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

Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

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

  • #76
    Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

    Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
    ERRRR...... Wrong.

    Those measurements were done well over 2 years ago for Josh which by the way was the fattest PF in the draft. Measurements can be tricky but your eyes don't lie. Josh is a better athlete plan and simple.
    Hey, you're right. Wow. If only I'd have mentioned something about Josh being in better shape now. It is what we have to compare with.

    The point is that there isn't this huge gap between the players athletically. Hansbrough isn't unathletic. Your eyes don't lie. Fine, he is stronger than McRoberts. He wouldn't be far off in any of the other measurements either.
    "man, PG has been really good."

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
      ERRRR...... Wrong.

      Those measurements were done well over 2 years ago for Josh which by the way was the fattest PF in the draft. Measurements can be tricky but your eyes don't lie. Josh is a better athlete plan and simple.

      Yeah, watching video on both makes it pretty clear. Tyler just cannot get up there like Josh can. He has this shot that just looks like it will get blocked in the NBA. He seems like a guy who will bring energy, hustle for rebounds, and hit a mid range jumper in the pros. A nice bench player.

      Josh can flat sky, and people act like he totally lacks any skills... his ball handling and passing are pretty advanced for a big man, he is better than Tyler in both areas right now. His offensive game is very raw but there is hope for his jumpshot. He has a lot of defensive potential, especially if he gained as much strength as advertised. I don't understand why people are so down on the kid.
      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

      - ilive4sports

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

        Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
        Yeah, watching video on both makes it pretty clear. Tyler just cannot get up there like Josh can. He has this shot that just looks like it will get blocked in the NBA. He seems like a guy who will bring energy, hustle for rebounds, and hit a mid range jumper in the pros. A nice bench player.

        Josh can flat sky, and people act like he totally lacks any skills... his ball handling and passing are pretty advanced for a big man, he is better than Tyler in both areas right now. His offensive game is very raw but there is hope for his jumpshot. He has a lot of defensive potential, especially if he gained as much strength as advertised. I don't understand why people are so down on the kid.
        Not down on McRoberts. He's just not that good.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

          I like both players.

          Look, I think we just have a different take on athleticism. For me, it is the total physical ability of the player. That's strength, quickness, hops, endurance, all of that. For others it is primarily hops, quickness...

          Josh can sky. He also gets pushed around. Maybe that changes with added weight, added strength. If he can hold his ground he has the chance to be an excellent player for us. Like I said, his anticipation is VERY good and he will be very solid shotblocker. He has shown us that.

          I'm leaning towards Hansbrough having the better career, but I'm not set in that line of thought. I think they compliment each other extremely well, however, and can see them both being part of this team for years.
          "man, PG has been really good."

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Take Murphy out, I don't think anyone is psyched about him being here long term.
            Someone clearly has TroyMurphy3 on ignore...
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

              Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
              Hey, you're right. Wow. If only I'd have mentioned something about Josh being in better shape now. It is what we have to compare with.

              The point is that there isn't this huge gap between the players athletically. Hansbrough isn't unathletic. Your eyes don't lie. Fine, he is stronger than McRoberts. He wouldn't be far off in any of the other measurements either.
              You can't base it off of one set of measurments. I mean clearly McRoberts is a better athlete than Troy Murphy but they also measure out similarly.

              Predraft Measurements Troy Murphy
              Predraft Measurements
              Height w/o ShoesHeight w/shoesWeightWingspanStanding ReachBody FatNo Step VertMax VertBench PressLane Agility3/4 Court SprintClass Rank
              6' 9.75"6' 11"2306' 11"8' 9.5"NA28.534.51111.223.4339


              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                The word "athletic" can mean a ton of different things. Some people would say Tiger Woods is a better athlete than Michael Vick because Tiger is better at his sport. Others would say Usain Bolt is a far better athlete than Lebron James because athleticism is size+speed+endurance+etc.

                To me, McRoberts is a more athletic basketball player than Hans because of how he leaps, the way he handles the ball, and the way in which he creates shots for himself. For you, it might not work like that.

