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

Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

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

  • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

    Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
    I hate to keep pointing this out but there are LOTS of fans who do not agree that the Colts did what was best for the franchise including me. I think what they did, will make Luck and any future superstar take a long look on whether to stay with the Colts or move to another team if the money is the same. Certainly the Colts showed no loyalty whatsoever and players will remember that. It could mean something to potential free agents thinking about coming to Indy too. I know it would to me. Do you think Brady will ever throw a pass for any team but the Patriots? I don't. ...
    The Colts showed loyalty by signing an aging/injured QB to that ridiculous contract. Once Manning took the money, knowing his season was in doubt (I believe Manning knew all along he wasn't going to play), all the loyalty owed to Peyton went down the drain. Don't get me wrong, I would have done the exact same thing and taken the money, but it was still wrong of Manning.
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
      The Colts showed loyalty by signing an aging/injured QB to that ridiculous contract. Once Manning took the money, knowing his season was in doubt (I believe Manning knew all along he wasn't going to play), all the loyalty owed to Peyton went down the drain. Don't get me wrong, I would have done the exact same thing and taken the money, but it was still wrong of Manning.
      No, it wasn't and when that contract was signed he didn't know that the was going to need more surgery. I do not believe for one minute that Peyton knew he was not going to play. He and the Colts knew it was a possibility but everyone involved thought he would be back if not for the season opener then certainly by the third or fourth game. I don't think you can just make this claim without some evidence. There is evidence that everyone was surprised that Peyton needd more surgery. Again, I think your Manning hate is shining through these posts..... ...

      Comment


      • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

        Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
        I hate to keep pointing this out but there are LOTS of fans who do not agree that the Colts did what was best for the franchise including me. I think what they did, will make Luck and any future superstar take a long look on whether to stay with the Colts or move to another team if the money is the same. Certainly the Colts showed no loyalty whatsoever and players will remember that. It could mean something to potential free agents thinking about coming to Indy too. I know it would to me. Do you think Brady will ever throw a pass for any team but the Patriots? I don't. ...
        When did it become a requirement for you and a few other fans to agree with the decision to make it what was best for the franchise?

        Comment


        • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

          Originally posted by Swingman View Post
          When did it become a requirement for you and a few other fans to agree with the decision to make it what was best for the franchise?
          It isn't just like it isn't a requirement that you agree with management's decisions. It is more than a few fans.... They had a waiting list for season tickets. They don't have that any longer and if the are anywhere near as bad as I think they are, you will start seeing empty seats in that stadium. The decision was arragant and ignored what the fans wanted. There will be a big price for that if they are wrong. There would have been a lesser price with the fans to bring Peyton back and let him end his career as a Colt. I think Peyton would have found a way to win nine or ten games with the team last year. But that argument is the hear and now against the future. It took the Colts 36 years to get to Peyton's first Super Bowl. I don't have ten years to wait and I think it will be that long or even much longer to get back to the SB..... ...

          Comment


          • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

            Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
            I hate to keep pointing this out but there are LOTS of fans who do not agree that the Colts did what was best for the franchise including me. I think what they did, will make Luck and any future superstar take a long look on whether to stay with the Colts or move to another team if the money is the same. Certainly the Colts showed no loyalty whatsoever and players will remember that. It could mean something to potential free agents thinking about coming to Indy too. I know it would to me. Do you think Brady will ever throw a pass for any team but the Patriots? I don't. ...
            I am a huge Peyton fan...more than a Colt fan. But it was quite appropriate for his time to end in Indy for numerous reasons. First, the money was way too much to risk on a guy who has had serious neck surgeries, especially a guy headed into his late 30's. Second, the team itself was well past its prime. Clark has had injuries and Saturday is about done.

            Goodness...my goodness...YOU even said Reggie Wayne had lost a step. Tell me now why he's all of the sudden going to help an injured and old team win a super bowl?

            Seriously. For his personal health and his own family, Peyton should have hung them up and called it a fantastic career.

