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

  • #91
    Re: Pep fired

    The above quoted article talks about passing yards per attempt, and how Luck is ranked 31st out of 32nd. It's not because he's throwing shorter than all QBs other than one, it's because his completion% is absolute crap. That number would be significantly higher, if he would complete more passes. Most of his passes right now are counting as 0s, which drags down the average quite a bit.

    I'm not saying Luck has been good, or that Pep is the reason why he's bad. But good coaches put their players into positions to succeed, and we've not seen many, or any, adjustments in the playcalling to help facilitate success.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pep fired

      It's not that the long balls are intercepted. It's that they end up rushed (or Luck sacked waiting for it to develop).... And we end up wasting the possession with a 3 and out. Meanwhile asking the defense to be on the field for ever longer periods of the games. Which then puts more pressure on the offense. And pressure = bad decisions.

      The playcalling (and playbook) needs to take that pressure into account and play to the offense's strengths. Or at least don't play into its weaknesses.
      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


      • #93
        Re: Pep fired

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        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.
        Be sure to see my edit.

        And the colts utilize the screen game less than any other team I've consistently watched. The same goes for slants, and passes to the RB. I'm not saying Pep's playcalling wasn't an issue. I'm saying Luck's turnover issues exacerbated Pep's playcalling.

        Luck and the team's offense had been one of the better offenses the last few seasons (with Luck still turning the football over) with Pep at the helm. The difference between then and now isn't the playcalling, it's the play of the QB.

        Basically I don't think it's fair to say that Luck and the offenses succeeded in spite of Pep when they played well, and then say that they failed BECAUSE of Pep when they play poorly.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pep fired

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          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.
          I personally don't want to see the Colts run more bubble screens. They've ran a few this year and it rarely goes for more than 1-2 yards. The Colts don't have that super elusive guy or super big guy that can run a play like that very well.

          Now traditional screens, the Colts have to figure out how to fix those. They've had several set up this year only for the pass to not be completed. A team that throws downfield as much as the Colts do should be able to figure out a screen play, but that's been a huge problem for them this year.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pep fired

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            Be sure to see my edit.

            And the colts utilize the screen game less than any other team I've consistently watched. The same goes for slants, and passes to the RB. I'm not saying Pep's playcalling wasn't an issue. I'm saying Luck's turnover issues exacerbated Pep's playcalling.

            Luck and the team's offense had been one of the better offenses the last few seasons (with Luck still turning the football over) with Pep at the helm. The difference between then and now isn't the playcalling, it's the play of the QB.

            Basically I don't think it's fair to say that Luck and the offenses succeeded in spite of Pep when they played well, and then say that they failed BECAUSE of Pep when they play poorly.
            Because they get to beat up on the AFC South every year. Their record vs AFC south opponents to non-AFC south opponents, while I don't know the exact numbers, are stark differences. When the Colts have had to buckle down against good teams, they've gotten smashed and not done very well offensively. It's just like NCAA teams that are pretty good on paper, because they schedule midmajors throughout their season and their ability to play so well against inferior competition skews their overall numbers upwards. This season, they're not only bad against good/average teams but have been pretty bad against the bad teams too.

            I think it's completely fair, because the complaints are being consistent. I didn't like the play calling when the Colts were playing "well" and I've not liked the play calling when they've played **** poor. The consistent thing is Pep's crappy game plans.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pep fired

              Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
              I personally don't want to see the Colts run more bubble screens. They've ran a few this year and it rarely goes for more than 1-2 yards. The Colts don't have that super elusive guy or super big guy that can run a play like that very well.
              TY is known as "ghost" for a reason. TY has used the field like a playground for a couple seasons now.

              I think defenses have zeroed in on what the Colts tendencies and know they can bump/run in coverage because they're not worried about getting burnt by quick stopping routes/comebacks. If there is a move being made, it's usually a double move to get downfield.

              Montcreif in the past has been the underneath guy, and he's been taken away. Everything else is downfield. I think working the TEs a bit more would help open it up, but Fleener is used in deep routes, and Allen has needed to stay in and help protect on the line. Doyle has been MIA all season.

              EDIT: And about separation problems, I think the logical conclusion when no one can get separation is that it falls down to the play calling. It's hard for me to believe that suddenly every Colts weapon that was being lauded in past seasons, this preseason, just suddenly got old or lost their ability to create space. When it was just Reggie/Nicks it was easy to understand Father Time. Now when in their prime guys are struggling? .......
              Last edited by Since86; 11-05-2015, 02:13 PM.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pep fired

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                TY is known as "ghost" for a reason. TY has used the field like a playground for a couple seasons now.

                I think defenses have zeroed in on what the Colts tendencies and know they can bump/run in coverage because they're not worried about getting burnt by quick stopping routes/comebacks. If there is a move being made, it's usually a double move to get downfield.

                Montcreif in the past has been the underneath guy, and he's been taken away. Everything else is downfield. I think working the TEs a bit more would help open it up, but Fleener is used in deep routes, and Allen has needed to stay in and help protect on the line. Doyle has been MIA all season.
                When I think bubble screen in the NFL game, it's usually the two wide receivers out wide and there's an immediate pass out to one of them while the other one blocks. That leaves the receiver with 1 man to beat. Hilton's much better when he's already on the move. It's not easy for him to make a guy miss who's bearing downhill on him when he's basically at a standstill.