                Word around the campfire is that McBob is pressing right around 300 now a days. Someone posted that he did 12 reps at the pre-draft testing at Hans did 18. I'm from more of a football/weight lifting background, and I'll just say this-
                1) The reps are at 185lbs right? Not 225 like in football.
                2) If Josh is really pressing 300, or even 290, that's going to translate to around 12 to 16 reps of 225.
                3) If Hans just did 18 reps of 185 at the pre-draft testing, then I think Josh is a good deal stronger than Hans right now. 185 means nothing to me, so I cannot translate that to reps at 225. My best guess is that if a guy can do 18 reps of 185, he's going to be able to do around 8 to 10 reps of 225, and his 1 rep max is around 285.

                My point in all this is to say that if there's one physical attribute that I would expect Hans to beat Josh on, it would've been strength. Bench isn't the only measure of strength, but it's the most widely accepted.

                This was McRoberts' first NBA summer of weight lifting. Last year, he was traded on draft day after being in the D league for the latter half of the season, so he never got a full summer with an NBA strength trainer. He was at Duke for 2 years, but they aren't known for building guys up to be bigger and stronger because Coach K runs 'em into the ground all year. If Josh is able to put on solid weight like he did this summer, then God only knows how big and strong he could be in a couple more years.

                Imagine if Hans and McBob hit the steel as hard as McBob did this summer, and they're both around 260 lbs and jacked in 2011. Those two are hard workers, and they could be something special, brother.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?



                  McBob Benching 300 pounds on that frame? Someone had to be yanking your chain. Mcbob literally looks to have very LITTLE muscle on his frame. Someone that is going to bench 300 pounds is going to have somewhat of a chest bulging from his jersey and some nice triceps. Mcroberts appears to have 15" arms.

                  I would have to see a video of him benching 300 pounds to believe it.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                    Good post Hall O' Point

                    I've just been kind of wary listening to the talk that McRoberts has finally had the time to be a gym rat, gain strength and weight. Given his young age, it can mean some huge things for the guy. Word is that he is about 250 right now, if that were his playing weight I would be astonished. 6'10" 250 explosive and a shot blocker, paired with his passing and ball handling, well, that's pretty intimidating.

                    I think Josh has a low floor but an incredibly high ceiling. Hansbrough on the otherhand, you generally know what you are going to get. A decent role player and maybe a sometime starter.

                    I have a question for everyone. If Josh ends up 6'10" 260, you think he could be a capable center? Not just power forward.
                    "man, PG has been really good."

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                      Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                      Good post Hall O' Point

                      I've just been kind of wary listening to the talk that McRoberts has finally had the time to be a gym rat, gain strength and weight. Given his young age, it can mean some huge things for the guy. Word is that he is about 250 right now, if that were his playing weight I would be astonished. 6'10" 250 explosive and a shot blocker, paired with his passing and ball handling, well, that's pretty intimidating.

                      I think Josh has a low floor but an incredibly high ceiling. Hansbrough on the otherhand, you generally know what you are going to get. A decent role player and maybe a sometime starter.

                      I have a question for everyone. If Josh ends up 6'10" 260, you think he could be a capable center? Not just power forward.
                      If he can put that mass in his legs then yes he could easily be a center.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                        Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                        Agree 100%.

                        Ill tell you one thing. The two of us are gonna look like geniuses if you are right because we are almost all alone on this one. Saying you think Josh has the potential to be a good player is enough to get you sent to the nut house around here.
                        Eh, I've been speaking well of the guy, too, but I also like Hansbrough. They're different players, but both can help us in their own way.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Eh, I've been speaking well of the guy, too, but I also like Hansbrough. They're different players, but both can help us in their own way.
                          I guess I just get irked by all the responses like "Josh is a marginal player who will be out of the league in two years, there's no comparison" type posts. Hansbrough has never set foot on an NBA floor, and I have heard him being compared to Carlos Boozer in this thread. It comes off a bit silly. If you do your homework its easy to see what positives Mcroberts brings to the table and to declare him a scrub is just ill informed in my opinion, especially considering his age.
                          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                          - ilive4sports

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                            Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post


                            McBob Benching 300 pounds on that frame? Someone had to be yanking your chain. Mcbob literally looks to have very LITTLE muscle on his frame. Someone that is going to bench 300 pounds is going to have somewhat of a chest bulging from his jersey and some nice triceps. Mcroberts appears to have 15" arms.

