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

2018 Andrew Luck Progress Report

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

    No, my thoughts are presented as opinion, based on actual facts... While you speak of facts based on your opinion.
    Now you care about facts? Here's one: 3.3 yards per carry.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by imawhat View Post

      Now you care about facts? Here's one: 3.3 yards per carry.

      so you got nuthin?
      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


      • #78
        Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

        That is nonsense. But if you keep patting yourself on the back, you are going to break that arm.
        Coming from you, that's some funny ****.
        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
          Originally posted by Bball View Post

          No it's not. If Luck returns this preseason as good as ever, that is still a far cry from what would've been expected based on what we were told all along. The 'ideal' scenario was out the window last July or August with Luck unable to return to summer camp and then out even deeper without any preseason games. Let alone a return in A1 shape. So the ideal scenario was badly missed. Next would've been an early season game 1 or 2 return in A1 shape. Or an early season game 1 or 2 return, but rusty would've been next. You can go down the line. Every step was missed or delayed. He might not be throwing a football even now, or just started if he is based on the most recent media reports about what was planned for the coming days.

          We're not in worst case scenario territory yet and might never get there, but at best it's time for cautious optimism. Anyone who's slid over to the side of pessimism isn't there without any reason. Anyone who argues this is going according to plan has to be blind. It's at the least in 'concerning territory' now.
          Missing a season isn't all that unusual for a player, but that is more typical of a preseason injury or game 1 injury. This was a planned surgery immediately following the season with an entire offseason to rehab. We know right now if there was a game he STILL couldn't play right now. There's no definitive talk (or any talk) that he's fine now and working toward being in shape for training camp. He's just trying to get to a point where he can throw a football again.

          This is definitely not going according to any plans we were led to believe over a year ago with this surgery and at every point right up until he was officially shutdown for the season.

          Maybe he has turned a corner, but we're going to need to see and hear more before we can ever believe it now.

          I'm firmly in wait and see mode. I won't be surprised if he's ready for camp and playing great... I won't be surprised if he has another surgery... I won't be surprised if he shuts it down for good at some point in the coming months. I wouldn't have said this a year ago.
          No, it's definitely craziness. That's a whole lotta text to basically say you really read too deep into things and believe in conspiracies. Makes for good drama, though.

          Btw, who here said "things were going to plan"? Think it's pretty obvious no one thinks that. The difference is, you seem to think it's all a big hairy conspiracy, whereas most of us just think it's all literally "not going to plan" and that's all.
          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-18-2018, 11:45 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


          • #80
            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

            Coming from you, that's some funny ****.
            You buy the Irsay line of ******** lock stock and barrel don't you. To make a Trumpian quote, "Sad."

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

              You buy the Irsay line of ******** lock stock and barrel don't you. To make a Trumpian quote, "Sad."
              Surprised you didn't go with another Trumpism: "Wrong". Had a hunch, btw.

              Tell ya what, Blu. Let's track this. You think it's all a lie and he's done. I think he's just taking a while to recover. When the moment arrives that Luck either 1) retires forever, or 2) comes back... And assuming you're still a non-banned member of this board... The loser of the argument has to come back on here and say the other was right.

              If I lose, I will gladly uphold my end of the deal.

              You in?
              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-18-2018, 11:55 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


              • #82
                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                You know, this really does make me sick the more I research it. I believe that during Luck's last season he was playing hurt, taking injections. That's why there wasn't a zip on his passes all year. He didn't change his style. He just couldn't throw it. Dude had a dead arm all jacked up on meds. Now he has a noodle for an arm and there's no fixing it. This thing is starting to look like Weekend at Bernies.
                He played pretty well on that injected shoulder. I think Shottenheimer had a positive impact on Luck.

                Also, and I can't find it now... I would've sworn I read a report immediately after Luck's surgery that reported the team didn't want him to have the surgery. It was his choice (well, duh, obviously it was his choice... it's his arm), but one the team didn't think was necessary.

                I've not seen that mentioned again so maybe it was just so internet speculation and not an actually insider report on a legitimate site. Or maybe I dreamed it... :/
                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, thatís teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

                  No, it's definitely craziness. That's a whole lotta text to basically say you really read too deep into things and believe in conspiracies. Makes for good drama, though.

                  Btw, who here said "things were going to plan"? Think it's pretty obvious no one thinks that. The difference is, you seem to think it's all a big hairy conspiracy, whereas most of us just think it's all literally "not going to plan" and that's all.
                  I don't think there's a "big hairy conspiracy" in that they know he's done and not coming back.... I just think there's a team that doesn't want to tell the fanbase how serious this actually was or is because.... insert reason here...

                  Is it career ending? Nobody knows that for a fact. Otherwise Luck wouldn't still be rehabbing. Is this dragging out way longer than it should? Oh yeah.... No conspiracy there.

