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 Non Colts Offseason Thread

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

  • 2018 Non Colts Offseason Thread

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...oaching-at-76/

    Jerry Glanville returns to coaching at 76

    The Man in Black now has plenty of gray, but he’s still ready to teach some football.

    Jerry Glanville, who routinely dressed like Johnny Cash and even more routinely left tickets at will call for Elvis Presley, will join the coaching staff of the Hamilton Tiger-Cats, according to 3downnation.com.


    Hired by head coach June Jones, Glanville will have a role on the defensive side of the ball.

    Glanville coached both the Oilers and the Falcons in the ’80s and ’90s, generating a record of 63-73, including four playoff appearances and three postseason wins. After a coaching stint at both a defensive coordinator (Hawaii) and head coach (Portland State) at the college level, Glanville was due to become head coach of the UFL’s Hartford Colonials in 2011, but the league suspended operations before the season began.

    During his time with the Falcons, Glanville traded a quarterback with a funny last name to a place where he’d become a legend.

    “I had to get him out of Atlanta,” Glanville said in 2010 regarding the decision to give up on Brett Favre after only one year. “I could not sober him up. I sent him to a city where at 9:00 at night the only thing that’s open is Chili Joes. You can get it two ways, with or without onions. And that’s what made Brett Favre make a comeback was going to a town that closed down. If I would have traded him to New York, nobody to this day would have known who Brett Favre ever was.”

    Glanville is now heading to a town that he probably wouldn’t have been able to find on a map, and possibly wondering about the redundancy of his new team’s name. (“I ain’t never seen a Tiger-Dog,” Glanville might say.)

    Regardless, he’s back. And there’s still a chance that he’ll eventually be working with a modern-day Brett Favre who is still trying to get back to the NFL.

  • #2
    Well this is embarrassing...



    Although I never expected Thielen to be so popular

    Comment


    • #3
      Don't buy that at all. Who's making this, what are their metrics? Given the general disdain for the Pats in Indy, it seems unlikely.

      Small sample size, I'm willing to bet.
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #4
        Well this is the whole state here just because Indy may hate Brady(and there are plenty of people in Indy that don't care for the Colts either) doesn't mean the rest of the state does. Northern Indiana is Bears country(a large part of why I became a Colts fan I hated the Bears and Packers). Some might be Bengals fans in the southern part of the state. Then there are football fans that don't consider the Colts a part of the state anyways(and remember a time when they didn't exist) so they were already fans of other teams/players to begin with.

        Florida liking Brady is also rather embarrassing when you factor in the Dolphins.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
          Well this is the whole state here just because Indy may hate Brady(and there are plenty of people in Indy that don't care for the Colts either) doesn't mean the rest of the state does. Northern Indiana is Bears country(a large part of why I became a Colts fan I hated the Bears and Packers). Some might be Bengals fans in the southern part of the state. Then there are football fans that don't consider the Colts a part of the state anyways(and remember a time when they didn't exist) so they were already fans of other teams/players to begin with.

          Florida liking Brady is also rather embarrassing when you factor in the Dolphins.
          It's not embarrassing. The guy isn't affiliated with the NFL, has a few hundred thousand followers on social media, and a percentage of followers answered a favorite player question for his "data".

          1/3 of the state's population is the Indy metro area. I could provide better "data" than these guys in a day to prove Brady isn't a favorite of 10% of people. And if Northern Indiana is Bears country, wouldn't you assume most of their votes would be Trubisky? Or Stafford? Or Rodgers?

          Not embarrassing. Literally a guy choosing a football player's name to put over a state.

          Comment


          • #6
            Lol, okay, right... Brady most popular in Indiana. That's one of the dumbest things I've seen in a long time.
            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


            • #7
              Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
              Well this is the whole state here just because Indy may hate Brady(and there are plenty of people in Indy that don't care for the Colts either) doesn't mean the rest of the state does. Northern Indiana is Bears country(a large part of why I became a Colts fan I hated the Bears and Packers). Some might be Bengals fans in the southern part of the state. Then there are football fans that don't consider the Colts a part of the state anyways(and remember a time when they didn't exist) so they were already fans of other teams/players to begin with..
              Yeah - NO. Or should I say HELL NO ................

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

                Yeah - NO. Or should I say HELL NO ................

