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

McCleod better then Tinsley.

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

  • #76
    Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

    Originally posted by Big Smooth View Post
    All I'm saying is that this team has had bigger problems than any one player all along. Where did I say anything about Granger becoming a leader? He obviously isn't a leadership type of guy so I'm not sure if you are trying to put words in my mouth there or not. Whatever.
    Put words in your mouth? Did you not go back and reread the very post I quoted?
    How can any rational person still support Granger when the team that he's supposed to "lead" is so incredibly bad?
    That is a direct quote from your post, where you subsituted Tinsley's name from the original and replaced it with Granger.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

      Originally posted by MagicRat View Post


      Classic MR work!
      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

        Originally posted by MagicRat View Post

        I'm the happiest boy in the world.
        Narf!

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          Keith won me over as far as deserving a good long look at starting while we draw the curtain on the Tinsley era when he said in the post game interview (paraphrased) "I try to involve all the guys on offense and get them going early... get them in a rhythm... 'cause we'll need them at the end of the game"

          Let Keith start, let Tinsley's legend grow on the bench.

          -Bball
          If thats not a cookie cutter comment right there, then IDK what is. Tinsley has said stuff like this all the time. I don't really like to get in on the Tins convos anymore, but I will say that IMO the idea of even thinking about starting a guy like McLeod over a guy like Tinsley is patently ridiculous. I mean honestly the team is losing. We as fans look for someone to blame more than everyone else. Its a natural reaction. Tins and Carlisle seem to be the favorites (Hell, I admit to using Rick as a scapegoat at times.) People are downright silly, no make that downright insane to think that if we trade Tinsley this offseason and have a guy like McLeod as our starting PG next season that we will be better. We heard this same sort of BS when Jack was here. "If we trade him people will come back in droves, it won't matter if we are winning cause at least that bum won't be here..." Now instead of Jack its just Tins and guess what it is still BS. If the team ain't winning it won't matter if we have a roster that would make the movie "Hoosiers" proud in terms of effort. If this team was winning 60 games a season and we had a roster full of cons people WOULD NOT CARE. Winning cures all, period. Darrell Reid of the Colts was arrested for marijuana possesion and that barely got a peep on the local news, forget about national news. That makes two Colts who have been arrested since the Super Bowl thats over the course of only two months. No one cares, not a single soul in this city cares. Could you imagine if a Pacer got arrested for marijuana? Lord help his poor soul.


          Comment


          • #80
            Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

            Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
            If thats not a cookie cutter comment right there, then IDK what is. Tinsley has said stuff like this all the time. I don't really like to get in on the Tins convos anymore, but I will say that IMO the idea of even thinking about starting a guy like McLeod over a guy like Tinsley is patently ridiculous. I mean honestly the team is losing. We as fans look for someone to blame more than everyone else. Its a natural reaction. Tins and Carlisle seem to be the favorites (Hell, I admit to using Rick as a scapegoat at times.) People are downright silly, no make that downright insane to think that if we trade Tinsley this offseason and have a guy like McLeod as our starting PG next season that we will be better. We heard this same sort of BS when Jack was here. "If we trade him people will come back in droves, it won't matter if we are winning cause at least that bum won't be here..." Now instead of Jack its just Tins and guess what it is still BS. If the team ain't winning it won't matter if we have a roster that would make the movie "Hoosiers" proud in terms of effort. If this team was winning 60 games a season and we had a roster full of cons people WOULD NOT CARE. Winning cures all, period. Darrell Reid of the Colts was arrested for marijuana possesion and that barely got a peep on the local news, forget about national news. That makes two Colts who have been arrested since the Super Bowl thats over the course of only two months. No one cares, not a single soul in this city cares. Could you imagine if a Pacer got arrested for marijuana? Lord help his poor soul.
            See the bolded part where you and other Tinsley adorers go wrong. As I can remember clearly most of us said a year ago when Jackson and Tinsley are gone we'll gladly coming back to watch a game and more.

            We are now at the half of that wish, so with Tinsley gone (and I don't care who the new starting PG will be next season... even if it is Saras ) the seats will get filled more.