                  If you're agreeing that things aren't going as planned then I don't even know what you're arguing with me about. That is ALL I'm saying that I feel confident about, outside of believing the team has played loose with the truth for whatever reason when they easily could've been more definitive about games Luck would miss. And if you're arguing about that then you are blind to some facts that were made clear with hindsight.

                  In June could've the Colts had told us that Luck would definitely miss at least 6 games? Probably not.... In Sept could they have told us there was no chance of him playing until somewhere near the end of the month at the earliest? Oh yeah... No way they didn't know that. When they were pretending it was game to game, it was really a far off point in the future because there never was a scenario where he would get cleared to practice and be ready to start that weekend. We can know that for a fact because once he did get cleared to practice we learned how far away he really was. Once he actually started practicing the goalposts moved and we learned it would be several more games before he could possibly play. That's probably the first point we finally got some truth. They were dangling that "he's getting close" carrot on a stick as if once he practiced he'd be close to taking the field. Until he finally got cleared to practice and the truth came out about the timeline. And then it didn't matter because there was quickly a setback.

                  How you disagree with that I have no idea.
                  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, thatís teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    That's a good way to put it. Once the timeline was officially revealed, we could see there was no chance he could come back soon, as was left a possibility.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Disagree with all this "they knew it would take longer, they lied to us, it's worse than we think" stuff. The original timetable was what they honestly believed, and what hasn't gone to plan is Luck's shoulder recovery. That's all.

                      The Colts had a precedent to reference for their timetable. Brees had a very similar injury, similar procedure, same doctor, the exact same time of year (January) and returned and missed no time the next season.

                      For Luck, they said it was a 6-9 month recovery, putting him anywhere right up to the start of the season. If it was 6 months (July return), that woulda gave him a few months to "get back in game shape". If it was 9 months, his "get back in game shape" timetable might eat a few weeks/months into the season, but still would be able to return at some point mid-season, which is why they kept him off IR and kept us all waiting week-to-week. Now, that said, 6-9 months is usually best case, but it can go longer, so it's not like Lucks' case is alarming or unusual.

                      But Luck's shoulder didn't respond like Brees', so after 2 months, they shut him down, and there were a number of reasons... 1) we weren't having a good season, were 3-6 and likely out of the playoffs, and 2) Luck was still having problems, and 3) our O-line is still terrible. There was no reason at that point in time to bring him back for a losing season, risk further injury behind that terrible line. Once they shut him down in November, that gave Luck theoretically 10 months to get his shoulder right for next season. Now, in the 3 months since, he went to Europe for therapy which evidently was a good thing for him, they set the timetable for re-evaluation saying that in January if his pain hadn't subsided, they might consider surgery, and Luck has stated that his pain went down drastically, he doesn't need surgery. He came back looking visibly stronger/bigger/healthier, and immediately signed up for the Cali throwing academy where they are rebuilding his motion and mechanics.

                      So it sounds to me that his original timetable just didn't work out, and once they shut him down, they gave him all the time he needed to focus on getting his arm right, and it sounds like that is in-progress and making progress.

                      This whole notion that the timetable never added up for you guys, or that they knew all along, and lied to us about the whole thing is just not true. I think they were genuinely playing it week-to-week, because by that time he was supposed to have been through all this and playing again, and when it became obvious that it wasn't happening, they were likely just as disappointed as you. But they had to play it week-to-week.

                      Now, if you build yourself up in your mind to believe that his injury is "way worse", or "he's done", and they're lying to us for God knows what reason, you can use revisionist history and say "look, every time he was supposed to play, he didn't, and they kept saying next week, there's proof." But that's the problem with reading between lines and thinking everything is a lie, it's unhealthy. There is no evidence that supports this claim that he's worse than they're letting on. That is created entirely by you; it's a sky-is-falling mentality. They said he had a labrum tear (he did), they said it would be 6-9 months which should make him available for the following season (which was true), and then his recovery didn't go as planned.
                      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-19-2018, 04:35 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


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        Disagree with all this "they knew it would take longer, they lied to us, it's worse than we think" stuff. The original timetable was what they honestly believed, and what hasn't gone to plan is Luck's shoulder recovery. That's all.

                        The Colts had a precedent to reference for their timetable. Brees had a very similar injury, similar procedure, same doctor, the exact same time of year (January) and returned and missed no time the next season.

                        For Luck, they said it was a 6-9 month recovery, putting him anywhere right up to the start of the season. If it was 6 months (July return), that woulda gave him a few months to "get back in game shape". If it was 9 months, his "get back in game shape" timetable might eat a few weeks/months into the season, but still would be able to return at some point mid-season, which is why they kept him off IR and kept us all waiting week-to-week. Now, that said, 6-9 months is usually best case, but it can go longer, so it's not like Lucks' case is alarming or unusual.