                To what? That there are people around these parts that don't care for the Colts? Its true I mean in my department alone there are two Packers fans, an Eagles fan, and a Steelers fan.

                A lot of my former bosses were Steelers fans and don't care for the Colts.

                I grew up around Bears fans.

                It doesn't surprise me that this state isn't all in on the Colts. We're not the Packers where they have most if not all of Wisconsin's support.

                So yeah seeing some latch onto Brady isn't that hard to believe.

                Originally posted by bunt View Post
                And if Northern Indiana is Bears country, wouldn't you assume most of their votes would be Trubisky? Or Stafford? Or Rodgers?
                Bears fans at least in Northern Indiana don't hate Brady and they wouldn't go for Stafford or Rodgers either.

                Manning is another story and anything Colts related.

                Comment


                • #9
                  At 39 though?

                  http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...t-quarterback/

                  Until he re-signs, Brees is the top free-agent quarterback

                  Most regard Washington quarterback Kirk Cousins as the best available free-agent quarterback. And that probably will be the case, when March 14 rolls around. For now, however, there’s an even better quarterback set to hit the open market.

                  It’s Drew Brees. Signed to a six-year, $60 million deal by the Saints 12 years ago as an unrestricted free agent despite having more than 20 studs in his shoulder, Brees is now healthy. He’s also 39. But he has shown no signs of slippage in his play, and he could instantly make a bad team good (like the Browns), an average team very good (like the Jets or Broncos), a good team great (like the Cardinals), and a great team a Super Bowl champion (like the Vikings).


                  MDS pointed out that the Cleveland cap space could support an obscene offer, but Brees likely would regard the Browns as a rebuild that will take more years than he has left. If he’s going to leave a Saints team that already has all the signs of being a championship contender in 2018, he’d likely do it only for another championship contender.

                  Anyway, those are just some words I typed to tee up a video that presents our top five free-agent quarterbacks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Moot point. Brees is going to re-sign with the Saints, or he's just going to retire. He won't hit the actual market, despite being a free agent.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I agree but it would be funny if he did go to the Browns. It would also give the AFC another QB that could get in the Pats way.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-earth-debate/

                        Geno Smith joins the flat earth “debate”

                        The ancient Greeks figured out that the earth was a sphere about 2,500 years ago, and Magellan proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt 500 years ago.

                        Geno Smith believes it’s still open to debate.


                        Smith said on Twitter that he is beginning to believe that NBA player and noted flat-earther Kyrie Irving has a point.

                        “I been studying this whole flat earth vs globe thing,” Smith wrote, “and I think I may be with Kyrie on this.”

                        Smith got more than 2,000 responses to that tweet, and he then engaged in a lengthy Twitter conversation with some who agreed with him and some who think he’s an idiot. In the end, however, he seemed persuaded by the evidence that the earth is, in fact, round.

                        “Hey guys I’m glad we had this talk today it was fun lol I know how you all love to debate on Twitter so this was good,” Smith wrote. “For the record Earth is a globe we know this. But why not listen to someone else’s beliefs or ‘truth.'”

                        Listening to others’ beliefs is never a bad idea. But if you’re listening to someone who believes the earth is flat, you’re not listening to “truth.”

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...falo/#comments

                          Vontae Davis headed to Buffalo

                          The Bills are signing veteran cornerback Vontae Davis to a one-year deal, Ben Volin of the Boston Globe reports.

                          Davis tweeted confirmation, writing “#BillsMafia.”


                          Davis, 29, visited five teams, selecting Buffalo over Cleveland, San Francisco, Oakland and Miami. The Colts cut Davis in November.

                          He made 17 tackles in four games in 2017.

                          The Dolphins made Davis a first-round pick in 2009. Miami traded him to Indianapolis in 2012.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                            Brees for one year is better than Bortles for three. But I get your point.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The NFL competition committee apparently has unanimously decided that the 2014 Dez playoff catch should be ruled a catch in the future, according to ESPN.com.

                              Romo must be thinking ““”gee, thanks”....””

                              Thats still some of the biggest BS I’ve ever seen and was the moment where all of this catch rule/replay stuff became a true parody of itself. It was obviously a catch.

                              I always liked Romo. Sucked for him because that was clearly his last chance at a deep playoff run. Dallas would have advanced to the NFC Title game if they would have won that game. That Dallas team was loaded.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X