                I completely agree with everything else you said. I would be running lots of 8 yard comebacks, shallow crosses, etc. Take advantage of both your playmakers speed and the fact the defense is scared of getting beat deep. I remember one play in the NO game where they showed the corners coverage on the receivers. When the receiver made his break to the outside (I think it was Hilton in this instance) the corner was already sitting right there. He knew exactly the route tree the Colts were running. I also remember someone analyzing the tape from the Buffalo game and said the Colts were simply trusting their receivers to beat their men. There was very little action to try to get people open.

                As for other things others have said, Luck has always been someone who has waited for the 4th quarter to really open up his running. I've always thought that was a key component of why the Colts offense was better late in games. I don't know if he's trying to preserve his body by doing that, but it's something that's been true well before this year. As we've mentioned before, Luck's accuracy tends to get better as the game goes on as well.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pep fired

                  It's alright to focus on Luck's "decision-making", but I really don't want people to forget --- he's been injured. The injuries he's had *will* impact his ability to rip the ball like he's used to. And he's also working his way back from those injuries, so it's entirely logically for him to think he's further progressed than he is when he let's some of these passes go, only to immediately find out that his body didn't respond like he expected it to. A short pass doesn't mean it's an easy pass. I've seen a lot of stuff behind and above his receivers, which generally points to a non-ability to fully tense his core and rip the ball where he needs to. I suspect that we'll see improvement as he heals and his body starts to respond like he's used to.

                  Either way, it's the coordinator's job to put in the plays that maximize his offense, taking into account strengths and weaknesses... and if you have a QB who's struggling with injuries, and possibly even shell-shocked from years of getting his butt beat into the ground by his line, you need to change the plan.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-05-2015, 03:14 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


                  • #99
                    Re: Pep fired

                    I believe in Chud.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pep fired

                      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                      Basically I don't think it's fair to say that Luck and the offenses succeeded in spite of Pep when they played well, and then say that they failed BECAUSE of Pep when they play poorly.
                      Au contrare, I think it's completely fair. I always felt this offense wasn't at it's full potential, even when they were functioning. That says a lot, because we put up some numbers... But I feel like we could've been even better.

                      Just do the Arians test. At any point in the last 3 years, think to yourself "Would this offense have been better under Arians?" and the answer is almost always yes. The point is, we've not been getting the most out of this offense under Pep.
                      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-05-2015, 07:29 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


                      • Re: Pep fired

                        Again, Luck has been playing this way since December of last season, so I don't buy that his play is all of a sudden shaky because he is soldering through some type of injury.

                        With that said - ribs don't affect the brain. If he's playing hurt, he should know his limitations and stop throwing into coverage and turning the ball over. If he's unable to do that, then he should sit out until he's healthy because he's hurting his team more than he's helping it right now.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pep fired

                          What's he supposed to do, just hand off 80 times a game? He's off - sometimes his throws are on, and other times not. Really it comes down to sitting him, but it's Andrew Luck, how do you sit him if he's functional, even if at only 70%? You don't, you just work through it, which is what we've been doing. Which is why this has nothing to do with Pep. If they felt that Luck truly was playing bad and Pep was fine, they wouldn't have cut him. Pep's removal was a separate and obvious situation.
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-05-2015, 07:49 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


                          • Re: Pep fired

                            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            Au contrare, I think it's completely fair. I always felt this offense wasn't at it's full potential, even when they were functioning. That says a lot, because we put up some numbers... But I feel like we could've been even better.

                            Just do the Arians test. At any point in the last 3 years, think to yourself "Would this offense have been better under Arians?" and the answer is almost always yes. The point is, we've not been getting the most out of this offense under Pep.
                            That's kind of backwards to me. Luck's second and third seasons were vastly superior than his first, with the only low light being his completion percentage and turnovers. He led the league in TDs last year. Yet Pep gets no credit for that while Luck gets all the credit for that success.

                            Fast forward to this year in the same offense, Luck is turning the ball over left and right, but most of the blame goes on Pep while marginal blame goes to Andrew?

                            If Andrew gets the praise for putting up good passing numbers, then he should get the brunt of the criticism for not producing.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pep fired

                              I think everyone knew Pep was gone, and they took the offense's current struggles as a way to get rid of the guy as early as they could. I think we all universally agree on that lol

                              If he is just struggling just because he's in a prolonged slump, then yes you absolutely let him play through it. But if we are blaming his poor play on some "injury", then he isn't functional. Because he's played like the worst QB in the league during this stretch (statistically speaking)
                              Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-05-2015, 07:54 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pep fired

                                It's not backwards at all, if you can accept that the offense has never been at 100%, even when they were having success, because Luck was able to mask things, when he wasn't injured.
                                It's always felt like this offense was held back from becoming a true juggernaut. It's never had any balance, and against true playoff defenses, we've never had any sort of working game plan.

                                I feel like we have the pieces to accomplish a lot more --- right now. We just need the right guy putting the offense together.

                                Pep wasn't that guy. Is Chud? Not sure. I have hopes.
                                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-05-2015, 08:03 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

                                Working...
                                X