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

Pep fired

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

  • #76
    Re: Pep fired

    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    Did Pep stop calling the game once the team was down? No, he was the one calling the plays when the team would make their dramatic comeback, just as he was the one calling them when they got down to begin with. That's just another cop out.

    I completely agree that Pep was inconsistent with his play calling and ability to maximize the talent of his skill players.

    If Luck continues to play as he has, then the firing of Pep won't improve or change a thing -- which is exactly what the firing is supposed to garner in the first place.

    I'd predict the typical 2ish game boost to the offense whenever a coach is fired, but after that I'd assume the offense and QB would return to the standard. The only way that doesn't happen is if the bad decisions and inaccurate throws are minimized.
    Pep decides what we run and when. Why he does and when he does it has been the main problem with this offense. He opens most games with that confounded style of his and always fails to recognize 1) that it's not working, and 2) waits entirely too long to go away from it, and 3) when something is working, he inexplicably goes away from it.

    When we go to our late-game, play-from-behind style, Luck looks infinitely better. In the hurry up, Luck is still rocking it. When we go west coast short-quick, Luck also looked way better. And yet we rarely went to those gameplans why??? Because Pep. That's why. He had no idea how to play to his player's strengths. He had no sense of timing. He buried us in holes repeatedly.

    Luck hasn't been consistent, but he has been consistent with certain playstyles this year and Pep just wouldn't adjust his game plan to utilize that fact. He recognized that Hasselbeck needed west coast; he knew Luck was hurt; he saw Luck have the same success as Matt in the west coast --- and ignored all of that information. And Luck isn't a disobedient soldier, you know this. He's running exactly what he's told to.
    Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-04-2015, 06:14 PM.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Pep fired


      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Pep fired

        Originally posted by joew8302 View Post

        If he had done a good job, he wouldn't have been fired.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Pep fired

          If football doesn't work out for him, Pagano should look into becoming a used-car salesman.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Pep fired

            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
            Pep decides what we run and when. Why he does and when he does it has been the main problem with this offense. He opens most games with that confounded style of his and always fails to recognize 1) that it's not working, and 2) waits entirely too long to go away from it, and 3) when something is working, he inexplicably goes away from it.

            When we go to our late-game, play-from-behind style, Luck looks infinitely better. In the hurry up, Luck is still rocking it. When we go west coast short-quick, Luck also looked way better. And yet we rarely went to those gameplans why??? Because Pep. That's why. He had no idea how to play to his player's strengths. He had no sense of timing. He buried us in holes repeatedly.

            Luck hasn't been consistent, but he has been consistent with certain playstyles this year and Pep just wouldn't adjust his game plan to utilize that fact. He recognized that Hasselbeck needed west coast; he knew Luck was hurt; he saw Luck have the same success as Matt in the west coast --- and ignored all of that information. And Luck isn't a disobedient soldier, you know this. He's running exactly what he's told to.
            I agree that Luck is running what he's told, I just think he's making the wrong reads at the wrong times. I actually agree that Luck looked much better running the west coast system. I don't agree about the hurry up, because teams typically go to a prevent defense and gave up easy completions. The only reason I say that is because it's not like Luck has killed it during the two minute offense going into the half. It's only in the second half and with the team down big.

            Outside of the 4th qtr against TEN, 2nd qtr vs Pats, and 4th qtr vs CAR, Luck hasn't really looked good no matter what we've run. If you want to put most of that on Pep, then Andrew should have a very good second half of the season. I honestly wouldn't rule it out at all anyway, but I still say that his improvements would be just as much because of better decision making and more accurate throws, as opposed to the change at the OC.

            Also, thanks for editing your post and taking away that "I don't know what I'm seeing". I think I'm pretty knowledgable, and am just trying to call it how I see it. No need for disrespect, even if we do disagree. So seriously, I appreciate it!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Pep fired

              The Luck we saw in the 4th quarter wasn't the same guy we had been seeing all year. I think the colts have to maximize the offense, including play calling and OL, so we see that Luck more often. Some will say that the panther defense was tired but I don't buy that.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Pep fired

                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                Pep decides what we run and when. Why he does and when he does it has been the main problem with this offense. He opens most games with that confounded style of his and always fails to recognize 1) that it's not working, and 2) waits entirely too long to go away from it, and 3) when something is working, he inexplicably goes away from it.

                When we go to our late-game, play-from-behind style, Luck looks infinitely better. In the hurry up, Luck is still rocking it. When we go west coast short-quick, Luck also looked way better. And yet we rarely went to those gameplans why??? Because Pep. That's why. He had no idea how to play to his player's strengths. He had no sense of timing. He buried us in holes repeatedly.

