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

New Pro football league - AAF

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

  • New Pro football league - AAF

    First I heard of it was today, so sorry if this is old news, but there is now the AAF (Alliance of American Football).

    If you're like me, you're probly like "so what", but after doing a little reading, it actually sounds kinda interesting. Some tidbits:

    - There's 8 teams.
    - It was founded by Charlie Ebersol (TV producer) and Bill Polian (you know who he is)
    - It's season will complement the NFL season, meaning it's just now starting after the NFL season ended and goes through April (10-week season, 2-week playoff).
    - It's intention is to feed off and point back to the NFL, so think of it as a sort of off-season NBA G league for the NFL, with developing players to get to or return to the NFL, pretty slick idea if you ask me.
    - It's leadership board consists of Jared Allen, Hines Ward, and Troy Polamalu.
    - Some head coaches you'll recognize: Mike Singletary, Steve Spurrier, Mike Martz, Dennis Erickson and a few other recognizable college coaches
    - The game I saw was commentated by M Jones-Drew and Marvin Lewis

    So they have some names involved.

    More info:
    https://www.cbssports.com/aaf/news/w...otball-league/

    While the NFL and AAF aren't directly-affiliated, it appears that the NFL will broadcast AAF games *on* the NFL Network (there's an AAF game on right now as I write this). They also appear to stream their games live on their main site: https://aaf.com/

    They are just wrapping up their Week 1, and our guy TRich () got a few TDs today, didn't have a great day, but they did get a win. He plays with another ex-Colt, Scott Tolzien. Another ex-Colt, Stephen Morris, also plays in the league.

    Anyway, might be interesting for those who want to continue catching some football, even if it's the B-league. From what I've been able to tell so far, it seems like they have their **** together, and the football resembles actual pro football.
    Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-10-2019, 10:51 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.

  • #2
    The teams are assigned some players based on where they played in the pros, so guys who last played with the Colts I believe will be playing for the Memphis team. I watched a bit of the first weekend and it was really good. There are almost no commercials so games only last for about 2 hours, they let guys hit quarterbacks, the technical aspects of the broadcasts were quality, and there were quite a few fans at the games I saw. I'm interested to see if this league can last. It seems like they are trying more to be NFL Europe instead of the USFL or XFL. That should help.

    Comment


    • #3
      Is this the league that eliminated kickoffs and all drives just start from the 25 yard line after the other team scores, and also the league that did away with extra point kicks and there are only two point conversion attempts after TD's?

      ...Or are these the rules for the new XFL (which is intended to be more traditional than the previous version)?

      I was reading rule packages for these new leagues but didn't realize either one of them was starting now. I'll have to try and find a schedule and catch some games.
      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


      • #4
        Yes, those are both correct. They say they are "experimenting" with these types of changes, which sorta makes it a cool aspect of the league. It is assumed that they may change things over time. They will be trying things out before the NFL and you can probly bet the NFL is keeping a close on eye on them.

        I only caught one game, but there were no kickoffs, and it was all 2-point conversions. So FGs are the only remaining aspect of kicking. I have to admit, I sorta missed the kickoffs and extra points.

        This article walks through the rule changes that are of interest: https://www.americanfootballinternat...l-interesting/

        Here is a quick run-down:

        1. The ‘sky’ judge (this is actually a really good idea)

        The AAF will have a ninth member of the officiating crew, called a sky judge who will be in the press box and can instantly correct “obvious and egregious” officiating errors. Think the 2019 NFC Championship game. The sky judge will use real-time technology to correct clear errors involving player safety anytime during a game and pass interference inside of five minutes left in the fourth quarter.

        2. Games will start without kickoffs

        3. Shorter play clock - The AAF’s play clock will be 35 seconds, which is five seconds shorter than the NFL’s.

        4. No TV time-outs

        5. New overtime rules
        Overtime will allow both teams to have the ball once, first-and-goal from the 10. Teams have to score a touchdown and go for two points while field goals are not allowed. Games can end in a tie after the overtime period. More on The Alliance’s rules here.

        6. Bye-bye onside kicks, hello ‘onside conversions

        If a team is trailing by 17 points or more for either team inside of five minutes remaining in the game. So, rather than trying an onside kick, a team must convert a fourth-and-12 from its 28 in order to keep the ball.

        7. Limited pass rush
        Only five can rush the passer, or a penalty is called
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-12-2019, 03:34 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


        • #5
          And now what? This has to be a joke right? A joke that isn’t funny and everyone gets hurt...
          Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
          I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Natston View Post
            And now what? This has to be a joke right? A joke that isn’t funny and everyone gets hurt...
            glad it wasn't my 250 mil...