            Comment


            • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

              Originally posted by CompACE View Post
              What's PF?
              Er, PG? I apparently can't read today...
              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

              Comment


              • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                No he shouldn't have and he will come back and prove how wrong you are. The chances of Peyton getting to a Super Bowl in the next five years are much higher than Luck EVER getting there.... Yes, Reggie Wayne has lost a step but I would have kept Garcon` who would have been the primary receiver. Reggie still runs good routes and is good for short yardage or they could have let him go and just keep Garcon` to play with a rookie reciever or a free agent like the one they signed. Who cares about Clark? Tamme is going to the Pro Bowl this year (yes, they still have it) with Peyton throwing to him all year long. You could have kept Saturday for continuity or made the change. Peyton's super quick release would help keep the defense off of him. They could have kept some linemen they let go for financial reasons and have a better line they they are going to have at the start of this season. Having Bracket back with Angerer getting hurt would have been nice. There were several other defensive players who could have been retained. They could have kept Caldwell for another two or three years to keep the defense matched to the personel. I'm not saying they would have made a Super Bowl run but, I think they would have been in the playoffs for the next three or four years. The draft could have been used to keep working on that line and adding good defensive players and getting younger. Peyton's personal health is not in jeopardy from that injury. In fact, he is less likely to have a problem there than anyone who has not had that fusion. He could get hurt at any time and end his career and so could Luck. I think it will take three years for this team to win ten games. I hope I am wrong about that but I have been watching this for a long time and it isn't easy to build a contending team. Irsay was never able to do it until Peyton came along. Luck looked great but I don't see him picking the team up and winning several games per year just about on his own like Peyton did year after year after year. If you all think the Colts are going to be so good now and in the next three years, you could make a whole lot of money and get great odds in Las Vegas to bet on that. I'll bet not many of the "homers" would want to do that....... ...

                Comment


                • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                  Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                  The defense will not be as bad as people think. It will be your typical "bend but don't break" defense that we saw during the Manning years. Colts will have problems stopping the run, and will give up long time-consuming drives resulting in FG's. The running game is also better than what the "experts" say. Donald Brown isn't good in short yardage, but he has the ability to take it house when he gets the running lanes. People shouldn't dismiss or call DB a "bust" when he has shown several times the ability to make the big play. Vick Ballard will be our "grinding" RB to get the tough yards. He puts his head down and falls forward.

                  Don't believe what you read from the "experts" when it comes to predictions in the pre-season. It seems like every season a perceived "horrible" team comes out of nowhere and makes the playoffs.
                  The problem with that theory is that this defense doesn't have the necessary components for bend but don't break defense. That relied on decent secondary work and cover 2 system that could mask the play of individual defenders. Here, we are not playing as much of that but rather more one-on-one defending with the increased emphasis on blitzing and disrupting the run. We're doing this with even worse secondary play than we had previously. All teams have to do is throw against us, and we're going to have a lot of problems doing anything against it. Sure, we have Freeney and Mathis, but it doesn't matter if the secondary is terrible, which it is.
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                    Originally posted by Swingman View Post
                    Saying "you people" doesn't lend people to believe you're referring to one person. The post sounded like you were rebutting the majority of posters on here and agreeing with blu.

                    For your information, blu said we'd be lucky to reach 3 wins and he voted in the poll that 0-2 wins would be the likely outcome of this season. From your post saying 4-5 wins is realistic, it sounds more like you agree with the majority and not with blu.

                    Here are the results of the poll that show how most posters think for this season
                    57% choose 3-5 wins
                    33% choose 6-8 wins
                    No other option was over 4%

                    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...lts-in-2012-13
                    My apologies for saying "you people". I obviously thought PG had a split personality.
                    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                      Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                      Now, I don't agree with Blu on his long term projections of this team, but there is no way we're going to do as well as you people think.
                      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                      Comment


                      • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                        Maybe Manning should be thanking the Colts brass for the release. I mean his chances of winning another SB are way better in Denver than they would have been here with last year's personnel and coaching staff. Although the coaching staff - not to mention the Polian regime - still could have been purged. In fact, that would probably have been Peyton's best chance here.
                        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                        -Emiliano Zapata

                        Comment


                        • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                          Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                          Maybe Manning should be thanking the Colts brass for the release. I mean his chances of winning another SB are way better in Denver than they would have been here with last year's personnel and coaching staff. Although the coaching staff - not to mention the Polian regime - still could have been purged. In fact, that would probably have been Peyton's best chance here.
                          Peter King has a nice article about Polian MMQB this week. He says he has been impressed by the reverence paid to Polian by brass from other teams. He also said he thinks Polian will take over another team next year. I do agree that Peyton has a better chance to win a SB with Denver or several other teams. I don't think the purge would have happened if they kept Manning. I thought he still might be back right up until they let Caldwell go. I knew he was gone then. Nonetheless, I think he really wanted to end his career in INDY...... ...

