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

Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

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

  • #31
    Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

    Jermaine & Larry have not liked each other since Larry did away with Isiah.

    Jermaine felt as the "man" he should have had a say.

    Larry has never liked Isiah. It goes back to the comment from Rodman reinforced by ZEKE. "If Larry Bird was black, he would be just another basketball player."

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

      Jay and J - JO is supposed to be the leader, he is supposed to be the best player - he is the one making $20M and you are comparing him to other players on the roster - not a fair comparision to say the least.

      The best player, the leader, the higest paid player has a disproportunate impact on the entire team. So NO JO is not just another player. As I always say a team is only as good as its best player - and I don't mean the talent of the best player. If the best player is unhappy - your team is destroyed if your 6th best player is unhappy - it doesn't really matter too much
      Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-27-2008, 01:43 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

        I don't consider what Foster said "calling JO out". He didn't say it was JO's fault the team lost. He just stated the fact that it's hard to rally the troops when your star player doesn't want to be on the team.
        Turn out the lights, this party's over!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
          Isn't Jermaine O'Neal a Raptor? I'm confused. Why are we talking about him? What about Ron Artest? Isn't he a Rocket? And I'm pretty sure Donnie Walsh is a Knick.

          Can we move on? It's weird. We expect the "common fan" to move on and accept this team but we, the hardcore fans, still talk about the same stuff over and over again and don't seem to move on at all.

          How about the fact that three of our young guys are working out in Indy right now-and looking good...or the fact that we're all developing UB-size crushes on Foster?
          I feel like were at the end of the movie "One flew over the cuckoos nest" when Chief smothers McMurtry and then crashes out of the place and runs through the field toward freedom. A return to normalcy at the nest. The crazy eventful days have past us by.
          "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
          Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

            McMurphy. Randall Patrick McMurphy.
            BillS

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
              JO was more an innocent bystander than troublemaker.
              Says you!


              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


              • #37
                Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                Originally posted by 2minutes twowa View Post
                I don't consider what Foster said "calling JO out". He didn't say it was JO's fault the team lost. He just stated the fact that it's hard to rally the troops when your star player doesn't want to be on the team.
                I totally agree!

                I find it ironic that JO didn't want to be here as a Pacer, and yet he never demanded/asked for a trade b4 now. He never had a problem opening up his mouth b4. DW accommodated other players who wanted to be traded in the past... DD, AD, Big Al; so if JO was unhappy he could have asked/demanded a trade. It apparently didn't bother him too much that he never had a problem cashing the Simons' checks for all those DNP the last couple of years.

                I understand the fact that JO re-signed with the Pacers with the understanding Zeke would be the coach only to have Bird fire Zeke, so he felt betrayed. JO's comment about the meeting at the end of last season was the most civil conversation he and Bird ever had just shows the strained relationship between the 2. If he didn't want to be here, then he should have spoke up and said so.

                I've always felt DW realized he made a mistake in hiring Zeke as coach, and used Bird to get rid of him... after re-signing JO. DW let Bird play the heavy while being the JO man. It put a real strain on Bird and JO's relationship while DW looked squeaky clean about the issue. With DW out of the picture to keep stroking JO, the relationship was bound to come to a parting of ways. 2 years too late as far as I'm concerned. JMOAA

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  I find it ironic that JO didn't want to be here as a Pacer, and yet he never demanded/asked for a trade b4 now. He never had a problem opening up his mouth b4. DW accommodated other players who wanted to be traded in the past... DD, AD, Big Al; so if JO was unhappy he could have asked/demanded a trade. It apparently didn't bother him too much that he never had a problem cashing the Simons' checks for all those DNP the last couple of years.
                  That's the craziest thing I've ever read.

                  We're criticizing Jermaine for not demanding a trade? Really? We're wishing that he'd done more griping to the media?
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                    Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                    The difference between Foster and JO is that Foster did not play like he didn't want to be here.

                    That may seem unfair, but I still can get over the fact that JO was lacking passion.
                    Revisionist history is so much fun.

                    JO averaged 19.8 ppg, 10.3 rpg and 3.0 bpg in the first 46 games of 2006-07 and was universally considered at Top 3-5 DPOY candidate for how greatly he was patrolling the paint to alter shots and take charges. He had five 5-block games in November alone.

                    Then his knee broke down and his game fell apart after the break. But he still played hurt when most guys would have shut it down.

                    We all know what happened this last season when he essentially missed the whole year.

                    So sure, maybe he was grumpy off the court for two straight years...But to act like he didn't play with passion on the court in 2006-07 is just plain wrong. He was as good defensively in the first half as I've ever seen him play.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Jay and J - JO is supposed to be the leader, he is supposed to be the best player - he is the one making $20M and you are comparing him to other players on the roster - not a fair comparision to say the least.

                      The best player, the leader, the higest paid player has a disproportunate impact on the entire team. So NO JO is not just another player. As I always say a team is only as good as its best player - and I don't mean the talent of the best player. If the best player is unhappy - your team is destroyed if your 6th best player is unhappy - it doesn't really matter too much
                      Agreed. But with a limit.

                      None of the key players wanted to be here. From one through 12. I don't think JO could turn that around by himself. And that probably contributed to the vicious cycle. It wasn't like JO could get Tinsley, SJax and Al to want to be here anymore. And since we've heard these four are tight, it was a trainwreck far beyond JO's control.

                      Foster isn't telling us anything we didn't know. But even then, he didn't say, "JO, like everyone else, didn't want to be here." He is placing the "didn't want to be here" blame on JO.

