I'm not saying it isn't very hard, just pointing out that it isn't impossible.
    Sure, there will always be a few sitiations where teams advance with a mediocre QB. The 49ers from last year were the exception, not the rule, and I would be surprised if they duplicate their success this year.
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

      Defense can take ya far, but it takes a rare defense that can win a Super Bowl on it's own. The 2000 Ravens.
      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: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
        I would like to talk risk vs reward with you Jay.

        Part of this all boils down is playing the hand that was dealt to you. I mean no one wanted Manning to get hurt but he did and one of the best QB prospects was there for the taking.

        Do you suggest not taking Luck and playing with an inferior team with bloated contracts and late 1st round picks to rebuild. Knowing a little about you I would say that you wouldn't prefer that but pleast correct me if I am wrong.
        This just wasn't the year to draft a QB. Trade down from #1 for as many lower first and second round picks as you can accumulate and draft offensive and defensive linemen. The Steelers also have had a lousy o-line, yet were able to pick up two guys (DeCastro, Adams) that "should" form the foundation of the line (along with Pouncey and Gibson selected over the past couple of years) long after Big Ben is gone. Solidify the lines first and address the "skills" positions second. Time will tell, but I think the team with DeCastro and Adams set themselves up better for success three-to-five years down the road regardless of who might be playing QB.

        Luck and more importantly Grigson is inheriting a bad team so no arguments there but this isn't really a high risk way to build IMo. All franchise rebuilds are risky but the most successful rebuilds have one thing in common. They play the hand that was dealt to them.

        So what was Grigson's poker hand? A young but talented LT and underachieving RB, a old wr, a young talented wr in Garcon (who would cost too much to keep), a porous DL and a secondary to match and bloated contracts that would hinder the rebuilding process.

        Really I am more concerned if a GM ignores the talent staring him in the face and doesn't seize the opportunity to draft those guys.
        Okay.

        I think all 32 GM's would agree that starting off with one of the most highly praised rookie QB's of this generation (under a decent contract) is a good start to a rebuilding process.
        I disagree. There are several that would start on the lines first and address the skills positions next. Football games are still won in the trenches.

        Notice I said good start because much of your examples are GM's/presidents that don't finish the process. They ignore the problems until its too late or they have untimely injuries and bad misfortune as is the case of the Chargers with Bree's injury and Eli's trade request.

        The only hope I have in Grigson is that he is not one to ignore the problem of not having weapons for a QB or a team that ultimately sucks on D. He won't ignore problems or holes that have to be filled and thats a good thing IMO.

        For one if his picks suck or his trades stink he will be replaced sooner than later which to me is very improtant not to hang on to incompetent people in the FO. Those above mention teams often do so which ultimately leads to their demise or lack of success.

        Much of this rebuild will happen next year do to the team salary cap. IF Grigson tries this low cost patch work on the o-line and d-line next year then I will start to worry but much of this years moves have to do with having no cap so I can't understand your point of how this is a high risk rebuild since really the hard moves of cutting players and the rewards of doing so is yet to pay off.
        I wouldn't ever put a franchise QB behind a makeshift line. I'd fix the line first, and those are the "weapons" that Luck needs - not receivers. You need a very, very, very good QB. We agree on that. But a best-in-generation QB is not very valuable when he's on his back, or hearing footsteps, or on crutches, or has no one to hand the ball to, or barely has time to throw a quick-read pass.

        Thanks for engaging.

        There is more than one way to do build a team and the high-risk, high-reward stuff can bring about high rewards some of the time. Who would have ever thought, even in the year 2000, that we'd see a Colts-Saints Super Bowl? Two franchises with decades of poor management desperate for one of their franchise QBs to pan out. We have no idea who the Super Bowl contenders will be three years out. Many of you would argue that it will be the team with the best QB. I think it will be the team with the best lines, as the best OL can make a very, very, very good QB look like a great QB and an average line can make a superstar QB look average.
        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


        • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
          Chicago J is simply jealous of the Colts.
          Funniest thing I've ever read on here.
          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


          • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

            Nah... the whole trench thing is not at all some fact. We won umpteen games over the past decade with some makeshift O-lines, and for that matter, D-lines... we just had a QB who was fantastic at making it work.

            And DeCastro is out for the season, and maybe even his career. What would you have done if we passed on Luck to draft a couple lineman, only to have that lineman go down like that? Then you not only missed out on Luck, but you lost your lineman, too. Silly. Take the best talent that fills a need, not work on some myth that the war is won in the trenches. Speaking of trenches, they aren't used in wars anymore.