                        But Luck's shoulder didn't respond like Brees', so after 2 months, they shut him down, and there were a number of reasons... 1) we weren't having a good season, were 3-6 and likely out of the playoffs, and 2) Luck was still having problems, and 3) our O-line is still terrible. There was no reason at that point in time to bring him back for a losing season, risk further injury behind that terrible line. Once they shut him down in November, that gave Luck theoretically 10 months to get his shoulder right for next season. Now, in the 3 months since, he went to Europe for therapy which evidently was a good thing for him, they set the timetable for re-evaluation saying that in January if his pain hadn't subsided, they might consider surgery, and Luck has stated that his pain went down drastically, he doesn't need surgery. He came back looking visibly stronger/bigger/healthier, and immediately signed up for the Cali throwing academy where they are rebuilding his motion and mechanics.

                        So it sounds to me that his original timetable just didn't work out, and once they shut him down, they gave him all the time he needed to focus on getting his arm right, and it sounds like that is in-progress and making progress.

                        This whole notion that the timetable never added up for you guys, or that they knew all along, and lied to us about the whole thing is just not true. I think they were genuinely playing it week-to-week, because by that time he was supposed to have been through all this and playing again, and when it became obvious that it wasn't happening, they were likely just as disappointed as you. But they had to play it week-to-week.

                        Now, if you build yourself up in your mind to believe that his injury is "way worse", or "he's done", and they're lying to us for God knows what reason, you can use revisionist history and say "look, every time he was supposed to play, he didn't, and they kept saying next week, there's proof." But that's the problem with reading between lines and thinking everything is a lie, it's unhealthy. There is no evidence that supports this claim that he's worse than they're letting on. That is created entirely by you; it's a sky-is-falling mentality. They said he had a labrum tear (he did), they said it would be 6-9 months which should make him available for the following season (which was true), and then his recovery didn't go as planned.
                        Tell, the truth, you are Irsay in disguise or a member of the front office. I suppose you felt the same way about Manning when it was a reverse situation where they wanted everyone to think he was done so that they could draft Luck without taking a hit from the fans. Manning signed a big new contract with Denver, won another MVP and got to two Super Bowls winning one. Manning leaked a video of himself throwing the ball and throwing it well when the Colts were telling everyone that he had a noodle arm with no strength or power. Now, of course, in this new situation, they have suddenly become a paragon of virtue? I don't think so. Luck may come back and be fine but I just think at this the point the odds are way against that. But hang in there, you have protected your season ticket sales for another year and that is what this is really all about.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Let's assume the best case situation. That Irsay and the Colts were not lying. Rather than weigh in on that, let's just make that assumption.

                          Irsay comes out in 2017, all year long, all the way into August claiming that Luck was going to play. He was dead wrong and he now knows it.

                          Next...

                          In early January of this year...just a few months later after being dead wrong..and knowing he was dead wrong...and knowing fans were ticked at him...he doubles or triples down on a bet he already lost and raves like a mad man about Luck.

                          Yet he knows for a fact that fans RELIED on his statements that Luck was returning to play last year and spent their hard earned money on season tickets only to watch a team go 4-12 because their superstar "born to do great things in the NFL per Irsay" quarterback got pulled at the last minute. 2nd to last in the AFC. That's what those fans got to watch after Irsay pumped them up. That right there is the problem.
                          Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            There is no evidence that supports this claim that he's worse than they're letting on. That is created entirely by you; it's a sky-is-falling mentality. They said he had a labrum tear (he did), they said it would be 6-9 months which should make him available for the following season (which was true), and then his recovery didn't go as planned.
                            This pretty much refuted your entire counter argument.
                            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, thatís teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

                              Tell, the truth, you are Irsay in disguise or a member of the front office. I suppose you felt the same way about Manning when it was a reverse situation where they wanted everyone to think he was done so that they could draft Luck without taking a hit from the fans. Manning signed a big new contract with Denver, won another MVP and got to two Super Bowls winning one. Manning leaked a video of himself throwing the ball and throwing it well when the Colts were telling everyone that he had a noodle arm with no strength or power. Now, of course, in this new situation, they have suddenly become a paragon of virtue? I don't think so. Luck may come back and be fine but I just think at this the point the odds are way against that. But hang in there, you have protected your season ticket sales for another year and that is what this is really all about.
                              Well, I'm not sure if that's all true. But one thing is true. Jim Irsay is either a liar or a loon.

                              Also, a great majority of the people who would say the things Jim Irsay has said are definitely lying. The only out Jim has is that he's an idiot. That's a terrible best-case situation.
                              Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                This whole notion that the timetable never added up for you guys, or that they knew all along, and lied to us about the whole thing is just not true. I think they were genuinely playing it week-to-week, because by that time he was supposed to have been through all this and playing again, and when it became obvious that it wasn't happening, they were likely just as disappointed as you. But they had to play it week-to-week.
                                The problem with this is that Luck got ruled out just 6 days before the season opener. Then the Colts revealed their 21-day ramp up period once he started practicing. So at a minimum, assuming Luck had been further along and had started practicing, they concealed that Luck would miss the opener by at least 15 days, but I suspect they knew even sooner.

                                In any case, I see a 0% chance that they truly believed Luck could play 10 days before the opener.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X