                          Comment


                          • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                            Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                            He means the "homers" who have no sense of reality.... ...

                            Comment


                            • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                              Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                              No he shouldn't have and he will come back and prove how wrong you are. The chances of Peyton getting to a Super Bowl in the next five years are much higher than Luck EVER getting there.... Yes, Reggie Wayne has lost a step but I would have kept Garcon` who would have been the primary receiver. Reggie still runs good routes and is good for short yardage or they could have let him go and just keep Garcon` to play with a rookie reciever or a free agent like the one they signed. Who cares about Clark? Tamme is going to the Pro Bowl this year (yes, they still have it) with Peyton throwing to him all year long. You could have kept Saturday for continuity or made the change. Peyton's super quick release would help keep the defense off of him. They could have kept some linemen they let go for financial reasons and have a better line they they are going to have at the start of this season. Having Bracket back with Angerer getting hurt would have been nice. There were several other defensive players who could have been retained. They could have kept Caldwell for another two or three years to keep the defense matched to the personel. I'm not saying they would have made a Super Bowl run but, I think they would have been in the playoffs for the next three or four years. The draft could have been used to keep working on that line and adding good defensive players and getting younger. Peyton's personal health is not in jeopardy from that injury. In fact, he is less likely to have a problem there than anyone who has not had that fusion. He could get hurt at any time and end his career and so could Luck. I think it will take three years for this team to win ten games. I hope I am wrong about that but I have been watching this for a long time and it isn't easy to build a contending team. Irsay was never able to do it until Peyton came along. Luck looked great but I don't see him picking the team up and winning several games per year just about on his own like Peyton did year after year after year. If you all think the Colts are going to be so good now and in the next three years, you could make a whole lot of money and get great odds in Las Vegas to bet on that. I'll bet not many of the "homers" would want to do that....... ...
                              This exemplifies the fantasy for the Manning worshippers I mentioned earlier. The entire rallying cry, "Peyton is going to the Super Bowl!!!" is strictly a fantasy. Denver is not a good team. Sorry, but Peyton isn't going to be the same player for Denver as he was with us. Not even 2010 Peyton, which was still a prime Peyton. The reality is that Peyton is 36 recovering from a severe injury. This injury kept Manning, who had never missed a start and would do whatever it takes to play football, to miss an entire season. Sorry, but the Peyton story isn't going to have a happy ending.
                              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                              Comment


                              • Re: Preseason Week 1: Rams @ Colts

                                Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                                This exemplifies the fantasy for the Manning worshippers I mentioned earlier. The entire rallying cry, "Peyton is going to the Super Bowl!!!" is strictly a fantasy. Denver is not a good team. Sorry, but Peyton isn't going to be the same player for Denver as he was with us. Not even 2010 Peyton, which was still a prime Peyton. The reality is that Peyton is 36 recovering from a severe injury. This injury kept Manning, who had never missed a start and would do whatever it takes to play football, to miss an entire season. Sorry, but the Peyton story isn't going to have a happy ending.
                                Well, we will see. A guy named Tebow took that team to the playoffs last year and won a game. They are about 1000% better with Peyton. He may not get to a Super Bowl, that takes some good fortune (note that I did not say "luck") and the Colts went 36 years without getting there before Peyton. But, they will be a solid playoff team and Peytone will put up his usual great numbers. He has a very good defense to work with and a great running game to compliment his passing game. I don't know where you get that Denver is not a good team. I think they will start off slow as they make the transition to playing Peyton's way, perhaps 3-3 or 4-2 on their first six games. Then I expect them to turn it on and finish strong. I think they will be 10-6 or better. Meanwhile, the Colts will start planning on who to take with the first pick in the draft after about eight games..... ...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X