            Oh yeah, what have we won the last years with all the bad apples? Exactly, nothing!
            Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

              Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
              No one cares, not a single soul in this city cares. Could you imagine if a Pacer got arrested for marijuana? Lord help his poor soul.
              That's where you are wrong. I don't hold the Colts to any lower expectations than the Pacers. Quite frankly this recent news has pi55ed me off. So . . . I doubt I am the only Colts fan feeling this way.

              About what Tinsley says. He can say all he wants, the problem is his BS doesn't play here anymore.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                Darrell Reid of the Colts was arrested for marijuana possesion and that barely got a peep on the local news,

                Will that read "formerly of the Colts" soon?

                forget about national news. That makes two Colts who have been arrested since the Super Bowl thats over the course of only two months. No one cares, not a single soul in this city cares. Could you imagine if a Pacer got arrested for marijuana? Lord help his poor soul.
                In Dominic's case that should read, "Formerly of the Colts". Also, the DUI didn't stick and was dropped. He pled to a lesser charge of reckless driving.

                IC 9-21-8-52
                Reckless driving; Class B misdemeanor; damage to property; suspension
                Sec. 52. (a) A person who operates a vehicle and who recklessly:
                (1) drives at such an unreasonably high rate of speed or at such an unreasonably low rate of speed under the circumstances as to:
                (A) endanger the safety or the property of others; or
                (B) block the proper flow of traffic;
                (2) passes another vehicle from the rear while on a slope or on a curve where vision is obstructed for a distance of less than five hundred (500) feet ahead;
                (3) drives in and out of a line of traffic, except as otherwise permitted;
                (4) speeds up or refuses to give one-half (1/2) of the roadway to a driver overtaking and desiring to pass; or
                (5) passes a school bus stopped on a roadway when the arm signal device specified in IC 9-21-12-13 is in the device's extended position;
                commits a Class B misdemeanor.
                (b) If an offense under subsection (a) results in damage to the property of another person, the court shall recommend the suspension of the current driving license of the person for a fixed period of:
                (1) not less than thirty (30) days; and
                (2) not more than one (1) year.
                ----
                But I'm not really interested in tearing down the Colts as if that will in some way make me feel better about the Pacers or somehow improve the Pacers.

                The funny thing is, we hear this talk about how bad we'd be without Tinsley.... yet last I checked we're pretty bad with him!

                Again I say... the argument that you can win with a bunch of low character talent is bogus. It will always disintegrate because uncoachable, unlikeable, arrogant people do not make for good teams nor good teammates.

                You -might- do OK with ONE head case as part of a strong team that he can't infect and can be led to play his role, but a group of them will get you nowhere. You have to have at least one strong individual to keep everyone on the same page so that the cancers can't spread.

                -Bball
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  It will always disintegrate because uncoachable, unlikeable, arrogant people do not make for good teams nor good teammates.
                  They do make good members of message boards, though!

                  Of course, I'm including myself in that...
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                    I don't get why people are thinking that Tinsley is the new scapegoat. He's been critisized for years! In the 61-win season he got a lot more love then previously and in the brawl year he also go a lot of credit and respect. However, he threw that away the following seasons by not producing what was expected consistently AND missing half the games.

                    The only difference this year is that he has amply missed games, which is a credit to him, but, no fear, we got something else back for it ... emberassments to the franchise, not once, but twice. And his inconsistency and bad desicion-making remain.

                    Again the calls for him to be moved are not new. They have been here from a sizeable part of the forum since the middle of last season, maybe even earlier.
                    This is no witchhunt.

                    Regards,

                    Mourning
                    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post

                      You -might- do OK with ONE head case as part of a strong team that he can't infect and can be led to play his role, but a group of them will get you nowhere. You have to have at least one strong individual to keep everyone on the same page so that the cancers can't spread.

                      -Bball
                      Well hate to bring it full circle but you get what you pay for...
                      or resign for that matter.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                        Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                        I hate to say this, but it bothered me the entire thread:

                        That's not what 'jump the shark' means. Maybe 'jump the gun'? (Sorry man. It was like an itch that won't go away ).

                        Anyway, McCloud isn't that great. But he knows it. Tinsley doesn't.