                      Since Foster has no appreciable talent other than hustle, we can all see for ourselves that he still hustled during the games. We don't know how he practiced or carried himself off the court. I'm not trying to pick on Foster here, I'm just saying that he could have named about a dozen players that didn't want to be here. What is the upside in calling out JO in any way?

                      The "I hate the team I love" side of me wants to see JO drop 40 on Foster during his first return to the Fieldhouse. But really I just hope that the team finds a way to move Foster, Murphy, Daniels, Williams and Tinsley before the season starts so that there are no leftovers from the Rick Carlisle-terrible-chemistry era (other than Granger) to possibly poison the young players.

                      The young guys like Rush and Hibbert don't even need to hear the "war stories" of just how bad it was.
                      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


                      • #41
                        Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        Who on this roster WANTED to be here the past two years? No point in singleing JO out like Foster is doing when I'm certain that at least half the roster didn't want to be here. With (former) teammates like that, who needs enemies?

                        This seems to be the exact thing that our "friend" (not really) - the purple people eater - would harp on. Remember all the criticism Croshere got for speaking out about Artest to the New York papers. And it was a legit complaint, even if it did validate what some of us were thinking.

                        This team was a dysfunctional mess at the top. JO was more an innocent bystander than troublemaker. But if Foster is going to be calling out former teammates, who is going to want to be a "former" teammate of his in the future?

                        This could be the by-product of Bird's semi-refreshing-but-very-dangerous airing of the team's dirty laundry to the press. These players may now be in a race to see who can give the next juicy tidbit to The Star. I don't see how this possibly improves chemistry.



                        (All the more reason to purge the team of all veterans that were here when Rick/ Donnie was still here and start over with Ford/ Rush/ Jack/ Granger - not counting him as a veteran when Rick was here - Hibbert/ Rasho/ etc. A first round pick in exchange for Foster never looked so good.)
                        The difference being, JO was the self-proclaimed leader of the team. Not liking the situation is not the same as not wanting to play for a franchise. No one likes to lose, but that doesn't mean that everyone on the Pacers wanted out. JO was the one on record saying as much.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          That's the craziest thing I've ever read.

                          We're criticizing Jermaine for not demanding a trade? Really? We're wishing that he'd done more griping to the media?
                          We have no idea if JO requested or demanded a trade. Because JO would have had the common sense and class to do that quietly, behind the scenes. We all know that JO "wanted" to be traded to the Lakers last summer, even when he came out and said all the PC things afterwords.

                          I believe JO asked for a trade when Bird announced Carlisle would be back to coach a fourth season. I believe Tinsley asked for a trade when Bird announced Carlisle would be back to coach a fourth season. I believe SJax had asked for a trade and made it clear, when he went AWOL on the morning of Game #6 against New Jersey (or perhaps earlier in that series) that he didn't want to be here any longer.

                          The team acquired Al as a passifier, as he was friends with all of those guys, and then Carlisle and Al didn't get along.

                          This team, as we have known it, has been dead ever since.
                          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


                          • #43
                            Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            We have no idea if JO requested or demanded a trade. Because JO would have had the common sense and class to do that quietly, behind the scenes. We all know that JO "wanted" to be traded to the Lakers last summer, even when he came out and said all the PC things afterwords.

                            I believe JO asked for a trade when Bird announced Carlisle would be back to coach a fourth season. I believe Tinsley asked for a trade when Bird announced Carlisle would be back to coach a fourth season. I believe SJax had asked for a trade and made it clear, when he went AWOL on the morning of Game #6 against New Jersey (or perhaps earlier in that series) that he didn't want to be here any longer.

                            The team acquired Al as a passifier, as he was friends with all of those guys, and then Carlisle and Al didn't get along.

                            This team, as we have known it, has been dead ever since.
                            I agree.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                              Carlisle and Al didn't get along? I could understand why after we were 8 games into the season and JO made it be known he wanted to be used differently... which affected Al... But I've not heard it actually said Carlisle and Al didn't get along.

                              Or do you mean there was some carry over from Al's sixthman days?

                              In any case, I will continue to believe JO was an overpaid, underperforming, prima donna whose ego was too large for the Pacer lockerroom and who could never accept he was a big part of the chemistry problem (if not the sole reason for it).

                              ...While you will believe JO was one of the greatest Pacers ever who was crapped on by management by not surrounding him with a better supporting cast.

                              I certainly won't miss him and I hope JO fans give the new team a chance. I'm glad he's went on to Toronto where he can "dominate" and return to "All Star form" while the Pacers actually build a team with an earned leadership structure and a collective goal.
                              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


                              • #45
                                Re: Foster say's O'Neal did not want to be here the last two seasons...

                                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                                We have no idea if JO requested or demanded a trade. Because JO would have had the common sense and class to do that quietly, behind the scenes. We all know that JO "wanted" to be traded to the Lakers last summer, even when he came out and said all the PC things afterwords.

                                I believe JO asked for a trade when Bird announced Carlisle would be back to coach a fourth season. I believe Tinsley asked for a trade when Bird announced Carlisle would be back to coach a fourth season. I believe SJax had asked for a trade and made it clear, when he went AWOL on the morning of Game #6 against New Jersey (or perhaps earlier in that series) that he didn't want to be here any longer.

                                The team acquired Al as a passifier, as he was friends with all of those guys, and then Carlisle and Al didn't get along.

                                This team, as we have known it, has been dead ever since.
                                Now wait a minute. Although there may not have been a direct quote JO hinted many times about a "whatever the best thing is". He cartainly was never adamant about wanting to stay and get this thing turned around.

                                This year's team is one I truly believe where Foster can be a leader simply because of his tenure. I find it interesting that you mentioned his lack of appreciable talent other than hustle but I bet there are a dozen teams that would like to have that on their team.
                                The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X