            Not that you want to ignore the lines, but to assume that getting your lines in place before you land your all-world QB is somehow "safer" and less risky is just.... old fashioned. I don't think there's any proof at all that that is in any way reality.
            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-28-2012, 03:22 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: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
              Not that you want to ignore the lines, but to assume that getting your lines in place before you land your all-world QB is somehow "safer" and less risky is just.... old fashioned. I don't think there's any proof at all that that is in any way reality.
              And as of right now there are 8 quality free agent OL tackles after this season. If the Colts have the cap space we think they will there are choices.
              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: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                There's more than 1 way to skin a cat and I don't necessarily think ChicagoJ's ideas are bad but it's not the ONLY way to build a team and be successful doing it. Thus, just because a team doesn't take your preferred strategy, doesn't mean management is led by a bunch of ignorant morons like some posters would like you to think.

                Building up the line first would more than likely keep you from having a high enough pick to get a talent like Luck behind it. You'd have to get lucky by drafting a diamond in the rough (which is risky) or bring in someone from FA (which will either be expensive or be risky as well).

                There is risk involved in every strategy. People can argue til they're red in the face but there's no way to prove one strategy is any more risky than the other.

                Comment


                • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                  Originally posted by Swingman View Post
                  There's more than 1 way to skin a cat and I don't necessarily think ChicagoJ's ideas are bad but it's not the ONLY way to build a team and be successful doing it. Thus, just because a team doesn't take your preferred strategy, doesn't mean management is led by a bunch of ignorant morons like some posters would like you to think.

                  Building up the line first would more than likely keep you from having a high enough pick to get a talent like Luck behind it. You'd have to get lucky by drafting a diamond in the rough (which is risky) or bring in someone from FA (which will either be expensive or be risky as well).

                  There is risk involved in every strategy. People can argue til they're red in the face but there's no way to prove one strategy is any more risky than the other.
                  Chicago J's ideas are old-fashioned and out-dated. Building a team around a QB is how you get to a SB in this decade. There is a reason why QB's are the highest paid and most protected football players
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                    Originally posted by Swingman View Post
                    There's more than 1 way to skin a cat and I don't necessarily think ChicagoJ's ideas are bad but it's not the ONLY way to build a team and be successful doing it. Thus, just because a team doesn't take your preferred strategy, doesn't mean management is led by a bunch of ignorant morons like some posters would like you to think.
                    I'm not the one saying it is the only strategy. Unlike others on here defending it as if it were the only possible approach. We have no clue yet if the new GM will be good. By definition, he's new with no track record.

                    Building up the line first would more than likely keep you from having a high enough pick to get a talent like Luck behind it. You'd have to get lucky by drafting a diamond in the rough (which is risky) or bring in someone from FA (which will either be expensive or be risky as well).
                    There is still a lot of evidence that QB's selected later in the first round have more successful careers than those selected in the top-five.

                    There is risk involved in every strategy. People can argue til they're red in the face but there's no way to prove one strategy is any more risky than the other.
                    There isn't a way to prove a strategy is any more risky than another?

                    I need to change careers then, because all the finance and strategy folks I work with daily seem to be able to do that type of analysis. You can evaluate success rates, failure rates, compute RoIs, run scenarios and simulations, etc.

                    Risk and reward are commonly measured.

                    Now, you are right that there's no way to prove one's risk profile, even for someone that is risk-averse (and not many rational people will take the higher risk for the same reward) or one's opinions of risk. But risk and reward can be measured.
                    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


                    • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                      I disagree. There are several that would start on the lines first and address the skills positions next. Football games are still won in the trenches.

                      I wouldn't ever put a franchise QB behind a makeshift line. I'd fix the line first, and those are the "weapons" that Luck needs - not receivers. You need a very, very, very good QB. We agree on that. But a best-in-generation QB is not very valuable when he's on his back, or hearing footsteps, or on crutches, or has no one to hand the ball to, or barely has time to throw a quick-read pass.

                      If I had a bet, I would bet that almost all teams would take Luck #1 if they didn't have a good QB, even if their line sucked. You can make a good line eventually. You make it seem that finding a good QB would be easier to do than finding a line. I completely agree that a line is very important, but you can make a good line eventually with other draft picks. You don't need a round 1 offensive lineman in order to succeed in the NFL. You must have a good QB, and you're more likely to have a good QB if you draft early. You can't waste a high pick if a talent like Luck or RG3 are available, no matter your line situation. If you feel so badly about the line, sit the QB while playing a vet while you fix the line. But don't miss a chance to get that QB.