                            I would have to see a video of him benching 300 pounds to believe it.
                            You gotta remember dude- even though he looks skinny compared to NORMAL PEOPLE, he's a friggin' giant among normal people. 6'10" 250 lbs is an enormous human being. The people that you know (if any) that can press 300 are not likely anywhere near that big. For a 250lb man to press 300 isn't that big of a deal. Being that Josh has long arms and a terrible body for the exercise, it makes it quite a bit more impressive. But a 300lb bench for a professional athlete isn't all that abnormal, even for an NBA player.

                            I read somewhere that Tiger Woods could bench 300. Like you, I'd have to see it, but the bottom line is, athletes are stronger than normal folks.

                            Basketball players like Josh, who have been playing ball non-stop since grade school, never really get much of a chance to focus in on lifting. Unlike football players, they're always playing their actual sport year-round, and never having enough time to make consistent gains in the weight room.

                            I don't doubt at all that someone like that- young, athletic, huge frame, -could put on 20 to 25 lbs of muscle in a summer dedicated to lifting. It's not like he's got any other job to go to!

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                              The idea that you accomplish the things Tyler Hansbrough has accomplished through nothing but hustle is lunacy. We're talking about the all-time leading scorer in ACC history and the all-time leading scorer and rebounder at one of the truly legendary programs, UNC. Brian Cardinal, Mark Madsen - these are your pure hustlers. Fairly good college players that bring enough to the table to ride the end of NBA benches. Hansbrough has that hustle, but he has a good skill level to compliment it, especially when it comes to scoring.

                              From Draft Express...

                              What about Tyler Hansbrough you ask? He actually fared quite well, in a number of different categories in fact. For one, he ranked third amongst all PFs in points per possession in terms of finishing around the basket, at 1.39. His field goal percentage was fairly average here—64%, just slightly under the mean—but the fact that he draws fouls on an outstanding 20% of his possessions (easily ranking him first) made him substantially more efficient in that regard. He also managed to keep his turnovers extremely low, and also did a nice job converting on his jump-shot attempts—making a very solid 42% on an admittedly small 2.7 possessions per game. His ability to operate out of isolation situations looks very encouraging (50% FG), while he was the second most efficient PF in post-up situations as well. From a pure statistical standpoint, Hansbrough obviously looks like a solid prospect based on his college data.

                              There were two reasons why Hansbrough's stock was so low coming in to the draft: (i) the idea that he was grossly undersized (I saw 6'7" a lot) and (ii) the idea that he was a terrible athlete. Both of these turned out to be nothing more than myths, and his stock soared accordingly in the past month. Unfortunately, certain people didn't get the memo (or did they...), as they're still repeating the now-debunked myths. This includes the slack-jawed yokel who wrote the CNNSI draft grades.


                              You forgot a few, like J.J. Redick, Lionel Simmons, Danny Ferry, etc.
                              As a rookie Lionel Simmons averaged 18/9/4 and over a steal and a block, each, and finished 2nd in R.O.Y. voting. He had a couple of good follow up seasons as well. He may not have been a superstar, but he was a very productive player prior to his accumulating injuries.

                              So far, it's 9-3. 75% chance.

                              Any other nominations ??
                              10-2

                              83%
                              Last edited by Lance George; 06-29-2009, 01:20 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                                In the Larry Brown world of "five guys that can defend the post", I could see McBob and Tyler as being somewhat interchangeable and perhaps on the court together when Hibbert is resting.

                                We are talking about post players here. Strength, length, footwork and fundamentals are more important than running like a gazelle and jumping like on a pogo stick.
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X