                        If we are going to use stats to defend Tinsley, then we are going to use stats to defend Starbury. "But all you have to do is actually watch a Knicks game to see how bad Marbury is!"

                        Exactly.
                        Sorry, typo. I meant to type "gun."

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          Right on the money. In the NBA, you need 2 stars and we've only got half that many. Hypothetically, I agree with you that Dunleavy could work at 2 if you've got a powerhouse PG or SF. But we've got Danny at 3, and there's no powerhouse 1 out there that's even remotely available. It's easier to get a star-quality 2.
                          Chauncey Billups is a free agent this year, isn't he?

                          [LA runs and hides from all the Pistons fans]
                          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                            Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
                            See the bolded part where you and other Tinsley adorers go wrong. As I can remember clearly most of us said a year ago when Jackson and Tinsley are gone we'll gladly coming back to watch a game and more.

                            We are now at the half of that wish, so with Tinsley gone (and I don't care who the new starting PG will be next season... even if it is Saras ) the seats will get filled more.

                            Oh yeah, what have we won the last years with all the bad apples? Exactly, nothing!
                            See the bolded part where the guy making an assumption goes wildly off the path of what my post intended? I want Tins gone. I have no problem with him moving on, in fact I would encourage for both the good of Tins and the Pacers franchise. However to say he is worse than Keith McLeod is well, ludicrous. That doesn't make me a Tins adorer, that makes me someone who is unwilling to blame one guy for an entire teams struggles and furthermore I am unwilling to say that a career journeyman is better than a 13ppg, 7 apg point guard.


                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                              Originally posted by Bball View Post
                              Will that read "formerly of the Colts" soon?



                              In Dominic's case that should read, "Formerly of the Colts". Also, the DUI didn't stick and was dropped. He pled to a lesser charge of reckless driving.

                              IC 9-21-8-52
                              Reckless driving; Class B misdemeanor; damage to property; suspension
                              Sec. 52. (a) A person who operates a vehicle and who recklessly:
                              (1) drives at such an unreasonably high rate of speed or at such an unreasonably low rate of speed under the circumstances as to:
                              (A) endanger the safety or the property of others; or
                              (B) block the proper flow of traffic;
                              (2) passes another vehicle from the rear while on a slope or on a curve where vision is obstructed for a distance of less than five hundred (500) feet ahead;
                              (3) drives in and out of a line of traffic, except as otherwise permitted;
                              (4) speeds up or refuses to give one-half (1/2) of the roadway to a driver overtaking and desiring to pass; or
                              (5) passes a school bus stopped on a roadway when the arm signal device specified in IC 9-21-12-13 is in the device's extended position;
                              commits a Class B misdemeanor.
                              (b) If an offense under subsection (a) results in damage to the property of another person, the court shall recommend the suspension of the current driving license of the person for a fixed period of:
                              (1) not less than thirty (30) days; and
                              (2) not more than one (1) year.
                              ----
                              But I'm not really interested in tearing down the Colts as if that will in some way make me feel better about the Pacers or somehow improve the Pacers.

                              The funny thing is, we hear this talk about how bad we'd be without Tinsley.... yet last I checked we're pretty bad with him!

                              Again I say... the argument that you can win with a bunch of low character talent is bogus. It will always disintegrate because uncoachable, unlikeable, arrogant people do not make for good teams nor good teammates.

                              You -might- do OK with ONE head case as part of a strong team that he can't infect and can be led to play his role, but a group of them will get you nowhere. You have to have at least one strong individual to keep everyone on the same page so that the cancers can't spread.

                              -Bball
                              They were still with the team when it happened and I would wager that Dom would still be with the team if he hadn't gotten a ridiculous offer from the Raiders. I'm not tearing the Colts down to build the Pacers up both teams have their problems off the field/basketball court. However my point was winning cures everything or at least makes it very easy to ignore the problems.


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: McCleod better then Tinsley.

                                There is only one question you all need to consider, as posed by Sir Stephen Colbert: Jamaal Tinsley, great point guard or the greatest?

                                Remember the good times...








                                ...and the answer is clear: GREATEST!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X