                Luck hasn't been consistent, but he has been consistent with certain playstyles this year and Pep just wouldn't adjust his game plan to utilize that fact. He recognized that Hasselbeck needed west coast; he knew Luck was hurt; he saw Luck have the same success as Matt in the west coast --- and ignored all of that information. And Luck isn't a disobedient soldier, you know this. He's running exactly what he's told to.
                Outside of the offensive line, Andrew Luck has been the biggest problem on offense for the Colts. Yes the OL creates more issues, but Luck is far too down field focused. Luck is making bad reads. He's forcing throws. And quite frankly he's not using his legs enough. Id be curious to see Luck's rushing yards in the 4th quarter versus the rest of the game. He certainly was using his legs more in the 4th vs Carolina and it made a big difference. I wonder if the same applies in previous 4th quarter surges.

                There was enough reason to fire Pep last year. I think this firing is overdue. But I don't think it will change things much. Turnovers kill an offense more than anything. And Luck is turning the ball over more than anyone. He's playing like Bad Eli Manning. Luck needs to be better, simple as that. Doesn't matter who is calling what play. If he keeps playing like this the Colts won't even win the division.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Pep fired

                  New Colts coordinator Rob Chudzinski believes in 'attacking'

                  The Indianapolis Colts declined requests from several teams, including the San Francisco 49ers, to interview Rob Chudzinski for open offensive coordinator posts after last season.

                  Under contract with the Colts, the associate head coach could not explore outside opportunities without the approval of his current franchise.

                  So, Chudzinski remained in Indianapolis and now, months later, he's an offensive coordinator after all. After the firing of Pep Hamilton on Tuesday evening, the Colts installed Chudzinski in that role.


                  INDIANAPOLIS STAR
                  Insider: Pep Hamilton's ouster no sure fix for Colts

                  So, now would be a good time to look at what made Chudzinski attractive to those other teams in the first place and, perhaps, find out what might be in store for the Colts offense with him calling the plays.

                  One overarching sentiment about Chudzinski was offered by Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam when Chudzinski was introduced as the team's coach in 2013: "He is tremendously innovative. We are very bottom-line people. You look at results. The last two years, Rob was coordinator at Carolina and they scored 88 touchdowns. We scored 48."

                  Chudzinski had a lot of success integrating Carolina quarterback Cam Newton into the NFL when coaching him during his first two seasons. Newton had some of his best moments during those two seasons, throwing for a career-high 4,051 yards as a rookie and 3,869 yards in Year 2. Those remain the highest passing totals for the fifth-year quarterback.


                  INDIANAPOLIS STAR
                  Doyel: Colts GM Ryan Grigson survives to screw up another day

                  Another statistical observation of Newton under Chudzinski: The quarterback had per-attempt averages of 8 yards and 7.8 yards in 2011 and 2012, respectively. That underscores the fact that Chudzinski pushed the ball down the field (it helped that the Panthers had receiver Steve Smith back then). Compare those numbers to struggling Colts quarterback Andrew Luck's current average per attempt – 6.3 yards, 31st among the 32 quarterbacks with at least four starts – and there's a stark difference.

                  Interestingly, there's been much clamoring among Colts fans to adjust to a shorter, quicker passing game, something that might help Luck compensate for his apparent injury and help reduce some of his inaccuracy issues. It will be interesting to see how the move to Chudzinski impacts this.


                  INDIANAPOLIS STAR
                  Reaction to Pep Hamilton's firing

                  As for his offensive philosophy, Chudzinski described it as "an attacking style" when he was introduced in Cleveland. A story in the local media there compared Chudzinski's scheme with that of Norv Turner's when he was the Dallas Cowboys' offensive coordinator in the 1990s and, later, the San Diego Chargers' coach. Those were systems built on power running and aggressive, downfield passing.

                  To be clear, Chudzinski won't be installing his offense here in Indianapolis. That can't be done on the fly. But getting a sense of how he's operated offenses in the past does tell us what his instincts and principles are. And it's very likely, we'll see those come through in some form or fashion now that he's got the Colts' play-call sheet.
                  http://www.indystar.com/story/sports...ator/75149766/
                  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


                  • #84
                    Re: Pep fired

                    I think Luck's just in his own head. Got a major case of the yips. When we go uptempo, Luck is able to get into a rhythm and start acting instead of thinking.