            Comment


            • #7
              When will these idiots get it ??

              A league isn't going to be successful going up against the already established one without some sort of association. MLB has its entire feeder system. NBA & the G-League.

              Fools & their money . . . . . .

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                When will these idiots get it ??

                A league isn't going to be successful going up against the already established one without some sort of association. MLB has its entire feeder system. NBA & the G-League.

                Fools & their money . . . . . .
                I think that's what they were going for, to be an NFL "G League". For whatever reason, the NFL didn't really play ball. I'm not entirely sure why, either, I can't see a scenario where an off-season (and maybe even in-season) feeder program wouldn't be a good thing for the NFL, especially if they own the damn thing. People will go to the games and throw more money at them, more penetration into the non-major markets, merchandise opportunities, they get off-season air-time and advertising opportunities, which is all the NFL really wants. And who knows, this whole "shutting down" thing might be some weird play on the part of the AAF to get the NFL to play ball, but it's pretty damn early in the game for such a poker hand, too risky of a euchre hand to go alone, so that probly isn't what's happening. One theory I read was the NHL owner Dundon bought a majority stake in the league simply to land the technology that the AAF had developed, and then shut the league down. Pretty crazy.

                That was always the impression I got from the founders of this league, though... that they intended to set up a feeder league for the NFL and then sell it to the league. They didn't actually say that, but you could just read it. I mean, duh, business. It actually was a pretty well-thrown-together outfit for the most part, considering how fast it all came together. The games and the programming was watchable. And they were throwing in the rule changes in an effort to sell to the NFL that they could be used as a sandbox for testing rule changes and stuff. It was really not a bad overall idea, imo. I wouldn't be surprised if we hear more over the coming days and this story gets flipped upside down and negotiations between the NFL and AAF get revived. Or not, who knows.
                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 04-02-2019, 09:41 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


                • #9

                  Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

                  I think that's what they were going for, to be an NFL "G League". For whatever reason, the NFL didn't really play ball. I'm not entirely sure why, either, I can't see a scenario where an off-season (and maybe even in-season) feeder program wouldn't be a good thing for the NFL, especially if they own the damn thing. People will go to the games and throw more money at them, more penetration into the non-major markets, merchandise opportunities, they get off-season air-time and advertising opportunities, which is all the NFL really wants. And who knows, this whole "shutting down" thing might be some weird play on the part of the AAF to get the NFL to play ball, but it's pretty damn early in the game for such a poker hand, too risky of a euchre hand to go alone, so that probly isn't what's happening. One theory I read was the NHL owner Dundon bought a majority stake in the league simply to land the technology that the AAF had developed, and then shut the league down. Pretty crazy.

                  That was always the impression I got from the founders of this league, though... that they intended to set up a feeder league for the NFL and then sell it to the league. They didn't actually say that, but you could just read it. I mean, duh, business. It actually was a pretty well-thrown-together outfit for the most part, considering how fast it all came together. The games and the programming was watchable. And they were throwing in the rule changes in an effort to sell to the NFL that they could be used as a sandbox for testing rule changes and stuff. It was really not a bad overall idea, imo. I wouldn't be surprised if we hear more over the coming days and this story gets flipped upside down and negotiations between the NFL and AAF get revived. Or not, who knows.
                  I don’t disagree with you; I have always been baffled by the way the NFL refuses to embrace a feeder league. With that’s said it’s not really a surprise considering the NFL shitcanned NFL Europe.

                  I read Dundon put in $250 million and got back $180 million. Basically, he lost $70 million in just under 2 months. I have heard some folks saythat he wanted some gambling app that is tied to the league. So perhaps what he did was pay $70 million just for the rights to that app and that app will allow him to make a lot more money down the road. But losing $70 million in 2 months is pretty substantial.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post


                    I don’t disagree with you; I have always been baffled by the way the NFL refuses to embrace a feeder league. With that’s said it’s not really a surprise considering the NFL shitcanned NFL Europe.

                    I read Dundon put in $250 million and got back $180 million. Basically, he lost $70 million in just under 2 months. I have heard some folks saythat he wanted some gambling app that is tied to the league. So perhaps what he did was pay $70 million just for the rights to that app and that app will allow him to make a lot more money down the road. But losing $70 million in 2 months is pretty substantial.
                    That other part of that equation is that if he put in 250 and already got back 180, why not keep it going? Sounds like he was making money.
                    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