                      And I feel if Ol Blu and Pacergeek combined into a single person, we'd have someone in line with the rest of the board....
                      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        And DeCastro is out for the season, and maybe even his career. What would you have done if we passed on Luck to draft a couple lineman, only to have that lineman go down like that? Then you not only missed out on Luck, but you lost your lineman, too. Silly. Take the best talent that fills a need, not work on some myth that the war is won in the trenches. Speaking of trenches, they aren't used in wars anymore.
                        Last I read, DeCastro isn't going on the IR. He'll miss most of the season, but is expected to return before the season is over.
                        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


                        • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                          Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                          If I had a bet, I would bet that almost all teams would take Luck #1 if they didn't have a good QB, even if their line sucked. You can make a good line eventually. You make it seem that finding a good QB would be easier to do than finding a line. I completely agree that a line is very important, but you can make a good line eventually with other draft picks. -snip-
                          No, that's not what I'm saying.

                          I'm saying a lot of highly-touted QBs never live up to their potential because they spend their first four seasons on their back, looking at the clouds and a linebackers shoulder pads at best or even worse suffer the types of injuries that tear away at their potential and bring them back to "average".

                          And some of those GMs that build a solid foundation of offensive and defensive line play never get a chance to draft a QB that high because an average QB keeps them in playoff contention.
                          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


                          • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                            There isn't an easy way to prove which strategy is more risky AS IT RELATES TO FOOTBALL. It wasn't a blanket statement covering all categories.

                            There is risk involved in every move. Sure, trading the 1st for multiple lower picks will spread that risk over more players and thus less risk per pick but you still have to add the increased risk of not finding a good QB to lead the offense. One of the most important positions on the team, not only on the field but as the face of the franchise.

                            QBs picked outside of the top 5 GREATLY OUTNUMBER those picked in the top 5. The question is how likely is a QB to be good enough to be the starter


                            QBs that were top 5 picks
                            Andrew Luck (starter)
                            Robert Griffin III (starter)
                            Cam Newton (starter)
                            Sam Bradford (starter)
                            Matthew Stafford (starter)
                            Mark Sanchez (starter)
                            Matt Ryan (starter)
                            Jamarcus Russell
                            Vince Young
                            Alex Smith (starter)
                            Eli Manning (starter)
                            Philip Rivers (starter)
                            Carson Palmer (starter)
                            David Carr
                            Joey Harrington
                            Michael Vick (starter)
                            Tim Couch
                            Donovan McNabb
                            Akili Smith
                            Peyton Manning (starter)
                            Ryan Leaf

                            13 of 20 QBs picked in the top 5 since 1998 are still starters for NFL teams. Some of the others were starters for their teams for quite a few years. The success rate of QBs becoming solid starters picked in the top 5 is MUCH HIGHER than those picked outside the top 5. The sheer number of QBs picked outside of the top 5 is the only reason they have comparable success. How many draft picks would you have to waste on the later rounds in order to get a solid starter? how many years would you waste in your search?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                              Omg... where have you been? You're not posting anything profound, we are all aware of the possible ways to fail, we've all been down that road and know what can happen... but why the hell would any true fan focus on that?

                              The case of OlBlu goes way beyond thin-skinned homers. It has nothing to do with what he's saying -- it's how he goes about it, and the frequency of it. I don't care if people have dissenting opinions. OlBlu doesn't get that either. It's how he goes about doing it. We start a normal discussion, and you can count on OlBlu entering the thread and just destroying it within a day. And you can count on him insinuating that we're a bunch of non-thinking sheepish idiots who can't form our own thoughts and all we want to do is be mindless rah-rah-rah cheerleaders for our team. He's called more people names on this forum than anyone I can remember. He posts unnecessary negative tangents to threads where he completely didn't stay on topic, and then pulls the ol "oh everyone is ganging up on me, and calling me a troll, poor me" schpiel.

                              Let's give you an example. Someone posts:

                              OP: Hey guys, what do you think about us getting Vontae Davis?
                              Random poster #1: I think he'll be this and that.
                              Random poster #2: Yea, but he has this negative, but I think he'll overcome it with this positive.
                              Random poster #3: Ya, good pickup, he's 24 and young and this coaching staff will get him in shape.
                              OlBlu: It doesn't matter because we'll go 0-16 with or without him. Irsay can't be trusted and Peyton Manning is going to throw 6 touchdowns on him. (Take note that there was no mention of the topic at hand).
                              Random poster #1: Haven't you said this in 57 other threads also?
                              OlBlu: If you don't like it, then don't read it.
                              Random poster #2: Yea, but isn't this excessive? Most people would call this trolling.
                              OlBlu: Why does everyoen call me a troll, you're all just stupid rah-rah homers who thinks the Colts are going 16-0 and Luck should be in the HoF. I don't think he'll make it through the season. We should probly draft Barkley from USC next year when we have the #1 pick again since Luck will out of the league by then.
                              Random poster #3: Ugh, welcome to ignore.
                              Random poster #2: I don't come here often, and I think I'll come here less now.
                              OlBlu: I'm 65 and live in a retirement home although my status says I live in a big motorhome and travel the country, and don't have time to wait for the Colts to get good again, and--- Irsay is making Jerry Jones look like a Rhodes scholar.
                              Random poster #1: Um, can you show some proof that we all think Indy is going 16-0 this year?
                              OlBlu: Look, I've already posted this, go look it up, I'm not reposting something I've already written. Something about CTRL-SHIFT refreshes the page.
                              ChicagoJ: Guys, what's wrong with what he said, why are you so thin-skinned.