                    Honestly, it's on the playcaller to realize that sometimes it's OK to abandon the gameplan when the team has struggled executing the game plan for 3 years even when Luck plays well. A 1 yard run and 2 incomplete 15 yard passes doesn't exactly scream ball control anyway.
                    Time for a new sig.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Pep fired

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      Outside of the offensive line, Andrew Luck has been the biggest problem on offense for the Colts. Yes the OL creates more issues, but Luck is far too down field focused. Luck is making bad reads. He's forcing throws. And quite frankly he's not using his legs enough. Id be curious to see Luck's rushing yards in the 4th quarter versus the rest of the game. He certainly was using his legs more in the 4th vs Carolina and it made a big difference. I wonder if the same applies in previous 4th quarter surges.
                      Interestingly, there's been much clamoring among Colts fans to adjust to a shorter, quicker passing game, something that might help Luck compensate for his apparent injury and help reduce some of his inaccuracy issues. It will be interesting to see how the move to Chudzinski impacts this.
                      It's play calling. The criticism hasn't been that Luck is by passing shorter route runners to go downfield, because there are no shorter routes he's choosing not to throw too. The play designs are for him to chuck the ball deep, so he does.

                      And it's the exact reason why Pep being fired was about 2 years too late.

                      Anyone should just be able to look back on the play calling when Hasselbeck started those two games, because the plays dialed up for him were completely different than what we see with Luck under center. That comes from the booth, not audibles.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Pep fired

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        It's play calling. The criticism hasn't been that Luck is by passing shorter route runners to go downfield, because there are no shorter routes he's choosing not to throw too. The play designs are for him to chuck the ball deep, so he does.

                        And it's the exact reason why Pep being fired was about 2 years too late.

                        Anyone should just be able to look back on the play calling when Hasselbeck started those two games, because the plays dialed up for him were completely different than what we see with Luck under center. That comes from the booth, not audibles.
                        I've seen plenty of plays where Luck just bombs it downfield when there is someone underneath or he has a check down WR or RB right there. The last drive in the 4th against Carolina was more difficult than needed because he was forcing downfield throws on first and second down.

                        And on those plays where he doesn't have a check down, guess what, all the defenders are downfield too. Instead of forcing a throw into double coverage, take off and run!

                        You don't lead the league in turnovers because of playcalling. It's because of bad decision making.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Pep fired

                          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                          You don't lead the league in turnovers because of playcalling. It's because of bad decision making.
                          It's a bit more nuanced than that. Like I said, Pep isn't THE problem, he was the multiplier. When you have a QB who's making bad decisions, you simplify the playcalling. It was never done. Instead we continued to see deep routes being ran. Pep did nothing to help the situation, and did pretty much everything to make it worse.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Pep fired

                            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                            You don't lead the league in turnovers because of playcalling. It's because of bad decision making.
                            Most of his INT's have come on shorter pass plays this year. 2 out of the 3 against CAR were shorter than 10 yard throws. His INT against NO was a shorter pass, and the numerous dropped INT's against the Pats were short to intermediate passes also. His turnovers aren't coming as a result of consistently throwing the ball downfield, they're coming on shorter pass attempts that some are supposedly not taking place.

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            It's a bit more nuanced than that. Like I said, Pep isn't THE problem, he was the multiplier. When you have a QB who's making bad decisions, you simplify the playcalling. It was never done. Instead we continued to see deep routes being ran. Pep did nothing to help the situation, and did pretty much everything to make it worse.
                            This is true. But again, if Andrew continues to turn the ball over on short and intermediate passes - then it doesn't matter what the gameplan is. Once he stops doing that, it'd be easier to reap the totality of benefits that would come from a simplified gameplan.
                            Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-05-2015, 01:41 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Pep fired

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Pep did nothing to help the situation, and did pretty much everything to make it worse.
                              This is a good summation.
                              It's also important to add that much of Coltdom has questioned Pep's playcalling since the beginning. Not just this year. It's just that this year we have the perfect storm brewing and that left no excuses or buts for him. He's simply making a bad situation worse. Plus, we've seen with the Hasselbeck games and the 1st half of the NE game that the Colts can quicken the throws and run more. But they abandon it and go back to mama. And we've seen mama is trouble this season...
                              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


                              • #90
                                Re: Pep fired

                                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                Most of his INT's have come on shorter pass plays this year. 2 out of the 3 against CAR were shorter than 10 yard throws. His INT against NO was a shorter pass, and the numerous dropped INT's against the Pats were short to intermediate passes also. His turnovers aren't coming as a result of consistently throwing the ball downfield, they're coming on shorter pass attempts that some are supposedly not taking place.
                                10yd throws are intermediate type throws. So basically the defense is, "he doesn't always go long, he goes intermediate sometimes." Well no crap, I'm not saying EVERY play is 15-20yds down field, but the vast majority are.

                                Let me ask you this, when was the last bubble screen you've seen ran? I fully admit I turned the Carolina game off pretty quickly in the second half, but I bet it's been a loooong time.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X