                              And never once did he discuss Vontae Davis.

                              That's what we get all up in arms about. It's not a productive argument, it's just getting people riled up. He's not out to have a productive convo.

                              Take like... Kstat. He's not a Pacer fan, but he comes here and provides a counter-opinion, knows when to stop, and he's part of a productive exchange... but OlBlu, just pisses people off. We can't have a Colts football discussion without him ruining it. We all get it, he thinks they suck, so move on. But he doesn't. He absolutely refuses to let us have 1 stinking positive thought about the Colts, or even a regular neutral thought. He has to ram it into our heads that he thinks they suck.

                              And now you seem to joining in... trust me, that's not a path you want to go down if you want to maintain your rep around here, lol...
                              Brilliant!!!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Another Colts Trade - Could be big - Irsay Tweet

                                Originally posted by Swingman View Post
                                There isn't an easy way to prove which strategy is more risky AS IT RELATES TO FOOTBALL. It wasn't a blanket statement covering all categories.

                                There is risk involved in every move. Sure, trading the 1st for multiple lower picks will spread that risk over more players and thus less risk per pick but you still have to add the increased risk of not finding a good QB to lead the offense. One of the most important positions on the team, not only on the field but as the face of the franchise.

                                QBs picked outside of the top 5 GREATLY OUTNUMBER those picked in the top 5. The question is how likely is a QB to be good enough to be the starter


                                QBs that were top 5 picks
                                Andrew Luck (starter)
                                Robert Griffin III (starter)
                                Cam Newton (starter)
                                Sam Bradford (starter)
                                Matthew Stafford (starter)
                                Mark Sanchez (starter)
                                Matt Ryan (starter)
                                Jamarcus Russell
                                Vince Young
                                Alex Smith (starter)
                                Eli Manning (starter)
                                Philip Rivers (starter)
                                Carson Palmer (starter)
                                David Carr
                                Joey Harrington
                                Michael Vick (starter)
                                Tim Couch
                                Donovan McNabb
                                Akili Smith
                                Peyton Manning (starter)
                                Ryan Leaf

                                13 of 20 QBs picked in the top 5 since 1998 are still starters for NFL teams. Some of the others were starters for their teams for quite a few years. The success rate of QBs becoming solid starters picked in the top 5 is MUCH HIGHER than those picked outside the top 5. The sheer number of QBs picked outside of the top 5 is the only reason they have comparable success. How many draft picks would you have to waste on the later rounds in order to get a solid starter? how many years would you waste in your search?
                                Okay, if you're only looking for a solid starter, then I agree completely.

                                While you make a good point about the volume of QBs picked later, and I'm not saying that you should try to build around a sixth-round QB, if you have a good team overall there are a number of QBs you can plug in.

                                Or, of the 20 you listed, only 5 or 6 are starting for playoff caliber teams or have ever started for playoff caliber teams. I'm not sure that both the Jets and Chargers will be playoff-caliber this season, but they've been in the playoffs. You guys typically want to dismiss Palmer's success even though he led the Bungles to a couple of playoff appearances. Now you're looking for a solid starter? If your only goal is to get a solid starter at QB, then yes you should take a QB at the #1 draft spot and we can end the conversation. Enjoy your solid starter.

                                = = = = = = = = = = = =

                                For current playoff-caliber teams, you get Stafford, Smith, Eli, Peyton, maybe Ryan, maybe Vick, and either Sanchez or Rivers.

                                So about half of the playoff QBs this year likely won't be top-five picks. (Likely playoff QBs also include non-top-five picks like Rogers, Brady, Flacco, Schaub, Brees?, Cutler?, maybe Romo but I doubt it, and perhaps Andy Dalton and/or Ben or Leftwich if the defenses in the AFC North don't cripple all of its QBs this season.)

                                You're overestimating the value of a top-five QB in building an entire football team.

                                PS, somebody needs to tell half of the NFL's playoff teams that they're too old school for you guys.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X